The North Platte City Council’s regular session was not big enough to hold a heated discussion between two of its members.

Check out our FREE online Bill Pay!

Third Ward representative Don Kurre and the Fourth Ward’s Larry Campbell continued to argue after the meeting was adjourned.

At issue was a resolution passed by the council, 6-2, adopting goals for the year they informally set at a budget retreat in late August.

At those meetings, the council set five goals:

• Reduce the property tax levy.

• Shrink the city government.

• Commit to downtown redevelopment.

• Work better with various stakeholders (notably the county government).

• Continue retail sector development.

That list was honed from individual lists submitted by each council member. Individual lists were combined, whittled down and prioritized, resulting in the list the council adopted on a split vote Tuesday night.

Earlier that day, Second Ward representative Jim Parish told the Bulletin there was likely to be some discussion about the resolution, as the members of the council had been emailing each other about the topic.

Discussion there was, first in the meeting, and more passionately afterwards.

Third Ward rep Dan McGuire, who joined Campbell in voting against the resolution during the meeting, said during the council debate he could not support the action because, “We’d be putting ourselves in a box we don’t need to be.”

McGuire said while the council made "reducing the property tax levy" the top priority, they never stipulated how the levy would be reduced, or by how much.

“As for shrinking the city government, I think that’s his job,” he stated, pointing at City Administrator Jim Hawks.

Kurre spoke, pointing out that during the budget retreat, the statement was made several times that the council needed to give the administration direction, chiefly by McGuire.

Kurre said adopting the goals is a way of providing direction and committing to the five goals.

“This, I think, makes clear to the public that the work we did (at the retreat) is now a part of the public record.”

Campbell then took issue with the wording in the agenda, which said that adopting the resolution would “memorialize” the goals.

“Memorialize? A memorial is a stone,” Campbell said.

City Attorney Doug Stack replied that by using the word memorialize, he simply meant that the goals would be committed to writing.

“We can carve it in stone, if you like,” joked Mayor Marc Kaschke.

Campbell expressed concern that the priorities had not been unanimous. Reducing the property tax levy had not been every council member’s highest priority; it simply had received the highest average, he said.

Passing the resolution would make it seem like it was everyone’s top goal.

Second Ward representative Judy Pederson said the council is accountable to the public, and passing the resolution would show the city’s government seriousness about following up on those goals.

Campbell replied that the public already learned of the goals from the media in August.

The First Ward’s Jerry Stoll said the resolution would show the focus and commitment of the council, and Parish said that it would, “Hold our feet to the fire.”

Harry Spohn of the First Ward said that he would frame the goals and put them on his desk, but that the council was unfortunately limited by reality.

“Reality may dictate that we can lower the property tax,” he stated. He went on to say that he did not think that was likely.

Ultimately the resolution passed, and the meeting opened to public comment. When no one stepped forward, the meeting was adjourned.

Campbell and Kurre started exchanging words immediately.

Kurre expressed dismay that the council could not fully support the goals that they laid out a few months before.

Campbell responded that the whole thing seemed frivolous and unnecessary. The passage was symbolic, nothing more.

“Symbols are important,” Kurre said.

“To you,” Campbell answered.

“To everyone,” Kurre replied.

The argument continued for a few minutes. As it wound down, participants became aware of the attention the members of the media were paying to their discussion.

When Diane Wetzel of the Telegraph asked the pair if they could recreate their argument so she could take a picture, Campbell joked, “No, this time he might hit me.”

Both men shook hands and said they enjoyed the debate before parting company.