The gloves are off in the fight over the Education Corridor.
In today’s CdA Press, the City of Post Falls writes a serious letter regarding their concerns for Commercial Development on Northwest Boulevard Underwritten by Education Dollars, which is called the Education Corridor (EC) by Mayor Bloem and the NIC Trustees. No punches were pulled.
The unquestioning partisan supporters of the EC will no doubtlessly claim that Post Falls just wants NIC to selfishly relocate on the prairie or in the outlet mall. I find that suggestion odd, but it opens the door on how the EC supporters think. I find it revealing.
Those who support the EC in its current proposed form do not like open, public discussion. Though they’ve held “public forums,” it’s now obvious that they were merely theatrical presentations. The deal is done. Agreements have already been signed and put in place. Any discussion by NIC Trustees in those forums regarding public input was misleading. They knew the deal was done, yet the Trustees lacked the candor to tell the public that the decisions were already made. This was especially galling to State Respresentative Frank Henderson.
Mr. Henderson asked the Trustees if they could set aside 10% of the EC purchase price for Professional Technical Education. Trustee Mic Armon replied that they would consider it at the next board meeting. Not only was the proposal not mentioned at the next meeting, Mr. Armon knew that no such set aside could take place. That’s because the agreement he signed with the NIC Foundation weeks earlier prohibited it. Yet Mr. Armon lacked the courtesy to tell Mr. Henderson the truth.
That’s just one small example of the lack of respect for the public demonstrated by the NIC Trustees, which goes to prove my point: The public is not part of this process, and the EC proponents like it that way. I find that disturbing.
If the EC were solely about education, then the location would be neither here nor there (literally!). But we all know that the EC is not about education; it’s about development.
Sure, the development of a Post Falls Education Corridor might have the same commercial interests attached. My guess, however, is that such development would not be as lucrative for those same developers.
Though we don’t know who the developers are yet, I’d bet that they are just too well-connected and too familiar with the inside connections of Coeur d’Alene for them to turn the same profit with a Post Falls EC. So for the insiders to spin education into gold (their own gold), the EC development must happen in Coeur d’Alene.
Bottom line: The Education Corridor purchase will happen. It’s a done deal. Its build-out, however, won’t happen soon because of the economic downturn. So the land will sit empty. That’s okay by me for now: I favor public ownership of that property. All of that property. I would have put it to a vote of the people, but I do believe it’s in the public’s interest to own the land.
Hopefully, in the future, we can bring accountability to the public back to elected positions at NIC and in Coeur d’Alene City Hall. Then, as a community, we can work together toward a future where the public is involved, where transactions involving taxpayer dollars are transparent, and where the property that is now called the Education Corridor can be put to the best possible use for everyone — including Post Falls.
Great job, Dan. I agree that if the Ed Corridor was solely about education we would not be seeing the hiding of information, the clouding of the issue, the “pretend” public forums that are only for show. If this was really all about education, the board would be trying to get the best deal for our tax dollars. They are not.
Mayor Bloem and NIC President Bell spoke at Rotary this past Friday. A totally one-sided, unbalanced presentation…again. A person sitting near me leaned over and whispered, “Did they just say that they will spend $10 million for 18 acres in CdA while they have an option on 40 acres out on the prairie for $1 million?” “Yes”, I replied.
Comment by mary — December 14, 2008 @ 10:11 am
Mary,
Is this the first time Bloem and Bell have spoken at Rotary about the commercial corridor? If not, how many other times have they spoken on this topic either individually or together?
Has Rotary invited people with differing views to speak? Who spoke? How often?
Comment by Bill — December 14, 2008 @ 11:27 am
Dan,
The role of the NIC Foundation in this should not be overlooked, either. Foundation members are active participants, not innocent bystanders.
Comment by Bill — December 14, 2008 @ 11:48 am
Very astute questions, Bill. I think one of them may have spoken about it before, but I’m not sure…if so, it was a long time ago and was before any of the details were public (if you can really say the public has true details now, which I doubt).
Rotary is supposed to be non-political, or at least politically neutral. In the past, they have made big errors in this regard: They allowed Dixie Reid to speak four days before the last city council election. Her speech was supposed to be a review of her career as she retired but turned very political and was quite inappropriate. The club president was embarrassed and apologized to the whole club,promising political issues would not be allowed in the future. Months later, Harry Amend spoke right before the last school levy…again a one-sided presentation. Club members complained and were assured this would not happen again.
Now this. Totally unbalanced, one-sided, politically charged and biased. Let’s see what happens this week.
Comment by mary — December 14, 2008 @ 11:51 am
three good reads in the local paper
http://www.cdapress.com/articles/2008/12/10/editorials/letters/letter10.txt
http://www.cdapress.com/articles/2008/12/14/business/bus01.txt
http://www.cdapress.com/articles/2008/12/14/editorials/letters/letter09.txt
Comment by TheWiz — December 14, 2008 @ 12:20 pm
ron nilson asks “Do we have a right to vote on a project of this magnitude? If not, why not?”
a great question ron. no we have no right to vote on a project this size. why not? because the system is set up to allow inside connections to work well. it has ever been so and very likely ever will be so. why?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Comment by TheWiz — December 14, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
why is it that so many opponents are from post falls? keck, nilson, henderson and nonini? curious, no?
Comment by reagan — December 15, 2008 @ 9:14 am
Simple answer: Business owners in Coeur d’Alene are intimidated not to cross swords with the powers that be. You must be new in town.
Comment by Dan — December 15, 2008 @ 9:34 am
The Post Falls argument is bogus. The land for the PTE high school and the 40 acres NIC holds are in the Rathdrum area, PF. And it doesn’t matter anyway, it’s about what is best for 2 groups of people: the taxpayers of Kootenai County who pay the bill, and the students who need the highest quality education possible for their tuition dollars.
You’re right, Dan, people from CdA can’t speak out without a huge backlash.
Comment by mary — December 15, 2008 @ 12:24 pm
Maybe you want to clarify what you mean by this, Mary?
Comment by Dan — December 15, 2008 @ 6:08 pm
I mean that supporters of the CdA location are starting to worry. They can’t answer important questions about the price, access, future space requirements and the plans to make 1/3 the site commercial. So instead, they attack anyone suggesting an alternative location might be better, cheaper and more sustainable in the future. Their attack point is that critics want Post Falls to get the tax base for having the college expansion. They accused me of this, they’ve accused others as well. Their argument is empty because I have no dog in this fight. I don’t care where the expansion takes place, I just want the best use of taxpayer dollars and the best quality education possible for the students. The CdA location does not meet those needs. Ron Nilson works in Post Falls and lives in CdA–how does that make him biased one way or the other? It doesn’t; it’s bogus. Mayor Larkin of Post Falls and his city adminstrator, Eric Keck, who wrote that strong letter to NIC, both support the Rathdrum location for the PTE high school and any expansion NIC creates out there.
These attacks are just to distract from the many, many weaknesses of the Fort Grounds location for the expansion of higher ed. in Kootenai County.
Is that better, Dan?
Comment by mary — December 15, 2008 @ 8:46 pm
bitter, not better. ;(
Comment by reagan — December 15, 2008 @ 10:56 pm
poor bitter raygone. so sad.
Comment by TheWiz — December 16, 2008 @ 5:54 am
Dan, I appreciate your call for clarification and am always happy to explain my comments. 🙂
And, again, “reagan” tries to distract from the issue by using personal words rather than discuss the actual subject.
Comment by mary — December 16, 2008 @ 7:46 am