The city council, through years of appointing its sycophants every time a councilor retires has given us this narrowly focused single minded entity we now have. I hardly think the current council really represents more than a small percentage of Boise. And anyone who has read this forum for a long time knows that I’ve opposed the Guardian’s views 90% of the time. But times change. The current proposal at The Grove is dubious at best.

Anyway, the big picture is that Boise City Council needs to be expanded. And, no more appointments. If a councilor retires then that seat should remain vacant until the next election.

Commissioner Baker; Didn’t ACHD expand from 3 to 5 commissioners in the not so distant past?

Boise City has had 6 councilors, as far as I can tell, since 1890. Truth is, it’s been so long that not even the paid historians know. The population has grown by nearly 200,000 and therefore our vote is worth a fraction compared to those who lived and voted 100 years ago. How is this justifiable?

Guardian and others, though it may have its own problems, the easiest route to solving the current lack of debate at city hall is to add elected debaters to the council and end appointments to replace retirees.

EDITOR NOTE–ACHD was expanded in an effort to get rid of commissioner Gary Richardson who was a bike advocate (still is). The legislation was orchestrated by Boise City by the previous mayor who instructed the city lobbyist to get a law which had reps from specific geographical districts (wards). That way they could get specific demographics and not have a countywide vote. Currently we citizens cannot vote for 80% of the members.