Williston, ND Active Issues

rwaitman · Senior Member

RE: Grondahl

vko · Senior Member

Silly me, my mistake.

Steve Powell · Guru

Sigma wrote:

Thanks Randy. You've proven to me in past posts that you can be cutting, yet endlessly polite at the same time, and that's a quality I respect. It was a bit disappointing to see the "he said, she said" that Slette pointed out. Sometimes things become personal as they obviously did here, and that's a shame. Sounds to me that the only real mistake made was Larry emailing his thoughts in such a bald manner, not because they were his legitimate thoughts, which he has a right to have, but because he put them in an email. The electronic record never dies, for good or ill. But elected official or not, a person has a right to like or dislike anyone they choose. The best bet, however, is not to share views on those one dislikes with strangers. Still, I'd encourage Sue Evans to stick to the issues on May 15th, even if she's challenged otherwise. Hopefully that's her plan already, but I don't know. And having posted this, I see that Sue posted an apology. Good on you, Ms. Evans! Thanks for the class.

Keep up the good work, Randy.

And as a side note, I think vko may think that I'm Steve. As flattering as that thought is, I'm a different person altogether. I'm just one of those guys Roosevelt was talking about, at least for now.

-- Edited by Sigma on Friday 23rd of April 2010 06:18:22 AM

-- Edited by Sigma on Friday 23rd of April 2010 07:36:13 AM

-- Edited by Sigma on Friday 23rd of April 2010 07:36:41 AM

Sigma, you're too kind. Nice to hear after you boxed me in so well on the Herald. biggrin

Thanks.

Steve Powell · Guru

This is great stuff you guys!

I understand, Randy. Truly. But this is where it gets tricky being the guy that "moderates" a board like this. I could actually be the one having to hire an attorney if I allow slandering to take place right here on the board. I've researched this and there truly is a fine line there.

I'm just covering my butt, that's all.

Randy, were there personal comments about me in any email, yes my first reaction would be to rebut. In fact, probably in the same fashion you desire.

Hopefully you can understand.

And discussing the fact that when we are invited to approach public officials and then are reprimanded for acting on that invitation, well, that's perfectly fine as well. wink

After all, I believe that's the jist of this topic. Correct?

Sue Evans · Senior Member

I agree Sigma, take the high road...it is always the best method, the turn the other cheek so to speak and as most learned when we were small. Thank you for your input.

Sigma · Veteran Member

Thanks Randy. You've proven to me in past posts that you can be cutting, yet endlessly polite at the same time, and that's a quality I respect. It was a bit disappointing to see the "he said, she said" that Slette pointed out. Sometimes things become personal as they obviously did here, and that's a shame. Sounds to me that the only real mistake made was Larry emailing his thoughts in such a bald manner, not because they were his legitimate thoughts, which he has a right to have, but because he put them in an email. The electronic record never dies, for good or ill. But elected official or not, a person has a right to like or dislike anyone they choose. The best bet, however, is not to share views on those one dislikes with strangers. Still, I'd encourage Sue Evans to stick to the issues on May 15th, even if she's challenged otherwise. Hopefully that's her plan already, but I don't know. And having posted this, I see that Sue posted an apology. Good on you, Ms. Evans! Thanks for the class.

Keep up the good work, Randy.

And as a side note, I think vko may think that I'm Steve. As flattering as that thought is, I'm a different person altogether. I'm just one of those guys Roosevelt was talking about, at least for now.

-- Edited by Sigma on Friday 23rd of April 2010 06:18:22 AM

-- Edited by Sigma on Friday 23rd of April 2010 07:36:13 AM

-- Edited by Sigma on Friday 23rd of April 2010 07:36:41 AM

Sue Evans · Senior Member

I would like to issue an apology for getting so far off topic. I should not have used the board in this fashion. I understand there are many people I need to learn to deal with in various degrees and this was a good test of my ability. I did not pass.

rwaitman · Senior Member

Slette wrote:

I know I tapped out a long time ago but I just want to say something on this topic. My view of the ongoing discussions between the two parties mainly involved are they are both passionate people. They both may have different opinions of what they think is good for the community, and that is great. I for one tend to lean towards the side that is there for ALL of our kids and grandkids to have safe, fun, community with all the great facilities that other towns of our size have.

At the end of the day we have to remember we are all from this great community. This town has done lots and lots of great things over the years. And 99 percent of those projects happen when we do 1 big thing. WORK TOGETHER.

We as a community need to get away from the "he said she said" mentality and move on.

So many times in life people just have to agree to disagree and be done with it and find a way to make ourselves and everyone involved better for it.

Thanks Dave..you are absolutely correct. I might have been starting to lose sight of the original objective, and it is becoming counterproductive. I am pulling in my horns a little.

Randy

Slette · Veteran Member

I know I tapped out a long time ago but I just want to say something on this topic. My view of the ongoing discussions between the two parties mainly involved are they are both passionate people. They both may have different opinions of what they think is good for the community, and that is great. I for one tend to lean towards the side that is there for ALL of our kids and grandkids to have safe, fun, community with all the great facilities that other towns of our size have.

At the end of the day we have to remember we are all from this great community. This town has done lots and lots of great things over the years. And 99 percent of those projects happen when we do 1 big thing. WORK TOGETHER.

We as a community need to get away from the "he said she said" mentality and move on.

So many times in life people just have to agree to disagree and be done with it and find a way to make ourselves and everyone involved better for it.

rwaitman · Senior Member

Steve Powell wrote:

Agreed. However, in this case I have to ask which one has been backed into the corner.

Steve:

I think it is grossly unfair that direct attacks on others can be made in a "personal" email, by an elected official, directly related to public issues, bordering on slanderous, and cannot be discussed on a public forum, particularly when there are a number of obvious contradictions in those posts and cannot be addressed in the same manner. You and I are in direct disagreement on that, Bud.

However, once I have posted this, I will honor your request.

From my perspective, this whole thing started simply because I, and others asked that we have a civil, productive, and respectful discussion and debate about the one cent sales tax extension. There were absolutely no ulterior motives. Larry chose to make weak excuses for not doing participating, and it went decidedly south from there.

While I disagreed on a number of things,I , in no way, attacked any individual or group.

Sue Evans, to her credit, did not post the hateful emails she got. I asked her on another thread to post the correspondence she referenced, thinking it was a spirited disagreement over her platform issues, so we could conitinue to discuss it in depth on the forum.

I had no idea this was an email from Larry Grondahl.  Up to that point, I had not and still have not, had any live conversation with Sue Evans, I had never met her, and had never had any contact with her other than indirect posts on this board, until this particular issue came up.  She sent me a private message via this board, and said she was uncomfortable posting what she had received, and asked, that since I was a regular poster on this site, I might have a better perspective as to whether it was a proper thing to post it. I read it.

I told her it was not. That would have been the end of it except that she sent me an immediate follow-up, which I found offensive. It proceeded from there.

For what it is worth, I am going to print the most quotable quote, then we can go back to our little forum with only a handful of members going back and forth. It will still, at some point and in some small way, continue to provide cheap entertainment to the general public. No worries...

(quote from Park Board President Larry Grondahl to Sue Evans, who, up to that point, was a perfect stranger to me, in an email dated April 16th in bold italics)

...and be careful with Randy Waitman, and do not believe anything he says...I served with him on the Board for a number of years, I do not like him, and he does not like me, and I can honestly tell you, he was one of the worst elected officials I have ever seen...would never make a decision on anything controversial and abstained all the time, extremely spineless, and now he acts like he has all the answers and people follow him like he is the pied piper....

Wouldn't you be offended? First of all, in twelve years on that Board, there were two things I abstained on, both because of personal convictions that created a conflict of interest for me. I had that right as a board member, and would do so again.

Secondly, and more importantly, if that is the worst that Larry could say about me, given his obvious animosity, I guess it is a more relevant testimonial to my own personal character rather than a slap at it.

;o)

R

Steve Powell · Guru

Agreed. However, in this case I have to ask which one has been backed into the corner. wink

vko · Senior Member

I do agree Steve. But never - ever back a person in a corner. It become's ugly, Now are you Sigma or Steve? And never attack a person for your own personal gain. That is all I am to say about that.

Steve Powell · Guru

While I have no issues with sharing facts that these things exist, I do ask anyone that has received these emails, please do NOT POST THEM HERE. Nor is it a good idea to share quotes from them on this board.

Thank you and carry on.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

LOL, this explains the last nasty I got. I shared the cc'd emails. EGADS!! Yea, I will be ready to explain why I shared the emails when challenged by Larry at the Library on May 15th at 10am. All are welcome. I will admit, I got emails of a colorful nature from a public official sent from the public email account. Actually, I got a series of emails. I did not respond to all of it. Some things a body can only sit back and laugh at. However, I am prepared to bring it to the public forum at the library as Larry has told me he wants to question me about this issue there. If he would like to question it here, I will also address it here. How about it Larry? Would you like to bring light to the statements you made pertaining to individuals on this site? I haven't shown that to EVERYBODY. I can if you like. Perhaps just the 10 friends I have between my web sites. Larry, I know you read this board. You accuse me of conducting personal attacks against you. I want you to prove what I have done to you. Cite it. Not against the tax. YOU!

rwaitman · Senior Member

I received carbon copies of a flurry of emails last night from Sue Evans related to the monthly Park Board Meeting.

These were correspondence between the Park Board President and Sue Evans. They were also sent to a number of other individuals, including Darin Kruger, Director of Parks and Recreation, so they are by no means private.

I am not sure whether to laugh, or be sad. Either way, I am truly embarassed to see such venom on the part of an elected officer towards a citizen simply asking for clarification of issues the park board is responsible for, particularly when this President has encouraged citizens to ask questions at these meetings.

The content was very mean spirited.

R

rwaitman · Senior Member

Sue Evans wrote:

I have all the paperwork and proof. I wish I knew how to attach it. If I sent it to you could you post it? The AG's office can not respond to citizen request. I tried. They have protocol. I sent it to the US attorney's office. I do not want this to sound as if I am just tossing about slander. I have visited with officials in Bismarck, Idaho and such. I just don't know how to convey it all without presenting the documents. This becomes so much easier to state when I can demonstrate the paperwork. I have worked on city issues for a long time. Not as long as others, but I like to have all supporting documents and multiple sources.

If a citizen complaint is not acceptable, what are the protocols they would accept, and are there any like-minded members of the respective boards you are referring to who could express to the AG their own concerns? Barring that, then any presentation of factual documentations, letter, etc, would seem to be a fair tool (ammunition?) to spur an explanation or response for those you are questioning. I am not sure how to add it or post it publicly, but Steve P is a computer geek....and could probably show a way to make those documents readable to the public. Fair enough?

;o)
R

-- Edited by rwaitman on Tuesday 6th of April 2010 07:47:31 AM

-- Edited by rwaitman on Tuesday 6th of April 2010 07:48:21 AM

Sue Evans · Senior Member

I have all the paperwork and proof. I wish I knew how to attach it. If I sent it to you could you post it? The AG's office can not respond to citizen request. I tried. They have protocol. I sent it to the US attorney's office. I do not want this to sound as if I am just tossing about slander. I have visited with officials in Bismarck, Idaho and such. I just don't know how to convey it all without presenting the documents. This becomes so much easier to state when I can demonstrate the paperwork. I have worked on city issues for a long time. Not as long as others, but I like to have all supporting documents and multiple sources.

rwaitman · Senior Member

Sue...are you related to Ralph Nader? Don Quixote? Consumer watchdog and windmill jouster extraordinnaire' combined into one package.

It is enjoyable to read your spins on these issues. I have no doubt that you believe this stuff sincerely, and there is likely some truth to each of these claims.

The problem is, it reads like slightly veiled accusations, rumor, and innuendo. All the things you say are your opinion. I am glad they are seeing the "light of day", but without a response, they are simply that...only your opinion, or perspective.

Unfortunately, the recourse we have when we feel the way you seem to, is limited to reporting to the Attorney General and providing claims that they have to respond to, or filing some sort of civil suit. Claiming stupidity on the part of the city fathers, is not generally an excuse, for a wholesale tarring and feathering, as we see that pretty much every day across all walks of life. And...of course we do not know what sort of mitigating factors might have been part of the process of selection.

Historically, it seems they (the AG for example) will, when forced to act, take a good look, and then find the path of least resistance out the door of local politics and conflicts. They want no part of family feuds.

I don't know the answer, you make a good case, but I would really, really, really, like to see the opposing spin on the accusations.

