City Government

Council Adopts Guardian District Idea

It looks like Boise City Councilors have come to their senses and adopted the GUARDIAN philosophy for the upcoming requirements for members of the commission that will set districts. The action took place at the Tuesday meeting.

The GUARDIAN had suggested ( see previous post) the expertise of members was more important than their geographical residence. A draft ordinance had been drawn up with a map which was less than logical. It came under fire from some citizens at last week’s council meeting.

Comments & Discussion

13 comments for “Council Adopts Guardian District Idea”

  1. Other Advice
    Apr 20, 2022, 9:08 am

    Perhaps they should have taken you advice from long ago and quit advertising this city for relocation. Now developers want free land. Give the free land to the homeless and to the Habitat for Humanity. Inexcusable pandering.

  2. McLean is worse than Bieter
    Apr 20, 2022, 4:48 pm

    Creating a district map is not rocket science. It’s just math and geography. If one can add and subtract and look at a map for major arteries and landmarks, like the river, one can create a district map in less than an hour.

  3. Now, if only they would allow citywide voting for candidates/councilors who reside in specific districts. (Their residences should be scattered about the city, but they should be beholden to the entire populace.)

  4. western guy
    Apr 21, 2022, 9:18 am

    Speaking of advertising this city for relocation, has anyone noticed the Boise airport still has a very large sign pointing out real estate offereings in the area?

  5. Boise Lawyer
    Apr 21, 2022, 1:42 pm

    I agree with bikeboy. Each Boise voter should have a vote on all six council members, even if the candidates themselves must reside in specific districts.

    Unfortunately, the Idaho state law forcing districts prohibits that. You’ve all been disenfranchised by 5/6 of your voting power to elect or reject the leaders who make decisions for you.

  6. David Gustafson
    Apr 22, 2022, 1:19 am

    Citywide voting makes as much sense as statewide voting for Idaho state representatives. There would be no minority/opposition representation that way. That’s what we have now on the city council. Citywide voting for each seat would be no change – the same liberal vote getters just shuffled across district lines.

  7. Concerned Neighbor
    Apr 22, 2022, 10:14 am

    We’ve learned to expect corruption from the likes of Marxist McLean and Bigot Sanchez, so if you allow districting without representation then they will abuse and manipulate it.

    As for the comments about taking away local representation… that’s simply undemocratic. Even with the state mandated districts, McLean and others have delayed representation of south Boise by several years. First by dragging it out, then by gerrymandering and only allowing for votes from the north while delaying the south yet another 2 years. And lets not forget their refusal to add further south and conservative Boise into city limits.

    EDITOR NOTE–To be clear, this commission is to establish district boundaries. It does not “represent” council candidates. Future councilors must live within districts yet to be established by the commissioners.

  8. western guy, of all people I know who moved here, I ask em why they moved to Boise.

    NONE of them have ever said, “Because I saw an advertisement at the airport.”

    No one has ever said, “I saw an ad in the LA Time.”

    Never have I heard any say, “I saw an about Boise that caused me to move here.” Never.

    Have you?

  9. On top of disenfranchising 5/6 of the voters (just like ACHD) the split timing of the reelections prevents the voters from sweeping the floor all at once.

    If the council, or commission, does something atrocious and the general consensus is to get rid of em all, that takes a long time- and memories are short.

    If anyone disagrees with the outcome here, let’s remember who sponsored the law we are referring to and those in favor of it: Rep Joe Palmer of MERIDIAN, and passed on party lines. That is Idaho’s idea of “local government” for you.

  10. western guy
    Apr 22, 2022, 3:21 pm

    Regarding ‘Concerned Neighbor’ and his ‘corruption’ comment, making such wild accusations without actual proof is what this country needs less of.

    EDITOR NOTE–Agreed. We allowed the comment to show the sentiment of at least one reader and knowing the elected officials have heard worse.

  11. making some districts
    Apr 23, 2022, 2:48 pm

    I think that there are reasonable options to make this decision. It is not about the mayor for you who are attacking the mayor. The problem to begin with was too many north-end reps. So for the voting districts as long as we don’t get two of what we’re trying to get rid of we’ll be ok.

    I would say no family or business associates, who have given money to reps, nor those who are on record for giving money should be on the commission.

    Basically, whatever we can do to neutralize EC.

  12. I just saw this. So you’re the culprit!

    I disagree with the argument that commissioner districts somehow limit the number of available qualified commissioners. Each commission disitrct would have had 40-60,000+ plus people. We aren’t reinventing the wheel or buildinga space shuttle. Distrcting is a process that has happened many times over, just not in Boise. It is a simple, releatively easy process oversaw by state and federal laws and expert from the County and State. If a bias exists, it exists whether a commissioner is at large or represents a district. Lack of bias isn’t as important as being able to set it aside, to participate in this process. What districts bring to the process is trust and familiarity. Trust that everyone, in each part of Boise is fairly represented in this process. Trust is something that the council has not earned yet, in this process. Familiarity with an area is important when it come to drawing the specific lines of the election district. As far as at large elections go, we’ve tried it and it isn’t working for the whole city. Why would would you want representative who was elected by people from another part of the city? Makes zero sense.

    EDITOR NOTE– You covered several topics here. FIRST, we haven’t put BIAS on the table. The idea is that it makes no difference where someone lives if they have valuable expertise to make the mandated districts fair and equal. SECOND, given your argument against “at large voting,” if you want to limit the voting authority of councilors to just the projects within their 1/6 of the budget, police, fire, etc. then disenfranchising 5/6 of the voters is OK. However we live in the ENTIRE city and it is impossible to split the council authority six ways. We support a system like the county commishes with district residence and at large voting.

  13. I believe an elected public servant representing an area of the city is a good thing. The city districts should consist of the whole of a neighborhood associations. With the best candidate being someone involved in their neighborhood. I would like someone sitting at the city hall table that has a horse in the race and a mint julep in hand.

Post a comment

Get the Guardian by email

Enter your email address:

Categories