2008 e-mail to City Council regarding Landmark Hospital

Sunday, February 21, 2010 | 12:01 a.m. CST; updated 4:32 p.m. CST, Monday, February 22, 2010

The e-mail sent from Gary Kespohl's account attempts to persuade the City Council's decision in the May 2008 vote on the issue of building Landmark Hospital (see the related story here).

Here is the original, unedited e-mail in its entirety:

From: "Gary Kespohl" <>

To: <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, <>

Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 14:39:51 -0500

Subject: Long term hospital proposal

Dear Mayor and Council members,

I am writing to give you some additional facts which may help in your decision at tonight's council meeting concerning the proposal of the long term hospital care facility. In 1994 I inquired about an R1 lot of about 1.5 acres to build a new home on for my wife and I. I offered $100,000 for the building lot and was told that if I let Crawfoerd Construction build the home I could buy the lot. I already had a builder in mind so we never came to agreement. In 2004 I inquired about purchasing the southern 8.9 acres bordered by Country Club Drive on the north and 763 on the west. We were interested in building a Lutheran School on that peice of ground and were given a price for the land. Again the conditions were that Crawford Construction would have to be the builder, so we declined. The neighborhood was in agreement, that a school would be a perfect neighbor. Only open during the day with little activity in the evenings and none on the weekends. I now understand that the northern tract is to be sold from the McAlester Trust to Elizabeth and Mark Crawford, with the conditions that the hospital be located there and that Crawford Construction be the builder. I am very concerned about future development on these tracts of land because of the conditions under which they are sold. My concern is that if the Construction Company sees a way to make money that the Trust and family will go along with any proposal. If you pass this rezoning request I would hope that it does not set a standard for the use of the remaining land. I think you must consider this possibility very carefully in making your decision.I have asked Elizabeth Crawford directly to consider some sort of promise to not allow more commercial development on the tracts and she has refused. I am very concerned.

Gary Kespohl


Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.