Boise City Loses ANOTHER Legal Fight

Boise City’s legal department and Team Dave have preserved their losing record on high profile civil cases with yet another courtroom defeat.

The city earlier this year sued Ada County over the approval of the Avimor planned community on Highway 55. Judge Duff McKee dismissed the city case Thursday saying they had “no standing” in their claim the county broke the law when the project was approved. McKee ordered the city to pay the county for costs associated with defending their actions in court.

Commish Chairman Rick Yzaguirre said, “Clearly Judge McKee found the claims filed by Boise leaders to be baseless.”

This is part of the pattern established by the Boise legal department–chasing and losing legal action at taxpayer expense.

Recent notable actions:

–Boise lost an Idaho Supreme Court case in their quest to build an airport parking garage without voter approval. In addition to the expenses of staff and office operation, they had to pay about $22,000 to the GUARDIAN editor’s legal staff.

–They lost to the 10 Commandments coalition when the Idaho Supreme Court declared the city violated the law not allowing the question of replacing a monument to be on the ballot. It was subsequently placed on the Nov. 7 ballot and was defeated.

–Boise has spent nearly $250,000 in the past five years for outside “bond counsel” and NEVER passed a bond. They did sell certificates to finance the airport terminal and that would be illegal today.

In another expensive and probably unproductive legal move, Boise is steadfastly spending thousands upon thousands of dollars chasing after those “dirty trick political phone messages” during the Mayor’s race three years ago. Conservative activist Laird Maxwell has claimed he is the sole perpetrator of the calls which had a message against candidate Chuck Winder.

The issue in that matter was over identification of who funded the calls and whether or not they were “advocating” a particular candidate. The GUARDIAN send a formal request to the spokesperson for Team Dave, but neither the mayor or city attorney’s office has responded.

Attorneys on the other side tell us they are “baffled” about the city’s motivation to pursue something that even if proven may not be against the law.

Finally, look for the city to be on the losing end of a fight with the Ada County Highway District over Ustick Road. That decision is expected by December 1 and the attorney general has already issued an opinion which favored the ACHD.

Comments & Discussion

Comments are closed for this post.

  1. Ironic how Boise is told to sit down and shut up the same way they tell the neighborhoods as the neighborhoods plead for them to understand the gross impacts of the row houses and massive condos. How Ironic.

    Only real difference is that Team Dave can go spend city money to try and sue. The mayor and council know that neighborhoods’ don’t have money to sue so there is no threat of a judge rebuking them for their arrogance.

  2. Well, at least Team dave is keeping his fellow lawyers in the pink with lots of taxpayers money…. maybe his reasoning is ” if I rip off the taxpayer, no one ‘s gonna bother me. I won’t be popular or get re-elected but all the lawyers will love me. As for getting a response from Dave and council members, Guardian, standard procedure for them is to ignore answering any taxpayer asking them to do their job responsibly.

    I posed a question to the mayor and city council some weeks ago on how we might get the City,county and state to work together on a much needed de-tox center.Can’t figure out why I never got a response…

  3. Guardian… another reason it’s good that Ada County prevailed – they now have a reputation for appealing (at taxpayer expense) the legal decisions that go against ’em, as in their Open Meeting Law violation. At least Team Dave has the sense not to appeal the numerous judgments that go the other way.

    EDITOR NOTE–Not much left to appeal when it comes from the SUPREMES…as in airport parking, 10 commandments and (public funds for campaign ads in the case of the G-BAD boys on the convention center). Boise used well over $50,000 taxpayer funds to promote the Foothills levy which was totally illegal, but prior to recent decision of the SUPREMES. One can only conclude local government is truly against the people in these cases.

  4. Looks like Team Dave lost yet another one – the screw-up with Community House.

    Looks like the City Council really enjoys creating their own law. Or just disregarding it. Their pattern of behavior demands we make some changes at the next election.

  5. Team Dave seems to be racking up the legal bills. I wonder how much was spent trying to annex the Hammer Flat property?

    I think Team Dave’s modus operandi is to:
    1. Mistrust all others,
    2. make knee jerk reaction,
    3. Go to court and lose,
    4. Determine what should have been done.

    King Cole’s side trips certainly cost much less than Team Dave legal bills.

  6. Opps again said: “Their pattern of behavior demands we make some changes at the next election.”

    How about just boot them out because of their bad policies? Like approving infill developments? And sprawl? Both are bad, but Team Dave gives us both.

    Granted, in the Avimor deal and the Hammer Flat deal, Team Dave is trying to stop those developments. Why them and not others? It’s incomprehensible.

  7. It’s all in the attitude… It is a case of pure blind arrogance at its best and we get to pay for their ego trips. The public was far better off when we were paying for Coles trips (notice that I didn’t include Lyman in that statement).

  8. Boise Insider
    Nov 10, 2006, 6:18 pm

    Boise City is on a (losing) roll…
    They really do need to find another hobby.

    Here are two stories from KBCI Channel 2 on their homeless shelter fiasco:

  9. I’m sorry Team Dave lost this one. Somebody needs to stop Avimor. Rod asked why Boise and no one else? Good question.

    We’re ALL going to have to pay for the Avimor fiasco. It’ll cost Idaho Power $4.3 million to build a substation to get power to the 685 homes approved for Avimor. Yes, Suncor will lend them the money to build it, but as soon as all 685 homes are online, Id Power has to pay back the money! Those 685 homes won’t “pay for themselves” — all of us are going to have to pay to make up the $4.3 million shortfall.

    If those 685 homes were built where there already is the infrastructure to support them, we wouldn’t be faced with this cost. And this is just the start. Wait until you see what Idaho Transportation costs will be.

  10. The fiasco isn’t over yet! The library foundation(or whomever runs it) has a new idea on how to circumvent the voters. Whatever it is will cost us anyway!

    Both the city and county have a competition going to see who can spend the taxpayers money the fastest, and least effective. I hope all thisis remembered when Dave B and team comes up for re-election next year? My Grandkids could run this city with more fiscal responsibility than they do!

  11. curious george
    Nov 11, 2006, 7:19 pm

    What’s truly unfortunate for Boiseans, who are now stuck footing all the court costs, is that any first-year law student would have known that Boise had no legal standing before Team Dave even filed the suit.

    I don’t fault elected leaders from taking an unpopular position on an issue, especially if it is one that they truly believe in. But, there’s a huge gulf between taking a firm stance on a controversial subject – and then choosing to spend other’s money on a course of action that you know will not forward your cause.

    Is it too much to ask that those in city hall exercise their brains before they act – even if it means that they’re only smart enough to listen to the smart folks?

    Well I guess we didn’t elect the sharpest tools in the shed…

  12. I’m not surprised that they lost this one or any of the others. Have you met some of the attorneys that work for the city? Not exactly the sharpest bunch around. Although I would like to see Avimor die a quick death, it does not take a stunning legal mind to see that the city did not have a case.

    What bothers me is the hyocrisy, the city seeks to stop any development outside the city but when it comes to inside the city, all bets are off. Bypass the public approval checks, allow unencumbered growth, build so many tiny houses that you have to give out new addresses in increments of 1/2. They need to keep their house in check first, something about glass houses. Thankful we have the guardian.

Get the Guardian by email

Enter your email address: