From the reports and quotes we have seen–especially the great reporting by Lora Volkert at the Idaho Business News web site–it is another story of government by the uninformed.

The proposal called for an ELECTED three member board with a countywide vote. The reason a county vote is appropriate is because the CCDC takes county taxes (as well as city and ACHD) and subsidizes the developers.

Let’s hope some common sense emerges on this issue. Boise City Councilors can–and SHOULD disband the current CCDC board and act themselves to run the urban renewal agency which is a city entity funded by tax dollars.

Rep. Dell Raybould of Rexburg had a great idea. VOTE OUT the mayors and councilors who appoint urban renewal boards if you don’t like the way they do business. Great idea Dell!

ADA COUNTY Coroner Erwin Sonnenberg has decided to “try something different” with the investigation of two recent fatal police shootings. Instead of inquests, he is asking prosecutors in Twin Falls and Bannock Counties to handle the investigations. Both of these cases have a different wrinkle than the shooting of the 16-year-old boy in the Highlands a couple years ago. Downside is most of their info will come from the locals.

In both the Boise and the Meridian cases, police and sheriff’s deputies were on scene for at least half an hour before killing men who were brandishing pistols. The sticky question is WHY did police in each incident use BOTH deadly and non-lethal force? Reports say the victims (suspects?) were shot with bean bag rounds as well as rifle and pistol rounds. The GUARDIAN won’t question use of either weapon, but BOTH? Nearly impossible to tell which weapons were fired first, but we fear “contagious fire” may be a factor–one shoots and they all shoot.

DEVELOPERS need to post huge bonds posted before they are allowed to go forward with public involved projects. Another planned community was announced last week and the media pretty much ignored it.

We fear these developers won’t come through with the proper infrastructure and if they fail to sell as many houses as expected, it could be cheaper to walk away and leave the few homeowners–and taxpayers–to provide for sewer and water needs…the latest developer to get the CCDC nod to build a 34 story tower on the infamous “hole” has a history of bankruptcy… and a parcel intended for condos at Idaho and 16th is in foreclosure.

Under a well intended plan to get medical aid quickly to those in need, three firefighters aboard a $275,000 fire truck respond along with an ambulance on most emergency medical calls. Costly, inefficient, and cause for endless “code 3” responses all over town as one station responds to cover for those not available.

Since fully 70% of all calls are for medical assistance, it seems wasteful to send 100% of the aid in the form of a truck loaded with hose, ladders, and pumps. The fire departments need to be staffed–and equipped–for firefighting, but that duty comprises merely 30% of their actual responses.

The GUARDIAN thinks local fire departments need to rethink their equipment investments. We think in the city of Boise for example, they could purchase 5 medical vans for the cost of a single fire engine. With the capability of transporting patients if needed, these quick response or “squad” cars could supplement the ambulance service in the event of disasters, save wear and tear on pumper trucks, and provide efficient medical service to residents. They could also eliminate the need for county ambulance service within the city.

We figure staffing levels could be increased by 15 firefighters to provide paramedic/firefighter coverage at five stations and cover all shifts. One member of the three-man crew from the pumper could be assigned to the medical response unit, freeing the pumper from responding to medical calls, thus eliminating 70% of the wear and tear on a truck designed to fight fires.

Instead of having a truck with three guys respond to 70% of the alarms (medical) it makes more sense to have the cheaper medical van respond to ALL calls with two firefighters (one would also be a paramedic). That way, the fire truck is not overworked, and if there is an actual fire both the medical van and fire truck respond, which places four people on scene at the outset.

That will be devastating to Kuna’s Fire Dept. which already operates an ambulance with trained paramedics.

Star wants to offer similar ambulance service 24/7 which they fail to get from Ada County EMS at present. Star Fire Commission Chairman Steve Edgar notes the 911 dispatch system is already in place and his department wants to provide an increased level of service to residents. The closest ambulance to Star responds from Eagle, but only 12 hours a day. Ada opposes the Star plan to provide their own ambulance and staff.

Monday all the fire chiefs in the county met with the county Emergency Medical Services director to discuss the proposed amendments to the EMS ordinance. None of them favor the changes which pretty much put the sole authority for all medical services under the county.

