Lillian Wissel Commissioner Candidate for all of Park County

10 Aug 2010 09:21 #31 by 2wlady
Lillian, you wrote:

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?

It sounds like you are right in line with your husband on the ball fields. To avoid impropriety, would you recuse yourself from this issue if you are on the board?

What should the $700,000 be spent on? The L&WTFB is not parks and recreation. That is what I see happening with to L&WTFB if it continues on this course with ball fields.

The manner in which the ball fields issue was presented and has continued to be presented, without evidence of the safety issues expounded by PCLL, and by painting the local homeowner residents as uncaring, selfish people, is a major factor in that mess.

As far as "your property rights end at your property line," that is a specious and not carefully thought out statement. Many 1-2 acre residential lots in PC are dumping grounds. They attract vermin and that is a health hazard. But according to your statement, homeowners just need to ignore it. One reason I didn't buy in areas of this county are because of those yards/dumps. It brings the neighborhood down and housing prices down. We didn't move to PC to look out the window and see our neighbor build some ediface that takes us back to suburbia. We want rural residential, at least most of us do.

And many people can't afford 35-100 acres to get a non-obstructed view. Is PC only looking after the wealthy in this regard?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Aug 2010 09:29 #32 by Mtn Gramma
Was the sales tax approved by the voters for recreational upgrades? Or was it for water protection/preservation?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Aug 2010 11:33 #33 by Tilt
Many want the new Sports Stadium??????????????????????
They don't live in Park county. The 387 against it feel
there are about 23 for it, BOCC, Land Water Trust trustees.

That was a bully reply in my opinion, we have that already
for the last 7 years. No Thank You Lillian.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Aug 2010 12:00 #34 by AV8OR
TILT, I without momentarily picking a horse in the race, have a question for you.

What is your source for the 387 folks against the Burland "perceived" project?

What is your source for the 23 folks in favor?

I look at with great respect those that argue with FACT. Equally important, are those that articulate so that us hillbillies can understand.


I apologize to Lillian for what may appear to be an off topic request.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Aug 2010 12:14 #35 by Tilt
Sport Stadium off topic?. Oh hush hush citizens!. New Telecommunications building, SHHHHHHHHHHH, hush hush.
Roads/infrastructure failed, shhhhhh, mute yourselves.
The jail costs, shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, quiet., hush hush taxpayers.
The Land Water Trust spending THE PEOPLES water protection trust$,
Quiet,mute yourselves, we know whats best to you, SHHHHHH.
In Lillian two fill ins, did zero for the PEOPLE(Just a few)shhhhhhhhhh,
no one will notice and vote her in. BOCC issuing no probable cause
arrests against citizens who disagee-no comment by LW agrees with
BOCC?, SHHHHHHHHHHHH, mute your selves, NOW. New $4 mil
Telecommunications building that would make the Patriot Act types jump
for joy, MUTE NOW, yourself citizens, were in charge, quiet, shhhhhhhh.
Public meetings that never happen, SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, idiots.
Ridgeline homes from remnant lots, lot splitting to create a rental
income county-QUIET QUIET, SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
Looks like same-o as usual, planned for YOU.
AVRo8--you savy now.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Aug 2010 12:17 #36 by AV8OR

Tilt wrote: Sport Stadium off topic?. Oh hush hush citizens!. New Telecommunications building, SHHHHHHHHHHH, hush hush.
Roads/infrastructure failed, shhhhhh, mute yourselves.
The jail costs, shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, quiet., hush hush taxpayers.
The Land Water Trust spending THE PEOPLES water protection trust$,
Quiet,mute yourselves, we know whats best to you, SHHHHHH.
In Lillian two fill ins, did zero for the PEOPLE(Just a few)shhhhhhhhhh,
no one will notice and vote her in. BOCC issuing no probable cause
arrests against citizens who disagee-no comment by LW agrees with
BOCC?, SHHHHHHHHHHHH, mute your selves, NOW. New $4 mil
Telecommunications building that would make the Patriot Act types jump
for joy, MUTE NOW, yourself citizens, were in charge, quiet, shhhhhhhh.
Public meetings that never happen, SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, idiots.
Ridgeline homes from remnant lots, lot splitting to create a rental
income county-QUIET QUIET, SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.


Looks like same-o as usual, planned for YOU.
AVRo8--you savy now.



I guess he did not want to answer the question....

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Aug 2010 12:20 #37 by Tilt
THANK YOU.... And please remove the Reagan quote. Stop playing
off dead people. You people are nothing like him, You are insulting.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Aug 2010 12:35 #38 by AV8OR

Tilt wrote: THANK YOU.... And please remove the Reagan quote. Stop playing
off dead people. You people are nothing like him, You are insulting.



Tilt,

In a non-condescending manner, I would like to say well done on your above sentence structure.

On a different note, there are several folks that really miss Reagan and his leadership. Please do not fall into the trap of being shortsighted in your thought that just because someone does not think totally like you or merely questions something that you wrote, as being against Reagan's principles.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Aug 2010 12:51 #39 by 2wlady
AV8OR, I don't have the numbers on the residents, but the ones I've talked to are against adding ballfields, wells, taking land, putting in lights, etc.

First, Dave Wissel said there would be no test well. Now he wants one, because that's the first step in getting a permanent well in this case.

You want facts. Homeowners have been respectfully asking for safety facts since PCLL brought up the "Bailey Bounce" because the fields are so bad, moving the "Mudhole" fields to the equestrian land because they are bad and are a safety issue, and turning the Mudhole field into a "practice" field. That's Phase 2 of the grand plan.

PCLL "must" move the Mudhole fields because the traffic is dangerous. If it's dangerous when the smaller kids are playing there, why isn't the traffic dangerous when other kids are practicing there?

There have been no safety statistics presented to anyone because PCLL doesn't keep any accident reports unless the child had to go to the hospital or the rescue squad came. That is my impression because PCLL holds that information close to the chest.

If you look at the ball field(s) that PCLL owns, they are pig sties. And, PCLL has refused for two seasons to offer a maintenance/management plan. And, from what I've heard (no proof), the grant money PCLL wants if they get the well will not be for maintenance but only for improvements.

Further, PCLL keeps saying they are a "volunteer" organization and they don't have money. Well, how many volunteer organizations are in this county? I don't hear them playing the "woe is me" factor. They suck it up and get the job done and find the money without dipping into taxpayers' funds for other purposes.

None of this has been answered because these are logical questions and facts are required.

Lillian, you have stated that spending this money and making all these changes, basically changing a rural residential neighborhood, is a "good" thing. PCLL wants to rip out the wooden fencing they have refused to keep in good repair or replace. In other words, let's make this like Lakewood and Littleton; except in those places, there are buffer zones beyond one street width.

One would think in a semi-rural area such as Bailey, keeping that heritage would be good for the community.

In all fairness, Lillian, I would like your answers to these issues and concerns.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

10 Aug 2010 12:56 #40 by AV8OR
Satchmo,

I was curious as to how TILT derived his numbers. I have no horse in the ballfield issue. I also do not subscribe to government cramming unwanted things down our throats. If TILT's numbers are correct, then I would say the county and PCLL have an issue. Contrary to that, the other side of the table should take notice.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.183 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+