Friendships aside, why would the mayor deny having a meeting with the city manager regarding Marvin Filsinger’s property violations? (I should mention that when I spoke to Mayor Dave Weiderspon yesterday he did not deny knowing about the violations themselves, as he said council members are routinely given property violation reports.)
It is only the meeting with the city manager that he denies.
Okay, there are two schools of thought, and neither leaves the mayor in very good light.
First, let’s say he did have the meeting (as it was documented at city hall) but he actually forgot about it. Do you want someone who would forget about such a meeting serving as your mayor?
Second, let’s say he figures that if he says he doesn’t remember the meeting, people will not hold him accountable for the violations. And won’t hold him accountable for not upholding the city council code of conduct. And won’t ask why he would put his friendship with Mr. Filsinger above his duty to the rest of the citizens of Sidney.
Maybe it’s because Mr. Filsinger was instrumental in blocking a land annexation proposal brought before council.
The land is that owned by Mr. Weiderspon, the property where White Bluff Vet Hospital is located, was in that proposal.
That land is not in city limits. The property to the south, Mudhead Ship and Pack, is in city limits. So are the housing developments to the west. The land directly to the north, the pasture land that is Verde Lane Dam, that is not in city limits, but is owned by the city.
Because the mayor’s land is attached by the thinest margin to the dam site, I would guess the land to be 20 to 30 yards wide where it meets with that property, than the land can legally remain as outside the city limits.
Note that I said it is legal. I don’t believe it is ethical.
In March of 2007, an ordinance came before council that proposed annexing the Saddle Club area, the Verde Lane Dam site, the Mayor’s land, and property near the airport being developed by Greg Huck.
Mr. Filsinger first worked to have the single ordinance written as three separate ordinances to be considered at the next meeting. (This was ostensibly to separate the mayor’s property from other land that many people stood in support of annexing.)
At the next meeting, when the ordinance containing the mayor’s land and the Verde Lane Dam site was discussed, Mr. Filsinger actively argued against it. He implied it would cost the city money because infrastructure would have to be provided to the dam site. That argument was shown to not hold water because the city could deny any requests that were not financially feasible and it was improbable that anyone other than the city would ever own the dam site.
The statement by city officials for the best reason to annex the property was that it would square up the boundaries of the city.
Unfortunately, no one bothered to stand up and state the facts about annexing the mayor’s land. With a property valuation of more than $250,000, the city would stand to collect more than $12,000 a year (at our present levy) in property taxes. The city would also be the beneficiary of the city sales tax the mayor would be required to collect on goods and services at the clinic, potentially tens of thousands of dollars.
Mr. Filsinger actually said that annexing the property didn’t “make a whole lot of sense.”
The citizens of Sidney should be aware that not having the land annexed cost them a whole lot of cents.
Maybe because Mr. Filsinger worked to keep the mayor’s tax bill at a minimum the Mayor developed amnesia about the meeting with the city manager.
You know, when you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. Then it’s really nice having someone to scratch your back if you agree to scratch his.
