A SCHEME BECOMES A DREAM
(OR WILL IT?)
The land by the river was once a big mill.
Marshall Chesron has the option, but he’s only the shill.
They won’t listen to Mary,
Or consider the prairie,
Holy Smoke, Mic, the price is ten Mill!
We’re very upset, our voices are shrill.
Why can’t we vote on this most bitter pill?
Sandi says it’s her “dream”,
We think it’s a scheme;
They just want it to be another “Tubb’s Hill”!
So who will pay for this ten million bill?
Foregone taxes, you and I; Yes we will.
Here’s what we can do,
Vote in leaders anew.
It will be a big thrill when this folly we kill!
Anonymous
May 23, 2008
One of our readers sent this to me with the request that we publish it on this web site if we think it worthy. Yes, it is worthy! This poem is a clever, witty way to express the frustration many taxpayers are feeling about the Ed. Corridor being shoved at them without proper information or honest opportunities for public input. Just last Friday morning, NIC officials, Mic Armon and Priscilla Bell stated for the first time clearly that they would NOT propose a public Advisory vote on the Ed. Corridor.
Comment by mary — June 1, 2008 @ 10:53 am
A SCHEME BECOMES A DREAM
(OR WILL IT?)Anonymous May 23, 2008
Well done!!!
Comment by Damn Yankee — June 1, 2008 @ 10:59 am
You guys just hate everything progressive in this town!
Nope. To address that attitude, I say that the Education Corridor is a great idea, but at a lesser price. Why NIC isn’t negotiating or using imminent domain to take the land is one of the key points in this issue. Dissent is good. We should embrace people who ask questions. When spending the public’s money, due diligence is not only needed, it’s demanded. We just aren’t getting any of that, so the questions will continue. Thanks, Anonymous!
Comment by Dan — June 1, 2008 @ 11:30 am
Dan, how can you say the Ed. Corridor is a great idea, when you don’t know about the traffic studies, the serious safety concerns, costs of constructing buildings in the congested Fort Grounds area,the future tax burdens that will be laden on the citizens of Kootenai County and much more?
The $10 million is just the first step in a huge plan that they are not telling us about. They only want to focus on the 10 million, calling it a modest tax increase. But it’s just a drop in the bucket compared to what the big plan will cost! Buying the Stimson/DeArmond Mill property will commit us all to the long range plan they will not share with us.
Comment by mary — June 1, 2008 @ 12:01 pm
dan is it really a good idea for the government to just take public property? are you proposing that is what should be done? and i understand that some states require that the government body offer to purchase the property before resorting to the use of eminent domain. do you know if idaho requires this?
Comment by reagan — June 1, 2008 @ 12:17 pm
Dan,NIC has already used eminent
domain to expand their campus.Back in the early to mid-90’s the college
declared eminent domain on a homeowner because,they needed to acquire more parking space behind the new Molstead library.From what I recall,this homeowner put up a fight for awhile,but in the end they
got his property.Supposedly,at fair market value?Hey,colleges can do what they want.They have an easier time employing eminent domain.
It seems criminal,that some entity,
like a college can boot you out of your house and give you what THEY consider a fair market price for your home.Doesn’t seem fair.
Comment by kageman — June 1, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
Hey, Kageman, did you realize that LCDC can use eminent domain too? They are an unelected group of people and they have the power of eminent domain. They are also very connected to this Ed. Corridor project.
Comment by mary — June 1, 2008 @ 2:15 pm
My preference is that the mill property be used as a park. That seems to be the goal of most involved with the project. They talk about open space, river access, trails, artwork, and so on. That’s a park to me.
Having it be a park also allows for easy expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. During last week’s City Council meeting, Sid Fredrickson showed the plant’s planned expansion. At its largest size, the plant consumes most of the corridor, including half the Osprey parking lot. Yet, despite this plan in place, not one person on the council said anything about the impact on the Education Corridor. (I find that extremely curious.)
Next to a park, college expansion would be good, but only after we have all the answers regarding impact and build-out. I am not opposed to an education corridor idea. I am opposed to rushing forward like is happening now. But if all the pieces fell into place — including cost per acre comparisons — I would support it.
Comment by Dan — June 1, 2008 @ 2:26 pm
Dan, your remarks seems to indicate you have moderated somewhat on this issue, although I do recall you expressing a preference for parks in the past. How do you feel about only enough of a purchase of land across the street from River Avenue so NIC can have some expansion for its function as a community college without getting involved with the Higher Ed Vision? I know that the Cheswron deal does call for a partial acquisition but I’m telling you now that using property tax money, directly or indirectly, for the purchase of land so Higher Education can build their facilities is probably illegal or should be and could result in some serious repercussions. It’s not like the NIC trustees have not been warned by myself and others recently on this issue. They just refuse to listen.
Comment by Gary Ingram — June 1, 2008 @ 3:42 pm
Mary,I find the prospect of LCDC having the power of eminent domain
scary.The state legislature needs to
revisit URD laws and change some of them.
On a side note,I mentioned a week ago that I was intriqued by Jai Nelson’s candidacy,as I had never heard of her before.Turns out, I went to school with her and sat next to her in 4th grade at the old Sherman grade school.Back then she apparently,was using her middle name,which I thought was her first name.Anyway,alot of locals like what she stands for.
Comment by kageman — June 1, 2008 @ 4:57 pm
The NIC Trustees are way out on a limb. Their arrogance is extreme on this issue. If it didn’t take 18,000 signatures….
Comment by Dan — June 1, 2008 @ 6:44 pm
now i am really confused. dan seems to suggest eminent domain to obtain private property for the expansion of nic, but i don’t know if that would be the right thing to do. now you are suggesting that the mill site should be a park? wouldn’t that also take the property off the property tax rolls?
Comment by reagan — June 1, 2008 @ 6:49 pm
dan, what takes 18,000 signatures?
Comment by reagan — June 1, 2008 @ 6:52 pm
reagan,
I didn’t understand that Dan was suggesting NIC swoop in and use eminent domain (assuming it can do so legally). I thought he was suggesting that NIC should have considered all its options to get the property at the best price. If NIC wanted the property, why did it not make offers or negotiate directly with the owners? Was the NIC Board of Trustees asleep (read: derelict) for years to what they now see as an opportunity for expansion? If so, those clowns need to be replaced before they can do any more damage out of ignorance. Why did they wait for Chesrown to get involved? Why would NIC not consider using eminent domain to condemn the property and pay the mill property owners the fair market value of the property? The mill was going out of business anyway. The real value of that property may well be less than $10M. Until we know the details of the total deal Chesrown made with the owners for all the property he acquired in the deal, we won’t know if $10M is a fair price. Did Chesrown buy that portion of the land as a bundled asset of lesser value? Did he need to buy an inferior piece of land in order to get the land he really wanted? It is near the wastewater plant after all. Think odors, biohazards, chemical hazards, and overflow after failure. Until we know the method used to appraise the property and the appraised valuation (assuming it ever receives honest appraisals from honest appraisers), the dots won’t be connected.
It probably takes about 18,000 signatures to get a recall for one of the NIC trustees on the ballot.
Comment by Bill — June 1, 2008 @ 7:40 pm
Dan, I think the best and most appropriate piece of land for a passive park is the property to the north of the Ospray building and extends to the bridge. At one time it had a boardwalk and small picnic tables with benche. I found it curious that this land was excluded from the recently approved parks master plan.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — June 1, 2008 @ 8:26 pm