City Government
Gentlemen, Start Your Engines
June 25, 2007 
Following two Daily Paper Sunday reports noting that he was a nice guy, but had offered no substance, Boise City Councilor and mayoral candidate Jim Tibbs revved his engine Monday at incumbent Dave Bieter on the topic of working with ACHD.
Tibbs issued a press release applauding an Ada County Highway District-funded Study which said the 6 cities in the county and the ACHD should work together and stick by their master plans.
The release spin claimed the Urban LAnd Institute “study endorses Jim Tibbs strategy while disavowing Dave Bieter’s approach.”
“The ULI report endorses what I have been saying for a long time. It is time to end lawsuit based relationships and commit government to serving the citizens.” Said Jim Tibbs.
Tibb’s release also took a shot at Bieter’s remarks last month.
In May of 2007 Dave Bieter decried the study as a waste of time saying to KTVB “We don’t think we need a study.” This comment was in addition to calling for the dissolution of ACHD all together.
To insure more advertising-free Boise Guardian news, please consider financial support.
Comments & Discussion
Comments are closed for this post.
Jun 25, 2007, 5:12 pm
Jim Tibbs just doesn’t get it.
First, ULI recommended radical change in how ACHD works–exactly what Bieter has been proposing. The “alliance” of cities, citizens, the county and ACHD recommended by ULI is almost identical to legislation supported by Bieter during the last session.
Second, this study would have never happened had it not been for Bieter pushing for more accountability from ACHD when it comes to Boise tax dollars.
Third, Bieter’s objection to the study was primarily linked to the idea that this would be another delay in dealing with Boise’s traffic woes. Given that a 1995 study conducted by ULI (it also recommended tighter integration between land-use and transportation planning) was largely ignored by ACHD, Bieter’s fear was that Boise drivers would get nothing more than a bundle of paper collecting dust on a shelf somewhere rather than any real relief.
If the good councillor is going to disprove the “all hat, no cattle” charge levied by his critics, he’s going to have to do a lot better than write a few glib press releases.
Jun 25, 2007, 8:17 pm
The ULI was pretty critical of ACHD. They said that the District isn’t spending it’s budget wisely, cannot raise enough funds to perform the tasks it has set out for itself and needs to work with the citizenry more. These truths are all self evident.
It should also be of no surprise that ACHD is in a real pickel. Their budget woes are not totally their own fault. An ACHD employee who I spoke with and is in a position to know, told me that last year, concrete sold for $45 a yard. This year it is $100 a yard. Petroleum based products that they pay for are going through the roof, which explains why they are setting a record year this year for projects started in west Ada county. Lock the prices in now before it really gets crazy.
“Peak oil” is in effect.
After watching all of the various cities and county governments fight over who should get the lions share of the road funds, I now feel that each city should just stop pretending that they want to participate in any “blueprint” for good growth and just tell ACHD via contract what they want done within the boundaries of their own cities and provide the monies based on taxpayer residence. This will end the foodfights over which city is getting the other’s money for sprawl.
If Eagle and Meridian want to sprawl, they have to pay for it based on their population/businesses. No more lump sums from a general coffer. If Boise has a plan for its funds, then it can go with its own plan. I for one am sick of the washbaord arterials that go unrepaired in Boise because Eagle wants new fancy roads to facilitate development. Pay your own way.
Jun 25, 2007, 9:25 pm
There is no question that ACHD is not without blame in this mess. But it is still a question of Dave Bieter saying that he wanted nothing to do with another study (which is really strange because he normally wants to study something to death), and called for the abolishment of the ACHD.
Now he is totally behind the results. The basic problem is that Bieter IS the problem! If he had even mediocre leadership skills, it never would have come to this. Let’s don’t even get into how poorly Bieter has handled the police contract negotiations. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that when you have an almost 10 million dollar surplus and you ignore the lack of negotiations with the cops, you aren’t exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Oh, and by the way Jade, that “KATHUNK-KATHUNK” sound you just heard, coupled with that stabbing pain in your gut, is your boss tossing you under the bus! That is, if it doesn’t catch fire first. But that’s OK because it is not like there was anyone on it at the time except the poor driver who’s got to be feeling like the Maytag repair man more and more every day.
