Does this mean all the dead end streets would be maintained better and plowed in winter. Would we be taxed higher for services we still don’t receive. Wish I had stock in a snow blower company.

It is still representative government and more responsive to the elected leaders of the cities. There are challenges, no doubt, but I have faith in my city mayor and council to represent my interests.

You are right on the mark Dave, The city government is the most greedy power hungry group that I can ever remember being in control of this city over the last 50 years.. Tax and spend that is their MOTTO. They would all do well to move to DC where there are a lot of their kind.
Regarding Scott L., what is a developer doing on the city council anyway?

Salt Lake is so awesome, they have a BUNCH of mayors! Including Salt Lake CITY and Salt Lake COUNTY! (Plus all the other little burgs – Sandy, West Valley City, Murray, etc.) I don’t visit there too often, but their roads haven’t seemed particularly horrible. (Go to Providence, RI, if you want to see some bad roads!)

On topic:
1) To bring up the notion of changing how we do roads in the aftermath of a “30 year snowstorm” is utter, blatant bold-faced opportunism!
2) If indeed it comes up for a vote, PLEASE don’t think the city can do it for less! If the city takes over, you’ll either be paying more for the same service, or significantly more for better service. (And in either case, also paying Ada County to maintain unincorporated county roads.)

It would be really interesting to calculate how much the Ada Country tax payers lost and spent in $$$ during this storm due to lost jobs, price-gouging-private-snow-plowers, lost wages, lost business, accidents, bidding-war sitter payments. Oh wait, wait, wait, ACHD is saving us $$ (not!), so they prioritized a few roads to keep plowed up and no one would expect to overwork those poor employees during the holidays (see the lovely writing in the Idaho Statesman by one ACHD commissioner whining in the comment section). If the all-knowing ACHD spent it now on you wussie citizen, silly’s boo-hoo’s, you will not get your fruit cup, aka, future “X” road project. And poor ole’ ACHD really did not have to plan for this snow emergency and be effective and keep our city productive- shit happens, you need to get over it you wussie citizens. ADHD knows best! The reality is this bloated ACHD organization is another layered/unnecessary and unresponsive government agency that does not answer to the citizens. This ineffectiveness and truly unresponsiveness group was taking place WELL before the snow storm. My hope is the snow storm will be the catalyst to
wake-up the citizens of Boise to the fact that they are paying more taxes and getting less from dear old ACHD. And I have no doubt the City of Boise could do much, much, more to benefit the Boise citizens with their portion of the ACHD 103 million dollar budget. Cutting the bloated administration alone (~60 people used to manage the ~350 people working this 103M budget) would be a simple and quick cost savings. I would LOVE, LOVE to have Boise own their roads and ACHD dissolved. If you know of a petition floating about, please share. I would be happy to sign it AND pass it around. I am motivated to get change- bring on the vote and kick out all these lame ACHD commissioners and employees.

A few comments to make after some of my own research. IMO Mayor Bieter has some major complaints that ACHD has failed to resolve in over 10 years. Boise represents half the population of Ada County. Accordingly, Boise also pays at least half of the tax revenue that ACHD receives, yet only has 1 seat out of 5 at ACHD.

If one cares to look, you can clearly see that the districts were created in way that minimizes the influence of Boise at ACHD. In the legislation that created ACHD I do not see any requirement that ACHD return or spend the money received in the City or area that generated it. I believe this is probably why Boise has so few fully updated corridor roads. I could be wrong, but I see a lot of completed corridors in Meridian. Boise has been here since ACHD was created. Meridian has only been experiencing substantial growth with in the last 15 years. There should be a requirement that ACHD report to each City on how much tax revenue was generated and how much has been within that city. Furthermore, there is no requirement that ACHD get approval from city council on major capital improvement projects, that just does not make any sense. ACHD went ahead and built Ustick despite months of neighborhood testimony against and despite opposition from Boise city council.

ACHD has the potential to be a very effective organization in efficiency and cost savings. However, in the 45 years that it has been in existence that model has never been duplicated, even once, in Idaho or the US. For me, that is a clear indication that there is an issue with the organizational model. Currently, ACHD only answers to the legislature. It is also apparent to anyone involved in planning and devlopment that there is a major difference in philosophy and ideology on transportation issues between Boise and ACHD, that goes way beyond the trolley. Now, BOise is a “world class” city that is receiving national attention for the quality of life that it has created here. The growth in the whole county started with Boise. It is also drawing billions of dollars of investment dollars from various developers. It does not bode well for anyone in this county to have ACHD and Boise bickering. IMO, Boise is the paying customer to ACHD and represents half or more of the customer base and their revenue. I feel the anmisoity between the two needs to be left at home and it is time to start acting like the professional people they were elected to be, on both sides. Mayor Bieter has some major complaints. Yes, he lashed out, but only after receiving 100’s of complaints that he is powerless to respond to. I do not support dissolution of ACHD, but it is time to make some changes. It would be better of ACHD initiated those changes. If it won’t it is time to take it the voters, 10 years is long enough. ACHD is our one of kind organizational model that we gt to answer too. It also an organizational model that no one else wants to touch with 10 ft pole, with th recent bickering, clearly illustrates why.

EDITOR NOTE–For the record, BOISE CITY lobbied (during the Coles Admin) for the specific districts when they pushed to expand the commission from three to five members. The intent was to enable them to get rid of one member who was not part of the strong conservative element. They would love to have him back today.

I am being serious, can someone please tell me something they think the City does well? I will offer the parks are nice, the public golf course is cheap and a good value. Before I even consider voting for Boise to take over the streets I would like some examples of what the city does effectively.

thanks

The city does a really good job of raising our taxes “EVERY” year. Even during the real estate dump they took their 3% every year and actually gave city employees a raise during that period.

So Easterner, while you always think you have all the answers, regarding commuterride you are wrong.

While it is true that VRT is supposed to run Commuterride, they never have, preferring to have ACHD run it under a Memorandum of Understanding. As far as I’ve always been concerned, if VRT wants it back, I’d be happy to let them have it. That way ACHD taxpayers wouldn’t have to subsidize it to the tune of at least $250,000 per year.

And BTW, the reason Commuterride goes to Mountain Home, Emmett and Canyon County is because either Ada County residents work in those counties, or those residents work in Ada County.

In any event, Commuterride doesn’t make ACHD taxpayers any money and it doesn’t break even. So as I said, if you can convince VRT to take it back, sans subsidy of course, be my guest and encourage them to do so.

Easterner. ACHD does Commuterride because VRT doesn’t want to?

As I said, if you want VRT to do it, get on them to take it over. If anyone could snark/badger/hound them into it, you could. And FYI, Trump has nothing to do with it.

I think ACHD is a good model. And I think that police and fire should be county-wide too.

Ludwig’s notion looks and smells like political posturing, which is in line with his general performance on the Boise city council. As hidebound and pathetic as ACHD’s response has been, and continues to be, to this winter’s snowy roads, it makes more sense to have a unified county transportation agency than a bunch of cities with their own road crews, thier own work schedules, their own engineering and traffic standards and their own bureaucracies

I do see a benefit for having a county wide agency in place for road planning. Though cities should have more say in how monies are spent. Maybe give each city a slush fund to spend on their priorities whether it be cycling infrastructure, more vehicle lanes, or some silly trolley.

EDITOR NOTE–We can only hope your idea of a “slush fund” is for melting snow removal.:-)