By Marla Dalrymple
Staff Writer

Franklin Town Attorney John Henning Jr. announced earlier this month that David Whitmire, who resides in Alaska, has settled with the town in the amount of $5,000 for the removal of property from his childhood home.

In September, the Town Board of Aldermen voted to write Whitmire and offer a final opportunity for him to make restitution for the removal of property owned by the town.

“It’s at an end,” said Henning.

The “Whitmire Property” has been a source of discord among aldermen since the former owner removed slate and doors from the property nearly three years ago. Whitmire received permission from the mayor and current assistant manager to remove a few mementos from his former Franklin residence.

Whitmire, however, removed permanent structures from the building, and some aldermen felt that permission to reclaim town property should have come from the board.

Alderman Bob Scott called for an independent investigation of the matter after District Attorney Mike Bonfoey failed to prosecute the case.

“I’m not happy with the settlement,” Scott said this week, “but there was no reason for lengthy litigation.” Scott said the removal of items from the residence made the house useless.

“It could have been used for something,” he said of the town-owned building, “now I’m not sure it has any value at all.”

The town purchased the 13-acre property from a third party in 2004 for $1.5 million. In September of 2008, the property was appraised at $2.15 million.

Tax apprasier Richard Lightner said the property is definitely worth $2 million, stating he doesn’t believe there are any other undeveloped tracts of its size left in town limits.

“It’s one of the better locations in town,” Lightner said, “but the building has no value.”

According to Genevieve Burda, sister to David Whitmire, the house alone was appraised at a mere $17,860 in April 2006, following the removal of items.

Alderman Jerry Evans agreed with Scott that the cost to taxpayers to take the disagreement to court would not have been worthwhile.

“I’m glad to get it behind us,” said Evans, adding that the decision to give town property away should have come from the board.

Burda said that her mother left a letter at the time of the sale of the home indicating a desire to reclaim material from the property were it to ever be razed or demolished.

First checking with his town administrator, Mayor Joe Collins granted Whitmire permission to remove a few mementos. Collins said he didn’t feel the matter needed to go before the board.

Alderman Verlin Curtis said the board had never determined they would not rebuild the house, but it would have been too expensive to rebuild after it was gutted. “It was a beautiful home,” he said.

Scott blamed poor communication for the fact that the board was not aware of the status of the property.

Evans said he doesn’t understand how the district attorney could say that no criminal action took place.

“They would lock some people up for that,” he said. “If you’re a taxpayer, and your money bought that, there’s no way you could be happy. The taxpayers ultimately lost.”

“It doesn’t matter how prominent you are, if you become a thief, you are responsible,” said Curtis. “You have to pay the consequences.”

In April of 2006, Whitmire wrote to town staff referring to himself as the “scoundrel of East Franklin due to recent removal of items from my 50-year-old abandoned home place.” Mayor Joe Collins, he said, gave him permission to remove a keepsake of slate sidewalk buried under overgrown grass. Whitmire also removed, however, slate tile from the patio and inside the house.

“What if your homeplace lay abandoned and neglected for years, was bought by the city, and was part of and surrounded by prime commercial property?” he wrote. “The most likely and sensible outcome is the home would be razed and the property would be converted to what is today the highest value use.

“If it will make folks feel better, I will gladly pay the city for the materials I took,” said Whitmire, “…I apologize for the trouble I may have created.”

In October of 2008, Burda wrote to the town board, saying, “I am truly embarrassed and amazed that with all the challenges of managing a wonderful area, you have chosen to focus on this petty, non-issue. I would hope your collective wisdom would encourage you to drop this matter now and get back to the important business of managing a wonderful town.”

Now the board will have to decide the future of the property. Discussion to surplus the property has been tabled.

“We don’t know what would be an excellent use for the property in five or six years,” said Scott, who is against selling the property.

“It is the largest single tract of green space left in city limits,” he said, suggesting a park for public use. “If we sell it, we’ll never get it back again.”