Park land or preserving trees

A petition submitted to the city Monday calls for voting on converting three pieces of city-owned land deemed surplus property near Lake Mitchell into park land. Right now, it looks headed to the Nov. 2 ballot.

‘This would cap development by the lake and also save a stand of trees that were at the center of a fiery public debate in late 2009 and early 2010. How do you feel about this proposal?
 

24 thoughts on “Park land or preserving trees

  1. I signed the petition and feel it is important to vote on this. It’s about time us tax payers and property owners have a say so!

  2. I did get to sign the previous petition to save the trees- and the mayor says I don’t know there maybe some invlaid signatures there- some with apt. numbers as address- let me tell you big boy I have an apt. address and I did not vote for you in the first place- you smug self-indulgent dummy- I am a voter and I say trees yes- Sebert- no.

  3. concerning the “incident” on Lake Mitchell, I find it interesting that Mayor Sebert’s son apoligized to the council for leading them into a fishing area that was being occupied and then Lou, defiant to the end, claims their boats were “50, 60, 70 feet away”. Come on Lou, which was it?

  4. I wasn’t aware this was about cutting down trees. I thought it was about being fiscally responsible. Other class A cities have modern wellness centers, (Huron) places for their kids to practice sports, Brookings, Yankton, Pierre, Brandon, Watertown etc., modern schools and Parks that look like the place you would want to have a picnic and use a modern bathroom facility instead of a porta poti. Mitchell is on the interstate and generates more sales tax revenue than most of the above towns. Mitchell has one of the highest mill levies in the state. Where does all the money go? If we don’t move towards quality parks instead of a thousand acres of land we cannot afford to take care of we will not have to worry about future generations. The council is making sense. If you listen to the reasons for what is happening you would understand. But, the people on this blog are more interested in personalities and name calling than the facts. FACT: the council does not think think the trees on north harmon are in danger as that problem was worked out. Fact: the city spent 30 million dollars on a water pipeline, an outdoor pool and replacing some of the older streets downtown in the last 6 years, money is tight with the given recesion. Fact: the city aquires more land every year (soccer fields, pump stations, from the state etc.) how much land should the city own? Whater we own we must take care of. We spend hundreds of thousand of dollars a years to mow grass. Fact: Mitchell is competing against all the other class A cities for educated, high paying, child rearing people. As a city, we must offer the same amenities other class A cities offer and we are not. How do we upgrade when the very park system that has so much potential sucks all the money away from our ability to ever achieve that potential. I think more discussion about the facts would be beneficial. We can plant more trees, lets just do so with intent and intelligence.

  5. I hope that the voters of mitchell elect to sell the land. If they don’t elect to sell the land the city is going to have to raise taxes to maintain this property. Because the citizens that want to save the property are going to want it cleaned up and look nice, which it doesn’t right now. Also that means hireing more government employees which inturn will raise my taxes and yours. What happened to the old days when the only land/building that government owned was the court house?

  6. more like a fictional account- just your opinion buddy- you’d do good for the chamber of commerce as a promoter- do you have a real job?

    Let’s vote for the tress not Lou- and then name the new park “Lou the tree hugger”

  7. Lou has nothing to do with this. He doesn’t get a vote. Run for mayor yourself. If you don’t think the above is true, attend soome council meetings and get the facts for yourself. Budget is comming up, the facts are in black and white. The council aproves the planting of about 1000 trees a year. They love trees. Danny Allen has single handedly treed the soccer complex. Lets get away from this being a tree debate and start looking at the reasons the council is looking at selling the property in the first place. What does anyone on the council have to gain for this agonizing debate about trees. Houwman has 500 trees planted in a nursery on his property as I have seen them. This is about the role and responsibility of government to do so responsibly. Lake Mitchell is a tremendous asset but needs some help on the accessability and quality side to make it be the huge draw it could be if it meets the expectations of tourists and potential new families. We are trying to maintain 20 crappy cars when we could be driving a brand new Caddilac if we just sell some of the ugly cars that don’t even work. Thats the facts jack! The Chamber promotes Mitchell which promotes you. Get a clue! Where do you think the taxes to pay for your roads, your schools, your cornpalace, your city employees come from? BUSINESS!

  8. yeah i do have a real job and i pay taxes! thats why i am in favor of selling the property. the city doesn’t need to own it at all. if there is 550 people that want to save this land, each of you donate a thousand dollars and buy all the ground. then every month you can change the name of that park, one month mike’s park, next month bob’s park, and you can do that forever!!!

