Lillian Wissel Commissioner Candidate for all of Park County

thank you lillian for taking the time to respond and for your thoughtful response. i will pass the info on to the person who emailed you and to others.

posteryoyo wrote: 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.

I am Sorry but I sent the answers to your questions two days ago. Oh no maybe the siber monster ate it. I will answer your questions again. Sorry I really did not ignore you.

Lillian

posteryoyo wrote: Mrs. Wissell,

Thank you for posting and answering here.

I have some related questions.

Would you be willing to push forward a vote and vote for an ordinance that made homeowner participation in the building department permit process voluntary. This could be coupled with a mandatory disclosure to future buyers and still come with simple planning board disclosure via a plot plan for taxation.

This is a private property issue in which Park County is even recognized (criticized) region wide. One should have a right to build a home on their own land, not for public use, without having to meet the expectations of individuals they do not know. Not everyone is hiring a contractor. Most of us are not ignorant, we understand how to build or if we do not know something we know how to hire a contractor just like we know how to hire a mechanic. Most of us could look at a stairway and know if it was repaired well, most of us cannot tell if our brakes were even fixed once we pull out of the mechanic, why such a disparity coupled with repeated searches of one's home? There is no local regulation of your mechanic, and I am not suggesting any, but the risks are far greater.

Also I would request the right to build a barn prior to a home on land smaller than 35 acres. This is done in many places with no issues. 10,20 or 30 acre landowners should not be regulated into 2nd class citizens.

And if these are not issues you would be willing to address, what do you mean by increasing personal property rights?

Thank you.

Let's try this again.

I am always in favor of simplifying life for the citizens of this county with less regulation and costly demands. I find your your proposal interesting and would like to talk with you more about your idea. Having said that I worked for the Building Department when regulations weren't quite as stringent as they are today. I also watched a house come down from the side of a hill in one of our subdivisions. I think this particular individual would have benefited from an engineers perspective at the very least. The house might still be standing today and if not the engineers license would be on the line. Many of the regulations that are in place now are due to our lending institutions that demand counties to ensure inspections and a Certificate of Occupancy has been given for the completion of the home before they will lend or as part of the lending agreement (more government interference in our lives). They used to allow a homeowner to be their own general manager of their home building project. However, you were still required to have inspections at certain intervals. There are many homes in this county that are very poorly built (some by actual licensed contractors). Again let's talk about your idea.

I am all for allowing an out building to be constructed on ones own property, regardless of the size of the parcel, before the home is built. What a concept! If this were allowed a builder wouldn't have to worry about storing their equipment or hauling it back and forth while working on their project. Don't you think this is a common sense approach to an absurd regulation?

I hope my answers have helped you to see where I stand. Thank you for asking them. Again I apologize for the first set of answers disappearing into another dimension.

Should you wish to discuss this at sometime in person give me a call or let me know on this site if you are interested in continuing with your concept.

Thank You
Lillian

Lillian, what is your plan for the following

Improve secondary roads - many items on our vehicles are only lasting 1/2 life due to poor roads and the lack of maintenance. If a BOCC member had to drive on some of these roads, you beat Dave K's team would fix these roads. I would gladly pay a tax to help the roads, since this would be cheaper than the repair bills.

LUR's - there are several properties in the county with court ordered judgments in favor of Park County, but the BOCC refuses to foreclose against these properties. What will you do as a BOCC member to enforce the LUR's and clean up the junk yards?

I missed the point RE: Sport Stadium. Counter,
Sorry Lillian you did not see all the Flume articles(9+)over
last year. Sounds like you support it, regardless of the
Fact that the homeowners do not want it.

Counter RE: "Ridgeline homes", you indicate the freedom of homeowner to build a "ridgeline" home----I agree.
I don't agree said lot should be made up from remnant
lots(check with your nearby appraiser) and driveways
not to code(Steep). Check/research surrounding competing
counties(mountain)and state(s). Those type homes not allowed
because they are considered abusive to other homeowners!.

RE: The spending of our trust money by $700,000 not true.
Indeed it is and ON TAPE!!!!!!! per the head of the new spenders/head trustee--David Wissel...

40coupe wrote: 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?

Hello there "40coupe"

Great question:

First of all I am not going to a Park County Government Office and asking for a job. I am asking the voters of this county for a job. Dave Wissel and myself if elected, will be duly elected constitutional officers chosen by the electorate of this county and are equal in that regard. Each elected office have different statutory guidelines that we must follow to perform our duties. I still believe in America and as an American citizen I believe I have an equal right as any other of the candidates seeking office in this election. I haven't given up my right as an individual just because I happen to be married to an elected official. As far as a conflict of interest goes I was a commissioner in 2006 and again in 2008 at no time were there any allegations nor charges brought up against me or the Assessor for misconduct on my part or his. If that were the case I can guarantee you we would have been headline news for weeks on end in the paper. It would have also been a big issue in this campaign. If I thought there was any reason that I, or someone else determined a conflict associated with that office I would most definitely remove myself from that discussion or decision without hesitation. I did in the past and I won't change how I handle that issue. I believe there is another Commissioner that has that same issue right now with the another elected office and he never steps away from any decision made for that elected official. Why wasn't that question asked of that candidate when he ran for office in the last election? He stands to gain from his decisions.

