In 2019 a comprehensive Vision Survey and subsequent Vision Statement for our City was completed. The intent to update our governing document, the Comprehensive Plan, to reflect resident interests has been stalled by State Laws preventing local municipalities from making changes to their Plans.

However, updates to the City of Naples Comprehensive Plan are now underway with the City providing a draft for public opinion (link below).

Changes are intended to reflect resident input collected in 2018 and further affirmed through the 2025/26 update process:

Residents Identified These City Features as Most Important:

1. Cleanliness

2. Accessible, Beautiful Beaches

3. Medical Facilities

4. Peaceful, Small-Town Atmosphere

5. Beautiful Landscaping

Residents Highlighted Their Most Pressing Issues:

1. Beach Erosion and Red Tide

2. Cleaning up the Waterways

3. Transportation, Traffic, Congestion

4. Management of Development/Re-Development

5. Greenspace

Residents Identified Their Goals for the City:

1. Preserve Naples Distinctive Small Town Character and Culture.

2. Make Naples the green jewel of Southwest Florida by protecting the natural environment through restoring Naples Bay, promoting community sustainability, and establishing more green space.

3. Maintain an extraordinary quality of life for residents through improving City amenities for residents, enhancing community health, mobility and public safety.

4. Strengthen the economic health and vitality of the City by maintaining the viability of local businesses.

5. Maintain and enhance governance capacity for public service and leadership through enacting strategies to ensure a well-run local government and providing leadership on larger issues that impact the quality and future of Naples.

* The complete Vision Survey and Analysis can be found on the City website.

RESIDENTS FELT THE CITY WAS FALLING SHORT ON SUPPORTING THEIR PRIORITIES – WHAT HAPPENED:

But in the same 2018 Survey less than 30% of the citizenry reported being satisfied with how the city was performing in addressing their primary issues of concern.

Despite resident values articulated in the prior 2007 Survey, in the decade that followed City Council approved departures from the City’s codes, approving variances permitting greater density. This eroded residents’ confidence that their vision for the community was being respected.

This response from citizens has highlighted the need for a Comprehensive Plan which includes strong, unambiguous language, strategies, and action plans, as well as the election of officials who provide updates to the Plan that reflect citizens values, and who will honor and implement that Plan.

More recently State laws have passed upending Home Rule and the power of our City Council to make and implement change. Special interests have taken public responsibility for encouraging these laws.

Sharing your opinions with City Council, and electing both local City Council members AND State representatives who support resident interests is critical.

RESIDENTS REMAIN COMMITTED TO THEIR CORE VALUES

In addition to reaffirming their core values, residents have now voiced strong sentiment that resiliency must be improved and protected. This response demonstrates a greater effort to manage development/re-development, preserve greenspace, and fortify our environment.

Contemporary efforts to address the issue include a town hall meeting when in 2021 City Council sought input from the community on proposed land code changes which would protect greenspace and positively impact resiliency. The development community strongly objected, and the proposed changes were shelved.

Residents have been subsequently surprised to learn about underlying building codes which allow greater density than expected, particularly along the stretch of Gulf Shore Boulevard referred to as the Miracle Mile where redevelopment will result in greater height and intensity than realized.

Long overdue is transparency to the taxpayers on what our City would look like when fully built out under current land and development codes.

PUTTING RESIDENT INTERESTS INTO ACTION:

A strong Comprehensive Plan and the election of Council members who govern with the City Vision and Comprehensive Plan in mind as well as the election of State legislators who respect Home Rule and will uphold local governance is critical.

At hand now are updates to the Comprehensive Plan, the long-term blueprint for how the community should grow and develop. It establishes the policy framework for virtually every major land-use and development decision, ensuring those decisions are consistent with the community’s long-term vision.

RESPOND TO THE CITY:

A partial draft of Comprehensive Plan updates is available to the public, and the City is asking for your input on whether they have captured your interests.

The Planning Advisory Board (PAB) will make recommendations on the Comp Plan updates and City Council will ultimately make the changes, but whether the Plan’s language supports your interests will ultimately determine whether your issues are addressed and your goals for our City are met in the future.

1. See the message from the City and the link to the draft HERE

Comment as much or little as you want about the draft. Or simply share your values with City Council, and insist strategies and action plans to meet your goals are incorporated into the Plan.

Follow PAB and Council meetings where this agenda item is discussed as the updates are completed.

Message your opinions to the Director of Planning in the link provided, and always contact City Council on matters of importance with your opinion: council@naplesgov.com

The line on the map between Naples and Collier County does not protect us from the decisions made on the other side of it and the District 4 County Commissioner who represents us should respect our City Vision and defend our local authority.

On August 18, District 4 voters, which include the City, will choose between the two (Republican)candidates in the 2026 Republican primary: 

• Incumbent Dan Kowal

• Daniel Zegarac, former city council president in Ohio and retired automotive executive

The Supervisor of Elections' official site confirms that candidate statements and financial information are available to voters.

Importantly, there are only four days left to request a Vote-by-Mail ballot.  The deadline is: Thursday, August 6 at 5:00 p.m.

WHY DOES IT MATTER WHO IS ELECTED?

County influence on our City is growing.  Given the difference in the city and  county land codes, the growth in collier county, and now County participation in the management of our largest asset, the Countyimpact on the City of Naples is undeniable.

GROWTH – DENSITY – CONGESTION:

Naples has its own Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Land Development Code, and has a unique and coveted City Vision.  Collier County has its own Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code governing unincorporated areas.

We are not aligned.

The distinction matters because Naples residents areaffected by what the County allows immediately outside the City's boundaries and the cumulative pressure on traffic, stormwater, infrastructure, density, and commercial development.

How the Commissioner candidates plan to reconcile that and respect our City Vision is an important election issue.

WHAT ABOUT THE MONEY?

The City of Naples receives only 13.62 % of ourcollected property taxes for the City budget. The School District takes the largest percent – but of the combined City/County portion the split is approximately:

• City of Naples: 27.5%

• Collier County: 72.5%

This raises a very legitimate civic question:

If Naples residents and property owners contribute so substantially to County government, how much influence should Naples have over County decisions that affect the City?

It has long been discussed that our Interlocal Agreements do not represent a fair monetary contribution by the County. When the County uses City assets and resources our District 4 Commissioner must advocate for the County paying their fair share.

COUNTY PARTICIPATION IN CONTROL OF OUR LARGEST ASSET:

The special interests supporting House Bill 4005, developed by a legislator outside our County and supported by then Senate President Kathleen Passidomo, has defined it at the City Council podium as politically motivated; a response to City Council appointments to the NAA.

The result has been a shift in our local management authority of a City asset to one that now includes the County.

The new law changes the Naples Airport Authority from a City Council-appointed board to an elected five-member board chosen by voters throughout Collier County. Three seats must be held by Naples residents;two seats must be held by Collier County residents who live outside Naples; not just in District 4, in any District.

All five NAA Commissioners will be elected in aCounty-wide election where the County outnumbers the City by 15:1.

When individuals with power and influence can over-ride the citizens’ democratic process, the management of their own land, a Billion-dollar asset, removing localCity control, our citizenry should be very concerned.

Voters in the County Commissioner race should bekeenly interested in how these candidates view such a taking by the State; would they defend it; why have they not publicly denounced it to date?  

Do the candidates have interest in more County control of other assets in our City?

WHAT THESE DISTRICT 4 CANDIDATES ARE SAYING:

Dan Kowal — incumbent

Kowal is a retired law-enforcement officer and Army veteran and has served as District 4 commissioner since 2022. His public positions have emphasized:

• public safety and law enforcement

• clean water and environmental protection

• infrastructure and storm drainage

• managing growth and its traffic consequences

• conservative, limited-government principles

• affordable/workforce housing

Kowal has been involved with affordable housing policy and has discussed controlling housing costs and managing growth as County priorities.  He has been a participant in regional airport matters in his capacity as a County Commissioner.

In his 2022 candidate questionnaire, Kowal said growth in eastern Collier was coming and that the County needed to manage the resulting traffic, including better north-south routes to keep traffic from overwhelming east-west roads.

Naples Watch thinks controlling growth through sound land codes, rather than “managing” it iscritically important.   Growth and Resiliency are opposing factors. Over-development erodes resiliency.Our representative must understand that in these critical times.

Daniel Zegarac — challenger

Zegarac's campaign is considerably more explicit about its platform. He describes himself as a Republican committed to fiscal responsibility, limited government, smart growth and taxpayer oversight. His campaign identifies these priorities:

• fiscal responsibility and government oversight

• traffic and infrastructure

• smart planning and responsible growth

• small-business support

• workforce housing

• public safety

• effective government hiring

• collaboration between Collier County and the City of Naples

He has made an explicit statement that “Collier County should work with the City of Naples rather than against it.” He seems to offer a fresh perspective that could benefit the City relationship.

Naples Watch would ask Zegarac how he would work with the City when the County and City have conflicting interests over land use, growth, the airport and the City's property rights.

Naples Watch would ask both candidates their position on local governance and protecting Home Rule.  Why have they not taken a position on our City’s local authority being diminished by HB 4005?

Will our City Vision be respected by these candidates?   Will they advocate for our local control or look for greater influence over other City assets?  

What will each candidate actually do when the interests of a rapidly growing county (continue to) collide with the interests of a city whose land, character and quality of life are increasingly under pressure?