Please continue to post the issues, but I suggest that you make them a little more clinical, and not so emotional; righteous indignation is good, but not when it appears to border on the hysterical...not to say that you seem hysterical, of course....

;o)
R

-- Edited by rwaitman on Tuesday 6th of April 2010 07:12:08 AM

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Had Waters Edge paid the contractors, it would have had rental property at a touchable rate ready in Feb.

They also operate under the name of Weeks Field Estates, Apple Creek, Community Development Inc., Waters Edge LLC of Idaho, Waters Edge LP of ND, ...Those are the names I can remember off the top of my head. I did a reverse phone look up. I also went through their Secretary of State for Idaho and found they listed themselves as an LLC of Idaho with our Secretary of State but not with theirs. Fred Cornforth is the CEO.

They bought the "abondoned" land, 4.77 acres from (us) our city, for $185'775 and mortaged it for $850'000.

The land was listed as "abandoned" in the grant.

-- Edited by Sue Evans on Tuesday 6th of April 2010 07:01:34 AM

vko · Senior Member

Thank You Sue. Keep your information coming. It keep's alot of different views, I have, moving around and around. That project should be open by now. Alway's something in the way. That's our Govenment working for us. Keep up the Great Work.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

If the property tax went away, the block grants would be put to good use. CDI/Waters Edge project used $315'000 in block grants from our tri county for housing in our area. They(CDI) forgot to pay their contractors and now face many contractor liens on the property. (filed at our court house)

Block Grants could actually do our communities some good. Thus far, I have read an article where the money was so wasted on one man who did the work of a 10 year old and billed like he was a grand master. This article did not appear in our paper. One of our nearby towns. I wish I knew how to attach the article here.
It was from Ray, Wed. Sept. 16th. I visited about the man's work and holy cow. What a waste of grant money.

Instead of our Block Grants being used poorly, we could actually do something great with the tax money.

Perhaps the Million and a half our city helped CDI/Waters Edge get in Grants from NSP funds could be established to help our community in better ways than groups who just take the money and ?. Could we not redirect those programs to better our communities? Where was the oversight? The land we issued to this project in a commission meeting and voted on by 5 members was placed in the paper a couple days later as a sale to the public. Land 5 men had already sold, they placed in the legals for a public sale. May 27th, 2008 our commission met and sold the land. Twice after that they listed the same land in the Herald under legals as a sale to the public. It was not available. In fact - in 2007, the same land, along with 6 other parcels were submitted to the state in a new plat called the "Waters Edge" in the pre application for the NSP funding. This new project is, according to the paperwork, due to be completed by OCT. 2010. Why did they advertise it to the public? ND Law states it must be done due to the value. Any land valued over $2500 must be advertised. It was never available to the public.

Items like this make me ponder the city obtaining millions more. Where will the oversight be? Transparency will be important. Now if an officer stops you for DUI do you think he believes you when you tell him this is your first time? He/she will think this is just the first time you were caught. Do you think this is the first time the city may have handled a land sale in a foggy manner?

No matter who is in charge here, the people need to stay informed. We are the ones who have to pay the bills.

Steve Powell · Guru

Agreed. I've echoed those sentiments in previous posts.

If in fact they used maintenance issues with the new playground as a sales pitch, well, I have a bit of an issue with that. One of the main reasons they turned us down with our first proposed playground was due to...maintenance issues. If they now feel there are going to be maintenance issues with the playground that is being built, why did they not turn us down for this one too? There will be some upkeep of the fiber that will be poured around the equipment, but that would have been an issue regardless.

From the sound of things, even with the one cent in their corner, there won't be any excess monies since there are so many things that need to be fixed or upgraded.

Our points are pretty much moot though if the property taxes go away next year. This would be quite ironic were that to pass.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

Steve,
This was an issue presented by the park board in an effort to get a group of us on board with the penny tax. NEW park, future maintenance issues. They have to look ahead. I like what this group has done. The new park was just a tool being used to evoke a tax. We weren't fully on board with what was being said to us. I commend the group effort to establish this new issue to the community. The cost to us? ZERO!! Can't beat that.

