Much of the land in the Fairview/Main Corridor is already effectively off the tax rolls. As I’ve written many times, suburbs are being subsidized by taxpayers by road building and widening. Every acre of land dedicated to roads is an acre off the tax rolls. Property tax is not the only tax in town. Fairview/Main is generating little in income tax and sales tax relative to what it could generate.

The old carved up lots along Fairview/Main cannot compete, despite the great location, against suburban properties. Something has to be done. Private enterprise can not pull it off due to new zoning laws implemented over the last 4 decades which hamstring private redevelopment. Even if a private developer had all the money in the world, he/she could not redevelop many Fairview/Main lots due to parking restrictions, lot size and setback restrictions, and storm water retention restrictions.

Please try to understand this. Many want zoning laws, but they don’t want to pay damages for regulatory takings.

The City has taken a few rezoning steps, Fairview/Main was recently rezoned 5CDD put the parking overlay is P2, not P1 that the downtown core has. The means mandatory parking lot sizes. Most of the lots are barely big enough to build a snow cone shack given all the zoning regulations even in light of the new 5CDD zoning.

Dave: It’s not just the city living on growth. The entire world is built on the foundation of fractional reserve banking which is a highly regulated pyramid scheme which needs ever more growth. It’s the very basis of modern reality that seems to get absolutely no coverage anywhere.

EDITOR NOTE–You are correct in what you say. Regarding the financing, it has been described as a game of musical chairs. As long as the music is playing, there is no problem. Once it stops, some is left out and when they don’t pay, the next, and next, and next cannot pay. This happened in 2008. Solution is to stop encouraging and PAYING to grow. Growthophobe credo: If they want to come here, pay their taxes, and a living wage, welcome! If they want welfare, go to California or New York.

EDITOR NOTE–Double edge sword here. The CITY lives on growth which creates a larger tax base. That same growth also means more students so the SCHOOL DISTRICT has to build more buildings and hire more teachers. Simplistic example: 1000 new residents can justify about one new copper on the force. However if half (500) of those newcomers are kids, it can mean a new school building and perhaps a dozen new teachers.

Put the stadium in MERIDIAN!!!Let those tax payers fund it.

My point is, welfare should be very minimal and only when needed… Such as to feed poor families so the children have proper nutrition. Or to front the R & D costs of an amazing new drug. Welfare for baseball is wrong!

You wouldn’t be affected because in the extremely unlikely event of a direct property tax, Boise School District’s portion of your tax bill would not go up. It is its own separate taxing entity. You may or may not live within GBAD’s boundaries which don’t exactly coincide with Boise City’s boundaries.

Regarding the Oriole Park in Baltimore. I disagree with the Orioles being a private company as an excuse to avoid disclosing their revenue. If there is to be a public/private partnership then the stadium should be treated like a public utility, with an elected or appointed commission overseeing the finances and limiting the stadium’s primary user to a reasonable return on their investment. Or any for profit user for that matter.

That’s what this is about. Public utility. Few individuals or corporations have the ability to not only run a sports franchise but to also build a stadium. A stadium which may benefit many, not all, but many. It’s not unlike the Boise River dams and canals which were financed publicly but mostly benefit private farmers.

I rarely drive on roads outside of Boise City limits so why should I pay for widening of Ten Mile and Linder and the Central Valley Expressway? One could argue we don’t need a Central Valley Expressway or Ten Mile interchange.