Previous GUARDIAN postings have been slammed with paramedics and firefighters sniping at each other over the ordinance which we see as a power play on the part of the county to rescue an ailing agency.

Ignored by everyone–including the mainstream media–is a provision in the existing IDAHO CODE which gives cities the power to allow a county ambulance to operate within the city limits. We assume this law would apply to “incorporated fire districts as well.”

31-3905. AMBULANCE SERVICE — OPERATION DEPENDENT UPON RESOLUTION OF EACH CITY — RIGHT TO TAX UNAFFECTED BY NONSERVICE. “All cities and villages within the county, upon resolution duly passed and approved and presented to the board of county commissioners, may authorize said ambulance service to operate within the boundaries of said city or village, but the failure of any such governing body to authorize said ambulance service to operate within the limits of said village or city, shall not affect the right of the board of county commissioners to levy the tax as hereinbefore provided.”

To our layman’s mind this says the county can indeed tax, but without permission from the cities, the EMS cannot operate within the cities.

We have no objection to a MEDICAL standard for all EMS service regardless of private, fire, or EMS offering it. It will come as no surprise if the court rules the county can set the standard, but they cannot usurp the cities right to provide services to their residents.

That state–not Ada County–should take the lead in establishing medical protocols, training requirements, and general standards for paramedics.

EDITOR NOTE–Please keep comments short and try not to rehash previous comments.

The city earlier this year sued Ada County over the approval of the Avimor planned community on Highway 55. Judge Duff McKee dismissed the city case Thursday saying they had “no standing” in their claim the county broke the law when the project was approved. McKee ordered the city to pay the county for costs associated with defending their actions in court.

Commish Chairman Rick Yzaguirre said, “Clearly Judge McKee found the claims filed by Boise leaders to be baseless.”

This is part of the pattern established by the Boise legal department–chasing and losing legal action at taxpayer expense.

Recent notable actions:

–Boise lost an Idaho Supreme Court case in their quest to build an airport parking garage without voter approval. In addition to the expenses of staff and office operation, they had to pay about $22,000 to the GUARDIAN editor’s legal staff.

–They lost to the 10 Commandments coalition when the Idaho Supreme Court declared the city violated the law not allowing the question of replacing a monument to be on the ballot. It was subsequently placed on the Nov. 7 ballot and was defeated.

–Boise has spent nearly $250,000 in the past five years for outside “bond counsel” and NEVER passed a bond. They did sell certificates to finance the airport terminal and that would be illegal today.

In another expensive and probably unproductive legal move, Boise is steadfastly spending thousands upon thousands of dollars chasing after those “dirty trick political phone messages” during the Mayor’s race three years ago. Conservative activist Laird Maxwell has claimed he is the sole perpetrator of the calls which had a message against candidate Chuck Winder.

The issue in that matter was over identification of who funded the calls and whether or not they were “advocating” a particular candidate. The GUARDIAN send a formal request to the spokesperson for Team Dave, but neither the mayor or city attorney’s office has responded.

Attorneys on the other side tell us they are “baffled” about the city’s motivation to pursue something that even if proven may not be against the law.

Finally, look for the city to be on the losing end of a fight with the Ada County Highway District over Ustick Road. That decision is expected by December 1 and the attorney general has already issued an opinion which favored the ACHD.

To hear the Statesman and mayor tell it, vigilant managers in your local government caused good to triumph over evil.

“Team Dave” leader, Mayor Dave Bieter, told the Idaho Statesman’s Brad Hem, “This case sends a loud and clear message that misuse of taxpayer dollars will not be tolerated and those who do so will be held accountable.” The safeguards that the City Council and I have put into place did what they were supposed to do: brought the wrongdoing to light, and brought the perpetrator to justice.”

The GUARDIAN doesn’t see it that way and neither do the good honest employees working for the City of Boise. They did their best to get things corrected and were thwarted in their efforts to bring honesty and integrity to the work place.

They came to the GUARDIAN with details as a last resort. When we confronted city leaders about the alleged misdeeds they repeatedly told us it was only a “personality conflict.” Later they said it was a “personnel issue,” but only after the GUARDIAN posted details and forwarded documents to councilors did they call for an audit–many months after initial reports.

Team Dave and the Councilors are simply in denial. We don’t think for a minute they were involved or condoned illegal or unethical acts in city departments, but the system they have is simply not working. The city council and purchasing department were not even aware of improper contracts and purchases until we forced the issue.

Finally, the auditor uncovered repeated violations of city policy and state law during the investigation and then resigned in the middle of the mess. HE HAS NOT BEEN REPLACED. Boise’s $150,000,000 annual taxpayer funded spending is without a forensic auditor–a position councilor Vern Bisterfeldt said is, “worth its weight in gold,” following the debacle of the Cole’s administration.

Use the search engine at the top right of the page and type in “POOP” to get the entire history of this story. It is not a pretty smell.

The Association, whose members include cities from throughout Idaho, seeks to modify the language of the FRAZIER decision in an effort to exempt cities from abiding by a constitutional interpretation that voter approval must be obtained to enter into debt exceeding a single year’s revenues.

The association is primarily a lobbying group and is able to exert influence over legislative acts–something which is more difficult when it comes to judges operating under the rule of law. They are asking the court to modify a ruling that requires “ordinary and necessary” DEBT to be of an emergency nature effecting public health and safety.