Most fire departments have medical supervision from a doctor, but under the proposed ordinance only the county medical directorate (including a doctor) would have authority over training and protocol.

Boise Deputy Fire Chief Dave Hanneman said while the fire chiefs were unanimous in in their opposition to the proposed ordinance changes, their reasons were varied. He cited a licensing authority of the EMS to collect fees from each emergency medical technician in the department.

Ada County EMS previously has pretty much limited private ambulance service to non-emergency runs, transporting patients between hospitals and nursing homes. Earlier this year Ada County EMS entered into that business with county assets competing directly with the private services. Now they want to curtail public competition as well.

All this comes after voters turned down a tax hike 18 months ago. The County has struggled to run the service as a business. Meanwhile, thanks to growth, a healthy economy, and eager firefighters, the fire services have added paramedics to some of their fire engine crews and in the case of Kuna even offered paramedic ambulances.

The county attempt to establish a monopoly on EMS care and transport short-changes many citizens, is ill advised and likely will end up in court if the ordinance is passed. We all live in Ada County and all deserve a certain level of EMS service from the county.

If, however, a fire district or city wishes to offer more and quicker services to citizens they should have the right to do so.

That is what we do with police. The sheriff provides a minimum level of law enforcement in the county and if cities wish to create their own police departments to deliver increased service at taxpayer expense, they are free to do so. Boise, Meridian, and Garden City do just that.

Competing to offer emergency medical services is ludicrous. The GUARDIAN thinks there are only losers when the county tries to operate as a business. Hopefully citizens will demand–and offer some common sense that is so far lacking at the government level.

Guest Post By
CURIOUS GEORGE

Less government? I’m not sure it’s possible to get less government unless we revert to Kurdish-style warlord-ruled fiefdoms. Hegemony anyone?

More to the point, when we moved out to Boise in the 1980’s I was surprised by the number of basic services (water, gas, electricity, etc.) that were privately-owned.

Then, I shrugged my shoulders and deemed it a quaint western states phenomena – a throwback to enterprising service providers from old mining towns. Now, I’m not so sure it’s a pattern we need to continue forward.

It is almost impossible to provide solid, achievable, regional goals when they are constantly undermined by competing private interests. These interests aren’t those of private property owners, since they provide the core financial engine to our economy, but it’s the myriad of (near unregulated – don’t get me started on the band-aid PUC) private service providers that fall all over themselves to provide electricity, water, gas, etc. with no regard to the long-term health of the various communities. And, who in turn pass the costs of the new (unexpected) expenses of new service extensions on to their entire cadre of rate-payers.

This creates an environment-of-expectation – where if growth can be “purchased” today, then we shouldn’t have to worry about if it can be afforded tomorrow. Yet no one would ever dream of budgeting their household expenses in this manner.

In the Midwest many public utilities are still privately-held – but they are all non-profit co-ops. All of these utility companies’ shares are held by the people who actually recieve the services. And, it is these recipient-owners who set the rates and determine where service extension should (or shouldn’t) be run. Can you imagine the hew and cry from the overseas Board of Directors and Shareholders of the Suez Corporation if they had the capacity to provide water to a proposed local development, yet the company’s local administrators refused to provide hook-ups because the development (regardless of how much money the developer was willing to upfront) wasn’t consistent with the community’s Comprehensive Plan?

There were only about 6 non-candidate related people in the entire room. Clerk-Auditor Dave Navarro’s opponent didn’t even show up.

Written questions from the “audience” were presented by BSU political science prof Jim Weatherby in his usual dignified manner.

Answers from the first question surprised few. “Do you accept campaign contributions from developers, realtors or builders?” All admitted they take money from the development crowd.

Incumbent Repub Fred Tilman, was not ashamed to take money from developers. Al Ames, his Demo opponent, admitted to a $50 donation, but said he will finance much of the campaign out of pocket.

In the District 3 race, Steve Kimball–a roofer by trade–wasn’t bashful about admitting payments from developers, builders and realtors. Nearly 10% of his campaign is financed by “Cliffs” Developer Tucker Johnson.

