Business

More Sneaky Boise Lease Details

Under the terms of a proposed amendment to a City lease deal with a Salt Lake City developer, taxpayers will be forced to pay for infrastructure costs traditionally borne by developers.

The area in question is 159 acres of industrial park land owned by the citizens of Boise. Bieter has signed a lease deal with the Boyer Company which will provide public land tax-free for up to 22 commercial structures.

As part of the Tuesday council agenda beginning on page 1166 of the agenda packet (it takes 10 minutes to download online) resolution 376-19 reads in part“…also including a reimbursement mechanism to Developer for the costs incurred by Developer in the construction of the Infrastructure Improvements…”

That means “we the people” will pay for the cost of construction for infrastructure to benefit a private for-profit business. It is a travesty to allow multi-million dollar agreements aimed at helping favored businesses be approved with no public discussion. The GUARDIAN finds it hard to justify hiding measures as profound as the industrial park deal on a consent agenda buried among dozens of other “routine items” in more than one thousand pages of legalese.

Comments & Discussion

30 comments for “More Sneaky Boise Lease Details”

  1. Stop the insanity
    Aug 19, 2019, 5:15 pm

    The deal needs to be stopped. A city does not give away the citizens tax money without their “consent”. Too broad, too quick, too unilateral toward the benefit of a developer. I’m seeing very wrong thinking here. Goodofthecitizenectomy.

  2. Ron Haberman
    Aug 19, 2019, 5:16 pm

    Team Dave still wants our votes, he also wants our money via taxes. This needs to be stopped.

  3. I would like to know what polluting industries Boyer plans to lure to the Industrial Park. Oh, that’s right – the bad air will just blow out to the desert — except when it doesn’t – like when an inversion sets in. I also wonder if the industrial park tenant employees will have to wear ear protection all the time- to shield them from the F-35 noise overhead …

  4. I don’t understand, with the rapid growth in the treasure valley, why any mayor in any town would think it is okay for property owners to subsidize an OUT OF STATE developer.
    Devious Dave is letting Boiseans know who he is working for and it isn’t us. Did Lauren McLean go along with Dave? As I refer to her as Dave in a dress!

    EDITOR NOTE–McLean has been asked to pull the resolution from the consent agenda for public discussion.

  5. From my long ago days taking a BSU course in contracts I seem to remember a contract is an agreement between two entities in which both parties equally benefit. What is the benefit to Boise City residents in this contract with Boyer? Isn’t the Mayor and Council supposed to be representing city residents? So far it appears developers benefit at the cost of taxpayers. Meanwhile those of us who are small business owners receive only larger tax bills.

  6. Thank you thank you thank you Mr. Frazier for weeding through those 1000s of pages! and deciphering it for us! Certainly agree with above 3 comments!

  7. Business as usual down at city hall.

    One has to wonder how many deals like this hizzoner has cut over the past 15 years and slid thru on consent agendas.

  8. Alternative Candidate?
    Aug 20, 2019, 12:43 am

    Did the alternative candidate also roll her eyes in opposition before letting this one happen too? TeamDave 2.0

  9. Add up populations of Meridian, Eagle, Star, Caldwell,Nampa 285,000 vs Boise’s 227,000. Now add up the proposed budgets of those 5 for $436 million vs Boise’s $764 million. (not apples to apples, but numbers are still astounding).

    FYI, it is budget time!

    EDITOR NOTE–Boise skews the numbers because they include the airport and sewer systems which are self-supporting “enterprise funds,” not funded with taxes. The true comparison is the “general fund budgets.”

  10. After contacting Councilwomen Holli Woodings, she advised me that RES376-19 has been removed from tonights Agenda and will be discussed and voted on separately at a later date.

  11. Deep Midnight
    Aug 20, 2019, 9:59 am

    RE Alternative Candidate? ha ha ha. Thats awesome!

  12. alternatively, the City could sell that land and provide proceeds for the Library! haha.

    I agree with Rabula, “Business as usual” —
    for Boise, and every other city/county/state/federal. Government will take as much as they can and spend it on many needless things.
    Anyone who thinks a ‘new mayor (or any politician)’ is going to change that, is being naive. And there are a LOT of naive voters. 🙁

  13. Kurt – Wow. This shows what the disinfection of a big upcoming election combined with media articles shining a spotlight will do. Boise Dev broke the news of the Boyer deal. Now this Guardian article informed folks of a Council Resolution and Agreement further solidifying the deal without any public process.

    It’s City land being used for more of Bieter’s development wheeling and dealing – yet Boise citizens have been kept in the dark, and have had no voice.

  14. Alternative Candidate?
    Aug 20, 2019, 1:46 pm

    Isn’t there a State or Federal agency which can look into these sorts of deals?

    EDITOR NOTE–While the deals are not in the best interest of the Boise citizens, we are unable to come up with any obvious violations of the law.

  15. Hidin' them rolling eyes
    Aug 20, 2019, 3:26 pm

    Since this topic was on the Consent Agenda, there most likely will not be a slideshow presentation, which also serves as a clever way to not put the camera on the Council Members and their body language. Has anyone else noticed that the video stream for the City Council hearings has leaned more and more to keeping the screen shot showing the slide content while the Council Members speak? Maybe this is to hide the rolling of the eyes by more than just one. Or to hide the Council Members texting on their phones while a citizen is providing public testimony. Or even to hide the Mayor when he kicks back in his chair and puts his feet up on the dais.

    But the slide will not be left up for very long if the content is from a standpoint of opposition (from a citizen or Neighborhood Association).

  16. Well Holli Woodings did not know what she was talking about re: this being voted on at a later date. After a very brief staff presentation, they voted for it. With Clegg, Mcclean and Bieter all cheering it on. And Bieter was absolutely ebullient at about the deal.

