Comments on: Another Growthophobe Victory

By: TFBoy

TFBoy — Wed, 20 Dec 2017 23:35:01 +0000

I see it now. The petition has to be accepted and judged as to conformance with the required signatures. Then the petitioners have time to gather the additional signatures to qualify it for the ballot. If this steep hill is climbed, the matter is placed on the ballot, and if passed, the court will then have the chance to rule on its legality. A ballot measure can be totally unconstitutional and yet can be placed on the ballot and voted up or down. Only then will a court rule on the merits. (the legislature does this all the time with its legislative power, why not the public!)

By: clippityclop

clippityclop — Mon, 18 Dec 2017 13:52:16 +0000

Judge Medema didn’t see it that way and if this citizens’ right to petition is appealed, you’ll get the same answer. Onward with the petition for referendum. This is a far bigger issue than you realize, and the judge gets it.

By: TFBoy

TFBoy — Sun, 17 Dec 2017 19:21:47 +0000

My point is that a zoning decision is not subject legally to the referendum. There is a distinction when a board is acting in a legislative capacity, a comp plan ordnance, or quasi-judicial, granting a variance. The former is subject to referendum process, the latter is not. Need more info on this.

By: David

David — Sun, 17 Dec 2017 17:53:33 +0000

If you have ever followed the sovereign citizen movement you see they act almost like our elected officials do. They pick and choose which laws to obey and which ones are an inconvenience and ignore them.

If there was ever any doubt as to the commissioners ignoring the will of the people over monied interests this is a prime example of that failure to serve the people and serve the money. Now is the time to vote them out.

By: TFBoy

TFBoy — Sun, 17 Dec 2017 05:50:31 +0000

Usually, P&Z decisions are not subject to referendum.

EDITOR NOTE–As I tried to explain to Boise City before they lost in the Idaho Supreme Court on the 10 Commandments tablet move, the issue is the REFERENDUM, not the P&Z decision. Local government does not have the luxury of deciding which referendum they choose to consider. If enough signatures are gathered, it goes on the ballot. THEN the issue is “ripe for adjudication.” City and County legal staffs forget it is THE PEOPLE who are in charge. Much more at stake here than just a development!

By: Easterner

Easterner — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 18:36:25 +0000

Agree with Westernguy. This is not a “private property rights” issue or post. Also agree ACHD is full of overbearing political hacks and employees.

It is also not a “victory” for growthophobes. Just a procedural clarification.

The ISSUE
Ada County Clerk Christopher D. Rich did not WANT to file the group’s petition for referendum based on his opinion.
That has nothing to do with property right or smart growth.
It has to do with govt employees ignoring “what is right”. But then that seems to be common for too many local government officials and employees.

The terrible part is, once again, a government employee, board, commission or official FORCES citizens to incur the cost and efforts of lawsuit in order to access democracy.
The judge said, ‘citizens prevail’.

By: KC

KC — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:47:59 +0000

And who pays for infrastructure? If we do then we should have a say. And if memory serves me I believe I heard that one of these developments wanted to pipe water all the way from Grimes Creek or some such nonsense a few years back. I missed any follow up or maybe that idea is still on the table and no one is ” mentioning it”.

By: clippityclop

clippityclop — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 04:34:03 +0000

This valley is the jewel of the foothills, prime agricultural ground and critical winter range for elk herds. Paving it over is a travesty. Not to mention the road congestion that would ensue. This land needs to hear the voice of the people. Speak for it. Let your voices be heard.

By: bikeboy

bikeboy — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 02:31:21 +0000

From the press release: … this subdivision is the epitome of irresponsible development. It will destroy 1,400 acres of prime farmland, open space, and wildlife habitat.

The acreage has varied from development to development, but that same thing could be said of HUNDREDS of subdivisions that have gone in over the past 50 years or so across our valley and in our foothills. That’s the price of progress… right?

By: westernguy

westernguy — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 00:39:46 +0000

Not ‘private property rights’; legal rights of citizens vs overbearing political hacks.

Kent Goldthorpe is overbearing and self-serving.