Home › Island News › Local News
Hideaway Beach seeks tourist tax dollars to fund beach erosion control
County to consider whether private beach is in public interest
More Local News 
Share and Enjoy 
Collier County officials are questioning whether erosion control on a private beach is something that is in the best interest of the public. The Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC) discussed the issue at a meeting on Thursday and the consensus on the board was the Hideaway Beach was an area enjoyed not only by residents of the private beach community but also by residents and tourists visiting the beach by boat.
Collier County Coastal Zone Management staff recommended a different direction. Their finding was that since Hideaway Beach had no public access by road that the beach was ineligible for Tourist Development Tax fund dollars. The tourist taxes are supported by tourism business including hotels throughout Collier County and are to be used for projects that are in the public’s best interest.
Collier County staff did find that the beach is subject to high erosion and the erosion control devices or “T-Groins” are successful solutions for erosion control.
However Hideaway Beach is not easily accessible to the public and therefore does not meet standards to receive tourist tax dollars because access to the beach is only gained by walking from the public access at Tigertail Beach or by boat.
Hideaway Beach representative and engineers, Humiston & Moore, presented to the CAC their finding that erosion control structures would protect the coastline including Tigertail Beach.
Ken Humiston, one of the engineers also said the devices would protect sea turtle nests on Hideaway Beach.
CAC members each expressed their opinion on whether preserving Hideaway Beach was in the best interest of the public and unanimously, 8-0 decided to recommend to the Tourist Development Council and Board of County Commissioners that controlling the beach erosion was in the public interest and suggested $1.6 million of tourist tax dollars be used to build the T-Groins.
Hideaway Beach residents formed a special tax district in 2004 for the purpose of controlling erosion. They proposed matching funds, offering to pay $1.9 million toward the cost of engineering, dredging and sand replacement for the project.
“We are offering every dollar we have available to us,” said Erik Brechnitz, vice chairman of the Marco Island Special Tax District.
Brechnitz said that with 312 homes at risk, he believes it’s a “compelling argument” that being able to continue to collect these residents’ real estate tax dollars is in the public interest.
“There is no such thing as a private beach in the state of Florida. Calling it a private beach is a misnomer. It’s a boater’s destination,” Brechnitz said.
Hideaway Beach resident Ilona Hirschmann said she too believes not only is the erosion control necessary, but the public does use Hideaway Beach.
“People come by boat and they barbecue on the island. It’s a very close place by boat for many people. Also, Marco provides tourism dollars. It makes sense to use those dollars in Marco,” Hirschmann said.
The CAC agreed, including committee member Victor Rios.
“I believe the shore lines of Marco Island are in serious danger,” Rios said.
Hideaway Beach received TDC funds in the past and the special taxing district matched those dollars to pay for $5.5 million in erosion control completed in 2005.
The Tourist Development Council may not agree with the CAC’s most recent recommendation however. The TDC will be discussing the issue 9 a.m., May 19, in the Collier County Board of Commissioners chambers on U.S. 41 East and Airport-Pulling Road. The meeting is open to the public.
“I believe the council generally follows staff recommendations,” said tourist director Jack Wert.
He added that the major concern for the committee will most likely be the lack of public access to the beach. Brechnitz said Hideaway Beach residents offered to make the beach accessible to the public, but it was turned down due to lack of space for parking.
Following TDC review and recommendations, the BCC will make the final decision on the issue.
Comments
This site does not necessarily agree with comments posted below — responsibility lies with the relevant reader alone. Read our privacy policy & user agreement.
People shouldn't live in sand castles on the beach and make me have to pay for their sand. Every few years our money goes to "save" a beach these people have been actively destroying for fifteen years. Their minions took out the "non-native" vegetation on Coconut Island to improve their view, now Coconut is Coco NOT. These homes now have a direct NW gulf view. Nice to look at until a hurricane looks back at you. For anyone familiar with the dome home on Cape Romano you've seen the future of hideaway.
No amount of our money is going to save their homes. When nature wants it, she'll take it. Hideaway start making your escape plans and stop wasting our money.
I got a good chuckle about the public use of this beach in this story. Just try to set up a bar-b-q on the beach front of one of these muckity mucks and you'll meet Guido and his dobe.
Reality is: these folks have enough power and money to get their sand whether we like it or not. I just muse the day a good North Wester ends all this silliness.
#1 Posted by yes on May 14, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
yes...you are 100% wrong in all aspects of your commentary....coconut vegatation was removed without the knowledge or request of hideaway...period!
people outside of hideaway use these beaches...there are boats beached constantly as well as people walking from tigertail daily....no one askes them to leave unless they inadvertantly walk all the way from the shore to the lot lines that are designated in hideaway...no different than someone walking from the street to your front door without permission.
take a look at the hotels....we pay for their beaches and access is exactly the same as in hideaway...
and by the way....there are many folks that own property in hideaway that are not rich muckity mucks.
van
#2 Posted by van on May 15, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Van – I have a question for you. For the longest time the people of Hideaway Beach were apposed to people using their beach. I was personally out there this weekend. Most of the boats were actually beached on an outcropping from Hideaway Beach. I heard stories of Hideaway Beach security coming out and disciplining boaters. I would be interested in knowing just how far their authority goes. Does it just go to the high water mark? If they have the authority to discipline people all over the beach including the outcropping I say let Hideaway Beach pay for the improvements.
#3 Posted by MarcoAvenger on May 15, 2008 at 9:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Alot of people forget that the original developer of Hideaway Beach bought the Caxambas Park boat ramp and gave it to the county in lieu of having to offer public access. In addition the proprty owners of Hideaway have been assessed extra tax dollars since 1989-90? when they started renourishment of the whole Island and still have a special tax district set up...strictly for beach renourishment.
#4 Posted by Bulldog32 on May 15, 2008 at 10:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Avenger, their authority should end at the mean high water mark.
#5 Posted by jgrif33 on May 15, 2008 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
When Hideaway first started years ago, their guards tried to chase even the boats away because their attorney said the beach was "river front" property with riparian rights. Only when they realized they were losing their beach and needed massive funding for re-nourishment did they change their tune. There should be no public funding unless they allow shore side access. Not 1% of Tigertail visitors walk to Hideaway. Hideaway also supported the defunct anchoring ordinance because they didn't want boats anchored off "Their" beach.
#6 Posted by maharg on May 16, 2008 at 1:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hideaway beachfront owners do have riparian rights but these rights and the publics right are not mutually exclusive.
#7 Posted by jgrif33 on May 16, 2008 at 12:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is a gated community......period. I think the case for tourist tax dollars is good--However, trying to twist the truth saying this is a public beach is just wrong.
#8 Posted by sunnycity on May 18, 2008 at 1:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post your comment
(Requires free registration.)