They don’t seek to change the ruling on Boise’s airport parking garage having to go for a bond election, but they want to appear as a “friend of the court” due to the substantial public policy implications statewide.

Bottom line is the association doesn’t want cities forced to ask permission from voters to spend their money on long term debt.

We can’t properly use “conviction” and “prosecution” in their common context because this case is a civil matter, but a judge found the three–Judy Peavey-Derr, Fred Tilman, and Rick Yzaguirre–to be in violation of the statute which mandates public business be conducted in public forums.

The matter stems from a closed door meeting with Boise City Councilor Vern Bisterfeldt. Bisterfeldt has testified that matters not involving legal issues were discussed during the meeting. The court ruled that an attorney must be present and litigation issues were necessary to qualify for “executive” sessions.

The AG wants Ada taxpayers to pony up the cash for the state fees and the commishes want us to pay their defense costs which are nearly $18,000. Their defense lawyer has offered to appeal the findings of Judge William Woodland to the Idaho Supreme Court at no additional costs.

Bottom line, Ada Taxpayers are on the hook for $30,000 to defend violations with $150 fines. This is a matter of principle for the commishes, but they are doing it on the taxpayer’s PRINCIPAL.

The commishes met with Boise City Councilor Vern Bisterfeldt last June in a closed session, claiming it was to discuss potential legal matters. Bisterfeldt has testified (by deposition) that strategies to get a bond passed to fund the Emergency Medical Services was discussed.

The Attorney General filed charges against the Commishes with a possible civil fine of $150 for each count. The Commishes dug in their heels and the AG’s office dug in theirs in a tug of war that is fund for the media pundits (and the GUARDIAN) but it is getting a bit pricey.

Since it is a civil matter, the GUARDIAN suggested a out of court settlement last June with the Commishes each giving a hundred bucks to a charity, saying they are sorry and the prosecution calling it good. That was before people listened to us.

The latest filing includes an affidavit of Boise City Councilor Vern Bisterfeldt who flatly says, “There was no discussion of pending litigation…Additionally…I was not aware of pending litigation or general public awareness of probable litigation…” The topic was the county emergency medical services and how to get a future bond issued passed.

The Idaho Attorney General has charged the three commishes with holding the closed meeting June 15 which he says should have been open to the public. It is a civil procedure which could result in fines of no more than $150 on each of three counts and will result in no criminal record–less damning than a speeding ticket.

The commishes have denied the charges and hired a private defense attorney at taxpayer expense (about $3,700 so far).

In a move that can be interpreted as an effort to “stop the bleeding” or “putting a gun to their heads” depending on your point of view, the AG filed a motion for summary judgment claiming the undisputed facts of the meeting along with Bisterfeldt’s sworn statement are sufficient evidence for the court to rule now and preclude a trial.

Is there anyone out there willing to call Vern a liar?

The Ada County prosecutor has a definite conflict of interest since the only potential defendant is a policeman on the same department the prosecutor represents on a daily basis. In the case of a death not involving a policeman or other official represented by the prosecutor we would not call for recusal.

When it is a cop under scrutiny the public deserves an unbiased interrogator.

These facts seem uncontested: The boy had an old rifle with a bayonet in his hands, suffered from apparent drug abuse, and was at home when he was shot. Officer Johnson was responding to a call for help from father Bruce Jones.

Rather than discuss the elements of the case, the GUARDIAN will comment on the system.

The inquest is to determine the facts surrounding the cause of death and to determine if the shooting was justified. This is where it gets cloudy.

Coroner Erwin Sonnenberg canceled the October 16 hearing, citing an inability to seat a jury that would be impartial due to pretrial publicity. The coroner said there were only two witnesses–Bruce Jones, father of the deceased and Officer Andrew S. Johnson. He seemed unhappy with Jones’ interviews prior to the hearing. Jones expressed fears the inquest would be “pro-police” and said he wanted the truth to emerge from the process, hence the interviews.

Sonnenberg never mentioned the police “show and tell” following the shooting. During that press conference police commanders backed up the officer and displayed the rifle, the officer’s torn shirt and Kevlar vest. This was all under the watch of former interim chief and city council candidate Jim Tibbs.

Coroner Sonnnenberg said the 40 members in the pool of potential jurors displayed bias and held some strong opinions, based on results of a questionnaire they all completed. The questions were supplied by the Ada County Prosecutor’s office and they claim to be standard jury questions.

The Idaho Statesman published the questions and the results, complete with graphs, of the questionnaire in the October 22 edition. The obvious conclusion was that most of the people polled felt they could offer an unbiased opinion.

The troubling aspect of this entire case is the involvement of the prosecutor and the questions themselves which ask about memberships in the ACLU, Amnesty International, the NRA, Neighborhood Watch.

The inquest is a fact finding proceeding–not an adversary hearing with two sides presenting evidence. The GUARDIAN thinks it inappropriate for the Ada County prosecuting attorney to have a role because he would have to “conflict out” of any trial if the jury were to find the officer may have violated the law.

It may sound oxymoronic (for you non-library types that means contradictory) but some honest lawyers have expressed concern about professional legal sanctions against her. Our sources at the Bar assure us charges were filed in April and are still pending.

She was to have written a letter to the quasi government agency which licenses lawyers informing them of her conviction and admitting she would be subject to disbarment and banned from practicing law. So far, no letter and the Ada County prosecutor may be forced to take her back to court. At least she will be easy to find.