Honestly I would be more for the taxation if this group had a firm idea of investment with the excess funds. CD's not grant programs. Interest that could roll over and assist with future needs. Continue to charge fees for the pool, golf ect. Invest the excess monies This should not be considered a forever tax. Proof that the money will be used for the correct purpose. NOT tapped for ?? Done proper, the board does not require a full penny to accomplish this nor 10 years.

Steve Powell · Guru

Keep in mind Sue, that new park is replacing an existing park with brand new equipment. I don't believe there will be any added maintenance to what they already have. In fact, considering the equipment is brand new, I believe there will be less. And in fact, it will be far safer for children to play there now.

The new playground won't pose any added tax burden.

Sue Evans · Senior Member

http://www.policynd.org/index.php?/site/article/critics_of_property_tax_measure_need_to_read_it

Here is a more detailed issue on the property tax debate. This explains the questions asked.

Now as for the park board...

They are not ever looking to sunset the penny tax. Once we are to become accustomed to paying this tax, it is their idea to keep it much like the penny we currently pay. I do not disagree that the parks needs repair. They will always need repair. This is why we asked about groups that donate to the system. Perhaps the donations could be better directed. We heard L. G. talk about the new park donation and yes it is nice but it will also pose an upkeep issue. The parks are already over burdened.

I do think we need to set up a priority list. We may have gotten an 80/20 financing on the walking paths but we have 100% of the upkeep. The new proposed park area at the railroad. It isn't done yet. Do we really need it? Maybe we should scrap that one. What is the full count of parks around our community?

Do we need a full penny tax? Not really. Should it be for life? Read the link I posted and inform yourself.

The parks can not actually start collecting this tax for almost 2 more years. This gives us all some time to think.

Steve Powell · Guru

Or it could be...and we should consider NOT dropping our property taxes.

Jibslider · Senior Member

Steve Powell wrote:

I think Washington state is a good example to use. Perhaps not..but from what I've read they bid adue to their property tax and loaded the state sales tax. Then all the other municipalities added their 2 cents (buh dum bum) after that.

Who's to say revenues from oil as well as increased sales tax couldn't be factored in. Might as well use it while we got it, eh?

... and WA state is in an enormous budget shortfall, and now looking to cut a ton of $$ from programs.

I'm just saying. WA might not be the best example.

Steve Powell · Guru

I think Washington state is a good example to use. Perhaps not..but from what I've read they bid adue to their property tax and loaded the state sales tax. Then all the other municipalities added their 2 cents (buh dum bum) after that.

Who's to say revenues from oil as well as increased sales tax couldn't be factored in. Might as well use it while we got it, eh?

rwaitman · Senior Member

NDGirl wrote:

Sue, as a candidate for mayor, what is your stance on the one cent tax? It would be a shame for the parks and rec to not have a fund, if the state of ND does get rid of property taxes. This is what will happen if the state gets rid of property tax, and we do not give the parks and rec their one cent.
It was brought up to use the oil revenue, but what does the city do when the oil boom is over? Us "locals" know that while it may be years away, or tomorrow, the oil boom unfortunatly will end, and where does that leave our parks and rec?

You ask a good question. I would like to hear from not only Sue Evans but any and all of the candidates for office. Or the current elected officials including but not limited to our local ones as well as the state representatives. Since Sue seems to have been studying it, she, as a contributor on this page, would likely have a good idea of what the failsafe they (the state) are offering to keep cities from going bankrupt.

I don't know much about it, but it seems if they get rid of property taxes, you are going to see a major and wholesale restructuring of the local taxing process... Fargo for example could probably get away with taxing the heck out of people, and they would still come there, for shopping, culture, tourism or whatever...they could get away with whatver they want....but if you tried to tax somebody 40% or so, they sure ain't gonna come to Williston to do their shopping or find some social and cultural activities...

Yes, the boom cycle for the oil industry will ultimately end. Those involved in the industry have historically be caring and giving when approached in the right manner, not only the major industries, but the more local service companies as well. When that cycle ends, the money will not be abundant and belts will inevitably tighten. Now is the time to be laying the groundwork for generating funding for those items of infrastructure we have been talking about.

