City Government
Guardian View In Daily Paper
September 30, 2007 
THE STATESMAN PUBLISHED THE FOLLOWING IN SUNDAY’S EDITION
Growth and a reluctance to allow the public a vote are the main issues facing Boise Citizens in the months ahead.
The council has pursued a policy of circumventing voters with their legal battle over the airport parking garage–they still have not held a bond election, despite spending tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees and ultimately losing in the supreme court.
They denied the 10 Commandments supporters a vote–even though sufficient citizens signed petitions to get the question on the ballot. The Supreme Court allowed the election and citizens ultimately voted to leave the rock where it is–just what the Councilors wanted, but done legally.
The City held an ill conceived library bond election asking for $38 million. They sought money and authority, but were unwilling or unable to produce libraries in a timely fashion. After the measure failed the mayor told us they didn’t really need the money and now they are building smaller branch libraries out of petty cash.
Overtaxing citizens for several years, the City has obtained a $14 million structure for the police and fire administration. They call it “savings” which is untrue. They taxed the citizens, earmarked the funds for a police building and made a multi-year purchase without approval of the voters. Cash was accumulated, but certainly no savings took place. It was a move to circumvent the voters again.
With sprawl development plans in the desert east of Micron, the mayor has said he likes the idea of having a “clean slate” for development east and south of Boise…a pro development stance any way you cut it.
Finally, establishing budget priorities through telephone opinion polls, sampling a mere 500 respondents, is unacceptable. Give us a shopping list of the high ticket items and LET US VOTE!
To insure more advertising-free Boise Guardian news, please consider financial support.
Comments & Discussion
Comments are closed for this post.
Sep 30, 2007, 11:09 am
Editor: You did a good job of cutting through the fluff and stuff and getting to the real issue printed in the Statesman–Let the People Vote!! Government was put in place to do our bidding–not to do our thinking. Or, can we even remember that concept?
Sep 30, 2007, 8:59 pm
This is why we need to ensure that the legislature DOES NOT allow local option taxes – we will be taxed out of our minds – and our wallets. We will see levy votes every year or maybe even more often.
I just watched the mayors’ “fund raising speech” for the Chamber of Commerce – otherwise known as the state-of-the-city speech. After watching it it is pretty clear that we lack thinking that focus’ on reduced spending, controlling growth and expanding government accountability and spending and tax reductions – time for a change.
Oct 1, 2007, 2:34 am
Yep, you got it right.
And I can’t help but chuckle every time I see The Daily quoting Frazier! Who wud have thunk it years ago???
By the way, did you notice that The Mistakesman apparently is having G.W. (Is our children learning?) Bush write headlines?
Yep, Front page of NationWorld section (which the Idaho Spaceman calls page 15 Main) deck head says”Soldiers … is eager to leave …”
Well, George, it looks like our children isn’t learning!
Oct 1, 2007, 8:56 am
Perhaps I’m the only one, but “No To Local Option Tax” left me scratching my head by what seemed to be supporting the editorial while warning against the potential consequences (like the people passing a tax increase).
Either we advocate allowing the people to vote on issues as pled by The Guardian editorial, or we don’t. If we advocate a vote, of course, it means people should be allowed to vote on local option taxes among other things. And if the vote favored passage, it would be a decision of the people to increase taxes — which “No” is against having them do. What am I missing here?
Oct 1, 2007, 11:48 am
Stephen,
That is just what I thought when I read “No To Local Option Tax”’s comment. It seems that “No” is contradicting his/her own statement. The whole purpose behind local option taxing is that it is brought to the people, via a vote, for the people to give a thumbs up or down. Where as it does offer government entities the chance to raise taxes, it is merely that, a chance. It only becomes a reality if the voters pass it.
Regarding growth, many of us say we don’t care for it, especially when it is “sprawl.” Rather than merely repeating statements of our disdain towards this growth, we should instead be tossing out a few constructive ideas about how to deal with the inevitable growth our area is going to see in the next twenty years.
That’s the kicker, the need to look out beyond five and ten years to truly keep a handle on how things develop, and have the guts to stick to the plan and hope that we can convince our neighboring communities to do so as well. It’s too easy to simply say “I Hate Growth” and “I Hate Sprawl!”
Let’s have a practical and beneficial discussion on the subject with a few realistic solutions thrown in that address the questions of “Where?” And “How?” because the “When?” is only a matter of time.
EDITOR NOTE–Colleen, you also have to toss in “whether” on growth as well. We DON’T have to accept growth as inevitable anymore than we have to accept pollution, crime, or global warming. We DO have to deal with the issue in some fashion, however.
Oct 2, 2007, 10:09 am
I don’t understand…
We keep electing the same bums, and keep getting the same predictably lousy results.
Hmm… Maybe if we elect the same people again this November, we’ll get different results THIS time.
Pick-Up Your B.S., M.S., and PhD, Free of Charge at City Hall (Bull****, More ****, Piled High and Deep!).
Oct 3, 2007, 1:57 am
Awe, come one guys, why are you sparing the School Districts from your tax lamantations? They charge more and more tax “for the kids” and the results don’t seem to be justified by the higher costs. Be fair now, School Districts are local option taxes to some extent, shouldn’t all of the other bums have the same crack at our wallets as the schools?
It sure is hard to talk with one’s mouth arranged this way.