Excessive regulation on Marco
At times, it feels as though Marco Island is in constant conflict with its own government. Many residents are exhausted by what feels like a nonstop cycle of new ordinances, new restrictions, and new debates over how people live their everyday lives. One issue ends and another immediately begins. That growing frustration is why some residents openly question whether the city has drifted away from the purpose it was created to serve in the first place. Government should exist to serve the people – not constantly place them at odds with their own community.
The role of city leadership should be to protect and preserve the Marco Island way of life: peaceful neighborhoods, outdoor living, family gatherings, beach traditions, and the freedom to responsibly enjoy the island we all love. Residents should not feel like normal parts of life – a conversation on a patio, kids laughing outside, swimming in the pool, families gathering together, fishing at the beach, or neighbors enjoying their property – could eventually become another ordinance issue or another trip to magistrate court.
Marco Island has never been made better by more ordinances or more restrictions. It has always been made better by strong communities, respectful neighbors, common sense, and leaders focused on bringing people together instead of dividing them. The people of Marco Island are not asking for chaos. They are asking for balance. They are asking for leadership that listens, protects the island’s character, its heritage, and focuses on the larger issues facing our community like infrastructure, resiliency, and the future generations who will one day call this island home.
There is still time to change course. This city council is full of talented and accomplished people capable of leading Marco Island toward better times and restoring confidence that local government exists to preserve the Marco Island lifestyle – not slowly regulate it away. Because what has always made Marco Island special was never another ordinance or another restriction. It was the memories made here that last a lifetime.
David Boggs, Marco Island
Step in the right direction
At the May 4, 2026, Marco Island City Council meeting, the council passed an ordinance to upgrade the Marco Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) to achieve Advanced Wastewater Treatment (AWT) nutrient standards in the sewage reuse water. The new ordinance will reduce the ‘nutrient footprint’ on Marco and improve canal water quality. A big step in the right direction.
In 2022, the City of Marco received a preliminary proposal from Jacob’s Engineering that estimated the cost to reduce the nutrients in the reuse water to AWT standards to be between $4M and $9M. In 2026, the city received another estimate from Black & Veatch that estimated the cost to be between $5M and $14M.
City staff should ask each of these firms to provide a firm quote for full ‘design and build’ of the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) upgrade to achieve the lowest sewage reuse nutrient concentrations possible.
Each quote would be compared on three terms: 1) How much of the nutrients are removed, 2) Capital cost (CAPEX), and 3) Operating cost (OPEX). On this basis, decide which firm has the better project for Marco Island. Fewer nutrients are better for the canal water environment.
When the nutrients in the sewage reuse water dropped to almost zero during the early days of COVID in 2020, the canal oxygen rebounded to healthy levels almost immediately. After the WWTP upgrade, we can anticipate that oxygen in the canals would improve to healthy levels within a few months.
Ed Sherwood, the executive director of the Tampa Bay Restoration Program estimated that it would take between 3 and 5 years for the benthic mats of ‘gunk’ at the bottoms of the canals to clear up – there is significant tidal flushing in the Marco canals.
The city could then move on to oyster bed and seagrass restoration in the canals.
Eugene Wordehoff, Marco Island
Government overreach
Marco Island is again playing with fire and government overreach. I’ve seen this movie before and it costs taxpayers when it’s time to pay the piper. Recent efforts to impose a stricter noise ordinance — targeting normal sounds of children are a troubling step in the wrong direction.
Let’s be clear: Children laughing, swimming, and enjoying the outdoors are not nuisances. They are a sign of a healthy community. We are not a 55-plus gated community or a small town, we are a city. This government overreach will embolden chronic complainers to call police on every sound. This is not good governance. It is absurd. The measurement should be quantitative and not someone’s opinion that something is plainly audible.
Councilor Gray’s proposal would treat everyday outdoor activities as violations, placing unreasonable limits on how we use our own homes, pools and backyards.
Furthermore, an 8 p.m. start to quiet hours is not just impractical — it is excessive. Many families are just beginning to gather after work, school, and activities. Enforcing such an early restriction invites unnecessary complaints, turning ordinary living into a potential offense.
Communities thrive when they balance peace and livability — not when they silence one to satisfy the other. If these measures move forward, Marco Island risks becoming even more intolerant of families with kids who live here.
City leaders should reject these restrictions and adopt a data based measurable standard — one that protects against genuine disturbances, like blaring music at midnight without penalizing normal family life.
Anna Horrigan, Marco Island
WHAT’S ON YOUR MIND?
Letters can be 275 words or less. We reserve the right to reject letters or edit for clarity, brevity, good taste, accuracy and to prevent libel. No poetry, personal attacks or letter writing campaigns. We cannot accept handwritten letters. Submissions limited to one letter every two weeks. Include daytime phone and sign your letter. Email to mail@margoeagle.com.
This article originally appeared on Marco Eagle: Letters to the Editor, May 22
Reporting by Marco Eagle / Marco Eagle
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