;o)
R

NDGirl · Veteran Member

Sue, as a candidate for mayor, what is your stance on the one cent tax? It would be a shame for the parks and rec to not have a fund, if the state of ND does get rid of property taxes. This is what will happen if the state gets rid of property tax, and we do not give the parks and rec their one cent.
It was brought up to use the oil revenue, but what does the city do when the oil boom is over? Us "locals" know that while it may be years away, or tomorrow, the oil boom unfortunatly will end, and where does that leave our parks and rec?

rwaitman · Senior Member

Sue Evans wrote:

I understand Larry's frustration. We did try to issue some other ideas when he spoke at our group. There were a couple of people that had issues with the golf course. We did try and stay on topic.
1. Did the park board require a full penny to accomplish this list?
2. Did the park board require a full ten years of this tax?
3. If they would agree to lessen the "free" items how quickly could this be tackled?
4. Would this tax take care of the problem?
5. Could they better direct the donations towards what they do need rather than a maint. exp. down the line? For instance, groups wishing to provide donations to our park system, refuse what we can not maintain.
6. Would we get a guarantee that the funds would be spent/allocated towards the projects set forth?

If the park board was insistant on setting up a fund for surrounding communities, what is the exact region this fund would cover?

We felt concrete answers to be very valid points. The surrounding communities enjoy our parks. All are welcome.

None of us want to see the parks deteriorate. In the same token, fiscal responsibility. What do we fully need, and how can it be done. The most cost effective manner.

There were people at that meeting I had never seen before and have not seen at one of our meetings since. Our parks people were hard hit. It was not just a TEA Party issue the night they spoke at our group. Much like this forum, we are open to all.

Did you get answers? Were they logical and clear?

Sue Evans · Senior Member

I understand Larry's frustration. We did try to issue some other ideas when he spoke at our group. There were a couple of people that had issues with the golf course. We did try and stay on topic.
1. Did the park board require a full penny to accomplish this list?
2. Did the park board require a full ten years of this tax?
3. If they would agree to lessen the "free" items how quickly could this be tackled?
4. Would this tax take care of the problem?
5. Could they better direct the donations towards what they do need rather than a maint. exp. down the line? For instance, groups wishing to provide donations to our park system, refuse what we can not maintain.
6. Would we get a guarantee that the funds would be spent/allocated towards the projects set forth?

If the park board was insistant on setting up a fund for surrounding communities, what is the exact region this fund would cover?

We felt concrete answers to be very valid points. The surrounding communities enjoy our parks. All are welcome.

None of us want to see the parks deteriorate. In the same token, fiscal responsibility. What do we fully need, and how can it be done. The most cost effective manner.

There were people at that meeting I had never seen before and have not seen at one of our meetings since. Our parks people were hard hit. It was not just a TEA Party issue the night they spoke at our group. Much like this forum, we are open to all.

rwaitman · Senior Member

I was really happy to see the post, the first one in a long time, from Larry Grondahl.

I have had two emails already this morning asking who "Grondahl" is. That tells me that more and more people are reading this page.

For those of you who do not know who Larry Grondahl is, he is the President of the Williston Park Board. In this role, he is the official voice of the Williston Park District.

He and I served together on the Williston Park Board for nearly 11 years, sometimes in agreement, and sometimes in disagreement, sometimes casually and sometimes heatedly.

It is something of a coup for this board, to have him post, since he holds a significant
position in the community. As I read through his earlier post, I was hoping it would be more along the lines of laying out the issue and his reasons for supporting it, similar to, but maybe with a different flavor than the recent post by Darin K, who is the Director of Parks and Recreation.

Rather, it looked more to me like a lecture to any and all who dare to write a contrary position.

I would like to say again, that whether or not we like it, the internet provides a venue for modern day communication. I do not like the idea of people "hiding" behind a pen-name and then attacking someone else. However, other than a few isolated incidents, that has not been happening on this board and so far as I can tell, the individuals, Larry, Sue, Justin, Darin...and many others, have been signing their names.

I really hope that Larry will continue to post, and lay out for us, his unique perspectives on the 1 cent tax proposal, and why it will be good for the community.

We, all of us, seem to care about the community, we just differ on how to get there and what approach to take. We have a wonderful opportunity, and place to communicate, and obviously we are getting more and more readers on the pages.

If you have not already, please take advantage of this opportunity to participate, and possibly make a difference in Williston.

The concept of "shout when in doubt" or "get mad and take your ball and go home" are not constructive.

Please express your opinions.

;o)
R