Lillian Wissel Commissioner Candidate for all of Park County

Q-hubby says "ridgeline homes" OK -- brings in more tax spending money.
They take our views, where do you stand on that.
Q-Hubby says $1.7 mil in our "water Fight trust" is too much, trustees
want to spend $700,000 on their pet projects rather leaving the trust funds
alone to protect us from the "water takers". Where do you stand.
Q-BOCC and Land Water Trust want to build a 2-3 mil$ Sports Stadium
within a quiet built up residential neighborhood-against the Majority of
the homeowners(3rd attempt last 15 years). Should it be built?
Q-Millions spent on Communications last three years. But do we really need
a multi-million dollar military like command bunker? While the infrastructure
crumbles?.

Nice to finally see you here. Why are you not answering the questions being asked to you? Get with it or Get out!

Becky wrote: These are also great questions for the candidate interview thread. Please copy them there also.

looked for it but couldn't find it. where did it go?

<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href=" 285bound.com/Forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2718 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2718<!-- l -->

Ms. Wissel, if you are elected, both you and your husband will be holding offices in Park County government. A number of citizens have expressed their perceptions that such would be, at best, a Conflict of Interest, and at worst, another flagrant example of Nepotism within the County government. Can you tell us why this would not be a Conflict of Interest?

mtntrekker wrote: rather than sending you an email from several of us, a friend sent an email question to your website regarding conflict of interest. could you respond to it here.

1. how will you handle any conflicts with the county assessors office.

2. what you will do in regard to commissioners (tighe) conflict of interest with the sheriff's department when he does not recuse himself when it comes to a vote regarding the sheriff's dept.

3. what you will do in regard to the county attorney's conflict of interest and ethics violation by advising the bocc when his wife is a parkco dept. head.

i think that is a reasonable facsimile of what was sent to you.

thank you.

Thank you for your patience on my getting back to you on the questions you and some others have for me. I must let you know that I did not receive your previous email on my election web site nor my personal site.

1. I will handle any conflict that I may encounter with the Assesor's Office as I did in 2006 and again in 2008 when I was a Commissioner. If I thought there was a conflict of interest involving a decision that I would have to make regarding this office I would recuse myself as I did before.

2. Mr. Tighe feels that he has no conflict of interest when it comes to the Sheriffs Department. However, I disagree completely with this statement. I did in the past and will continue to voice my opinion at every meeting involving any decision that I feel is clouding the judgement of a Commissioner regarding a conflict with any department or elected office. If I am held to this standard it should be no different for any other Commissioner.

3. Again when there is a conflict regarding the Attorney he should recuse himself from any decision that is made and the Commissioners should require the Attorney to recuse himself. I had this same problem with another County Attorney while I was in office regarding one of his clients and a Zoning case brought before the BOCC by this client. I asked our County Attorney to recuse himself from this case but the two other commissioners and the attorney stated that he had no conflict of interest. I went on to vote no on this application because it was against county regulations. This particular case was brought to trial by a Park County Citizen. The two Commissioners and the Attorney lost this case. I was not involved in the case because I voted no. I will continue to voice my concern and ask the attorney to step down.

Thank you so much for allowing me to answer your very important questions. I am sorry it took so long but at this moment I am traveling at the speed of life in the fast lane. Again I apologize for the delay.

Lillian

Tilt wrote: Q-hubby says "ridgeline homes" OK -- brings in more tax spending money.
They take our views, where do you stand on that.
Q-Hubby says $1.7 mil in our "water Fight trust" is too much, trustees
want to spend $700,000 on their pet projects rather leaving the trust funds
alone to protect us from the "water takers". Where do you stand.
Q-BOCC and Land Water Trust want to build a 2-3 mil$ Sports Stadium
within a quiet built up residential neighborhood-against the Majority of
the homeowners(3rd attempt last 15 years). Should it be built?
Q-Millions spent on Communications last three years. But do we really need
a multi-million dollar military like command bunker? While the infrastructure
crumbles?.

A - "Ridgeline homes" - I am a big proponent of personal and private property rights. I believe that people buy property in the mountains for the "VIEWS" that you talk about. As a very wise person once said "Your View Stops At Your Property Line". I am sure those individuals decided to build on a ridge line for those wonderful views. I for one would not want to have someone tell me that I couldn't build on my ridge line because it would block my neighbors view. It seems to me if they wanted that view they should have purchased that property. As you can tell by my answer I am for "ridgeline building". I was at the Commissioners meeting to protest and fight the ridgeline restriction. Where were you? It didn't matter what the people who were there to testify said but only what the Commissioners thought was best for all of us. I was there to stand up for what I believe in.

A- What are you talking about? I have never known the Land and Water Trust Fund Board to do anything with this dedicated money other than to improve and preserve land and water for our future benefit. If there is something you know of please tell me.

A- To my knowledge there has never been a proposal to build a 2 to 3 million dollar sports complex in Burland or any other place. This proposal whould have to be approved by the BOCC and it doesn't fit within the purpose of the fund or the Land Use Regulations. I am not sure if this is truly what is proposed or if it is how you perceive what the Little League people are trying to do.

A - I don't believe that millions of dollars have been spent on communications these last three years. What is proposed is a new 2 to 3 million dollar new Communications complex. I believe that we should be looking at our exisitng buildings, such as the jail that is in the hole every year by a million dollars or more. A comparison and feasibility study of our existing buildings (i.e. McNamara, Jail) would have been a very good thing to have in order to make a decision of this $ amount. Don't you think so?

This is what I believe and have given my views on your questions. Thank you for submitting them.

Lillian

Stand Proud N Speak Out wrote: Nice to finally see you here. Why are you not answering the questions being asked to you? Get with it or Get out!

I am sorry that you feel I haven't been answering the questions on this site in a timely manner. I have tried to answer just as quick as I can. I am pretty busy at this point and time with a long hard campaign. I have been meeting with others on a daily basis to answer their questions also. If you feel slighted in any way let me know where you would like to meet and I will be glad to discuss any issue you might have on your mind.

Thank you for SPEAKING OUT!

Lillian

Hi Lillian,

Perhaps you missed my post or need to take more time to answer, but I just wanted to say I am still here and I did post some q's on a previous page in this thread.

Thanks.

Thanks for taking the time to answer questions here, Lillian! :thumbsup: