My January 10, 2009, post titled “What?” pointed out that the City of Coeur d’Alene plans to spend as much as $100,000 to commission a piece of artwork for the east end of Sherman Avenue.
That project has not yet begun and once again the City plans to spend even more money on “public art.” This time the City wants to spend as much as $20,000 for “4 free-standing sculptures that can serve as bike racks” for Midtown. Yikes!
We will see this growth in public art continue, Bill. I love public art, but what is happening now is a clash of realities; a result of local government not responding to changing needs. The LCDC’s urban renewal districts have a glut of money in their public art fund because they take a percentage of every development dollar within their districts and require it to go to public art which also must stay in their districts.
With the economy down and development at a low level all over the city, the creation of public art projects from the fat fund, stand out in sharp contrast to the tough financial situation of many citizens and of the city budget itself. What did I hear at the last city council meeting?–that the financial auditor said the city’s Fund Balance (“Rainy Day Fund”) is dropping quickly and is a cause for serious concern? Meanwhile, there will be more art!
Comment by mary — April 25, 2009 @ 1:07 pm
I wrote a blog once titled:’Does our local gov’t care that we are in a recession’? Our local gov’t officials
always seem to be moving forward with
their spending ways, regardless of the hard times the ordinary citizens of Kootenai County feels.Many of them
including some LCDC board members are well-off people and probably,dont
feel the economic pinch like some of us.Do our local officials really care
about the struggles of ordinary KC citizens? Or does the end justify the means?
IMO-it’s negligent to raise taxes during a recession and it’s crazy to keep building all the things the city wants during an economic downturn.It was almost negligent to start building the KROC Center when they did and to raid the ‘slush fund’
to get the KROC Center started.
Comment by kageman — April 25, 2009 @ 1:24 pm
But they had to hurry, hurry, hurry, Kageman. That’s why they didn’t have time to ask for public comment on the $3 million for the Kroc Center. Funny, in a sad way, but the hurry-up method of avoiding the public is becoming a national theme. Never waste a good crisis. And maybe, if need be, create the impression of a crisis so as to hurry the decision.
Remember when NIC simply had to get the $10 million right away? Hurry! They didn’t have time to get an appraisal on the mill site. “We don’t want to lose the deal! Chesrown’s got someone else who will pay way more”, I was told by a NIC Trustee. But then they were pushed enough by public sentiment so they finagled an appraisal-of-questionable-sorts. And all this time later, they’re still moving ahead with that outrageously high price, even though the whole market has changed, the seller is in serious financial trouble and the supposed “appraisal” is way out of date.
Comment by mary — April 25, 2009 @ 2:30 pm
I’d like to refresh everyone’s memory on the $10 million: We don’t know what the mill site is worth, or what price Stimson is selling it to Chesrown.
Back in the 1990s, Stimson cited the price of the entire mill operation as $10 million. That was the land and the business. The business is gone. The land was appraised by the county for about $2 million.
Stimson is selling both the Atlas and DeArmond mills. Together. It’s a package deal. Chesrown is buying both of them for an undisclosed price, though the rumor mill has put the price at between $60 to $80 million.
Between the two, the valuable property is the Atlas mill; 80 acres on the good side of the Spokane river. The dog property is the DeArmond mill, which sits next to the Wastewater Treatment Plant.
The $10 million price was set by Chesrown. It’s lower than the questionable Ed Morse appraisal, but way more than the county’s appraisal. Supposedly it’s based on the average per-acre price of both mill sites.
All this is nonsense of course. The true issue is that NIC is proceeding with the purchase in a bull-headed way, ignoring all public input that isn’t favorable. No vote. No accountability to the taxpayer or student.
The sad thing is that expanding NIC isn’t objectionable on the surface. It’s the process NIC is using is objectionable. And the fact that their own documents point to overt commercial development of the “Education Corridor” is offensive.
Welcome to Coeur d’Alene.
Comment by Dan — April 25, 2009 @ 5:08 pm
Remember that the $10 million price tag for the DeArmond Mill site is from well more than a year ago. The real estate market has plummeted since then but there has been no change in the price, nor has NIC indicated they even notice.