    I take back my previous comment – as I STUPIDLY thought there was going to be more of a process. Nope – not from this current Council Gang who scorns public process and involvement.

    Regime change is so desperately needed!

  17. Pre-Deal Making?
    Aug 21, 2019, 8:14 am

    Did the City make a visit out to see the Boyer Company’s similar campus in Utah prior to creating the standards and qualifications they would use for the application process?

    Essentially making it so that no one else would qualify and therefore “fit” into the box they made?

    EDITOR NOTE–There was a secret trip to Salt Lake City. https://boiseguardian.com/2017/08/04/boise-officials-set-secret-meeting-in-slc/

  18. The Boise Model
    Aug 21, 2019, 8:27 am

    Why is the City making the commitment to reimburse developers? Shouldn’t it be the CCDC making that commitment? Those 22 building will be within the newly created district and all their taxes will go to CCDC.

    If 22 buildings are built at a cost of $10 million each that results $3.5 million a year in property taxes for CCDC. The Ada County, Boise School District, ACHD and the City’s General Fund will get zero additional tax revenue. Once again the Mayor and City Council has acted in the “best interest of CCDC” not the citizens.

    The City will demand ACHD build access roads and pay for those from ACHD’s budget. If a fire station is needed it will be just outside the CCDC district’s boundaries thus its construction cost will be an obligation of the City’s General Fund.

    EDITOR NOTE–Amen! None of your points were addressed by the mayor and council. Mayor called it “A great day!”

  19. Missing councilperson
    Aug 21, 2019, 8:59 am

    Do we know why Scot Ludwig does not come to the meetings anymore?

  20. And then, if not already, it can become an urban renewal area. Hard to believe this scheme is legal.

    EDITOR NOTE–It is already part of the Gateway Urban Renewal District. That means the tax on the buildings is diverted to the CCDC for 20 years. The underlying land owned by the city is tax-exempt. City Council voted Tuesday to approve the payback deal to the developer for the infrastructure expense.

  21. Where's Scot?
    Aug 21, 2019, 3:26 pm

    RE LUDWIG, Probably because he is not going to run for re-election – so he is on “lame duck” status?

    Besides, he got what he wanted and needed in the “revolving door” at City Hall/CCDC, learning all one needs to know to work the system, just as the other developers have, and their “representatives” they hire who deal with the Neighborhood Associations, and the former City Planners who do a stint at City Hall then go on to work in the development field. Not to mention the attorneys, engineers, surveyors, and architects, who all drink at the same trough of bloated tax dollars.

    TURD tax dollars (the urban renewal district) have their own version of a revolving door: The developer pays tax on the building’s value only to have it come back to them in the form of reimbursing them for their infrastructure through CCDC’s Participation Program – which can include reimbursement for a piece of public art. Your tax dollars hard at work!

  22. Where's Scot?
    Aug 22, 2019, 10:19 am

    RE: Ludwig, Or maybe he is not at the Council Hearings because his moral compass is not willing to partake in what he has learned occurs behind closed doors, at the expense of the citizens?

  23. Missing councilperson
    Aug 22, 2019, 6:24 pm

    Does he need to submit an excuse for his absence? Some elected positions require that, i.e. legislature. I hope he is not ill. If he has moral or ethical concerns, I ask him to express them. He is paid for his full term. This is a good question and we would like to know. Now if some other officials did not attend city council meetings, I would cheer. But that is just getting snarky.

  24. Scot M. Ludwig
    Aug 23, 2019, 6:04 am

    Good mornin. Just had an opportunity to read these comments. I find valuable and interesting insight in many comments on the BG and learn from many of you a variety of perspectives. It is extremely important that your elected officials attend as many meetings as possible. I have always taken that very seriously and have attended as many meetings as I could in my 5 years. Recently, I could not attend the NWNA development Appeal due to a long-planned family vacation. You never know when an important matter on Appeal will be set. I really wanted to be in Boise for that meeting. This past Tuesday I was in Texas taking my Freshman in College to school. I hope I am not a “lame duck” and should not have to miss but a few meetings the remainder of my term. I really want to contribute in a positive manner. Every public servant you elect, whether you like them or not, should make it their responsibility of attending as many meetings as possible. THX for raising the question. Scot

  25. Missing councilperson
    Aug 23, 2019, 8:24 pm

    If you miss but a few meetings, you’ll have missed most of them remaining. Tuesday follows Monday, each week. You can know that. Word on the street is you do not return emails either, so let’s see you enforce the law. Good luck to the Texas Freshman, especially since Texas is not BSU. lol

  26. Every single council member and the the mayor know exactly what they are doing.

    When there is not a single motion made to the contrary by anyone then they are all guilty. Period.

  27. TeamDave ripoff alert
    Aug 28, 2019, 2:18 pm
  28. Growth Equals More Trash
    Aug 30, 2019, 2:34 am

    City bills this option as “reducing” waste, when it really means trying to “create capacity” for all of the additional waste created by the explosive growth the City has solicited. All of the extra trash has added a whole new burden that probably was not well thought out, as the landfill is Ada County’s turf – not Boise’s.

    It is not a bottomless pit, therefore we should all prepare for a future tax increase to cover a new landfill. This is absolutely not a “growth pays for itself” mantra, as there are no Landfill Impact Fees.

  29. TeamDave ripoff alert
    Aug 30, 2019, 5:15 pm

    TeamDave obviously does not ever get a whiff of the rotting dirty diaper stench emanating from one week old trash.

  30. Now the truth
    Aug 31, 2019, 9:13 am

    In addition to looking trashy and haphazardly tossed together, the city will now smell of trash. Very bad idea.

Post a comment

Get the Guardian by email

Enter your email address:

Categories