Ch-ch-ch-changes in city government

David Bowie won’t sing nor will Joe Robbie show up to discuss his 1948 campaign to alter Mitchell’s city government structure. Bowie is mostly retired and Robbie is, well, very retired. He died a decade ago.

But you can be there. A second meeting on the proposal by Focus 2020 starts at 7 p.m. Monday at MTI’s Technology Center. Brookings and Aberdeen city officials will be there to discuss how a change worked in their cities.

Planning on being there, don’t care or will you be too busy dealing with the Killer Skeeter Attack!

19 thoughts on “Ch-ch-ch-changes in city government

  1. Tom Boddett’s comments on behalf of DeSmet farm mutual add said< a memory of Tom Lawrence at SDSU interviewing Maudlin the WW correspondent? Would that be you Mr. Tom Lawrence?

  2. I and others will be watching online. Many are curious, however, as to whether Focus2020 is paying the travel expenses for many of these speakers. That is something, I’m sure, most interested readers would want to know. There seems to be an innate bias toward advocating the change while only superficially discussing the cons of the proposal.

  3. I thin you have a bias from your comments? why not put your cards on the table so to speak mr./mrs fairness??

  4. Yes, that radio ad by the great Jim Thompson, not Tom Boddett, recounted an interview I had at SDSU 30 years ago with famed cartoonist Bull Mauldin, the creator of “Willie and Joe,” cartoons about World War II dogfaces. He was a Pulitzer Prize winner who drew acclaimed editorial cartoons for decades.
    Thompson, who has a regional radio show called “Jim Thompson Live,” is a former state senator who was a radio host at KWAT in Watertown for years. Jim lives in the Black Hills now. He’s a great guy and I feel honored to call him friend.

  5. When the USD professor and graduate student spoke at the Focus 2020 meeting two weeks ago, they told me they didn’t receive a dime. The professor said providing information to people in the state was part of his job, and he would buy his grad student a steak out of his own pocket to thank him.
    I will check on the Brookings and Aberdeen officials who will speak here tonight.

  6. I think you touched a nerve. Nothing wrong with that. Keep asking questions. You may be on to something.

  7. I am confused why cost could possibly be an issue. We are talking about a salaried postion that could add 150,000 per salary and benefits to the cities expenses. Getting the right information from a neutral source (USD) and from other munincipalities (tonight) that have been through the process is priceless. Why does Mitchell have such an issue with any discussion of change. We leak more money down our legs due to this inability to pay for planning and a lack of cooperation between city and county. Bite the bullet and find some courage to at least be objective and listen to the facts.

  8. That Brookings budget is very professional looking and is easy to understand. Does anyone have the link to the Mitchell budget for comparison? I can’t even find it on the website.

  9. As someone very much inclined to see some progressive change in the community, particularly local government, I am glad that the local media is helping educate the public. Some of the input of some of the posters on this blog helps inform the decision that I and the community will make in deciding what is best for Mitchell. Unfortunately, “foxy lady” [post 6/28, 5:48 pm] is putting forth her position in an irresponsible, not to mention distasteful way that reinforces the idea of some that we should proceed with great care. When she says “why cost can possibly be an issue” I think some of us should try to get informed on this issue. At last night’s informative meeting, the gentlemen from Brookings and Aberdeen made it very clear that there are significant costs and risks that would come with this change.

    When Mitchell makes its decision, after careful and thoughtful analysis, then somebody should try to explain to foxy lady what “objective” means.

  10. When times get tough, it’s time to pull on the purse strings. Keep it simple, keep it cheap. Listen to the old folks, they know how to make a nickle squeek. Our young people have never learned to go without like our older generation.

  11. changes are coming to our government and one thing we will do next election when his term expires is get rid of old Mayor Lou- save the trees- get rid of an old republican nay sayer

  12. If people are upset with how things are going in local government, they can always vote the pols out or recall them.

    If we have a mayor and a city manager and you’re upset with local government, we can vote the pols out, recall them, and buyout the contract of the city manager.

    The people of Mitchell are going to have to decide which is the more responsive and cost-effective way to run the city.

    There have been a number of good points on both sides of the debate, but some of the clamor for change seems to be motivated by some individuals with an ax to grind. Judging by the low attendance at the two informational meetings at MTI, I’m not sure whether the public is eager as much as others in the community for this change — at least not yet.
    In the end, that may not matter. We all know that the trend is lower and lower voter turnout, so a small segment of the community, with their agenda, can have a profound effect in an election. To be fair, I would urge everyone to get informed on this issue, so the best decision — whatever that might be — will be made for Mitchell.

  13. the lake was created and full by 1929- there wasn’t the housing development which has flourished since the 70′s around the lake. The first housing at the Lake probably came to North Harmon dr. Now the lake has been impacted not just by housing but upstream farming pratices. Some of the documents I’ve seen seem to indicate that the previous generation intention was to have a park around the lake- well enough said a little too late for that. What is so wrong about protecting the remaining undeveloped areas at the Lake? The city probably mowes it once in awhile anyway- especially road right of ways.? Is there any truth to the story that the tall tree on North Harmon were once the property of the state, that a GF&P sign hung there designating it as a wildlife production area? and why was that changed or dropped by the state?

  14. Face it, it is NOT about the trees, it is current lake property owners wanting to keep anyone else from having a home on the lake. Unless or course you pay one of the current home owners an inflated price for theirs.

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>