Comments on: GUARDIAN Guest on Channel 4 Dialogue Show

By: cyclops

cyclops — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 02:40:50 +0000

Bristol who??

By: bikeboy

bikeboy — Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:42:11 +0000

Hopefully Spongebob and other citizen/voters got a chance to watch a rerun. (I watched a little of the live broadcast; watched the entirety Sunday afternoon.) Of course, the reality is, despite the “Dialogue,” and the $60,000 “informational campaign,” etc., the majority of eligible voters won’t vote. And the majority of those who do vote will enter the booth uninformed. (Too busy watching the Broncos, or Bristol on “Dancing with the Stars,” or the new-and-improved “American Idol.”) I hope they take the time to read Dave’s explanation as to why these amendments are not a good idea.

Regarding the “Dialogue” program…

Marcia Franklin is a master; she truly comes across as unbiased, and asks fantastic questions to get at the jist of the matter.

Both participants were well-prepared and eloquent, but Mr. Stegner gave me the distinct impression I get from far too many “public servants.” He pats us on the head and tells us to go away quietly, because it’s too complicated for us to understand, and we can trust him to do the thinkin’ for us. (Cut from the same cloth as Shealy.)

One of the “case examples” was a public hospital buying a used, bargain-priced imaging machine. And if they can’t act quickly and quietly, they might miss out on an opportunity to save the taxpayers some money.

I’m not buying it.

Currently if they need an imaging machine, they ask 2/3 of the taxpayers to approve the purchase. THEN they start shopping, or perhaps start watching for a bargain in a used machine. (Imagine how impressed the taxpayers would be, if they approved $1 million and their awesome hospital administrators ended up getting one for $500K!)

Under the amended rules, apparently if they happened across a bargain-priced imaging machine, or the semi-annual wheelchair sale, or whatever, they could cut the check? And then issue bonds or whatever to cover it, without taxpayer approval? I hope I’m not the only one who prefers the current methodology.

My hat is off to Mr. Frazier. If it weren’t for him, I’m confident I would’ve entered that voting booth on November 2, never having given these amendments much thought.

(Sorry to wax verbose…)

EDITOR NOTE–Earlier commenter cites example of Meridian Schools purchase of Jabil plant. Schools wrote “letter of intent” to purchase subject to voter approval. They played by the rules and now have the facility and promise of voters to pay. Clean and honest deal.

By: Spongebob

Spongebob — Sat, 25 Sep 2010 23:02:21 +0000

Sorry Game Day is here between that and the boys on the blue, my weekly allowance of TV time has been used up.

By: JJ

JJ — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:36:20 +0000

Thank you Dave.

By: Confused

Confused — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 12:01:43 +0000

I thought one of them had to do with U of I, the state’s “land grant” university, being allowed to charge “tuition” versus “fees.” I thought there were three: airport, hospitals and U of I. Can you please clarify. I did not see the city utility one on my ballot and I live in the city of Boise. Thanks.

EDITOR NOTE– There are actually 4. You describe the U of I correctly and it is mostly without opposition and a technical correction. The “power cities” amendment is for places like Idaho Falls and Burley that own utilities and generate electricity. They want to enter into agreements–17 years in the case of I.F.–the obligate citizens without their permission. Not as big an issue as airports and hospitals, but still chips away the existing right of citizens to vote.

By: Rod in SE Boise

Rod in SE Boise — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 00:38:21 +0000

Good luck, Dave.

I set the DVR to record it.

By: Kappa TA

Kappa TA — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 00:32:02 +0000

Editor:

Thank you for helping educate voters on these important amendments.

KTA