This is the third thread alleging nefarious dealings on the part of team Dave with no substantiation.

Unless the G is resorting to pure slander, it is overdue for you to make your case. Where’s the beef?

Dave, Your apparent vendetta with “team Dave” has clouded your vision. Using foothills levy funds to broker such a deal as Hammer Flats is entirely within the intent and spirit of the citizen-passed initiative. Such negotiations have resulted in some excellent acquisitions and swaps and have made the $10 million go much further than anyone could have expected. If you were a bit less antagonistic toward city hall, you might not get scooped so easily. Last time I checked, real estate negotiations are exempt from public disclosure.

EDITOR NOTE–I will post your comments, but I deeply resent your characterization of me. While the law ALLOWS secret negotiations of real estate deals, it doesn’t mandate secret deals. I can think of no reason for a secret deal between two government agencies other than to preclude public discourse.

With regard to being “scooped” by the Statesman because of my attitude, your perception speaks volumes.

First – Huh? Please reread my previous post.

Second, Dceipt carries a negative connotation. I would agree that the city was deceitful if they claimed they were getting the land for free when in fact they were paying several million. However just then reverse is true. Having told Boise citizens they spent $4 million it turns out we are not as poor as we thought. Cool!

If anyone was deceived it would be non-Boise Idaho citizens who may be on the hook. But even there, if rumors are true and the souce of IFGs funds are long overdue federal monies, they ae not on the hook either. That is about as close to free land as it comes. And that is very very cool!

EDITOR NOTE–Our problem is the secrecy between two government agencies. We have always opposed development in the area. There are no doubt more details to surface.

Guardian pwned again. Just like that railroad story earlier this month.

Dave,

You have been accusing “team Dave” of sinister “motivation” behind all sorts of city affairs–for two months now on the Hammer Flat deal. You attribute to “citizens” your personal opinions. Perhaps you have been deceived and your trust has evaporated, but I doubt you had much to begin with.

It seems pretty clear to this citizen that the “motivation” behind the Hammer Flat deal was to stop its ill-advised development and protect prime wildlife habitat in the foothills. Those on the city team that were able to pull this off–at no cost to the foothills levy fund–deserve our praise–as does Tony Jones, who single-handedly stalled development until the time was ripe to do what’s being done.

There has been no “betrayal.” There are very good reasons for lack of transparency in public agency real estate transactions. The most important is protecting public resources, including funds.

Your “Guardian”ship of the public interest would be a lot more convincing if you’d tone down the rhetoric and report what you know.

You all are missing the point Dave is trying to make. The levy tax money is supposed to be used to purchase foothills land for the recreation use of taxpayers. It was not intended to be used for the short term funding of other govt. agencies. There has to be a cost to taxpayers with all of these financial transactions and land swaps. I can think of a lot of fees that are associated with real estate transactions. And if Dave seems a little critical about “Team Dave”, he has plenty of reasons. This city govt. is far from transparent. The taxpayers have a right to know what their elected officials are up to. Keep it up Dave:)

Dearest 64.01% [ in reality, 8.7% ], et al…

How anyone can make an argument against those who advocate for the transparent, ethical and efficient government we deserve is beyond me.

If it were up to y’all, we’d probably still be paying a Tea Tax to the Crown!

B-a-a-a-a-a…!

Mr. Guardian
My bet is Boise City paid for the ground and then they will “trade” for some worthless piece of ground that the Fish and Game have. And it will be done with friendly appraisers.

The citizens of Boise will be in a lose lose situation. We paid out our tax money for open space… sure not close space… and then the city will end up with a worthless building or property that the Fish game own that they can’t sell.

And of course both properties will be off the tax rolls so our taxes will need to be increase again.

The only good news in this whole story that no one has reported is that Sky line will probably owe the IRS a boat load of tax on the deficiency of the Short sale.
http://ezinearticles.com/?Selling-at-a-Short-Sale-and-the-Possibility-of-Getting-a-1099-Income-Statement&id=942361

Here’s an excerpt from the first Foothills Conservation Advisory Committee Report to the Mayor & City Council (May 2002). This Committee is charged with providing guidance and oversight for all Foothills levy expenditures.

“The Committee’s meetings are conducted in accordance with Idaho Open Meetings Laws, however land acquisition negotiations, whether public or private, are usually done with the benefit of confidentiality. If the parties and negotiations were made public, other potential sellers would unfairly benefit from this knowledge. Recommendations from the Committee must be forwarded to the Mayor and City Council for approval, the details of which must be made public when completed, thus insuring accountability.”

In that same report, the Committee provided a list of levy expenditure priorities:

A) Preservation of important wildlife habitat and movement corridors;

B) Protection of riparian areas;

C) Protection of scenic views, historic properties, and
archaeological resources; and

D) Enhancement of recreational opportunities.

Notice how recreational uses came in last.

I know, I know — the only thing worse than people who write things down, are people who keep bringing them up.

Where public funds are involved, confidential private land purchase negotiations (and negotiations for private land exchanges) with the owners do actually benefit the public.

But the dealings (or negotiated terms) of any purchase of land between PUBLIC entities, of publicly-owned land, carries no actual public benefit — and should not be (and I believe cannot be) held in a closed session.

By definition, the Committee cannot act to “protect” the Boise citizen from an Idaho agency — any more than it can protect them from a County agency — by shrouding its negotiations with such an agency in secrecy. A Boise citizen is a County citizen, is a State citizen.

The need for confidentiality doesn’t extend to protecting the public from itself.

“Accountability” isn’t a status that’s earned when (after all the opportunity for public input has passed) you file a report with an elected body. It’s interesting to me that when The Cliffs developer was working with Ada County Development Services staff, as he prepared his application for submittal, Tony Jones and others alleged that the department’s staff was holding secret negotiations with the developer. This allegation was often repeated through the public hearing process — even though no decision regarding the application had yet been rendered.

Now that the parcel has been acquired by a public entity (Boise City), and it appears that the city has been in private negotiations with another public agency regarding the presumably favorable transfer of ownership of that parcel, those same parties who alleged some type of conspiracy during Ada County’s open process are mysteriously quiet. The Committee’s obvious attempt to thwart a Freedom of Information Request from a member of the press is a troubling development.

It sets a bad precedent, especially for an activity between two public agencies that should be so open, that it could have been held at an open-air table on the corner of Capital Boulevard & Main Street and live-telecast on KTVB.

Dean, it is execrable that you should try to build yourself up by tearing others down. There is a difference between legal private negotiations, which the city and state seem to be having, and clandestine illegal negotiations like the county held during your tenure.

Did you forget that your three commissioners were found guilty of violating the open meeting law?

Did you forget that one of your colleagues offered Skyline a quid pro quo for “taking care of the illegal subdivision”?

Did you forget that your department coached the cliffs, and charge the public for documents that you gave to the developer for free.?

Did you forget that your department once paid one of your colleagues to spy on a SaveThePlateau picnic?

Did you forget that you personally were on the receiving end of exparte communications with the developer during the hearing process?

That, Dean, is what illegal, secret activities at the county looked like during your tenure at Ada County. How dare you, in the absence of proof, pretend that this situation and yours are somehow comparable.

Another view on developing in foothills and other sections of the county out yonder. All the people who wind up living there cry foul against the city when their homes go up in flames, causing precious time, energy, and safety of firefighters and paramedics. Personally, I think these rich people ought to buy and build in safer zones. Now there’s a democratic vote in spite of rich people’s vote to screw others cuz they’ve got theirs.