ONLY FOUR DAYS LEFT:

The deadline to request a Vote-by-Mail ballot is:Thursday, August 6 at 5:00 p.m.

You can request one online through the Collier County Supervisor of Elections Vote-by-Mail request page or call 239-252-VOTE (8683).

If you are mailing in your vote return it promptly rather than relying on regular mail close to Election Day. The ballot must be received by the Supervisor of Elections by 7 p.m. August 18—a postmark isn't enough. There is also early voting August 8–15, 10 a.m.–6 p.m.

This is an unusually important primary because the District 4 race is a Universal Primary Contest.

Collier County specifically confirms that all qualified voters residing in County Commission District 4 can vote in this race, regardless of party affiliation.

Both candidates are Republicans, and there is no Democratic candidate who will oppose the Republican winner in November, so Kowal vs. Zegarac on August 18 = the election that determines who gets the seat.

The candidate who receives the most votes wins the District 4 County Commission seat; the loser does notcontinue on to November.

That's different from a normal closed Republican primary where the winner advances to face a Democrat in November.

ASK THESE CANDIDATE ABOUT ISSUES THAT MATTER TO YOU:

The Candidates can be contacted at:

Dan.Kowal@collier.gov

info@danielzegarac.com

Expect the elected to commit to supporting your values and our City Vision..  

VOTE!

At the joint meeting between the Airport and City Council this week on the topic of HB 4005 which transfers NAA Commissioner appointment authority from City Council to a County election, a motion was made to by Vice Mayor Blankenship to continue lease discussions with the Airport but simultaneously pursue the legality and constitutionality of the new law with the courts.

The motion failed 4:3 with Schultz, Penniman, Kramer and Berne voting “No” on moving forward with securing a court ruling; three of whom initially voted to defend the City’s authority with the courts and secure clarity on the law but have now delayed the action.

Mayor Heitmann, Vice Mayor Blankenship and Councilman Krol voted to approach the new law and the lease in the right order, to get clarity on the law so a new lease can be negotiated with facts, eliminating confusion about the new law and the implications.

Naples Daily News reports have not made clear that neither the NAA nor the City want to stop negotiations on an updated lease; but first moving forward with a court ruling – which has already been filed - will provide answers for the public, critical to defining lease terms that benefit the community.

WHY ARE WE HERE:

The issue has never been about creating conflict with the Airport. City Council’s original 6-1 vote was intended to obtain a judicial determination on the legality of HB 4005 and the removal of the City’s appointment authority.

Under Florida law, the City cannot challenge the State or the legislators who developed the Bill directly, so the Naples Airport Authority was the only appropriate party to name in the action.

The purpose of challenging the State over-reach was to obtain legal clarity—not to create an adversarial relationship—and to ensure that future decisions regarding the Airport are made on a clear and legally certain foundation.

CONTEXT AND FACTS MATTER IN REPORTING:

We watch City Hall and this matter closely. The context of the vote by Heitmann, Blankenship, and Krol is relevant.

Their action seeks to resolve the fundamental question of legal authority before proceeding with lease negotiations or other long-term commitments. Establishing whether this law is even legal, or should be in the hands of City voters first helps ensure that future agreements such as a lease, which is secondary, are negotiated with certainty, legitimacy, and stability, benefiting both City residents and the Airport.

WHY THIS IS SO IMPORTANT TO CITY RESIDENTS:

If the lawsuit is allowed to be heard the ruling would include not only a determination on whether the lease was actually voided by HB 4005, but whether local authority can be returned to the City, and, importantly, if the Bill was properly noticed to the public before becoming law.

If the lawsuit is heard and it is determined the Bill was not properly noticed a CITY VOTER REFERENDUM may be required. In that case City voters, not special interests who influenced a Bonita Springs legislator to develop the Bill would then decide their fate.

City residents would reclaim their voice, and if City voters voted to keep appointment authority in the hands of their elected officials a new lease could also be negotiated. A win/win.

TAKE YOUR CHEESE BACK:

Presently a City asset is under the control of the State, the County, and special interests, not officials elected by the residents as it has been since 1969.

City residents have objected to encroachment of County development on our borders that drives congestion and a loss of our character, to county garages for beach access, to water elements at the Grande Hotel which will bring noise to our northern neighborhood.

Can we really now accept County influence “inside” our borders, that they will now control our decisions on how 12% of our city owned land is managed?

You can be sure that left unchallenged this sets a precedent for more erosion of your local authority – resident only beaches and garages at Seagate and downtown would be viewed as valuable targets; easy marks for the County.

Voters who have responded to campaign promises of Your Voice, Your City, Your Choice by Council candidates and have considered Home Rule an important campaign issue must now be asking themselves who has their back?

Before negotiating a long-term lease, and accepting a law that may not be constitutional the City Council should first obtain a judicial ruling on HB 4005 to determine the extent of the City’s authority and legal responsibilities.

Naples Watch believes this is the responsibility of our Council when a targeted, political, assault on the people’s right to local authority is categorically removed.

A court decision would provide the clarity needed to determine who has the authority to negotiate a lease, what powers remain with the City, and whether any proposed law removing authority over taxpayer land should ultimately be presented to City residents by the State for their approval.

Tell us what you think – Reply HERE

Leave a comment

More than 90% of municipal airports across the country operate under a governance model of local authority. The City of Naples, owner of the land which they lease to the Airport followed this same proven model for decades, with City Council appointing the Commissioners of the Naples Airport Authority (NAA) until the recent passage of House Bill 4005.

At the previous joint NAA/Council meeting, the City Attorney was directed to obtain answers from the FAA to five questions that the Airport Authority insisted were critical to determining whether the Airport would support the City’s effort to restore appointment authority through a dependent district. Instead, NAA Chair Cavanaugh said the answers now don’t matter; the Airport abruptly reversing course and ending further discussion of a joint strategy.

This means that, if the City chooses to proceed, it will pursue its legal challenge to House Bill 4005 independently, without a partnership with the NAA.

MAYOR HEITMANN IS CLEAR ABOUT THE CITY’S INTENTIONS

Special interests who championed House Bill 4005 have been remarkably candid about its political purpose. They have openly acknowledged that the legislation was prompted by their dissatisfaction with certain City Council appointments to the Airport Authority Board and they object to the City’s authority overall.

These special interest groups have relied on influence over State legislators, undermining local constituents. With the unprecedented action has come a plethora of narratives defending it.

But Mayor Heitmann has been consistent and clear on the City’s intentions citing the City’s continued commitment to the Airport, Council’s responsibility to the community at large, the importance of transparency, and the intention that the Airport’s growth management line up with the City’s growth management.

See the Mayor’s comments HERE

BLANKENSHIP KEEPS THE FOCUS ON LOCAL CONTROL

The City has stated it’s position that the new law in part has frustrated the City’s lease, rendering the lease terminated. Although an updated lease is desired by both parties, the success in regaining Council’s appointment authority over our largest City asset would be complicated by a narrow focus on the lease renewal.

Listen to Vice Mayor Blankenship’s’ Comments HERE

HOUSE BILL 4005: PROPERTY RIGHTS BE DAMNED

Removing a property owner’s authority over the management of their own land runs counter to a fundamental principle of property rights and accountable governance. In a state where property rights are deeply valued, and in a community like Naples where residents are especially vigilant in protecting those rights, this law impacting a targeted City asset for political purposes represents an extraordinary departure from longstanding municipal governance.

THE HIGH COST OF “IT DOESN’T AFFECT ME”

It’s stunning that residents at large would be “unphased” by the States actions as Councilman Schultz has repeatedly claimed they are, one driver in his decision to accept the new law. But this is in stark contrast to his campaign pronouncements defending Home Rule, an issue raised city-wide in the last Council election.

The potential consequences of passivity over Home Rule include:

• Continued reduction of local accountability – a reversal of resident interests on any issue.

• Additional loss of local control over land use and development projects.

• Increased fiscal impacts on City resources and taxpayers.

• Diminished influence over quality of life.

• Precedent for future state intervention including but not limited to any valuable asset - Beaches currently considered private neighborhood resources, and parking garages in the City and on our norther border for additional public access.

Despite the significant implications of this law, and the shift in NAA appointments to a County election in which County voters outnumber City residents by 15:1, little or no information has been shared by City HOA’s with their members.

A trend of neighborhoods to become increasingly insular, focusing primarily on issues affecting their own immediate surroundings while losing sight of the broader interests that unite the community puts at risk our collective ability to safeguard the character, quality of life, and future of our community at large. Coupled with the continued erosion of Home Rule, our local influence is steadily diminishing. We are watching it happen in real time.

NEXT STEPS:

The City and Airport will convene again on July 20^th at 8:30 a.m. to discuss the possible framework for a new lease while the Council initiates any concurrent legal path forward they may plan in defense of HB 4005 and their appointment authority.

For decades, Naples residents believed they controlled their community through local elections, public meetings, and City Council. Increasingly, that is no longer true.

A steady stream of state laws has stripped away local control. Tallahassee now dictates much of what can and cannot be done in our city—from regulating 5G towers to limiting how Naples manages growth and development. Now even authority over our City land leased to the City of Naples Municipal Airport, has been diminished by the passage of HB 4005. Local democracy has been taken away, one law at a time.

With help from these actions Naples is changing. Neighborhoods are giving way to transient occupancy and tourism-driven development. Residents who came for a small-town, elegant quality of life are watching that character be challenged by their own legislators.

With Home Rule neutered City Council is often left trying to minimize impacts rather than shape the future. State preemption, special interests, and development pressures have rewritten the rules preventing local decisions by those elected by you. The issue is no longer about unbridled vs. managed growth. It is about whether locals or State government have control.

As evidenced by the Vision Surveys and those with campaign platforms they elect, residents believe an equitable balance between economic vitality and quality of life can exist. A City Vision and Comprehensive Plan ensure it. But the ability for residents to decide where that line is drawn has been fiercely challenged over the last 5 years by the State and developers and special interests emboldened by the State actions.

Why wouldn’t developers and special interests be giddy about the future – the State has their back.

The hard truth is that if residents disengage completely, others will make decisions for them. Engagement begins with demanding that local officials defend your values.at home; empty promises that fade after the election must not stand. Even with reduced authority, Council appoints key boards, establishes priorities, sets budgets, litigates when necessary, and negotiates with other governments. Elections have consequences so residents must stay engaged.

City Council still matters. We consistently see Heitmann, Blankenship and Krol, in particular, demonstrate a resident first agenda on the dais. Six Council members that include Barton, Kramer and Penniman have shown their commitment to defend the City against HB 4005.

However newly elected Councilman Schultz who campaigned on defense of home rule and a “residents first agenda” stands out. He has said legally defending against HB 4005 and the taking of our largest City asset is “too expensive” and “no one cares.”

Schultz votes repeatedly against legally defending control of the management of this City land and has claimed from the dais that those who support the House Bill say they “can buy the County election” (of Airport Commissioners). One wonders why this elected official would not simply defend against that.

THE DEFINING ACTION BY COUNCIL

The next two weeks will reveal whether Naples City Council is prepared to fight for Home Rule or surrender it. Council meets again in mediation with the Airport in an effort to gain agreement that preserving a city-centric management model with a dependent NAA board should continue.

We will witness either Council’s defeat in responding to the most egregious taking of local authority by the State with the passage of House Bill 4005 or see a historic response to this over-reach rooted in political power by taking the issue to task in court and fighting for your rights.

Council’s response will determine whether this latest unprecedented state overreach is challenged or simply accepted as the new reality.

The stakes extend far beyond who appoints airport commissioners, or an updated lease with fair rent. At issue is whether Naples will defend the principle of home rule and the right of residents to govern their own community, or quietly accept the final erosion of local control. Stay tuned.

UP NEXT

Any update on action taken by Council over HB 4005 will be included in our next issue.

Council has concluded their season and will be on summer break until mid-August. The next Naples Watch issue will report on the actions of Council over this past season, their voting record, progress on priorities, and issues ranging from “Cars on Fifth” to the Comprehensive Plan update.

NAPLES WATCH

Naples Watch is a resident opinion paper. We have chosen to remain anonymous to keep the focus on the issues rather than personalities. Information shared is fact based and verifiable.

Our opinions are rooted in the idea that we are a fabric of neighborhoods with unique challenges but shared values and goals that should be upheld. The neighborhoods together represent a cohesive town unlike any other, governed by our City Vision that reflects the interests of its’ residents. Worth defending. . .

Mayor Teresa Heitman is facing a serious matter following a probation-related test that reportedly showed a positive result for a cannabis-like substance. In her statement released she denied the use of any alcohol or drug and promptly obtained two additional tests, both of which were negative.

It is reported that false positives are not uncommon. Some medications can trigger THC-like results, and initial urine immunoassay screens are especially known for false positives because they are designed to be sensitive rather than definitive.

Citizens are concerned; they must have full confidence that ethical standards and our laws are being upheld by our elected officials. Public officials must be held to a high standard, and any allegation involving compliance with court-ordered probation deserves careful attention.

At the same time, fairness requires that judgment be based on verified facts rather than premature assumptions. The appropriate course is neither automatic condemnation nor blind defense, but patience until the full facts are known.

Because the matter is now before the court, and a hearing has been scheduled for May, it is important to allow the legal process to proceed before drawing conclusions. Both accountability and fairness matter.

Naples Watch will be following this important matter as it develops.

STATE OVER-REACH AND ACTIONS BY SPECIAL INTERESTS RAISE REAL CONCERNS

Governor DeSantis has now signed into law Bill 4005, which has removed the authority of City Council to appoint Commissioners to the Naples Airport Authority (NAA). The NAA manages the City’s municipal Airport.

The land, owned by the City is 12% of the City’s total land mass, estimated to be worth $1 Billion. The City is the lessor in the lease of the land, with the Airport being the tenant on the City property.

Now Management of the City’s largest asset will be decided by Collier County voters.

Six of the seven City Council members who have rejected the politically motivated Bill believe losing governance over land that belongs to City taxpayers is a step too far by the State, and have voted to take legal action.

Only Councilman Schultz voted “no” on the resolution, saying most residents “don’t care” and it will “cost too much to defend.”

Residents have been taken aback by his position, since Schultz was a strong defender of Home Rule during his campaign. His resident-centric platform was noted by this publication, but his conduct on the dais since the election has left many questioning whether his campaign platform was ever sincerely held.

According to Councilman Schultz, special interests who supported the Bill told him they would “Buy the (County) election” to ensure control over NAA seats.

The City is now looking beyond power and influence to what many consider threats of corruption. One wonders why Councilman Schultz, hearing this, is not even more inclined to denounce the political underpinnings of the Bill and fight for his city’s governance and the residents’ land.

Last month, former Council member Gary Price admonished City Council, explaining that House Bill 4005 was created because Council “made a bad appointment to the NAA Board” and Council is responsible for the response (Bill 4005).

While on Council, Price made the decisions he chose, including routinely extending building variances to developers, voting to lengthen the Airport runway against significant citizen opposition, and appointing NAA Commissioners.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

It seems upending one’s own city governance by convincing legislators to advance Bill 4005 is quite the overreaction to the appointment of an NAA Commissioner and may have unintended consequences.

Now those responsible for Bill 4005 being conceived have put the Airport itself in the cross-hairs.

It has been argued that ”a municipality has an ethical, stewardship, and fiduciary-like duty to protect major public assets, especially land that belongs to the community.”

Now, because neither the Governor nor the Legislature can be sued by a municipality, regaining local authority for the citizens forces the City to name the Airport in any legal action.

Removing local authority and controlling a County election was thought by special interests to be a solution to strengthen their influence, but it seems to have resulted in a troubling consequence; the future leadership of the Airport and potentially the Airport itself has been placed in uncertainty.

Next steps following Council’s recent 6:1 passage of the resolution to pursue legal action in defense of the State over-reach will be an executive session of Council and development of the City’s legal strategy.

INTRUSIVE DEVELOPMENT AT OUR BORDERS

Responsible leadership includes looking beyond property lines to consider the cumulative impact of development wherever it occurs. The City still “smarts” over the County Davis Triangle as that development continues to grow on the eastern entrance to our City.

Now the Naples Grande Beach Resort plans to add a water park to its property in the County, but on the northern edge of the City. We applaud our City Council, which is unanimously opposed. This project can have very real consequences on our abutting neighborhoods: traffic, noise, infrastructure strain, and environmental impacts that do not stop at a municipal line.

Equally concerning is the broader environmental impact of the water park. At a time when we face growing water supply challenges and increasing resiliency concerns, approving a project that requires substantial water use and could include replacing permeable ground with additional hard surfaces raises serious questions about long-term planning.

The loss of absorbent land needed to manage stormwater, combined with the ongoing water demands of such a feature, deserves careful scrutiny before decisions are made that could affect surrounding neighborhoods.

COUNCILMAN SCHULTZ PICKS AND CHOOSES

It is noteworthy that Councilman Schultz feels The Naples Grande project, located next to his own home, is worth opposing. But Schultz should join City Council in their efforts to protect our City at large, opposing Bill 4005 and the taking of the residents’ largest asset.

The consequences of the City losing control of the land are profoundly consequential, permanent, and deeply significant to the city as a whole.

DEVELOPMENT WITHIN OUR BORDERS

Council is prevented from building resiliency measures into the City’s land codes due to a series of recent State laws eroding Home Rule. What remains as options are adding resilient landscape where we can and building expensive underground infrastructure to accommodate the increase in intensity and density of development, as older structures are re-developed under land codes that are significantly more lenient than many realized.

The majority of development does not come before Council for approval, but rather is “administratively approved” by staff. Although staff approval requires development to be within code, the allowable intensity comes as a surprise to residents who see the reality of dense redevelopment.

Mayor Heitmann has requested Council receive reports of administratively approved projects – in this way, the public can have full transparency, Council can fully understand the impact of our current codes, the pain points, and the effect redevelopment has on resiliency.

Although Councilman Kramer questioned the request, Heitmann insists that with knowledge and information, the City can consider how to meet challenges while handicapped by the State’s assault on Home Rule.

CAMPAIGN FOLLOW-UP

When Naples Watch reported on campaign platforms that were resident-centric, represented strong defense of Home Rule, and included robust plans for resiliency, candidates Blankenship, Krol, Schultz, and Petersen appeared in the resident column.

Blankenship, Krol, and Schultz were elected.

As we follow the elected officials on the many issues facing our citizens, discussion on the dais, voting records to date, and support for the residents and local governance…

Blankenship and Krol are the new Council members walking the talk.

CONNECT WITH US

Share your thoughts with us privately by hitting the “Reply” to this email button or with the community at large on our comment page by hitting the “comment” button.

