Since CCDC’s Board is appointed by the elected members of the city council (and, currently, two of those board members are on the city council), and any renewal plan (with public money spending obligations) has to be approved by the city council (in a public hearing), how has the tax-paying public been removed from the process?

I know it’s popular to spin conspiracy theories, but I don’t even catch a wiff of a smokey back room.

Perhaps folks are a little uncomfortable with the idea of a democratic republic. Or perhaps folks are uncomfortable with the notion that local government ruling bodies have no true separation of powers (they are administrative, legislative, and judicial), and as such carry the authority to obligate future debt. And, all this without a “special” election, since they were elected into office to make such decisions.

If that’s the case, folks could lobby to change state statutes (and perhaps the state’s constitution), to limit an urban renewal agency’s debt obligation to the specific length of a city council’s majority term. The length of this term of debt wouldn’t span longer than 6-8 years (depending on the size of the council and the time at which the debt was obligated). This period should be enough to retire the debt incurred by many smaller capital projects (sidewalk improvements, street furniture purchases, street tree plantings), but larger debt obligations would have to revert to a special election. But, this would probably greatly slow down urban renewal efforts and relegate CCDC to not much more than a downtown improvement district.

New businesses would then probably opt to locate their offices where land is cheaper (out at the urban fringe), where they can get “free” parking for their customers, and their employees wouldn’t have to deal with (near-term) road congestion. The end result, for the tax-payer, would be the need to spend massive amounts of funds to create and maintain far-flung public infrastructure systems.

Just a thought…

EDITOR NOTE–George, you sugget lobbying for change. Pretty hard to do when you have to pay (through taxes) for the CCDC and City to lobby against you!

Long term debt is the only real issue at hand. I have NEVER seen the council vote on CCDC long term debt. In fact, the code–which I believe to be in violation of the state constitutional prohibition against long term debt–specifically authorizes this NON ELECTED board to sell bonds for long term debt. You ever want to meet or talk and I will bet you a year’s wages you will agree with me in the end. There is little or no oversight on how TAXES are spent.

Sharon, I guess that you would be assuming that I believe the things you speak of are “good ideas” and “positive changes”.

Not at all. I just don’t believe there are too many people on here who are advocating for what they believe are NEGATIVE changes! We all might disagree about what changes should be made, but isn’t that the point of having the discussion? I said, “some of the good ideas might actually be implemented.” I didn’t say all of the ideas are good.

If we can have the discussion on here, in a civil manner, then hopefully the best ideas with the most support can rise to the top and be implemented. The beauty of it all is that you can choose which responses to read, or not. If you really don’t enjoy being here at all, you can simply turn it off.

I am grateful we have Dave providing this opportunity for interested citizens to have an amazing ongoing public policy discussion, and I think you are as well, or you wouldn’t be on here anymore! 😉

I do have to say though, that oversimplifying this to a democracy discussion isn’t the most straightforward approach. After all, Constitutional literalism is an ideology too.

THANKS, drf

However, as informative as this site is, often the battle cries are becoming monotonous and predictable. The blanket application of “taxes are bad” and “non-elected officials shouldn’t have any oversight of the spending of tax revenues” is something I simply disagree with. So far as I can see, the benefits derived from districts like the CCDC and others far outweighs the risks and problems associated with them.

Respectfully,
Jon

EDITOR NOTE–Jon, a point of clarification. GUARDIAN is not opposed to taxes, bonds, improvements, progress, etc. We just want the citizens to vote on ANY long term debt as provided in the Idaho Constitution. That’s it. If city council takes over CCDC we have elected officials spending tax money. If CCDC operates WITHOUT direct taxes and spending authority (as part of city budget) we see no problem. This issue is one of simple democracy–not conservative, liberal, progressive or religious.

Now, I freely admit that this is a theory that in most instances works, but in the specifics of your statements that NOTHING of the taxes goes to the jurisdiction I don’t know. However, I would guess that your statement is not totally correct.

I can’t say that the CCDC board members are working against the best interest of the public and that they are somehow actually skimming money into there own pockets. But I can say that I don’t always agree with their vision.

You somehow think that by simply electing this board they will be better qualified. Not sure I agree with the premise that an elected official, simply because they are elected are better at any job than an appointed official.

Anyway, do appriciate your bringing this issue to our attention.

EDITOR NOTE–We have NEVER alleged any “skimming” or illegal activity by CCDC. We just think the system is wrong. Since they are paid taxes that would otherwise go to city/county/ACHD we feel ELECTED officials should be held accountable. The law provides for the CITY COUNCIL to act as their own board which is fine. Police, fire, parks etc. do not have authority to get DIRECT TAX MONEY and CCDC shouldn’t either.

EDITOR NOTE–You can check for yourself at the CCDC site. http://www.ccdcboise.com/develop/renewal.htm

They expanded the original downtown area, created a River Street District and recently creted another new WEST downtown area. Bottom line is most of downtown tax revenue goes to CCDC, but WE pay for all the high demand services.