This is typical politicians. They take publicly owned land and buildings which taxpayers pay for and lease them to for profit business because they say it is a “proverbial “win-win” partnerships”. I believe we have heard this before.

The Ada County Commissioners well maybe two of them sold out Ada County taxpayers once again, shocking! We all need to remember them come election day. When are Ada County residents going to wake up and vote them out. Yzaguirre has sold us down the river for years while taking home a very nice salary on our backs.

I agree whole heartily with Joan, quit taking public land/ buildings and leasing them to for-profit business who will make hundreds of thousands of dollars while not paying property taxes and other expenses that a business would if they were on their own and not subsidized by us taxpayers.

I say if the land is a buffer and not to be built on then it needs to stay that way. Sounds important to me that the land stays a protective buffer for the landfill.

Voter

There is one problem with your comment. Do not get me wrong I agree with you but, no one will remember, no one really cares. If it is not effecting them right at the moment they could care less. So many things in this valley and the country are run in the same way, people bitch but no one will stand up and be the first to actually do something.

I have read your many letters on this issue Joan and thank you for your work and fortitude. You have brought transparency to many aspects concerning this proposal. I share your concerns. Seems like a project of this magnitude and in such a reversal from public land ownership to private commercial venture, involving using tax dollars for purchase (taking away from fund for other Eagle parks) and pre-existing public funded facilities, warrants a vote, like in March when we’re also going to polls to vote on tenative proposed school levy.

Having been intimately involved in the demise of the fiasco that was Dynamis, I see a parallel in the process here more than anything else. In both instances, an unsolicited bid came forth to benefit a private enterprise through use of public property. In each case, even if the various parties (Council, citizens, county, city) “like” or “dislike” the basic tenets proposed, the process for approving or not approving the “project” is not being followed.

Recall in Dynamis, an “Industrial Park” in the form of “ARTIC” was established after the council was wooed by Mr. Mahaffey (unsolicited). Then, that and a number of zoning changes were made conveniently and surreptitiously to eventually “allow” what would have otherwise not been allowed per zoning in the form of a HUGE for-profit power plant (that initially was touted as an ancillary, minor add-on to the land fill). The damning evidence included a false open bid process in conjunction with ARTIC after the fact, even as contracts were already being drafted for Dynamis.

So, what would be prudent here? If Ada County, in connection with Eagle and the existing park lease, determine that some new venture or development would benefit the citizens at this specifically zoned parcel, shouldn’t there be a vote and approval, a design and input, and an open bid process to actually construct the agreed upon delivery? I have no doubt Mr. Neptune is good at what he does…if the legal process was/is followed, a winning bid might just be in his hands…but there also might not be so much give-away to him for a private venture. Unlike the backers of Dynamis, Mr. Neptune actually has a track record. But just “seeming like a good idea” does not override the process that is NOT taking place here.

Once again, the cart has come before the horse in the form of Mr. Neptune’s unsolicited bid. I think Mr. Case learned this, hence his holding out.

Since when did the City of Eagle become flush with disposable cash? Making interest free loans with a return on investment tied to future ticket sales is not a good business plan. Taking risks with taxpayer dollars based on a project’s future financial good health is a fools errand for any City Hall. One needs look only as far as Nampa to see what happens when City Hall predictions of financial success fail miserably.
This snow park venue was first sold as a low cost taxpayer participation with the developer putting the majority of skin in the game. Upping the ante of taxpayer dollars to hundreds of thousands of dollars means years before any tangible positive cash flow might possibly be realized.
It was wholly irresponsible for city leaders to fail to first quantify the impacts and final dollar costs before committing to a concession agreement with developers. There are way too many blank checks waiting to be added to the true cost of doing business with this venture. Studies have shown that the revenue “multiplier” of such “specific use” parks is far less than the same money put into other methods to attract new business to a city. This weather dependent venue is subject to reduced days of operation which further reduces the multiplier. Management by crisis (dealing with the cost of each downstream impact problem) is never good stewardship of taxpayer funds. Budgets drive taxes with the inevitable result being higher taxes to support each and every “project du’ jour that city fathers “think” up. Cities leaders should stick to provisioning essential city services first and leave the business of business to the private sector. There is a big difference between facilitation and participation. For this taxpayer, the “ends” simply do not justify the “means” in this project.

As usual politicians are around and never seem to go away. Until voters wake up and vote them out they will continue to be the snakes in the grass.

This all smells like padding pockets to me. It does need to go out to bid. But the other big question is why is the Ada County accepting a price below appraised value? Especially, if it is going to be leased to a private business who will make money on the venture and with a cost to taxpayers who will get the honor to subsidized this private business and pay taxes too, lucky us!