Thank you for your questions and I hope this in some way lets you know were I am coming from.

Lillian

Tilt wrote: I missed the point RE: Sport Stadium. Counter,
Sorry Lillian you did not see all the Flume articles(9+)over
last year. Sounds like you support it, regardless of the
Fact that the homeowners do not want it.

Counter RE: "Ridgeline homes", you indicate the freedom of homeowner to build a "ridgeline" home----I agree.
I don't agree said lot should be made up from remnant
lots(check with your nearby appraiser) and driveways
not to code(Steep). Check/research surrounding competing
counties(mountain)and state(s). Those type homes not allowed
because they are considered abusive to other homeowners!.

RE: The spending of our trust money by $700,000 not true.
Indeed it is and ON TAPE!!!!!!! per the head of the new spenders/head trustee--David Wissel...

I am not sure where the remnant lot notion came from. I don't see it in your other posting. I do believe that there are ways to mitigate drive ways to allow for their steep slope.As far as making lots from remnant pieces of land, if all the parcels are adjoining one another and can make a larger parcel of land it seems to me that that is what people here in this county are asking for. Or that was what was discussed at those particular land use discussions that I attended. Just go through the files in the Planning department regarding the updating of the land use regulations. I don't compare our county to other counties. I have had enough of that idea when we were stuck with Land Use Regulations that came from Boulder. The Commissioners also base department head salaries (not the worker bee employees) on surrounding larger counties. Does that seem fair? We do live in the mountains and we have land that has been sold with varying slope conditions. Again as I said before and told to me by a very wise individual "Your view stops at your property line". By the way this individual has lived in this county all his/her life and has seen many changes and doesn't begrudge anyone the right to build a home on their lot where ever they see fit. I still believe every individual who purchases land here in Park County does so because they don't want the restrictions of City Living.

Your right I don't read the Flume much. When and if they become fair and equitable in there stories and aren't just another liberal source of the reporting media I might become more interested.

You should check to see what other good things the Land And Water Trust Fund Board has accomplished with the money the citizens entrusted them with. I can tell you that the citizens on the South side of Kenosa pass have been very appreciative for the Land and Water Trust Fund efforts. There are always two sides to every story. There are many others within the Burland area that have told me they want the Ball fields upgraded. It would be a very wonderful idea if all of you could come to a uniform decision regarding this issue that pits one against the other. What is the $700,000 to be spent on?

This issue might just have to go to the vote of the citizens on this side of the pass in order to solve the problem.

Thanks again. I enjoy your input. I would like to meet you in person. You seem to be passionate in your beliefs as I am in mine.

Lillian

Lillian, quick follow up on my questions when you have a chance.

billy wrote: Lillian, what is your plan for the following

Improve secondary roads - many items on our vehicles are only lasting 1/2 life due to poor roads and the lack of maintenance. If a BOCC member had to drive on some of these roads, you beat Dave K's team would fix these roads. I would gladly pay a tax to help the roads, since this would be cheaper than the repair bills.

LUR's - there are several properties in the county with court ordered judgments in favor of Park County, but the BOCC refuses to foreclose against these properties. What will you do as a BOCC member to enforce the LUR's and clean up the junk yards?

billy wrote: Lillian, quick follow up on my questions when you have a chance.

billy wrote: Lillian, what is your plan for the following

Improve secondary roads - many items on our vehicles are only lasting 1/2 life due to poor roads and the lack of maintenance. If a BOCC member had to drive on some of these roads, you beat Dave K's team would fix these roads. I would gladly pay a tax to help the roads, since this would be cheaper than the repair bills.

LUR's - there are several properties in the county with court ordered judgments in favor of Park County, but the BOCC refuses to foreclose against these properties. What will you do as a BOCC member to enforce the LUR's and clean up the junk yards?

Hello there billy:

Sorry about the delay on this response.

What I have proposed and discussed at some the candidate forums is Road maintenance District that would be voted on by the voters and would allow districts on both the North and South side of Kenosha Pass. There could even be more than one district per area if the voters chose to do exactly that. The citizens of this county would determine how the districts would be defined and for what purpose (i.e. only road maintenance no equipment purchase) or what ever they decided would be appropriate for their areas. A citizens committee should be allowed to have input offer their suggestions along with R&B. There could be a sunshine placed on this proposal of 5 or 10 years or again what ever was voted on by the citizens.

I believe that if you aren't going to enforce the county regulations then you shouldn't have them. Some of these junk areas are very unsightly. While I was in office we went after many of these problems. Unless they are kept up with and the commissioners make every effort to continue enforcement then we will continue to have the same problems. I will as I did in the past work closely with our violations and complaint person to resolve this issue once again.

Let me know what you think of these proposals.

Thanks for letting me resond to your questions.
Lillian

Thanks for responding, Ms. Wissel. I appreciate the assurances, but I can't help but think that even the appearance of impropriety is something that must be avoided. I understand what you meant, but it's a 'Sunset' provision. The other Commissioner's conflict-of-interest issue you mention might not have been covered up or smoothed over had there been a 285Bound.com back then.