Leave a comment

Residents are encouraged to stay informed, stay engaged, and stay Naples.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is an independent resident opinion platform and is not a political committee. It does not endorse candidates or coordinate with any campaign.

At their March 18^th meeting, City Council discussed the status of HB 4005, which has passed the House and the Senate and has been sent to the Governor for his signature.

In a letter to the Governor requesting the Bill be vetoed, the City remarked that “HB 4005 would remove the Naples City Council’s governance and oversight of the Naples Municipal Airport and the land on which it sits, transferring authority to a governing body elected by all Collier County residents. . . The legislation introduces significant risk by opening the door to external influence over one of the City’s most critical assets. The loss of local control could lead to incompatible land use decisions, intensification of airport operations, and policy direction that may not reflect the values or best interests of the Naples community.”

Council requested a meeting between the Governor’s office and a City delegation, and sent a strong signal from the dais that they will consider legal options to defend their governance over City land.

THE PUBLIC OBJECTS TO THE BILL

Members of the community spoke at the March 18^th meeting, concerned about what could happen should this State over-reach become law:

• Commissioners with no agency in our community or connection with our City documents that call for the Naples Municipal Airport to co-exist positively with our City residents will manage 8% of our land.

• The cross runway could be lengthened to allow for increased jet traffic – particularly over our northern neighborhoods – posing real safety concerns

• Removal of the weight restriction would allow bigger jets and commercial engagement

• Consolidation of 3 local municipal airports could occur – moving mosquito control and flight schools away from the City to Marco to make way for more jet operations here in the City . . . where the money is

• An outside commission could challenge the lease and City land codes, making claims of local over-reach when they don’t like something, supported by a State that will have demonstrated political will to circumvent democracy.

Does an emboldened State and County stop here, or flex control over our interlocal agreements, control of our beaches, or even move to annex the City because they want political influence?

DRAMA AT THE PODIUM

The Bill, written by Representative Adam Botana and advanced by Senator Kathleen Passidomo, raises serious questions about whether a small group of local interests is driving policy to gain greater control over the City’s airport.

In a cringeworthy appearance, former Councilman Gary Price, who serves on the Board of The Friends of the Airport, took the podium to admonish City Council for appointing two NAA Commissioners that he said had no business on the Board. “They shouldn’t be on there,” he said, warning Council that Home Rule “is not unconditional.”

The two candidates are fully qualified, a pilot and a business executive, stand-up City residents who came forward to serve the community.

Apparently, Home Rule really does have conditions . . . political.

Price has appeared at public comment several times since leaving office, admonishing Council for one decision or another. The criticisms have generally signaled support for development interests, saying . . . “Don’t make us stop you.”

The question is, should special interests be allowed to use their influence and power—locally and at the state level—to get their way, while the rest of us rely on democracy?

Home Rule ensures that our elected officials can govern without undue interference by the State, protecting the voice of the electorate.

When that principle is undermined, it is a serious concern and raises the question:

When you want your interests advanced, do you weaponize Home Rule because you can?

IN OUR NEXT ISSUE

• Council, adds, deletes, updates, and re-orders their priorities

• Council considers more transparency on administrative approvals of development projects

• Council reviews and accepts a Level of Service, the minimum standards for our infrastructure and services. Why is it an important Flashpoint?

Residents are encouraged to stay informed, stay engaged, and stay Naples.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is an independent resident opinion platform and is not a political committee. It does not endorse candidates or coordinate with any campaign.

The Bill removes the authority of the Naples City Council to appoint Commissioners, under their lease, on their land, to the Naples Airport Authority Board, who manage the Naples Municipal Airport.

The Bill replaces that authority with a County-wide election.

Watch the five-minute video of the Vice Mayor’s remarks HERE:

The Airport has leased, from the City, one square mile or 8% of City-owned land with a value of as much as $1Billion dollars since 1969.

The City manages the lease, and the Airport is subject to all City land codes and ordinances.

Allowing the County and special interests to influence the management of our City’s largest asset is a politically motivated State over-reach without justification, and could likely have far-reaching consequences to be covered in an upcoming Volume of Naples Watch.

WHAT TO DO:

The City meets tomorrow, Wednesday, March 18^th. The issue is on the agenda, which will likely be heard in the afternoon.

• Come show your support for supporting our local governance.

• Email the governor and tell him to veto HB 4005
  GovernorRon.Desantis@eog.myflorida.com

• Email City Council and encourage the to defend their authority, your land, and your voice with the full extent of the law Council@naplesgov.com

Resident concerns about special interests and over-development within the City, as well as County growth and influence, were recently addressed at the Voting Booth. But those concerns are intensified by the States’ action to compromise local governance through the erosion of Home Rule.

The State has (and is passing) four laws over the last as many years to override local governance of municipalities, and now the City of Naples in particular.

Defending our values is difficult enough, but State interference is a game-changer.

HOME RULE – A REALLY BIG DEAL

Home Rule is enshrined in the State Constitution, allowing municipalities to govern themselves without undue interference. But when the State decides to diminish Home Rule, your elected officials are prevented from independently governing on your behalf.

Decisions are made by legislators in Tallahassee. Voters lose control to decide what’s best for their town. Resident values and democracy become subservient.

THE CITY OF NAPLES AS A TARGET

These laws are sometimes applied to all municipalities in the State, but now the threat is specific, and the City of Naples is the target.

The Bill will change the game, with others able to garner control over the City’s largest asset, our wholly owned land and the Naples Municipal Airport.

House Bill 4005 was introduced last October and will move on to Senate approval. If passed, it will become law.

The Bill changes the Airport Enabling Act, removing the City Council’s authority to appoint City residents to the Naples Airport Authority (NAA), which manages the Naples Municipal Airport.

The City has been appointing members to the NAA Board since it was established in 1969.

But others want influence over who manages the Airport.

The Bill calls for County-wide “elections” for all NAA seats; an election not by City but Collier County who outnumber city residents by 380,000.

The Bill dilutes the City’s voice by 95%. If those in the County are allowed to vote on the management of our largest asset, 400K County residents will overshadow the 20K residents in the City.

The Bill also stipulates that two seats must be occupied by Collier County (not City) residents.

SPOILER ALERT – IT’S POLITICAL

City Council has the authority related to planning, zoning, and building permitting over the Airport, as well as the authority to appoint members to the NAA, unless that authority is pre-empted by State or Federal Law.

So why the development of the State Bill to pre-empt our City’s authority?

The Bill was developed by Representatives outside our District and was certified by Senator Kathleen Passidomo.

No rationale for the pre-emption has been given; no accusations or evidence of NAA mismanagement, policy, or operational failures at the airport exist.

Public speakers at Council meetings, and letters from those who appear to be in agreement with the Bill, have asserted that those with influence at the State level do not like recent NAA appointments made by City Council. The majority of Council members on the dais have remarked over the last year that the Bill appears politically motivated.

Fairness and balance are hard to come by when financial stakes are high and when those who profit have influence. Political influence generally follows the money, and the City of Naples is an epicenter for such influence.

WHAT’S NEXT AFTER PRECEDENT IS SET

If a State that values tourism and growth can step in and regulate your zoning, your land, and make unwarranted changes to the management of your local assets, it seems not out of the question that they would step in to control your beaches, require public parking garages, and regulate your development codes, advancing local transient activity and growth in your City.

These interests are contrary to those of our residents who crave preservation, neighborhood charm, and local control.

The City has already been impacted by prior Senate Bills preventing code changes, which prevent the City from responding to the very resiliency improvements that the State claims municipalities must enact.

The Bill prevents the protection of green spaces and initiatives to limit congestion.

City Council has denounced this latest Bill and agreed it must not move forward. But will Council prepare to defend Home Rule with legal action, or attempt to negotiate a lesser fate? YOUR voice must be heard.

MARCH 13, 2026 DEADLINE

Now that this House Bill 4005 has passed the House and has been referred to the Senate Rules Committee, the Committee must schedule it and approve it.

Referral to the Rules Committee does not guarantee a floor vote; you can object.

The Florida Senate Regular Session runs through March 13, 2026, which means Senate action needs to occur before then.

Naples City Council and City Residents must petition the Rules Committee NOW to “not” move this ill-conceived Bill forward for Senate vote.

WRITE to City Council and tell them no amount of compromise in the City’s management of the Airport is acceptable.

WRITE to Collier Commissioner Kowal for support to stop this Bill.

council@naplesgov.com

Dan.Kowal@collier.gov

WRITE to Senator Kathleen Passidomo, Chair of the Rules Committee; write to members of the Rules Committee, and Governor DeSantis to object to the State over-reach.

Tell them to stop House Bill 4005; tell them you value Home Rule, the independence of your municipality, and the right to manage your land and its’ assets.

Tell the State that your voice and your local governance matters and that the City must not lose control of their land and governance of the Naples Municipal Airport to the County and State.

GovernorRon.Desantis@eog.myflorida.com

Florida Senate Rules Committee:

Senator Kathleen Passidomo (Chair) – 📧 passidomo.kathleen.web@flsenate.gov

Senator Shevrin D. “Shev” Jones (Vice Chair) – 📧 jones.shevrin.web@flsenate.gov

Committee Members

· Senator Bryan Avila – 📧 avila.bryan.web@flsenate.gov

· Senator Lori Berman – 📧 berman.lori.web@flsenate.gov

· Senator Jim Boyd – 📧 boyd.jim.web@flsenate.gov

· Senator Jennifer Bradley – 📧 bradley.jennifer.web@flsenate.gov

· Senator Jason Brodeur – 📧 brodeur.jason.web@flsenate.gov

· Senator Danny Burgess – 📧 burgess.danny.web@flsenate.gov

· Senator Colleen Burton – 📧 burton.colleen.web@flsenate.gov

· Senator Tracie Davis – 📧 davis.tracie.web@flsenate.gov

· Senator Nick DiCeglie – 📧 diceglie.nick.web@flsenate.gov

CORRECTION: In our last volume we reported that two city council candidates who finished last in the recent City Council race were members of CCREC. In fact, we were informed by CCREC that John Langely is not a member of the organization. We apologize for the error.

Residents are encouraged to stay informed, stay engaged, and stay Naples.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is an independent resident opinion platform and is not a political committee. It does not endorse candidates or coordinate with any campaign.

In the recent City Council campaign all candidates promised to control development and improve resiliency. Voters selected those they believed were the most independent and likely to deliver on their promises.

At the regular City Council Meeting on Wednesday, February 18^th, three new Council members were sworn in for four-year terms.

Ted Blankenship, who was elected Vice Mayor at the meeting, John Krol, and Scott Schultz took their seats joining Mayor Heitmann, Linda Penniman, Bill Kramer, and Berne Barton forming the newly elected Council.

Outgoing members Beth Petrunoff, Terry Hutchison, and Ray Christman were recognized and celebrated, each offering final remarks to the public.

Beth Petrunoff offered compelling remarks that she believes underscore the City’s challenges and the resident’s interests.

Watch the video clip of her comments below:

PARTY AFFILIATION AND VOTER PREFERENCES

https://mail.yahoo.comAll three newly elected Council members are affiliated with the Collier County Republican Executive Committee (CCREC). However, one other CCREC member in the race received fewer votes than two candidates registered as independents and finished at the bottom of the field.

WHAT DECIDED THE ELECTION

The outcome of the election made clear that residents support responsible growth, protection from overdevelopment, preservation of our independence as a municipality, improved resiliency, and the safeguarding of their investment and values.

The idea that special interests should control our governance was rejected.

The results also signaled opposition to the idea that our downtown should function as the County’s central hub.

IMPROVING DEVELOPMENT TRANSPARENCY

Many development projects within the City are administratively approved by staff and do not require Council review. As a result, residents often learn of new projects only after construction begins.

Establishing a regular Council reporting item for projects both under staff review and those administratively approved would enhance transparency and public awareness. This measure would also help evaluate whether current approval procedures and development codes continue to serve the City’s long-term objectives.

A CONVERGENCE OF CONCERNS

Existing concerns about special interests and over-development within the City as well as County growth and influence are now intensified by State actions that compromise local governance through the erosion of Home Rule authority. Collectively, these dynamics pose a significant risk to the long-term interests and values of our residents.

PROMISES MADE – PROMISES KEPT

Commitments made to ensure the City’s independence, character, and quality of life will become real expectations of the electorate over the next four years.

The new Council will face many challenges beyond those discussed on the campaign trail.

NAPLES WATCH IS WATCHING

As a new Council refines their priorities and begins their governance Naples Watch will report on significant issues and action being taken.

Nothing can substitute for resident engagement. Your voice and determination to ensure your interests are represented make all the difference.

STAY CONNECTED - INFORMED - ENGAGED

Subscribe to this opinion piece by hitting subscribe above the banner; share it with a friend. Give us your comments by replying.

Most important, stay visible and connected with the elected who work for you:

Write to City Council as a group at: council@naplesgov.com

Include the City Manager: citymanager@naplesgov.com

Write to individual Council members:

Mayor Teresa Heitmann mayorheitmann@naplesgov.com

Vice Mayor Ted Blankenship tblankenship@naplesgov.com

Linda Penniman lpenniman@naplesgov.com

Bill Kramer wkramer@naplesgov.com

Berne Barton bbarton@naplesgov.com

John Krol jkrol@naplesgov.com

Scott Schultz sschultz@naplesgov.com

Residents are encouraged to stay informed, stay engaged, and stay Naples.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is an independent resident opinion platform and is not a political committee. It does not endorse candidates or coordinate with any campaign.

We looked beyond campaign rhetoric to public records, voting records, debates, endorsements, and financial filings, to assess candidate platforms that would serve the residents.

Too often special interests have been prioritized over our residents and the City Vision.

HOPE FOR RESIDENT VALUES

Supported by Councilwoman Beth Petrunoff, arguably the most resident centric civil servant to serve on City Council, four of the eight candidates have the will to make resident interests the fabric of our local governance.

KROL - PETERSEN - BLANKENSHIP - SCHULTZ

Among them is a commitment to your values, proven track records of service at City Hall; Code Enforcement, the City Planning Advisory Board, Coastal Commission for Resiliency. They have a determination to strongly defend Home Rule and your voice in local government.

They are similar in their independence and resident support. They have no special interest funding. What they have to gain is a strengthening of your values, our environment, and the protection and preservation of our town.

CONVERSLEY . . .

Special interests emerged early in the campaign and in a bold way – developers claiming it was “their time to shine”; bolstered by former Council members who, for over a decade, circumvented our codes for the benefit of intense development who are now calling for voters to bring “A Majority” to City Council.

These power brokers know there is a plethora of development opportunity remaining. They want to regain influence and have created a SLATE they are counting on:

CHIRSTMAN - BARONE - LANGLEY

Christman’s endorsements and financial backing have shifted significantly from resident support to special interest support. Comments from some leaving candidate debates said he “accepts development projects that could be more refined to meet resident values, excusing it as a “fait accompli” and prefers to negotiate vs. strongly defend Home Rule and resident interests.

“When a politician avoids every hard position, the result isn’t balance—it’s vacancy.”

Dan Barone has recused himself on PAB due to concern over conflicts of interests; landowner clients with development petitions.

All three are similar in that they are heavily funded by special interests and endorsed by prior council members who consistently circumvented our land codes; a worrisome mix.

YOUR VOTE - YOUR CHOICE

Selecting Palm Trees or Power Brokers to shape the future of the City is in the voters hands. There is so much at stake, that without an independent Council willing to enforce limits, defend local authority, and prioritize residents - congestion, infrastructure strain, and quality-of-life impacts will accelerate.

• The results of this election will be felt well beyond four years. It will define the City’s future

• Election results can come down to single votes

TUESDAY FEBRUARY 3^RD IS ELECTION DAY

Residents are encouraged to stay informed, stay engaged, and stay Naples.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is an independent resident opinion platform and is not a political committee. It does not endorse candidates or coordinate with any campaign.

All candidates say what you want to hear. But we have looked beyond the campaign rhetoric.

RESIDENT INTEREST CANDIDATES

· PETERSEN – KROL – BLANKENSHIP – SCHULTZ

Supported by outgoing Councilwoman Beth Petrunoff for their commitment to protect against over-development and to build resiliency.

Supported and financed by the residents - Independent - No special interest funding.

Guided by the City Vision and our Codes – understanding that development, not, just storms impact resiliency and our quality of life.

Strongly committed to defending Home Rule and your voice in Local Governance

Unwavering in the commitment to every neighborhood; to managed development/redevelopment, and preservation.

They share the residents Vision and will defend it.

THE SLATE - DEVELOPER AND SPECIAL INTERESTS CANDIDATES

· CHRISTMAN – BARONE – LANGLEY – TAYLOR

Publicly chosen, endorsed, and financed as a slate by special interests who routinely bring development petitions to City Council;

Endorsed by prior council members who circumvented our building codes for these special interests, resulting in intensity and density beyond what our laws allowed and residents wanted.

They now want to regain influence.

Christman has a history of running on resident values but voting in support of developers. Barone has clients who are landowners who will bring development petitions to City Council.

Together they claim there are “no issues with development” in the City when the truth is nearly every vacant lot and every existing project on a parcel can be redeveloped at far greater intensity under current rules than exists now. No neighborhood is exempt from the impact.

WHY YOU SHOULD BE CONCERNED

When candidates are financially backed by developers and special interests, policy decisions often reflect donor interests rather than resident needs.

WHAT’S AT STAKE

Since 2007 residents have expressed concern about over-development, congestion, and the negative impact on quality of life and the environment. Resident interests have not been prioritized and residents feel it.

There is a plethora of development and re-development opportunities before us. The Slate’s endorsers say there is “Nothing negative about Naples becoming Miami West.”

But residents felt differently when Miami came over during COVID and they feel differently when they consider the differences between the two.

The developer/special interests have publicly called for “a majority” on City Council and say “it is their time to shine.”

Without an independent Council willing to enforce limits, defend local authority, and prioritize residents; congestion, infrastructure strain, resiliency and quality-of-life impacts will accelerate.

THERE IS NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT than defending your home. . . it could finally be your time to shine – the power is in your VOTE: February 3^rd

Residents are encouraged to stay informed, stay engaged, and stay Naples.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is an independent resident opinion platform and is not a political committee. It does not endorse candidates or coordinate with any campaign.

Since 2007 residents have continually expressed concern in City Vision Surveys about over-development, congestion, and it’s negative impact on quality of life.

RESIDENTS ARE CLEAR AND CONSISTENT

Residents want managed growth; upscale, in-scale, sophisticated development, a vibrant business community that is centered on residents and visitors, preserving small town charm, protecting our environment and quality of life.