Jun 25, 2007, 10:26 pm
I wonder if Jim Tibbs great new fondness for ACHD has anything to do with his new best friend John Franden. Also I guess one way to differentiate yourself from your opponent is to be on opposite sides of issues. It’s unfortunate however, that Tibbs took this tack and sets himself on the side of ACHD against the citizens of Boise. Oh wait he was on our side, oh wait no he isn’t.
Jun 25, 2007, 10:50 pm
“…what I have been saying for a long time…It’s time to end lawsuit based relationships…” Interesting quote that Tibbs made up for his campaign news release, because he voted for the Comprehensive Plan amendment opposing the Ustick Road widening that led to ACHD suing the the city in the first place. This just shows Tibbs is another unremarkable flip-floppin’ taking both sides of the issue politician.
Jun 26, 2007, 12:48 am
This comment from Tibbs sums up the biggest problem with the current admin.
“It is time to end lawsuit based relationships and commit government to serving the citizens.”
Team Dave thought by throwing their Gorilla prowess around with lawsuits they could get what they want. Guess that happens when a lawyer is elected.
Jun 26, 2007, 6:21 am
The biggest problem with ACHD is the fact that they refuse to listen to the people. I’ve been to a couple of meetings and all it’s been is a total waste of time.
They will do as they dang well please. For that reason I would like to see the leadership changed. If it means closeing it down to get rid of the present leadership then so be it. I’m sick of these groups that we hire and pay for that aren’t held responsible for their actions.
Jun 26, 2007, 8:29 am
I 2nd the opinions that ACHD doesn’t listen well. I’ll give you my example. ACHD installed sidewalks on my never-before-sidewalked block last year. But they didn’t do the curb and gutter. Dumb, dumb, dumb. It looks half-baked.
However, people should be careful about making statements like “they don’t listen.” One person interviewed on CH7 made that very statement and it seemed to me she was really saying “they don’t listen to ME.” In other words she wanted things HER way, period.
I don’t envy gov’t officals, they can’t please anybody.
Otherwise I support a countywide road agency. As far as the cities telling ACHD what to do, ACHD doesn’t tell the cities what subdivisions to approve or disapprove.
Jun 26, 2007, 9:40 am
I think Robert is right on, but in the past tense. There is no question that ACHD has been, in the past, virtually non-responsive to citizen input. I don’t, however, think it is fair to assume that they won’t be responsive today or tomorrow.
The recent study clearly faulted them for their past transgressions, so now we will see if they listened. Let’s see what happens before we send them packing. I believe the biggest problem they will face is the proposed “binding” agreement they call for with all the city governments in the valley. It will be very interesting to see how many mayors and city councils will sign on to that.
Jun 26, 2007, 11:33 am
ACHD is a mess, and if Tibbs supports the status quo then he won’t be an effective mayor.
Apparantely he doesn’t even understand that the ULI is critical of ACHD and the current situation. Imagine what they would be saying if ACHD weren’t paying for the study. Say what you want about Bieter, but I support the cities being able to make the planning decisions on roads within their own jurisdictions. ACHD should not be a political body and should not be a decision making body.
Jun 26, 2007, 2:44 pm
I remain somewhat surprised at how accomodating Dave Bieter has been to the Harris Ranch Mafia. They get whatever they want from him. It all goes back to that Park Center bridge and Chuck Winder, who spearheaded ACHD’s original deal with them where Harris Ranch had to build it in order to build.
The Harris Ranch Mafia must thank their lucky stars that Chuck Winder was not elected mayor. He would not be carrying their water for them.
Jun 26, 2007, 10:48 pm
If status quo is what you are after, look no further than Bieter. Will someone please let us know just what he has done in the last four years about the traffic in this city? Not what he has had “studied”, not what he has “talked about”, not his”intentions”, but anything concrete(pun intended) that he has actually done.