What a ludicrous thing to “understand”. Why do they need more revenue? Why? They clearly do not.

They clearly are expanding the scope, power, and spending of local government well beyond the original very basic purpose of local government. Team Dave won’t be happy until your taxes are on par or greater than big liberal cities. He wants wine sipping liberal sheep to flood Boise and push out those who recall the simpler low cost days. They want crime and poverty just like big liberal cities too. Anything for more power and money.

If the area gets rezoned to “University” from “Residential”; does that mean that there is only one potential buyer for area homes?
If that sole buyer is suffering from budget constraints, can they force a sale at an artificially low arbitrary price for the public good?
Can an eminent domain condemnation be forced if a public (administrator only) parking lot is deemed necessary?

You just wait until BSU proclaims the need for you to pay for their expansion with additional property taxes like CWI does. You remember CWI? The school for people too stupid to attend BSU… not a block away from BSU. Look, CWI is on your taxes… because you voted for it! Why not BSU also?

How many on here whimpering about BSU and Team Dave voted for Obama? Did you really think he would make his rich friends pay your bills? How do you think his friends got rich… you idiots!

A 40% increase in property taxes.

In comparison my pay raise last year was 2%.

So I canceled cable TV and dropped one cell phone off the family plan. While admittedly a first world problem to reduce luxuries, the point is to afford ever increasing taxes which are increasing faster than my pay or even CPI, I have to reduce my quality of life, reduce spending on the things I want so I can give the government more of my pay.

One of the basic expectations of being dedicated and productive, is that the quality of life will at least be maintained if not improved.

While I am generally a fan of local control, I think it is time the State stepped in and saved us from a tax and spend Boise political machine and pass a law that property taxes can not increase more than CPI, or some other reasonable index. I understand the City and all governments, need more revenue, but it needs to kept in-line with the public’s ability to pay.

EDITOR NOTE–JJ, there is already a 3% limit on city BUDGETS. The formula excludes “new construction so you often hear “3% plus the value of new construction.” The theory is that cities approve their budgets in August and then pass a LEVY to determine the RATE we all pay to cover the cost of government. The problem I see is when they reduce the number of taxable properties–like within CCDC urban renewal districts, city-owned rental facilities, state owned places like 10 Barrel Brewing, etc. Fewer people to split the costs combined with a 3% budget increase means higher taxes. The RATE often remains near static and the politicos make do because the VALUE of property increases, but is taxed at the same RATE.
Hope this helps.

“Although we have spent over two years thoroughly vetting this plan, it is also important to us that our neighbors and constituencies are heard in the approval process,” wrote Associate President Michael Sumpter in a letter to the city on Tuesday (Jan. 5), two days after the Idaho This just from the daily rag….. the Statesman reported details of the plan in a story and maps.

The Boise City Council is scheduled to hold a public hearing on the master plan on Tuesday, Jan. 19.

YOU BET THEY WILL “LISTEN” BUT IT WILL NOT CHANGE THEIR PLANS. Just like the city council and mayor.

The ONLY factor that crosses there minds in this regard is if they “feel” THEY “need more” money so they can spend more. Then they thing about how to TAKE more – not give more back. They also “feel” they know how to spend our money better than we do.

There is no other time they even give it a thought.

That is what happens when you elect people that have no regard for others or their money. We see it at the national level as well.

EDITOR NOTE–Floyd, I stand by my comment. Take a look at the long comment below from Yossarian_22 detailing the negative impact on PROPERTY TAXES from New England schools. The growth issue relates to property taxes, not more business for restaurants and hotels. More residents–on or off campus– means more demand for services and infrastructure with LESS property tax base.

If the City was truly interested in leading by example they would sell and privatize (including the land) all the airport parking, city owned golf courses and City owned bare land or under-utilized land. The truth is the City is just fine with taking property off the tax roles when it is their choice, but they cry and complain when other qualified entities do the same.