Mayor Dave Bieter has a shopping list of items for the council to consider. Most of them probably make sense, but there are some red flags popping up as bright as Rudolph the reindeer’s nose.

In an item entitled “BONDED DEBT ADJUSTMENT”, he seeks to spend $15,000 for an election of private INVESTORS who own two of Boise’s fire stations. Team Dave would be better served asking the voters of Boise for permission to BUY the stations which the previous administration illegally purchased without voter approval. There is no bonded debt according to court records provided by the City–they say it is a LEASE.

The Idaho Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that voter approval MUST be obtained with a two-thirds majority for long term debt. The GUARDIAN is concerned because the slip shod financing methods employed by the City always tend to go around the voters.

It makes good economic sense to own the stations and not be forced to pay $60,000 a year in property taxes. However it is up to the citizens of Boise to make the decision–not the holders of “certificates of participation” (bonds) which were illegally issued. Our interest is one of precedent to prevent such illegal shenanigans in the future.

If the City wishes to to pay cash (buy out the leases) for the illegally financed stations they would be within the law. However, to take title to the leased property and CONTINUE long term debt would certainly constitute a purchase without voter approval. It is prohibited by the Idaho Constitution.

Councilors need to be aware the proposal is a cover up of past council’s sins and will do nothing but add to the record of defeats for the legal department.

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.

Current Commishes Judy Peavey-Derr, Rick Yzaguirre, and Fred Tilman have been charged by the Idaho Attorney General with violating the open meeting law when they met in a secret session with Boise Councilor Vern Bisterfeldt and discussed matters which should have been open to the public.

Steve Kimball beat Peavey-Derr in the Republican primary and suggested the commishes pay the fines and stop wasting county money. “I’ll pay the darned fines just to get it over with,” he declared.

Paul Woods is running against Kimball as a Dem and he too said he would cut off any further spending for the defense attorney. Independent Sharon Ullman has long declared she would halt any further legal fees to defend the Commishes. Ullman, Kimball, and Woods are all after the seat being vacated by Peavey-Derr.

Al Ames is running against incumbent Fred Tilman and is highly critical of the $30,000 tab that has been run up so far. “I will definitely not authorize any more funds for that case,” said Ames.

Incumbent Tilman has publicly stated there is a need for “clarification of the law” and has defended the spending for his defense.

CLARIFICATION: The outside attorney has said he would not charge to defend the appeal that has been filed, but citizens are still paying for the attorney general staff to prosecute the civil case which has a maximum fine of $150 for each offense.

Keep The Commandments Coalition gathered more than 10,000 petition signatures demanding that city councilors put the question of keeping or removing a monument with the commandments before the voters. The council removed the monument and refused to honor the will of the petitioners–or the voters, calling their action “administrative” and not legislative.

The Supremes disagreed and reversed the judgement of Fourth District Judge Ronald J. Wilper. Only Jusitce Linda Copple Trout dissented. In a nutshell, the court said the petition process is legal, the group had enough signatures, and the people have the right to decide the issue.

Only after the voters APPROVE the issue would it be “ripe” for review by the court, but they refused to interrupt the initiative process. If the voters deny placement of the tablet, it is a dead issue. The legal question is NOT about the commandments– it is about allowing citizens the right to petition and vote.

This action is typical of a pattern established in recent years by local governments in general and Boise City in particular. The city attempts to find reasons to subvert the will of the people by using “judicial confirmation” for long term debt and lost two cases to the GUARDIAN editor who only wants the people to have a voice–regardless of the issue. It looks like the Supremes agree with the people more often than local governments of late.

Justice Gerald Shroeder authored the opinion which said in part, “The initiative process is a mandate, significant enough to be embodied in the Idaho Constitution, that enables voters to address issues of concern. Sometimes it compels authorities to listen when nothing else will….Just as the Court would not interrupt the legislature in the consideration of a bill prior to enactment, the Court will not interrupt the consideration of a properly qualified initiative. The petition qualifies for the ballot for consideration by the voters.”

For the record, we believe the Boise Council was probably correct in removing the biblical tablet from a city park, but they were totally out of line denying the measure to be placed on the ballot. This self serving legal advice is proving costly to taxpayers who have to foot the bills.

Idaho’s Supreme court Friday denied motions filed by three special interest groups attempting to create a loophole allowing local governments to enter into long term debt without a vote of citizens.

Three associations representing most of Idaho’s cities, counties, and school boards filed briefs recently asking the court to modify the language in an April 13th decision denying Boise City’s attempt to build a parking garage at the airport without a vote of citizens.

David R. Frazier challenged Boise City’s attempt to use a legal maneuver known as “Judicial Confirmation” to build a new $27,000,000 parking structure instead of asking for permission from voters. The city said the construction was an “ordinary and necessary” expense. The tactic has been used by local governments statewide to go around voter approval of long term debt.

The Supreme Court issued an opinion which agreed with FRAZIER contention that a vote–a bond election–was needed. The court said a parking garage may be “ordinary,” but “necessary” would have to be something urgent involving public safety or an emergency that could not wait for an election.

None of the associations was a party to the legal proceedings and each sought to appear as a “friend of the court” to espouse their special interest. Friday the court said the matter was settled April 13th and the decision will stand with the language unchanged.

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 AG got the case because the Ada prosecutor had an obvious conflict of interest prosecuting the officials he also represents in legal matters. None of the local judges would take the case, hence Woodland was assigned.

The case has gone beyond common sense and raised the ire of GUARDIAN readers and county citizens in general. Simply put the commishes had a CLOSED DOOR meeting with Boise City Councilor Vern Bisterfeldt. According to his Bisterfeldt’s sworn statements and the findings of the court, matters not subject to “executive sessions” were discussed.

The judge agreed with the AG assertions that meetings closed to discuss “litigation or possible litigation” needed to have an attorney present and more substance than speculation by the elected officials closing the meeting to public scrutiny.

State law provides for civil fines up to $150 for each violation. The GUARDIAN suggested nearly a year ago the commishes admit they screwed up and make a donation to charity as penance…it would be hard to prosecute if they said, “We made a mistake. SORRY.”

Instead they hired a private attorney and paid him nearly $18,000 in taxpayer money to defend them. The guy lost the case for them and we hear he is now going to handle the appeal “pro bono” (free to you non-library types).

At least one commish claims the reason for keeping the battle alive is to “clarify the law.” Perhaps it is easy to argue PRINCIPLE if you don’t have to pay the PRINCIPAL. If they want clarification, how about supporting new legislation that will make the rules abundantly clear?

We figure the upcoming county election campaign will have some “clarifications” from voters.

The GUARDIAN raised the red flag question when an item appeared on the County Commish agenda along with a resolution that appeared rather broad in its scope.

Attorney Ted Argyle lamented the lack of record storage space and the “furor” raised by the GUARDIAN posting–which merely raised the question that only appropriate documents get dumped.

Looks like a New Year’s resolution to clean house in the records room is in order. Green light.

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.