Education

BSU To Use A “Forced Out” For Baseball Field

Even with the home team advantage, Boise State University has been unable to get to first base with several property owners over attempts to build a baseball field.

Owners of properties at the following locations have loaded the bases during negotiations:

A)–1104-1108 South Grant Avenue, the current location of an eight-unit apartment complex, owned by South Boise Apartments, Ltd.
B)–1116-1122 West Beacon Street, the current location of a four-unit apartment complex, owned by Cotner Properties and Investments
C)–1101 South Denver Avenue, the current location of a surface parking lot owned by Boise Church of Christ

BSU has been pitching to owner (A) and they have a 3-2 full count going. One more in the strike zone (tentative agreement) and he’s outta there! The other two owners are on-deck, but they don’t appear ready to hit into any forced outs.

At a Thursday meeting of the State Board of Education, BSU sought permission to initiate a double play and use “eminent domain” to pick off the remaining parcels needed for their 2020 baseball season if they can’t out score the property owners.

Comments & Discussion

13 comments for “BSU To Use A “Forced Out” For Baseball Field”

  1. So baseball is sooooooooo important that the Board of Education HAD to approve condemning property!?!?

    So much for personal property rights in Idaho.

  2. Just turn the game off
    Aug 16, 2018, 10:45 pm

    The courts and authorities are wrong. Land owner rights are more important than a baseball stadium which will mostly be used for noisy drunken rock concerts.

    We would be a better society without the pro and semi-pro sports. The biggest msm story of the past year being whether or not the meatheads would take a knee. What a bunch of zeros society has become to give a crap what the meatheads say or do.

    The biggest event in a school kid’s life should not be sports related as it so often is. The pressure is so intense in the high schools the kids are using steroids and other performance enhancing dope with parental encouragement. No, it is not normal at age 16 to look like a Mack truck. Shame on you schools and TV news people for commercializing Idaho high school sports.

    EDITOR NOTE–We’ll post your thoughts, but the topic is taking private property for a COLLEGE baseball field.

  3. The Supreme Court decision (Kelo) sunk property rights with regard to eminent domain. Nothing to see here folks.

  4. If BSU didn’t have 4 football fields, The Blue turf, the Williams Cavin indoor facility , the field on Bronco lane and the Donna Larsen facility on Broadway then it MIGHT make sense to WAIT A SECOND isn’t there a baseball facility at the Donna Larsen Complex? Could BSU win football games with only 3 fields?

  5. Eagle Writer
    Aug 17, 2018, 9:30 am

    Somewhere there has to be tie between a proposed BSU baseball field downtown and a proposed Boise Hawks baseball field downtown. The Hawks play a short season, so couldn’t one field suffice for both?

    To be clear, I am on record as opposing a new Hawks field in Boise and favor some spiffing up of the one properly located at the Fair grounds. But I suspect the developers will get their field regardless – so let’s do ONE and not two.

  6. C'mon keep up
    Aug 17, 2018, 6:47 pm

    BSU doesn’t want to share due to scheduling. Let their boosters pay for it. But eminent domain is a little hinky. Those investors lose their cash cows. You would have to pay me an arm and a leg.

  7. Nothing says thanks for giving good programs for our students like using eminent domain to take away a church parking lot.

    Seems like this is the 2nd time BSU has used eminent domain on a church… I think they did it to University Christian.

    Lesson here is if you are in the BSU area of impact they will pick you off sooner or later. First a Honor’s classroom … next a baseball field..I’m sure they will need horse stables for the BSU horse….

    Oh for the days of the College in/out on University Drive and the fresh banana milkshakes…..

  8. Great comment by “C’mon keep up”:

    A couple of these properties are not just someone’s home that a fixed property value can be assessed as the basis for the purchase price offer – but are investment properties which provide monthly income to the investors.

    I don’t know for sure – but I suspect that BSU wants to low-ball the property owners and pay fair market value for the property itself – and won’t consider as part of the settlement the income value the current owner is realizing.

    I too fail to see a college baseball field having greater value to the community as a whole – versus individual rights of property owners.

    Shame on BSU for strong-arming property owners and shame on those who will allow eminent domain to be applicable in this case.

  9. chicago sam
    Aug 18, 2018, 1:30 pm

    This is not a proper use of eminent domain.Hopefully a legislator will take a look at curbing this over reach.

  10. As a person that has been through eminent domain several times it is a big game that the State/Federal/Local folks use. And they will win.

    Boise State…. State of Idaho( BSU) wants a property. They say they need the property for a “public” use that is authorized by Idaho law..

    Boise State ( Dr Kustra) says they need the property for parking/ baseball field..etc. etc…..No more wrestling!!!

    Boise State gets a MAI ( Made As Instructed) appraisal… low ball ( hate to use that term for a baseball field…..)

    Owners of the property ( in this case the church of Christ…) http://boisecoc.org that have no money and are just trying to have a Boise State Student Christian program and have owned the property for 40 years…. BSU that was their friend is now fighting them.

    BSU has all the lawyers they need

    Biblical Studies has no Lawyers… can get one for $$$

    BSU will win… Biblical Studies will get some $ that the Lawyers will get most.

    I just love BaseBall.

    Where are the Historic Boise folks in this dog fight?

  11. C'mon keep up
    Aug 24, 2018, 7:12 pm

    To chicago sam

    Should the property owners be able to contact their legislator and require the legislator to step in with a challenge to eminent domain? How many ways can the challenge be pursued?

  12. chicago sam
    Aug 25, 2018, 8:25 am

    keeping up–Certainly contact with legislators would be one approach. A good swift kick in the budget might be very effective.

Post a comment

Get the Guardian by email

Enter your email address:

Categories