City Government

Bike Park Costs Mount?

This came in from a GUARDIAN reader today on the bike park near Ft. Boise…

Was I the only person in Council chambers during the Bike Skills Park “hearing” who heard Parks Director Doug Holloway, in response to concerns about hidden costs of a “public” park being developed for an Albertson Foundation Board member who lives in the East End, say that there would be no additional staff hired? “We can cover it with existing staff.”

So how does the Mr. Holloway, the Mayor, and City Council explain this JOB POST on the City’s web site?

Comments & Discussion

8 comments for “Bike Park Costs Mount?”

  1. Obscured by clouds?

  2. I thought a BMX course was established south of Amity road a few years ago. Why is another needed?

  3. Our Despot Mayor
    Oct 15, 2019, 10:20 am

    Does it ever end with this administration? Out of the blue $100,000 jobs within his own office to this position, an activity already covered!! Of course, this job is news to me. It just seems like here is another dart in the board that cries for a change in leadership.

  4. There have been MAJOR cost overruns on the Bike Pit/Park and all it set in motion.

    Months ago, records show an $85,000 cost overrun on what was to have been a $200,000 bathroom. So that cost is now up to $285,000.

    2-3 weeks ago, there was an 18 per cent cost increase ok’d by Council for the shrunken in size dog park. I believe that meant an additional $45,000 in cost above the initial amount.

    The archery range cost is drastically higher than the initial cost projection of $15,000 – because initially the City wanted to place there archery range by the historical Cemetery. When that caused a major uproar (inappropriate site and safety) the archery range landed in the old lead-heavy police shooting range. So there had to be lead clean up on the part of the shooting range where the archery range is being built. Approx. cost increase – $60,000. I am not sure of the exact total. My figures come from a lead clean up estimate in a Records Act request from around 6 months ago.

    These are all City costs. AND it would be really interesting to know how much above initial projects Albertson’s has sunk into Bike Park pit area, where dirt has been being moved around since last Xmas.

  5. It’s very possible that this is a position was created from an existing vacant position. It’s not terribly unusual to change the specific duties of an existing position to make sure that a new situation is covered. The outcome is no net increase in staffing level or budget, just a changed job description. Let’s make sure we’re mad at the right things before we start handing out the pitchforks and torches.

    EDITOR NOTE–Very good point! We always welcome all voices.

  6. Dave Kangas
    Oct 16, 2019, 6:16 am

    In a city overrun with with cash, tight budgets don’t seem to matter as much as “just get it done”. Even a doubling of the cost of fire stations wasn’t an issue. Of course those fire stations also came with hefty campaign donations. Can you imagine trying to build a “one of kind” $100M+ library in this environment? Would that cost also double as it moved along?

  7. Dave Kangas;

    The fire bond was a shell game from the very beginning. The bond amount wasn’t really based on actual cost estimates, but a pulled-out-of-somewhere number that would be palatable to voters. The understanding was that if voters approved it, council would simply carry the remaining money out of the general fund. The whole story about ‘cost overruns’ was spin after they got caught.

  8. Paid With Park Impact Fees
    Oct 22, 2019, 8:04 pm

    $200,000 was approved for the sewer/bathroom portion of this project, to be funded through the Regional Park Impact Fee Account – yet this very project is not on the Park Impact Fees Capital Improvement Plan (2016-2025). The Idaho Code for impact fees (Title 67, Ch. 82) specifies that impact fees be spent on projects that are on the legally adopted Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).

    The CIP is not the same thing as the City’s Capital Projects Fund.

    The appointed members of the Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee are to review Capital Improvement Plans and proposed amendments, and advise the government entity (City Council) of the need to update or revise the CIP. The law does not charge them with determining and deciding on wholly new projects. If a new project is put forth, they are to file written comments and then the City is to go through the formal hearing process to amend the CIP.

    These issues have been reiterated in their own meeting minutes for years. But when you have a revolving door of appointed members who profit from the development trough, all they seem to care about is getting a slice of this money directed towards the area of the City they have a project in, or an area where they actually live – which is mostly the north and east ends of Boise.

    For every voter out there who has an undeveloped/or minimally developed park in their neighborhood, these are fees that should have gone to your Regional area, rather than a wholly new project that slipped in to swipe them away.

Post a comment

Get the Guardian by email

Enter your email address:

Categories