  9. truth finder would make a good spin doctor for the party of denial _Lou’s- where his idol Reagan said trees cause pollution- cut them down you republicans

  10. Actually I voted for Mondale. I was young and imature in those days. I have since been educated in the real world and consider myself an Independent that has voted for Clintons and Bushs alike. Would like to have more to chose from but certainly toe the Independent party line. Good for you to truth finder. I like your logic. What is the role of governement. Maybe we should all give our personal land to the city, oh wait, they tried that in the soviet union. How did that work out for them?

  11. I must be looooooooosing it! Trees cause pollution? Surely that was tongue in cheek. That cannot be an example of our education system.

  12. Nobody has ever said they want to cut down trees. This very headline is misleading, it is not an either or situation. The DR is not being truthful at all. They should report the news and not make foder for them to sell more newspapers. This is not about trees. It is about the fact that this city has the highest taxes in the state and the least to show for it in terms of investment that pays off. examples: Hithcock pool costs us about tens of thousands of dollars a day that it is open, we spend about 250000 to mow around the lake and all the city owned property and they still look like a class B city. Ruts in the dirt behind posts and wire, inaccessable public access lots, dirty beaches with muddy parking lots. WOW. Why would a young person with a family want to move here. Would it not make sense to put our best face forward and be the envy of the state. Lets put all this tax money we raise back into the cities parks and the lake so everyone can have a quality experience with their family. If Mitchell can grow with young families, our schools get better with more kids, our businesses do better with more sales our newspaper sells more papers and adds, our taxes can go down. We have so much potential but we argue about trees and not the cost of having land that costs us to own. Why are Kucera and Porter so fired up to save the trees? They want you to pay for them to have a nice backyard. They don’t care about Mitchell as a whole. They are spreading lies about ‘saving trees’ when the council saved those trees by excluding them from the surpluss property that isn’t what this is really about. Do we want to grow and have quality parks or do we want to get with the 21st century and get outside the box and attract new business, new people, new ideas, etc,? The lake committee is coming up with all kinds of new projects to do this such as a bike trail that goes all the way around the lake, a sandy beach you would love to take your kids to with real bathrooms and showers and parking, fishing docks with asphalt parking and places to bring the elderly that are accessible by wheelchair for everybody that doesn’t own a boat. Maybe a marina. A campground that you can walk along the shore at instead of having ugly orange fences. The council has no money to spend on all this. It is trying to come up with the money without raising your taxes. Cut them some slack and get the facts. PLEASE!

  13. Well said. If the city turned the north harmon lot into a park, wouldn’t they have to remove all the couches, grills, clothes, beer bottles, liquer bottles, and a lot of trees to put up park stuff or even a trail?

  14. tongue-in-cheek- is better than truth finder’s foot in mouth comment on the soviet union- which is no longer called that comrade? Some of you so called indes. are in fact closet socialists- comrades?

  15. If it means more dollars spent on upkeep and development of these lands, sell the land and get it on the tax rolls.

  16. I previously resided in another class A city and would note that Mitchell has most, if not all the facilities the other class A cities have. What Mitchell does not have, that other class A cities have, is green space. Almost all the other class A cities require developers to put in green space, parks and bike trails in the housing developments. Why doesn’t Mitchell require the same? Why is beutification such a low priority for this city? Believe it or not quality of life is important to recruit and maintain residents.

    The fact that the council has wasted so much time and effort on an area of trees that will generate such a nominal income is an embarrasment. Aren’t there bigger things to worry about? If the city needs money, why are we financing councilman Howman’s maintence of a waterfall? Why aren’t we taking a note from Sioux Fall’s new mayor and cutting expenses (cell phones/printers)?

    I believe the people have spoken on this issue. Why can’t the council listen? You are suppose to be the people’s voice. We pay your salary.

  17. you are wrong- more money into government means they just spend more- just like you- there is no restraint here- getting more land on tax rolls does not mean that government profits one bit- this is flawed logic- how can a grove of trees at the lake generate money- unless you tear them down and build on the land housing???- that is not what the residents of this town want- we will all get a chance to vote on this one bubba?

    Dear soldier freak go out there and start picking up the trash- all you do in these bloggs is complain- well talk is cheap buddy- get involved????

  18. Just leave the land around the lake as it is. A one time sale of property for what reason? Did someone suddenly start charging the city to own this land? It has been fine for many years, leave it all be for the future. If the council wants to sell some land, let it be a public vote on the land, not an under the table deal. Go to a public auction, not a private or closed bid. Or does the Mayor and his council think we are too stupid to make these decisions?

  19. Wasn’t the waterfall donated? I don’t think the council had anything to do with the waterfall, the golf board passed that. It is beautifull. The above comment on quality is duly answered not to mention the fact that the stinky swamp is now gone. I think the golf board is putting in another waterfull to clean the area in front of the indian village. Lets see, free, beautiful, increased quality of life, lost habitat for mosquitos and a heck of a lot less than say $400000 for alum.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>