<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Firms Pay To Play With Cities	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://boiseguardian.com/2008/06/27/firms-pay-to-play-with-cities/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://boiseguardian.com/2008/06/27/firms-pay-to-play-with-cities/</link>
	<description>A different slant on the news.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:15:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Mr. Logic		</title>
		<link>https://boiseguardian.com/2008/06/27/firms-pay-to-play-with-cities/#comment-8627</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mr. Logic]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:15:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://boiseguardian.com/wp/?p=946#comment-8627</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Idahokid--A LEASE financed by the bank is a multi year deal (example 5 yrs) and the city OWNS the item--it is a PURCHASE and the banks make interest. The city HAS to pay for the period of the lease.  RENTING is an annual agreement with the vendor and the banks are out of the loop and don&#039;t collect interest.  It is the defference between renting a car at Hertz for a week vs getting hooked for 60 months at the Ford dealer for an Expedition you can&#039;t afford to fill with gas.

There is no problem if the city does an annual lease with no intent
to own.  The banks (and cities) want to lock in multiyear obligations for payments and not let the citizens vote on them.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Idahokid&#8211;A LEASE financed by the bank is a multi year deal (example 5 yrs) and the city OWNS the item&#8211;it is a PURCHASE and the banks make interest. The city HAS to pay for the period of the lease.  RENTING is an annual agreement with the vendor and the banks are out of the loop and don&#8217;t collect interest.  It is the defference between renting a car at Hertz for a week vs getting hooked for 60 months at the Ford dealer for an Expedition you can&#8217;t afford to fill with gas.</p>
<p>There is no problem if the city does an annual lease with no intent<br />
to own.  The banks (and cities) want to lock in multiyear obligations for payments and not let the citizens vote on them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: idahokid		</title>
		<link>https://boiseguardian.com/2008/06/27/firms-pay-to-play-with-cities/#comment-8626</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[idahokid]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2008 11:43:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://boiseguardian.com/wp/?p=946#comment-8626</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I am glad that they would never listen as I sincerely believe there are the cases of the small city or county needing and requiring lets say a  piece of road building equipment costing a several hundred thousand dollars.  From their meager little budgets they would never be able to pay for this in cash, although they would be able to afford an annual lease payment, which is the same as renting. To provide the needed maintenance to their roads or other infrastructure I believe that the ability to lease is a necessity.
I do not believe the larger issue is black and white as there is agreement with you on the large ticket items like libraries and parking garages by the larger cities and counties that are just making and end run around the statutes and trying to use a like minded judge to do their dirty work.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am glad that they would never listen as I sincerely believe there are the cases of the small city or county needing and requiring lets say a  piece of road building equipment costing a several hundred thousand dollars.  From their meager little budgets they would never be able to pay for this in cash, although they would be able to afford an annual lease payment, which is the same as renting. To provide the needed maintenance to their roads or other infrastructure I believe that the ability to lease is a necessity.<br />
I do not believe the larger issue is black and white as there is agreement with you on the large ticket items like libraries and parking garages by the larger cities and counties that are just making and end run around the statutes and trying to use a like minded judge to do their dirty work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