Congestion, loss of green space, over-development has had them very concerned.

The City Vision calls for this equitable balance, but residents don’t feel it.

WHY IS THE RESIDENTS VISION NOT PRIORITIZED?

In spite of resident input those serving on City Council for over a decade (2007-2019) put special interests and development first, granting 100% of the requests by developers for deviations from our land codes. The result was intensity and density well beyond what our laws intended and residents wanted.

Now these former council members, developers and other special interests want to regain influence. They have developed a slate of three candidates urging voters to elect “a majority on City Council.”

In letters to their network the developers and special interests have said:

“this is our time to shine!”

These candidates, Christman, Barone, and Langley are endorsed and are financially subsidized by special interests.

WHY SHOULD YOU BE CONCERNED

• When candidates are financially backed by developers and special interests, policy priorities reflect donor interests rather than resident needs.

• In our City there are significant opportunities for intense development and redevelopment that will bring more congestion, dense development and erosion of our resiliency given our underlying land codes.

WHAT CAMPAIGN PLATFORM WILL SERVE THE RESIDENTS

With Eight candidates all saying and promising the “same thing” distinctions matter. Who is just garnering votes and who are the public servants that will to serve you?

We have studied the debates, endorsements, financial filings, backgrounds, voting records, public records, and meeting minutes to form our opinion on the platforms.

Voters decide on the candidates. Links to a full collection of debate videos is at the bottom of this piece.

PALM TREES VS. POWER BROKERS

We have separated the Palm Trees from the Power Brokers to give our opinion on the campaign platforms from the lens of resident interests as expressed in the City Vision Surveys.

JOHN KROL

• Has articulated clear alignment with resident-first governance and firm defense of home rule, emphasizing enforceable limits, independence, and long-term quality of life over short-term accommodation.

• As Chair of the City’s Code Enforcement Board, he has demonstrated reliability, good sense, a respect for our codes and a commitment to full transparency

• He understands that reckless development in BOTH the County and the City assaults our environment; bad development decisions by the County, if not strongly rejected by the City add to diminishing water quality, stress on our infrastructure, additional congestion and negatively impacts our quality of life.

• Unwavering in his commitment to champion for all neighborhoods, our environment, and the importance of our codes;

• Describes himself as a civil servant who can’t be “bought” having “good business experience” vs. “bad political experience.”

SALLY PETERSEN

• She offers a fresh approach, informed by prior experience in local governance and a love for the City of Naples.

• Petersen is amiable and collaborative; will get things done with inclusion and consensus but is tough and unwavering on what matters: Home Rule protecting greenspace, building resiliency and managing development

• She is one of the few candidates who has come forward with well-defined practical solutions, such as incentives for greenspace preservation and consideration of our land codes demonstrating an understanding of how BOTH development, storms, impact resiliency

• Petersen is believable when she insists on an “all neighborhood” approach to our City governance and has demonstrated that inclusive approach in her public service background

TED BLANKENSHIP

• Blankenship served on City Council from 2020 – 2024 and brought a business financial acumen that served the City in budget building, pension development and wage negotiations.

• He projects a cooperative, consensus-driven approach, and is not easily ruffled

• Blankenship is independent enough to call out the facts: saying, “This is the fifth election in a row with a strong undercurrent of developers versus residents. It’s a constant battle to control development and redevelopment within the city and manage it in a way that benefits residents.”

• Blankenship sees the connection between resiliency and development commenting on the scale of “over-development” allowed in what is now the Four Seasons, saying “the City (in 2017-19) gave up too much.”

• His record demonstrates a collaborative approach; reaching out to all neighborhoods on important issues

SCOTT SCHULTZ

• Claims a steadfast commitment to resident interests, managing development and improving resiliency.

• Served as Chair of the Collier County Coastal storm risk management committee forging important County and State relationships; led the effort to replant mangroves and finish the sea wall project in the norther part of town.

• Believes greater geographic balance would bring a grass roots understanding that would serve the community as a whole

• Schultz pointed out that “the northern part of town lacks representation.” He observed that “if Barone, a Sun Terrace resident, is elected and joins current Council members Kramer and Berne, roughly 4% of voters would then hold 42% of the Council seats.”

• He has spoken forcefully about limiting variances and overreach; promising an aggressive approach in defending home rule against county and state encroachment.

PENNY TAYLOR

• Taylor served multiple terms on City Council, including when the State directed the City to clean up the Beach Outfall Pipes, admitting that “can was kicked down the road” and demonstrating a lack of interest and leadership in taking on the big issues.

• She has not clearly explained her vote supporting the Davis Triangle development, nor addressed concerns about developer funding behind her campaign—leaving unresolved questions about judgment and independence.

• Taylor claims “not one person” in the City approached her as County Commissioner on her vote for Davis Triangle. However, public record shows she appeared before a questioning City Council, defending the project, and in spite of City concerns she was not deterred.

• She has hailed expansion of the local hospital as “good for medical tourism” when residents just want excellent health care.

• Taylor dismisses efforts to improve greenspace saying “lot line to line lot brings in money.”

• While serving as a County Commissioner she questioned the City in prioritizing beach end parking for residents with parking stickers

• Taylor has been referred to as a career politician who, although serving on both City Council and as County Commissioner did little to advance collaboration.

• She seems unphased by the County’s lenient land and building codes that add to the drain on resiliency and quality of life for the City residents

THE SLATE CANDIDATES

Christman, Barone, and Langley have been selected as the slate by both the former Council members and special interests who have gone public in their support of the trio.

Their endorsements and public financial filings are similar variations of financial donors which include:

• A Collier County Planning Commissioner who voted for the Davis Triangle

• Senior leadership from Naples Community Hospital, with projects expected to come before the next Council

• A member of the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce

• The president of a realty investment firm that owns and develops commercial properties

• A past president and current board member of the Fifth Avenue South Business Improvement District

• Property and real estate developers, investment executives, and professionals who regularly seek zoning changes and variances

• Business and airport-related leaders advocating commercial growth

• Architects, attorneys, and finance professionals

This does not imply any wrong-doing but is a stark contract to resident support of other candidates.

SOME REAL CONFUSION

• Christman has said the City is not really growing—only the County is.

• Barone claims development is not a concern because it’s “only re-development (happening).”

It’s difficult to imagine these candidates, especially a sitting Councilmember, do not understand the significant opportunities for intense redevelopment that will benefit special interests vs. the residents given our current underlying land codes. Vacant lots and projects for redevelopment can be built with an intensity and density well beyond what we see today.

RAY CHRISTMAN

• Christman ran on a resident-first platform in 2019 but his first vote was to approve dozens of variances and deviations for the Naples Beach Hotel.

• Effectively weakened the intent of the linear park requirement for commercial projects designed to preserve green space by allowing it to be satisfied within the public right-of-way in the A/C Marriott development.

• Objected to further consideration, as the development community did, of four land code ordinances that could result in developer – resident collaboration to improve resiliency

• Willing to negotiate vs. strongly defend the attack on our Home Rule and local governance by Senate Bills that strip governing power from municipalities.

• Favors “negotiation” of pending legislation that would permanently shift control away from city residents: If the proposed House Bill 4005 is passed, vacating authority of the City to appoint members to the managing Board of the Airport, it would remove 8% of the city’s land mass from resident control—forever.

• Christman continues to signal to the Bill’s developers from the dais that he would “negotiate” the Bill, sublimating a City Council consensus to reject the Bill out of hand.

• He is criticized by River Park leadership as Chair of the CRA in not allocating funds to that area in true need

• Favors a plan that demonstrates intensity of the 10th Street Corridor/Design District re-development that many argue will become a playground for the County vs. serving the residents interests.

• Voted consistently to amend the Charter Height Amendment for the popular Naples Community Hospital project rather than working to find a legal solution to support the height requested; letting other Council members do the strong work to find a legal pathway for the project to advance.

• Has taken credit for the Naples Beach Hotel perpetual easement but was ready to accept a lesser version of their promise; other council members and community groups advanced the issue for success

• He attributes our declining resiliency to warming ocean waters and stronger storms, while overlooking the role development plays in exacerbating those impacts.

DAN BARONE

• During his short tenure on the Planning Advisor Board, he has recused himself twice due to conflict-of-interest concerns; land owners seeking project approval who were his clients

• Has been questioned on whether he is independent enough to be fully engaged and make tough decisions

• Would accept negotiation of the State’s assault on Home Rule

JOHN LANGLEY

• Continually claims the current City Council is responsible for intense development outcomes. The fact is for more than a decade the (2009-2019) the former mayor and city council member who now endorse him approved 100% of developer requests to circumvent our codes.

WHAT’S REALLY AT STAKE

Naples is not built out. Vacant parcels remain; redevelopment of an entire design district can become a playground for the County vs. an upscale renovation for our community, hotels and transient lodging developments are at the ready.

Nearly every existing project on a parcel can be redeveloped at far greater intensity under current rules. No neighborhood is exempt from the impact.

Without a Council willing to enforce limits, defend local authority, and prioritize residents, congestion, infrastructure strain, and quality-of-life impacts will accelerate.

Voters are not choosing campaign rhetoric and slogans. They are choosing governing philosophies that will impact us well beyond the next four years.

