Comments on: GUARDIAN Saves Taxpayers $49,000

By: Lew Payne

Lew Payne — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 20:13:29 +0000

Public records are public so that we can view and, if necessary, question McQuade’s decisions and actions… not so that we can do McQuade’s job for him while he continues to collect a salary. Think about it.

By: Tax Payer

Tax Payer — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:22:13 +0000

Mr. McQuade is only giving you lip service on date and records! Ask him for the details on the exact “comparibles” that they use to raise your property taxes 30+%. They CANNOT find the exact data!!

We called and asked for it on our Boise property and they had to admit that they “just use averages” and there is NO ACTUAL DATA THAT POINTS TO ANY EXACT COMPARISON OF ONE PROPERTY TO ANOTHER”. What a joke.

It is time for Prop 13!!! NOW!!

By: joe Moran

joe Moran — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:40:18 +0000

What The Guardian actually did here was demonstrate to the average taxpayer how easy it is to hold the bureaucrats to exactly what their suppposed to do ( save the citizens as much money as possible) instead of doing a slip-shod job. Way to go guardian!

By: Treva

Treva — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 18:28:22 +0000

Yes, Idahokid. These developers would be smart to lease out their property to sharecroppers and use the property as agricultural until the time they actually want to develop. Guess HP got smart early on.

By: idahokid

idahokid — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 14:02:18 +0000

If the farm ground is raising a crop of alfalfa and whether it is owned by Farmer John, Jack Simplot or HP doesnt matter. It is ground being used for ag purposes. I commend HP for being good stewards of their land and not raising a great crop of weeds like some of our city and other governmental bare ground is doing.

By: Porcupine

Porcupine — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 12:17:14 +0000

Mr. Guardian… good job
But the sad thing is that our county officials will figure out a way to waste this money… as they always do!

EDITOR NOTE–To be clear. It is not NEW money. It just means the rest of us don’t have to come up with $49,000. Small saving overall, but the developer is now paying his share.

By: Treva

Treva — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 19:11:23 +0000

When I commented about this post to a neighbor who works for HP, he told me that HP has some of their property planted in alfalfa in order to get the Ag exemption. Hmmmm.

By: Clippityclop

Clippityclop — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 12:51:08 +0000

Way to go, Guardian!
Readers, spotted any other bogus ag exemptions out there? If so, let the Tax Assessor’s office know. This affects ALL of us.

If ag land is bought for development purposes and is no longer being farmed for real, it needs to be reclassified for tax purposes. Close these loopholes. In fact, I feel that if such prpoerties have been sold to developers who have active or approved applications before the City or County, they need to be reclassified, whether or not the developer has run a harrow over them or turned out a few cattle for show.

By: Tj

Tj — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:56:39 +0000

That’s really amazing, and encouraging.

Keep it up!

By: Rob

Rob — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:20:27 +0000

Way to go! I don’t always agree (although I do most of the time), but you get things done! I say thank you.