Former commish Sharon Ullman said she got $50 from a personal friend who sells real estate, but does not seek funds or endorsements from the development community.

The biggest surprise was Paul Woods’ answer. Not only does he proudly accept cash from developers, he plans to spend a whopping $45,000 for the county race. Tilman’s campaign budget of $25,000 was the only one that even came close. All the others were in the $6-12,000 range

“Our community has been built by developers, realtors, and builders. They have a tremendous roles to play,” said Woods.

Ames and Tilman traded barbs about inconsistent past positions and Kimball got a long answer out of Ullman on why she voted FOR him in the primary. GUARDIAN says she voted for the Republican Kimball in the primary so she wouldn’t have to go up against incumbent Judy Peavey-Derr.

Saddest comment of the night was Kimball’s answer to the question, “Identify county departments under the commissioners and what you would do to change them.”

Kimball stammered and declared, “I don’t have a basic comprehension of county government…” He then went on to say that “Fred and Judy” said they would help him out to learn the ropes.

Not a pretty event if you are looking for changes in Ada government.

Last Friday I received a message left on the Boise Mayor’s hotline. The caller said, “The tax assessor must be smiling all the way to the bank thinking we were going to get any [property tax] relief.” If the caller only knew that my assessed property value increased 21% this year! As a result, my taxes will most likely go up by more than 15%. Bottom line: if I get a raise this year, more than half of it will be used to pay my tax bill.

While a 15% tax increase is hard to swallow, I at least have a clear understanding of Idaho’s tax laws and how the tax system is structured. For those of you who are as troubled as I am about skyrocketing assessments,
I’d like to arm you with the following facts so you can at least make an informed call for meaningful tax reform.

Ada County’s real estate market has experienced unprecedented growth. According to Intermountain Multiple Listing Service, the median price of all properties sold in the first quarter of 2005 was $173,300; by the 4th quarter of the same year, the median price soared by 22% to $211,575. Why is this important? Idaho’s Constitution and statutes passed by lawmakers require each county assessor to appraise property at current market value. If they don’t, the state tax commission may adjust property values to reflect the true market trend.

Land values have followed the same amazing upward trend. Many people speculate land values were only increased to offset lost revenue brought by the expanded homeowner’s exemption. This assumption is wrong for two reasons. First, any deficit created by the increased exemption could easily be made up by increasing the levy on the 49 other taxing districts. Secondly, and perhaps more to the point, continued demand for land in Ada County has caused bare land prices to explode – in some cases by more than 100% in less than a year’s time.

One other question I am always asked is, “Where’s all that extra money going?” The answer is simple; there is no extra money or “windfall,” to the county or any of the taxing districts. Other than schools, the current tax law caps local government budgets at 3%, with a growth component allowing counties to tax new construction, not yet on the tax rolls, with last year’s levy rate. Ultimately, increased property values decrease the levy rate. For example, the total tax levy for Boise residents went from a high 2.1% ($2.10 per $100, value) in 1994 to 1.76% ($1.76 per $100 value) in 1995. But as we all know, such decreases can’t offset double-digit increases in property values.

Lawmakers moved in the right direction by increasing the homeowner’s exemption to $75,000 and including land in the exemption. But as I told many lawmakers during the session, increasing the exemption by $25,000 would not lead to any real relief, since we were already seeing property values increase in excess of 20%. On a bright note, the legislature did tie the exemption to the Idaho Housing Price Index, which means it increases with market inflation instead of staying static at $50,000 as it has for the past 25 years.

Governor Risch sees the opportunity for property tax reform and seems willing to take bold steps to bring tax relief to Idahoans. Personally, I think the school maintenance and operation (M&O) budget should be covered by a sales tax increase and removed from property taxes altogether. I urge you to contact both your state representative and senator and ask them to support Governor Risch’s call for a special session to solve this property tax issue once and for all.

Robert McQuade has served as Ada County Assessor since he took office in 1995.

Last Friday I received a message left on the Boise Mayor’s hotline. The caller said, “The tax assessor must be smiling all the way to the bank thinking we were going to get any [property tax] relief.” If the caller only knew that my assessed property value increased 21% this year! As a result, my taxes will most likely go up by more than 15%. Bottom line: if I get a raise this year, more than half of it will be used to pay my tax bill.

