Exemplary Citizens of Our Community

March 27, 2009

Exemplary Citizens of Our Community

Filed under: Probable Cause — Bill @ 12:51 pm

Please recognize and thank three exemplary citizens from our community: Sharon Culbreth, Kathy Sims, and Dan Gookin. On March 18, 2009, all three testified in Boise before the House Revenue & Taxation Committee to express their individual opinions on House Bill 244 sponsored by Representative Phil Hart. The significance of their action is not just in their willingness to testify but in their commitment to our community to travel to Boise on their own time and their own dime.

Look at the minutes of the March 18 meeting. Note that Sharon Culbreth, Kathy Sims, and Dan Gookin were the only three private citizens testifying on that bill. All others were paid government employees and paid lobbyists, and none of them were from northern Idaho. It’s inspiring that Sharon, Kathy, and Dan chose to personally exercise their citizenship rather than hire it out.

Comments (14)

14 Comments

I send my thanks to Ms. Culbreth, Ms. Sims and Mr. Gookin. How did George Sayler weigh in on the proposed changes to the Revenue Allocation Areas?

Comment by doubleseetripleeye — March 27, 2009 @ 3:59 pm
Here is what I said to the committee:

Thank you, chairman Lake and members of the committee. I am Dan Gookin, citizen of Coeur d’Alene and activist for open, transparent government and I stand in support of this bill.

I started my public mission over 3 years ago, investigating the Coeur d’Alene urban renewal agency, the Lake City Development Corporation, LCDC.

Whether the intentions are good or not, the bottom line with urban renewal is money. Specifically, it’s property tax dollars. That money is the only property tax revenue in Idaho that is spent by an unelected board, not directly accountable to the public. While the intent of the Urban Renewal law is to fight blight and promote economic development, the legislation as it is currently written opens the door to questionable practices and overt abuse.

One issue is oversight. While I’m certain that many urban renewal agencies in Idaho operate under adequate supervision, and according to a well-defined plan, and they practice transparency, there is room in the law to accommodate an insider’s advantage. Put simply, the existence of all that urban renewal money is tempting to a body that can spend it freely and without input from the public. If the URA and its oversight body, the City Council, are in full agreement they can defy public accountability to do what they wish with the people’s money and lawfully ignore the public’s input and concern.

It is my hope that this legislation seeks to bolster the level of accountability and oversight to the process. The bottom line is transparency and openness, which is all I’m asking for. I urge members of this committee to approve this legislation with a do-pass recommendation to the house.

I will now stand for any questions.

Comment by Dan — March 27, 2009 @ 4:04 pm
Dan, your comments are excellent and should be sent to all the newspapers in the state! Thank you for standing up for the taxpayers with such clear and forthright principles. Great job.

Comment by mary — March 27, 2009 @ 4:20 pm
dan, what questions did the committee members ask?

Comment by reagan — March 27, 2009 @ 4:23 pm
reagan, I wish I could remember! I was pretty nervous.

Comment by Dan — March 27, 2009 @ 8:48 pm
reagan,

Assuming you’re in Idaho, you might contact your state representative and ask if the Rev&Tax committee meetings are recorded. If they are, you should be able to get a copy of the recording of the public meeting where they testified. Even if a recording is only made to help the secretary compose the minutes, it is still a public record.

Comment by Bill — March 28, 2009 @ 6:47 am
Thank you Sharon, Kathy and Dan.

Comment by citizen — March 28, 2009 @ 7:39 am
thanks bill, good suggestion.

Comment by reagan — March 28, 2009 @ 10:45 am
thank you to all who help keep government at every level honest, small and innofensive.

Comment by TheWiz — March 29, 2009 @ 10:55 am
Dan, are you going to get a recording of the committee and put it up here? I’d be interested to hear it, and last I knew the Idaho Legislature is pretty behind the times and doesn’t have recordings of its committee meetings or floor debate/votes online. We’re spoiled over here with TVW.org.

Comment by samtaylor — March 29, 2009 @ 11:38 am
Sam, I tried to record the whole thing. The page came over, however, and told me to turn off the video camera. 🙁 Turns out there is a “house rule” against videotaping any of the proceedings. So much for transparency and openness! Otherwise, all I know of is the recorded meeting minutes. I’ll have to ask one of the legislators why they have such a rule.

Comment by Dan — March 29, 2009 @ 6:16 pm
Yeah, there’s a big difference between Washington and Idaho in that regard. Idaho won’t even let you film their Legislature. Here, they specifically fund an entire news network you can watch at home or online. It consists of coverage of their committee, the floor, even press conferences, bill signings, public affairs reporting and discussion shows (full disclosure: I participate in one).

I’m not sure why Idaho doesn’t do that. Most Legislatures do. Actually, I don’t know of another that is like Idaho, to be honest.

Comment by samtaylor — March 29, 2009 @ 10:05 pm
Sadly, I could make an educated guess.

Comment by Faringdon — March 30, 2009 @ 9:37 am
Sam, check out this site:

http://www.idahoptv.org/leglive/

The only committee it shows is JFAC, but the House and Senate are streamed live.

I watched the HB244 debate live last week. It was cool being able to see it, although law-making and sausage-making have a common component: after you see it up close you’re not sure you can stomach the result. 🙂

Comment by JohnA — March 30, 2009 @ 11:37 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.