Comment by mary — April 25, 2009 @ 5:54 pm
It seems to me the NIC Board of Less-Than-Trustworthies is is putting it to the taxpayers one more way with the method of the DeArmond Mill site purchase. NIC could have put it to a vote of the public. No, they’d lose that hands-down, and that would amount to a (very appropriate) vote of no-confidence in the NIC L-T-Ts and their co-conspirators.
They could petition for judicial confirmation. It’s less risky than a straight up-or-down vote of the people, but it would still require a public hearing, and the NIC L-T-Ts fear that an overwhelming number of Kootenai County taxpayers might show up and upset their gravy train.
So the third way, the way the NIC L-T-Ts apparently intend to go, is lease-purchase. While not strictly legal, it is close enough to legal to have squeaked by in Idaho before. Taxpayers should ask themselves this: If lease-purchase is legal, why are some legislators jumping on the bandwagon behind amending Idaho’s Constitution to legalize that which is supposedly already legal (if you believe those legislators and the NIC L-T-Ts)? The answer to that is the legislators fear a court test would eliminate lease-purchase as the dishonorable option it is. They hope that voters will amend the Constitution before they wake up and before lease-purchase can be challenged in court.
Locally, NIC’s L-T-Ts fear this could be the issue that awakens Kootenai County voters, opens taxpayers’ eyes to the incompetence or worse of the North Idaho College Trustees and Administrators. The NIC L-T-Ts are willing to gamble with Kootenai County tax dollars that we’re not paying attention.
Comment by Bill — April 25, 2009 @ 6:51 pm
Actually, I would have voted “yes” IF the vote were held before the economic collapse AND the purchase price were negotiated to something more in line with its realistic value AND (importantly) if the corridor were truly about expanding the college and not a scheme for developers to get rich at the public trough.
Comment by Dan — April 25, 2009 @ 9:33 pm
that’s an awfully big IF. 😉
Comment by raygun — April 25, 2009 @ 10:22 pm
Ray, if they were truly working hard on the project, selling it the public, then it would have happened by vote a long time ago. They just don’t want to work that hard, I suppose.
Comment by Dan — April 25, 2009 @ 10:25 pm
We all got to see first hand the pamphlet showing sketches of RETAIL, COMMERCIAL and CONDOS of the proposed “EDUCATION CORRIDOR”! (wink wink)
If, and raygun is right, that IS a big if, IF it were truly about education, most would likely vote FOR it with proper appraisal and economic timing.
Comment by concerned citizen — April 26, 2009 @ 8:07 am
It’s much more than just NIC “not working hard to sell it to the public”, Dan. As you say, they didn’t do that work, yet the incredible energy they used to actually keep information away from the public, to circumvent an open vote or even an advisory vote, and to cover up who knows what with a bogus appraisal, is mind-boggling. And even now they push forward, pretending no one will notice their purchase of this highly over-priced mill site while they raise student tuition and cut services.
Comment by mary — April 26, 2009 @ 9:12 am
Mary, I find it not only mind-boggling but also insulting.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — April 26, 2009 @ 7:00 pm
Me too, Susie. It’s as if they consider the citizens to be totally stupid and beyond outrage.
Comment by mary — April 26, 2009 @ 7:30 pm
…and to cover up who knows what with a bogus appraisal, –mary
so you are accusing the nic trustees (and others) of conspiracy and fraud?
Comment by raygun — April 26, 2009 @ 7:56 pm
mary? mary?
Comment by raygun — April 27, 2009 @ 4:03 pm
Of course not. I’m accusing them of using a now out-of-date appraisal that was done by a person with close business ties to one of the Trustees, who also admitted in his report that he was not experienced in appraising contaminated properties…and he also failed to factor in the wastewater treatment plant next door! The real estate market has changed, hasn’t it ray-gun? We all know values have dropped dramatically, yet our tax dollars are still being pledged for the full $10 million dollar price tag from a couple years ago.
So, I guess what I’m really accusing them of is irresponsibility.
Comment by mary — April 27, 2009 @ 4:54 pm
thanks for the response. when i saw you write “bogus appraisal” and “cover up who knows what” it sure sounded like you were charging the Trustees with a couple of felonies! sometimes it is hard to seperate the facts from the innuendo.
Comment by raygun — April 27, 2009 @ 5:56 pm