While a 15% tax increase is hard to swallow, I at least have a clear understanding of Idaho’s tax laws and how the tax system is structured. For those of you who are as troubled as I am about skyrocketing assessments,
I’d like to arm you with the following facts so you can at least make an informed call for meaningful tax reform.

Ada County’s real estate market has experienced unprecedented growth. According to Intermountain Multiple Listing Service, the median price of all properties sold in the first quarter of 2005 was $173,300; by the 4th quarter of the same year, the median price soared by 22% to $211,575. Why is this important? Idaho’s Constitution and statutes passed by lawmakers require each county assessor to appraise property at current market value. If they don’t, the state tax commission may adjust property values to reflect the true market trend.

Land values have followed the same amazing upward trend. Many people speculate land values were only increased to offset lost revenue brought by the expanded homeowner’s exemption. This assumption is wrong for two reasons. First, any deficit created by the increased exemption could easily be made up by increasing the levy on the 49 other taxing districts. Secondly, and perhaps more to the point, continued demand for land in Ada County has caused bare land prices to explode – in some cases by more than 100% in less than a year’s time.

One other question I am always asked is, “Where’s all that extra money going?” The answer is simple; there is no extra money or “windfall,” to the county or any of the taxing districts. Other than schools, the current tax law caps local government budgets at 3%, with a growth component allowing counties to tax new construction, not yet on the tax rolls, with last year’s levy rate. Ultimately, increased property values decrease the levy rate. For example, the total tax levy for Boise residents went from a high 2.1% ($2.10 per $100, value) in 1994 to 1.76% ($1.76 per $100 value) in 1995. But as we all know, such decreases can’t offset double-digit increases in property values.

Lawmakers moved in the right direction by increasing the homeowner’s exemption to $75,000 and including land in the exemption. But as I told many lawmakers during the session, increasing the exemption by $25,000 would not lead to any real relief, since we were already seeing property values increase in excess of 20%. On a bright note, the legislature did tie the exemption to the Idaho Housing Price Index, which means it increases with market inflation instead of staying static at $50,000 as it has for the past 25 years.

Governor Risch sees the opportunity for property tax reform and seems willing to take bold steps to bring tax relief to Idahoans. Personally, I think the school maintenance and operation (M&O) budget should be covered by a sales tax increase and removed from property taxes altogether. I urge you to contact both your state representative and senator and ask them to support Governor Risch’s call for a special session to solve this property tax issue once and for all.

Robert McQuade has served as Ada County Assessor since he took office in 1995.

Last Friday I received a message left on the Boise Mayor’s hotline. The caller said, “The tax assessor must be smiling all the way to the bank thinking we were going to get any [property tax] relief.” If the caller only knew that my assessed property value increased 21% this year! As a result, my taxes will most likely go up by more than 15%. Bottom line: if I get a raise this year, more than half of it will be used to pay my tax bill.

While a 15% tax increase is hard to swallow, I at least have a clear understanding of Idaho’s tax laws and how the tax system is structured. For those of you who are as troubled as I am about skyrocketing assessments,
I’d like to arm you with the following facts so you can at least make an informed call for meaningful tax reform.

Ada County’s real estate market has experienced unprecedented growth. According to Intermountain Multiple Listing Service, the median price of all properties sold in the first quarter of 2005 was $173,300; by the 4th quarter of the same year, the median price soared by 22% to $211,575. Why is this important? Idaho’s Constitution and statutes passed by lawmakers require each county assessor to appraise property at current market value. If they don’t, the state tax commission may adjust property values to reflect the true market trend.

Land values have followed the same amazing upward trend. Many people speculate land values were only increased to offset lost revenue brought by the expanded homeowner’s exemption. This assumption is wrong for two reasons. First, any deficit created by the increased exemption could easily be made up by increasing the levy on the 49 other taxing districts. Secondly, and perhaps more to the point, continued demand for land in Ada County has caused bare land prices to explode – in some cases by more than 100% in less than a year’s time.

One other question I am always asked is, “Where’s all that extra money going?” The answer is simple; there is no extra money or “windfall,” to the county or any of the taxing districts. Other than schools, the current tax law caps local government budgets at 3%, with a growth component allowing counties to tax new construction, not yet on the tax rolls, with last year’s levy rate. Ultimately, increased property values decrease the levy rate. For example, the total tax levy for Boise residents went from a high 2.1% ($2.10 per $100, value) in 1994 to 1.76% ($1.76 per $100 value) in 1995. But as we all know, such decreases can’t offset double-digit increases in property values.

Lawmakers moved in the right direction by increasing the homeowner’s exemption to $75,000 and including land in the exemption. But as I told many lawmakers during the session, increasing the exemption by $25,000 would not lead to any real relief, since we were already seeing property values increase in excess of 20%. On a bright note, the legislature did tie the exemption to the Idaho Housing Price Index, which means it increases with market inflation instead of staying static at $50,000 as it has for the past 25 years.

Governor Risch sees the opportunity for property tax reform and seems willing to take bold steps to bring tax relief to Idahoans. Personally, I think the school maintenance and operation (M&O) budget should be covered by a sales tax increase and removed from property taxes altogether. I urge you to contact both your state representative and senator and ask them to support Governor Risch’s call for a special session to solve this property tax issue once and for all.

Robert McQuade has served as Ada County Assessor since he took office in 1995.

Last Friday I received a message left on the Boise Mayor’s hotline. The caller said, “The tax assessor must be smiling all the way to the bank thinking we were going to get any [property tax] relief.” If the caller only knew that my assessed property value increased 21% this year! As a result, my taxes will most likely go up by more than 15%. Bottom line: if I get a raise this year, more than half of it will be used to pay my tax bill.

While a 15% tax increase is hard to swallow, I at least have a clear understanding of Idaho’s tax laws and how the tax system is structured. For those of you who are as troubled as I am about skyrocketing assessments,
I’d like to arm you with the following facts so you can at least make an informed call for meaningful tax reform.

Ada County’s real estate market has experienced unprecedented growth. According to Intermountain Multiple Listing Service, the median price of all properties sold in the first quarter of 2005 was $173,300; by the 4th quarter of the same year, the median price soared by 22% to $211,575. Why is this important? Idaho’s Constitution and statutes passed by lawmakers require each county assessor to appraise property at current market value. If they don’t, the state tax commission may adjust property values to reflect the true market trend.

Land values have followed the same amazing upward trend. Many people speculate land values were only increased to offset lost revenue brought by the expanded homeowner’s exemption. This assumption is wrong for two reasons. First, any deficit created by the increased exemption could easily be made up by increasing the levy on the 49 other taxing districts. Secondly, and perhaps more to the point, continued demand for land in Ada County has caused bare land prices to explode – in some cases by more than 100% in less than a year’s time.

One other question I am always asked is, “Where’s all that extra money going?” The answer is simple; there is no extra money or “windfall,” to the county or any of the taxing districts. Other than schools, the current tax law caps local government budgets at 3%, with a growth component allowing counties to tax new construction, not yet on the tax rolls, with last year’s levy rate. Ultimately, increased property values decrease the levy rate. For example, the total tax levy for Boise residents went from a high 2.1% ($2.10 per $100, value) in 1994 to 1.76% ($1.76 per $100 value) in 1995. But as we all know, such decreases can’t offset double-digit increases in property values.

Lawmakers moved in the right direction by increasing the homeowner’s exemption to $75,000 and including land in the exemption. But as I told many lawmakers during the session, increasing the exemption by $25,000 would not lead to any real relief, since we were already seeing property values increase in excess of 20%. On a bright note, the legislature did tie the exemption to the Idaho Housing Price Index, which means it increases with market inflation instead of staying static at $50,000 as it has for the past 25 years.

Governor Risch sees the opportunity for property tax reform and seems willing to take bold steps to bring tax relief to Idahoans. Personally, I think the school maintenance and operation (M&O) budget should be covered by a sales tax increase and removed from property taxes altogether. I urge you to contact both your state representative and senator and ask them to support Governor Risch’s call for a special session to solve this property tax issue once and for all.

Robert McQuade has served as Ada County Assessor since he took office in 1995.