DEBATE VIDEOS

Following are links to each of the Candidate Debates held around the City:

• RedBlue4Green

• Old Naples Association

• GSAC

• Collier County League of Women’s Voters

• Port Royal, Aqualane Shores, & Royal Harbor

Election Day is Tuesday, February 3rd.

RESIDENT FIRST CANDIDATES

1. Ted Blankenship: https://www.tedblankenship.com/

2. John J. Krol: https://www.krolforcouncil.com/

3. Sally Petersen: https://sally4naples.com/

4. Scott T. Schultz: https://www.schultzfornaples.com/

Residents are encouraged to stay informed, stay engaged, and stay Naples.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is an independent resident opinion platform and is not a political committee. It does not endorse candidates or coordinate with any campaign.

As a resident opinion piece dedicated to the idea that our local governance should reflect resident interests, our attention has been focused on the upcoming City Council election. We will live with the results far beyond the next four years.

Many of you have written to us in support of how closely we are following the elements of this race, that all our fact statements are verifiable, and sharing your comments and opinions.

A LETTER TO THE EDITOR

In a recent Letter to the Editor in Naples Daily News, a resident called us out as likely a Political Action Committee (PAC), making derogatory statements about us, defending a candidate supported by the developer slate.

We wanted to share our response sent to the writer:

“We are sorry you are confused about our status (as a PAC). We do not collect or spend money; not a dime. Substack is free, and residents, or anyone else is free to share their opinion, as you did in your Letter to the Editor.

We are not a PAC and we are not breaking any rules. We are clear that we are an opinion piece, but that every fact we include is verifiable in the public realm.

I understand that our being anonymous gives you pause; but we have seen first-hand the opposition and special interests get retaliatory. A sad state of affairs, but fact.

We think resident voices should be heard, their values and interests as expressed in the City Vision should be upheld and that special interests should not govern our community. We have the history of seeing that being upended by special interests and prior council members who now want to regain influence.

The special interests have been completely transparent in who they support - public magazines, letters and campaign material, and we object to a special interest slate.

We have not been personal or disparaging in our opinions; that is not our intent. It is disappointing that your letter to the editor about us did not offer the same restraint.

We wish you the best as a fellow resident; we live in a beautiful, special place that deserves our mutual efforts to preserving what we have remaining.”

IT COULD NOT BE ANY CLEARER

As Ted Blankenship has pointed out – “This is the fifth election in a row with a strong undercurrent of developer vs. resident interests”

Sally Petersen has acknowledged unprecedented development and says that “residents know it – Naples feels different today . . . we need new, thoughtful leadership.”

John Krol has made clear the impact of over-development on our environment, resiliency and quality of life.

THE SPECIAL INTERESTS ARE TELLING YOU WHO THEY ARE

The special interests and their slate are fully out in the open. They are “thrilled” that two of their candidates were seated on City Council in the last 2024 election. Along with former council members who continually circumvented our land codes to benefit developers 100% for over a decade, they are now publicly calling in the press for A MAJORITY of like-minded candidates to be elected: Christman, Barone, Langley.

The developer interests have penned a letter saying boldly: “This is our time to SHINE.”

Their slate candidates all have campaign material saying resiliency and managed growth matters, but voting records, endorsers, and those who are financing these candidates tell a different story.

With everything out in the open, voters will choose on February 3^rd if it is now the residents time to shine and for the City Vision to be upheld.

NAPLES WATCH

Naples Watch is a resident opinion platform grounded in the belief that City governance should reflect the interests of all Naples residents, in every neighborhood.

We are not a PAC and are not connected with any campaign. We do not endorse candidates but support verifiable campaign platforms that put resident interests first. All our Facts can be checked: public record, campaign filings, debate transcripts, City voting records, and official minutes.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

A SLATE HAS GONE PUBLIC

In the January issue of Life in Naples, former Mayor Barnett, who voted 100% of the time for variances and deviations from our building codes to benefit developers, endorsed candidates Christman, Langley, and Barone. He urged voters to support these candidates, adding to the two Council members seated in the last election to create “a majority” on City Council.

All three candidates have special interest support, with Christman the most heavily funded by special interests.

NOW A DEVELOPER LETTER - “THIS IS OUR TIME TO SHINE”

Now, developers, architects, special interests, and a former councilman who, like the former mayor, voted for over a decade to consistently circumvent our development codes, have put forward a transparent agenda.

They have distributed a letter saying “this is our time to shine,” endorsing Christman, Barone, and Langley.

WHY DOES IT MATTER

In recent debates, Christman has said, “the City’s not growing, growth is (only) in the County.” Barone has said, “We don’t need to worry about development; there is little land left; it’s only redevelopment.”

BUT THAT’S NOT TRUE

Managed growth is more important than ever before. The City’s current, underlying land codes allow for much greater intensity, density, and potential for growth than exists today.

Buildings that will be redeveloped were built well below what current zoning allows, meaning redevelopment will be far more intense than what exists now.

Christman, Barone, and Langley won’t tell you what their endorsers and financial backers don’t want you to know: there is a plethora of development opportunities in our City, and unchecked redevelopment will have a negative impact on resiliency, congestion, and your quality of life.

RESIDENT INTERESTS

With resident-centric governance, Naples can develop with elegance and restraint. Redevelopment should be in scale, preserve our charm, protect green space, and strengthen our economy without sacrificing quality of life or resilience.

In the election of three City Council members on February 3^rd, there are candidates with consistent, resident-centric messaging, no developer endorsements or financing, and no conflicts of interest, who represent a real opportunity for “resident values” to finally shine:

John J. Krol: https://www.krolforcouncil.com/

Sally Petersen: https://sally4naples.com/

Scott T. Schultz: https://www.schultzfornaples.com/

Ted Blankenship: https://www.tedblankenship.com/

NAPLES WATCH

Naples Watch is a resident opinion platform grounded in the belief that City governance should reflect the interests of all Naples residents, in every neighborhood.

We are not a PAC and are not connected with any campaign. We do not endorse candidates but support verifiable campaign platforms that put residents’ interests first. All our Facts can be checked: public record, campaign filings, debate transcripts, City voting records, and official minutes.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

A slate of candidates has emerged with backing from former City Council members who supported overdevelopment, along with campaign funding from special-interest groups.

From 2009–2019, Council members approved variances and deviations from the City’s land-use codes 100% of the time, despite residents raising concerns about overdevelopment in the City’s 2007 Vision Survey.

Resident concerns were repeated in a 2017 survey, reporting that their interests were not being served. They took action in the 2020 election, voting in more resident-centric Council members.

But former elected officials and special interests have since sought to regain influence.

In the 2024 election, a slate of candidates openly backed by members of the 2009–2019 Council was put forward. Two of those council candidates were elected.

Now, in the January issue of Life in Naples, former Mayor Bill Barnett has endorsed candidates Christman, Langley, and Barone, publicly urging voters to now create “a majority” on Council.

All three have special interest support, with Christman the most heavily funded by developers. His campaign language emphasizes residents, but his voting record and campaign funding reflect growth-driven priorities.

THE CONTRAST - A CRITICAL DECISION

In contrast, four independent, resident-centric candidates are running for the three seats who prioritize all neighborhoods, Home Rule, and responsible growth:

Ted Blankenship: https://www.tedblankenship.com/

John J. Krol: https://www.krolforcouncil.com/

Sally Petersen: https://sally4naples.com/

Scott T. Schultz: https://www.schultzfornaples.com/

NAPLES WATCH

Naples Watch is a resident opinion platform grounded in the belief that City governance should reflect the interests of all Naples residents, in every neighborhood.

We are not a PAC and are not connected with any campaign. We do not endorse candidates but support verifiable campaign platforms that put resident interests first. All our Facts can be checked: public record, campaign filings, debate transcripts, City voting records, and official minutes.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is a resident opinion platform founded on the principle that our city governance should reflect the interests of its residents. As the campaign for three City Council seats unfolds, we share facts and opinions about who we think will defend resident values.

UP FIRST - FOLLOW THE MONEY:

The extraordinary rewards tied to development in our city can create influence on elected officials from well-funded special interests, leaving residents’ values overshadowed.

CONTRIBUTIONS AND ENDORSEMENTS:

To date, all candidates have filed two campaign finance reports.

• Sally Petersen, John Krol, and Scott Schultz are funded by local residents.

Outgoing Councilwoman Beth Petrunoff has endorsed Peterson, Krol, and Schultz.

Petrunoff upheld resident interests city-wide and addressed unique challenges facing individual neighborhoods. She hopes “others elected will now prioritize resident values.”

She explained her support, saying, “these candidates will defend what really matters to residents. They are the Churchill vs. the Neville Chamberlain appeasement strategists adopted by the other candidates – a path that sacrifices residents’ quality of life.”

• Ted Blankenship and Penny Taylor are relying primarily on personal resources.

THE MOST STUNNING FINANCIAL FILING:

Ray Christman’s campaign filing shows a significant shift in contributors from his initial run for office. 2019 campaign donations came heavily from local residents, but following a voting record supporting developers, Christman’s 2026 financial report includes key donors:

• A Collier County Planning Commissioner who voted for the Davis Triangle

• Senior leadership from Naples Community Hospital, with projects expected to come before the next Council

• A member of the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce

• The president of a realty investment firm that owns and develops commercial properties

• A past president and current board member of the Fifth Avenue South Business Improvement District

• Property and real estate developers, investment executives, and professionals who regularly seek zoning changes and variances

• Business and airport-related leaders advocating commercial growth

• Architects, attorneys, and finance professionals.

