Boise Redevelopment Agency, predessor to the CCDC, bought up most of the buildings downtown, many from the Broadbent family which had owned and rented out spaces for decades, and made a tidy profit for the Broadbent heirs.

Personally, I don’t understand why CCDC is still operating. And I agree that if a convention center is good why doesn’t one of the wealthy people in the valley build it?

The city council members currently hide behind the nine-member board of CCDC with no oversight and, as a result, have no accountability.

Currently, our mayor appoints the board members. Talk about stacking the deck!

I’m glad there are so many people left in the US with that ol’ pioneering spirit. Remember the stories that grandpa used to tell about pulling up stakes during the 30’s and looking for prosperity? Its seems that a few generations on and grandpa’s decendents have gotten a little too comfortable and would prefer that things never change. Isn’t this just another form of undeserving entitlement? In my way of thinking, these emigrant-phobes are even worse than “welfare queens”!

What’s wrong with progress and change? What’s wrong with our community inspiring a little yankee ingenuity and why wouldn’t we open our arms to newcomers? I can guarantee you that those who are moving to this area are willing to work, and willing to invest their hard-earning money in this area – to become members of our community.

And remember, no matter how hard you wish, you don’t have the keys to the city gate. Playing ostrich and refusing to confront & facilitate growth will only result in a socioeconomic calamity of such epic proportions that it would make the financial doldrums of the 70’s seem like a walk in the park. Does anyone think that we’re that comfortably insulated from the possibilities of race riots, rampant unemployment, run-away home foreclosures, or urban decay?

Trying to turn away emigrants, or adopting policies and laws that make our communities unattractive to newcomers, is the equivalent of cutting our nose off to spite our face. Personally, I don’t think we should be hoping to carry the full tax burden of fixing all our communities’ problems by ourselves. I look forward to spreading the load.

How about you?

Ain’t that just WONDERFUL?!!? (/sarcasm) What would we have to do to get on the list with Detroit, East St. Louis, Gary Indiana, and Yuba City? I’d rather be on THAT list.

Ironically, the “cons” they see about living in Boise is spiraling property taxes and “sprawl.” How will those problems be impacted when 500 more families pull up their California (or elsewhere) roots and aim the U-Haul toward Boise?

If the Convention Center is a great idea, maybe the Simplots can build it as a private venture. They’ve got money. They could incorporate a wing for the J.R. Tractor Museum, and for the expanded Discovery Center.

Once this debt is retired, the tax income is re-diverted back to the public’s coffers. These improvements were badly needed today, but rather than wait until all the tax funds were saved up (and dealing with the misery of decrepit infrastructure in the mean time) the developer pays for (and builds) it all today. Because the FREE MARKET upfronted the money to make these improvements – and rightly requires that the money be paid back over time – the public benefits today, and realizes an increased taxable land base as the debt is retired. Otherwise, with no improved infrastructure and no way to finance it there would be no private-sector reinvestment in the area – with no such investment, the public languishes under the oppressive debt of deferred infrastructure maintenance & capital improvements, and a contaminated environment. And, the public never realizes an increased tax base.

Does such financing tilt the level playing field that all private business is suppose to be playing on? To believe that, you would have to first believe that such a level field even exists. Hint, hint. nudge, nudge, wink, wink… it doesn’t.

Is the redevelopment of a city’s downtown city core a necessary component of a vibrant community? Only if you treasure a vibrant downtown. I suspect many who oppose an urban renewal agency & its core mission don’t burden themselves with this belief.

Is the use of public taxes to intice private-sector reinvestment a legitimate expense? It depends on 1) the terms of the deal, 2) the size of the public benefit, and 3) the number of people who will benefit from the reinvestment. To answer the first factor – the deal makes sense if the amount of interest the tax-increment financing arrangement pays is near-equivilant to the interest on bonded debt. To answer the second factor, the deal makes sense if the physical size of the improvement and the demand for the improvement match a previously published infrastructure deficiency report. To answer the third and final factor, the deal makes sense if the residential and employment base which will enjoy an improved urban fabric is large enough. As for BoDo (a seriously crappy name, the developer’s PR group should be fired), it appears to meet all these criteria.

Access to the north side of Front Street (the Courthouse Corridor area and points west) is very restricted. This is because it is served by a five-lane, one-way arterial – access onto which is further restricted by the Idaho Transportation Department (not ACHD), because it is a state highway. This alone is enough to scare private businesses away. Any development that has service & customer access to both Front AND Myrtle at least has a chance at survival – look at Winco, and the office building in which George’s Bicycle is located, and maybe BoDo (if the financial projections are honest). This benefit would also hold true for the proposed Convention Center – and why the current “single-loaded” CC site suffers so poorly.

The very fact that the existing CC was built at “Center-on-the-Grove” was an act of extremely poor urban planning. That Boise’s Chinatown was condemned and demolished to make way for the “Center”, by CCDC’s predecessor (the Boise Redevelopment Agency), was urban renewal at its height of criminal arrogance. And, that the couplet was extended into the heart of downtown is nothing more than a knife at the juglar of the city. These events have all come to pass, the best we can do is correct the mistakes of the past and do so in the most cost effective way possible.

EDITOR NOTE–George, you got it right for the most part. However, these people don’t play fair. The continue to expand their horizons, create new “districts” and then refinance the debt and extend it. Greed drives their development decision–hence mega plans like the defunct tower because they figure it will yield more revenues. You could have a “vital retail” outlet with two stories of offices over the Boise Pit, but CCDC holds out for grander plans. I am no longer willing to pay for all the services they consume.

In truth, I think what I see mostly on this board is a lot of people that care about Boise, but we just have a different vision of how to get to utopia.

Not myopic? Wrong. Just myopic in the opposite direction, and seemingly buying the line of the pro-growth-no-matter-what groups. Think growth pays its way? Take a look at NYC, Chitown, Phoenix, Silicon Valley, etc. — check out their property tax rates, income tax rates etc. and see how well they do after astronomic growth.

Maybe we can’t stop growth, but maybe we could stop the money-grubbers from constantly encouraging it and promoting it on our tax dollars.