TO THE EDITOR:

This is in answer to the letter of the ex-chairman of the Nessel Township Board, David Christensen. He seems to think that it will get worse now that he is gone, but just consider we will not have him yelling at the citizens of the township that he does not like.

He will not be telling the taxpayer that they are out of order when the taxpayer has a legitimate question. There were many insulting events that went on. Things are bound to get better.

As for Mrs. Leier, she received 531 votes out of 800, so the people thought she did her job right.

On the reprimand of our employee, Dave said he did not know if it was right or wrong. He voted "no," why did he not abstain? I think if an employee takes a Nessel Township resident's land to make a public turn around, without any direction from the board, then verbally insults him, that is an easy call - he did wrong.

We will be lucky if we do not get sued - again.

Dave was also concerned that when our employee was fired, then hired back again after mediation, that letters were not sent to the employee, and the union, and questioned whether we had an employee or not.

I would ask, if you have doubts, then why did you sign his time sheets and pay him?

If you read page 4 of the October minutes, the procedure is all explained and correctly executed.

You made the motion to accept the mediator's letter to rehire the employee.

As for the mediator telling the board to set up an explanation and policy for time sheets, it has been in the Nessel Policy Manual since 1997.

It is in detail, and I was there when the employee received his copy.

He was also told to fill out the time sheet - or no pay. This you have neglected to see happen for four years, and you are the one who signs for it.

It is all documented and on tape.

Dave says that for 30 years the township has had a pull-type grader to use on their driveways. He means for the board, their friends and family members to use, because it has been kept a secret. It has never been advertised because it is against the law.

Mr. Beise said he used it two or three times and Mr. Twingstrom says it is a perk.

There is no such thing as perks in government, unless authorized by law. The General Purpose Law states, ‘That if the primary purpose is to benefit a private end, an individual, or a group of individuals, the expenditure is illegal, even if it incidentally serves some public purpose.'

Which means no money, personnel, or equipment can be used. The law was challenged unsuccessfully in 1923, 1934 and 1958. It is still in effect.

In 2001, the state auditor sent a letter to the Nessel board. I just quoted to you from mine. The last line in the letter says, ‘We recommend that you start obeying the laws of the state of Minnesota.'

What do you suppose a judge would say if they loaned the grader out and a child was injured. Do you think we would be liable? All of us? Would you like to split up a claim of 10 or $15 million?

Ray Henderson received 547 votes, Dave, and you got 316. You lost for a lot of reasons. You were the chairman, Dave and all of your complaints and doubts should have been taken care of by you, yet you blame everybody but yourself.

Thomas L. Hennemann
Rush City