This does not imply wrongdoing. But the contrast is notable:

His campaign language emphasizes residents - His campaign funding reflects growth-driven priorities.

In the December 2025 issue of Life in Naples magazine, Mr. Christman was endorsed by a former Mayor who voted 100% of the time for deviations to our building codes, and in his campaign material is endorsed by a former Councilman who voted over 80% of the time for the same variances and deviations.

• John Langley’s campaign filing also includes senior leadership of NCH and a Board member of the 5^th Avenue BID.

• Dan Barone’s filing includes some comparable contributors. In the December 2025 issue of Life in Naples magazine Mr. Barone too is endorsed by a former Mayor who voted 100% of the time for deviations to our building codes.

Mr. Barone has mentioned clients in Planning Advisory Board (PAB) meetings who have brought and may bring additional projects before the City. Will he recuse himself as he has done twice as a member of PAB?

WHO WILL BE REPRESENTED

Developer contributions paired with endorsements from former Council members who routinely circumvented building codes for developers raise a troubling concern.

BACK TO THE FUTURE

Continued growth and intense redevelopment are the realities we face. Resident-focused leadership—capable of managing this pressure – is the way citizen values will be prioritized.

CANDIDATE CONNECTION

1. Dan Barone: https://danfornaples.com/

2. Ted Blankenship: https://www.tedblankenship.com/

3. Ray Christman: https://christmanforcouncil.com/

4. John J. Krol: https://www.krolforcouncil.com/

5. John A. Langley: https://john4naples.com/

6. Sally Petersen: https://sally4naples.com/

7. Scott T. Schultz: https://www.schultzfornaples.com/

8. Penny Taylor: https://www.votepenny.com/

WHAT’S NEXT:

What the candidates are saying - rhetoric or reality

The PACS are back - the problem with their messaging

Residents are encouraged to stay informed, stay engaged, and stay Naples.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is an independent resident opinion platform and is not a political committee. It does not endorse candidates or coordinate with any campaign.

Naples Watch is a resident opinion platform grounded in the belief that City governance should reflect the interests of Naples residents. As the campaign for three City Council seats unfolds, Naples Watch does not endorse candidates but offers a resident perspective to inform voters.

Subscribe now

PALM TREES VS. POWER BROKERS

Eight candidates are competing for three City Council seats in the February 3 election. Through campaign materials, forums, endorsements, and financial disclosures, voters can assess whether candidates align with resident priorities—or with special interests seeking continued influence

Candidates:

• Dan Barone

• Ted Blankenship (Council 2020–2023)

• Raymond R. Christman (Incumbent)

• John J. Krol

• John A. Langley

• Sally Petersen

• Scott T. Schultz

• Penny Taylor (Former Collier County Commissioner)

THE FIRST DEBATE

The first candidate forum was held on December 11 by Red/Blue/4Green, a bipartisan organization focused on environmental protection and resiliency. Candidates were asked how development policy affects resilience. A video recording of the forum is available at redblue4green.org.

DEFENDING YOUR LOCAL VOICE

Multiple State Senate Bills such as SB 180 have restricted local authority statewide. Additional legislation targets Naples directly, removing City Council’s authority to appoint members to the Naples Airport Authority (NAA). The NAA manages our largest City asset. These actions weaken Home Rule and diminish the voice of local voters.

The majority of Council candidates support negotiating with the State on Bills that erode Home Rule, accepting “compromises” that still strip cities of meaningful local control.

Other candidates believe legal action is necessary to protect Naples’ local authority, especially on zoning and the airport.

John Krol and Sally Petersen emerged as the strongest defenders of Home Rule. Both emphasized that protecting local authority requires not only legislative advocacy but also legal action when necessary.

• Krol described Home Rule as “under constant attack” and supports litigation to challenge state overreach.

• Petersen stressed that resident voices must be an intentional part of Council decision-making and supports legal action to keep decisions local.

Councilman Christman voted against joining 25 other Florida municipalities in the SB 180 lawsuit, although the motion passed with a majority vote by Council and has already had a positive impact.

Sally Petersen supported Council’s decision to join the SB 180 lawsuit, noting that legal pressure has already prompted reconsideration of parts of the bill.

Candidate Penny Taylor stated she would not use litigation as a tool against State legislation threatening Home Rule and even defended legislation removing Council’s authority to appoint Naples Airport Authority members.

Note: City Council has appointed Airport Authority members to manage our local airport for 57 years. State intervention raises broader concerns about future control over other critical city assets, including more interference in development and control of our local beaches.

WHO WILL PROTECT THE VOTER MANDATE

The Charter Height Amendment —approved by voters in 2000—limits commercial building height to 42 feet and is widely regarded as essential to preserving Naples’ character. Under Florida law, municipal charters may be amended only by voter referendum.

Despite this, Councilman Ray Christman and then–Councilman Ted Blankenship voted to amend the Charter Height Amendment to allow a 72-foot-high development project.

Other Council members rejected that approach and did the work to establish a lawful alternative for a project broadly supported by the residents. The pathway preserved the Charter Height Amendment, avoiding citywide precedent.

THE BLAME GAME

Penny Taylor has claimed City Council failed to secure outside funding for stormwater projects. Public records show otherwise. The City has secured county, state, and federal funding, including:

• Over $10 million from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection

• County funding, including Tourist Development Council allocations

• Federal funding, including FEMA awards

• Over $70 million for major resiliency projects, including beach outfalls, stormwater remediation, lake restoration, and flood repairs.

• President Trump just announced Federal Aid for the Naples Pier reconstruction

Resiliency funding requires shared investment. Outside grants supplement—but do not replace—local participation.

WHO REALLY IGNORED WHAT

Candidate Dan Barone claimed Council delayed approving stormwater infrastructure projects. In fact, projects were largely deferred from 2009–2020 by a prior Council. That Council prioritized development and granted developer-requested variances to our land codes over 90% of the time. Resiliency issues were left on the cutting room floor and resident concerns about over-development were not prioritized.

The current 2020–2024 Council took action, completed design, secured funding, and launched the beach outfall project in October 2024, while also initiating a citywide infrastructure prioritization plan. At the same time Council tightened development codes by limiting variances and codifying the removal of site plans with deviations from consideration.

INTENSE DEVELOPMENT: DAVIS TRIANGLE

While serving as a County Commissioner, Penny Taylor voted to approve the Davis Triangle—the densest development on Naples’ border—despite objections from City officials and residents. The County now plans further expansion.

County decisions such as Taylors directly affect Naples through increased traffic, congestion, and reduced resilience. Can she make the transition to City values?

Taylor has also described the NCH Heart Institute as beneficial for “medical tourism,” at a time when residents prioritize improved local healthcare over increased tourism.

DEVELOPMENT DEALS

Ray Christman claimed leadership in securing the Naples Beach Club (now Four Seasons) conservation easement. That easement was offered by the developer in exchange for extensive variances allowing significantly greater density.

Councilman Christman’s first vote was in favor of those variances. He later lamented that partial compliance with the easement agreement being offered by the developer “may be as good as we can get.”

Ultimately, sustained pressure from City staff, Council at large, and neighborhood groups resulted in the delivery of the easement as originally promised.

DENSITY AND SHRINKING GREEN SPACE

Voters heard a forum discussion about bigger buildings, more density, congestion, shrinking green space, and flooding.

• Krol and Schult came out most strict about variances, in cases of hardship only.

• Peterson was a hard no on commercial variances, but suggested common sense on residential issues, based on neighborhood benefit; she supports incentives for preservation of green space.

• Blankenship and Christman favor tighter rules but would allow for flexibility.

• Barone and Langley believe the tool should be available on a case-by-case basis.

• Taylor has demonstrated as a County Commissioner that our interests in managed growth are not her priority.

No candidate addressed assessing land-development codes as a proactive tool to manage growth and strengthen resilience.

WHAT YOU SEE IS NOT WHAT YOU GET

Candidate John Langley said, “... (we are not talking about) overdevelopment in the city of Naples. I mean, there’s not much more land to build on. So, we’re talking about redevelopment . . . .” The inference seems to be that the intensity of future development is not a concern.

But underlying land-use codes are part of the problem. Many buildings that appear appropriately scaled today were constructed under far lower density and intensity than what the current code permits.

As redevelopment accelerates, increased intensity is not theoretical—it is already happening. Our cityscape will change in ways that increase congestion and density, strain infrastructure, weaken resiliency, and diminish overall quality of life.

For example, major redevelopment of the Design District, supported by Ray Christman, could result in a playground for the County vs. a beneficial neighborhood revamp for the City if resident concerns are not prioritized.

FORUM RESULTS

Following the RB4Green forum and other actions mentioned in this issue, Candidates Sally Peterson, John Krol, and Scott Schultz appear at this time to be the most independent, resident-centric candidates supporting managed growth, increased resiliency, and preservation of Home Rule.

WHAT’S NEXT

• Additional Forums will tell us more about the candidates.

• Assessing the impact of emerging endorsements and financial contributions will determine who has influence.

• Is there an “invisible slate of candidates”?

Residents are encouraged to stay informed, stay engaged, and stay Naples.

Read the previous Volumes of Naples Watch by clicking here.

Your comments are welcome. Please reply to this email to let us know your thoughts.

Naples Watch is an independent resident opinion platform and is not a political committee. It does not endorse candidates or coordinate with any campaign.