The Idaho Statesman is reporting, “On Feb. 14, the Eagle City Council voted to terminate the volunteer seven-member urban renewal board and appoint itself as the replacement board to make the tax-collecting agency more accountable and transparent.”
Once installed, the replacement board looked at how much the urban renewal district’s attorney was charging the district to protect the ousted urban renewal agency members from being replaced by the city council. According to bills received from Elam & Burke, attorney Ryan Armbruster billed the URD approximately $17,000 in his failed attempt to keep the volunteer URA members in their jobs.
One wonders why it would be so important for volunteer URA commissioners to keep those volunteer jobs that supposedly are uncompensated.
Someone a whole lot smarter than me should look at the environmental impacts of these plans from the eyes of the DEQ and the EPA. Everything from current traffic to future traffic impacts, degradation of the flora and fauna, storm water runoff and ground water mediation insofar as it impacts the lake and “Washington’s” clean water restrictions on Idaho in the Spokane River, nighttime light pollution at McKuen and the “equal or better” Cherry Hill ball”Stadium”,impact of the hardscape within the pan,sunshine/shadow easements, noise pollution from the increases in the activities suggested for McKuen etc,etc,etc. Much analysis should be done to baseline what is actually occurring now and what effects the proposed changes will cause.
This should keep the paperwork flowing until the 2013 election. They could be enjoined from moving for the next 18 months.
Comment by Ancientemplar — March 27, 2012 @ 7:31 am
JohnA seems to be saying here that the LCDC has committed all of its current and future funds, so closing it down would be pointless. If that’s the case, John, why does LCDC continue to meet? Why not have them all resign, to stop wasting their time if everything’s a done deal? Why continue to pay Tony Berns $120k plus his golden benefits and retirement package? I’m sure the City Treasurer could track the money flow and allocate the funds, since it’s all prearranged now.
Comment by mary — March 27, 2012 @ 12:59 pm
Mary,
That seems to be the logical conclusion that a reasonable person, or even just me, might come to based on what John Austin has posted. My review of the financials is that he paints a picture that is only partially complete. His apparent assumptions of the future may simply be not warranted.
Comment by justinian — March 27, 2012 @ 2:11 pm
My concern is debts that can not be retired at the end of the urban renewal life. Did I read somewhere that a urban renewal district time can be extended?
Comment by LTR — March 27, 2012 @ 2:14 pm
Mary. Don’t forget they will create
some more blight
Somewhere.
Comment by Ancientemplar — March 27, 2012 @ 2:19 pm
The city council , as overseers (alter egos)of the LCDC would know if the Team McKuen/LCDC has filed the necessary environmental impact reports
for the McKuen and Cherry Hill projects, Right?….Dan, Steve Ron.?
Comment by Ancientemplar — March 27, 2012 @ 4:25 pm
Ancientemplar – Unless things have changed, I don’t think that environmental impact reports are required for projects in the city. Stone’s representatives used the brownfield excuse for the pond although I have yet to see substantiation of that claim.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — March 27, 2012 @ 6:32 pm
Also, I think that the next blighted lcdc area will be the former Atlas mill site.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — March 27, 2012 @ 6:34 pm
Thanks, Susie, I’m just grabbing for straws.
Comment by Ancientemplar — March 28, 2012 @ 7:57 am
Mary, if you read the financials you’ll see there are many contracts to manage at LCDC, as well as refinancings when lower interest rates warrant them. I think the Board with Tony’s management has done a good job of keeping costs down, both in financing projects and admnistrating the agency.
Plus this discussion has involved just the Lake District. The River District has many more years to run and many more projects eligible for funding.
The bottom line is that the LCDC Board has a lot left to be done, including possibly creating new districts as the need arises.
Meanwhile, Just, the future revenue projections for the agency were calculated by Northwest Securities, which were the basis by which LCDC acquired the $16 million in future bonding. That is clearly listed in the audit report. All I’ve done is help to interpret what it means, from my viewpoint as an urban renewal adminstrator.
Comment by John Austin — March 28, 2012 @ 10:40 am
This from John A. #106 “Plus this discussion has involved just the Lake District. The River District has many more years to run and many more projects eligible for funding.
The bottom line is that the LCDC Board has a lot left to be done, including possibly creating new districts as the need arises.”
This from Susie S.#”Also, I think that the next blighted lcdc area will be the former Atlas mill site.”
I said, #101 “Mary. Don’t forget they will create some more blight.Somewhere.”
Mary, they are pretty easy to read.I think the public has to stop the bleeding. Ol’ Johnny is telling us what’s on the agenda and Susie is pretty good a reading between the lines.
Comment by Ancientemplar — March 28, 2012 @ 11:00 am
Susie is right that the Atlas mill site fits the description as being deteriorated. I’m not sure, however, if anything can be done to make it very usable again because of the measure of deterioration. It might be best to simply cap the site and make it a greenspace like the EPA has routinely done in the Silver Valley.
Comment by John Austin — March 28, 2012 @ 2:29 pm
Maybe the powers to be at the LCDC (given who and what they are) should be the the “chain of title”.
Comment by Ancientemplar — March 28, 2012 @ 3:12 pm