Here’s a touch of the tropics when we might need one as the snow starts to fly.
I’m not thrilled about several things going on around town. What are your thoughts about NIC paying off the “lease” (purchase) on their backdoor deal to buy the Mill site without a vote of the public?
What about the LCDC getting into the business of subsidizing residential houses for middle class families?
Any other issues, concerns or ideas?
I was just watching the evening news and the story of Dave Talley came on. He is a homeless man in Tempe AZ that found $3000 that did not belong to him and he gave it back to its rightful owner.
This man with nothing did something elected and appointed officials could NEVER do.
KUDOS Dave Talley Tempe AZ
Comment by concerned citizen — November 19, 2010 @ 7:20 pm
Sound on? Good, cuz It’s Aloha Friday.
Comment by Bill — November 19, 2010 @ 8:33 pm
concerned citizen,
I saw the Talley story, too. Two things struck me: First, he’s homeless but he has more honor and integrity than many multimillionaires. Second, his actions influenced the kid who got his computer and money back to volunteer to help the homeless. Sometimes we need to be reminded that good people are not defined by their social or economic prominence or by the amount of public acclaim they seek and receive as much as by the strength of their character.
Comment by Bill — November 19, 2010 @ 8:42 pm
HMMMMMM, I thought the only good people were the ones on the front page of the Press that give 10’s and 100’s of thousands of dollars.
🙂
Comment by concerned citizen — November 20, 2010 @ 7:04 am
Hey, Bill, that’s a cute link!
Comment by mary — November 20, 2010 @ 8:15 am
Let us discuss the item in Thursday’s Press regarding LCDC funding private homes and Mr. Berns additional compensation. We might include Lori Eisenberg’s My Turn column in today’s Press justifying the funding.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — November 20, 2010 @ 8:36 am
I don’t believe that the LCDC can “give” money, even to a non-profit, and have that non-profit spend the money outside the district. When the LCDC orchestrated a $2.5M shell game to the Centennial Trail Foundation, it was for land outside the district that, Mike Gridley promised me, would be transferred inside the district once the RR abandoned property.
Comment by Dan — November 20, 2010 @ 9:14 am
Susie, I added the links to those articles so folks can just click and read.
I know Lori Eisenburg probably wants to keep her job, so she’s justifying LCDC’s method of taking taxpayer money (without a public vote) and giving it to reduce the cost of housing for certain people. This is REDISTRIBUTION of people’s money, against their will.
What about the little old lady, living on a fixed income, who has to pay higher taxes because of LCDC, and her taxes are then given to a “working family” to subsidize their purchase of a more expensive house than they can afford? It’s socialism! EVERY single taxpayer in Kootenai County pays more in property taxes because of LCDC!
Want proof? Go to the NEW urban renewal info page made by the Kootenai County Assessor. It’s easy to read and has great graphs and visuals.
Comment by mary — November 20, 2010 @ 9:27 am
Their goal is to tax the little old lady out of her house so they can steal that one too.
It’s interesting how we (the LCDC) can donate to these private foundations and then how they can work to make more money on behalf of our tax dollars for the community like the Kroc Center and now private homes.
Lori mentions that the homes are between $120,000 – $180,000 and the buyer picks up the taxes as well that will continue to tax them out. That is not affordable housing. “It would target families who earn up to 120 percent of the median income, or $68,400 a year, by buying deteriorating homes and refurbishing them before selling them as workforce housing.” Why were they at that stage in the first place? Are they old crack houses?
Give me a break. These are homes for professionals that need the mortgage write off along with the kids. That is how they will be able to afford these homes built on our tax dollars so they can still live day to day along with the new cars and boats. With an unemployment rate over 10% where are these jobs in the area that earn that kind of money?
That median income can afford a $150,000 to $180,000 home, but not a $200,000 one.
“There’s a gap there,” said Lori Isenberg …
Please, I am going to choke on that $20,000 dollar “gap.” Boo, hoo .. Well, it’s nice to know that my mobile home tax is going to community endeavors that will help out those poor working families – I mean investors. Just another Kroc!
Comment by Stebbijo — November 20, 2010 @ 10:16 am
Where, Stebbijo, does the Constitution say we all have a RIGHT to home ownership and that the government must help us pay for it? Of course, it’s nowhere to be found on our list of rights. We have the right to PURSUE our goals. Let these people rent a home or apartment until they can afford to buy on their own terms.
Over on the Press blog, someone commented, correctly, that the LCDC should close down, which would lower taxes for everyone and allow the working families to get closer to home ownership on their own!
As Reagan said, the scariest words are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”
Comment by mary — November 20, 2010 @ 10:44 am
I posted this as a response to the absurd idea presented to the LCDC.
This is a bunch of liberal LCDC hyperbole. The assumption is that the downtown “…..Coeur d’Alene continues to improve and become a wonderful and unique place to live, the neighborhoods will become too expensive…” . Secondly the holder doesn’t earn any interest on the value of the 2nd mortgage and thirdly the assumption is that real estate prices will increase during the term of the loan.
This is the same type of thinking that has caused the real estate bust in the U.S., easy money and over supply.Sorry Lori this is just a give away of the Tax dollars paid by the property owners in Kootenai County.
When will they learn?
Comment by Ancientemplar — November 20, 2010 @ 11:32 am
Cool hat Dan!! 🙂
Reading the paper this week has been a head shaking event. Where to start. Using tax payers money (that basically is stolen) to help someone purchase a house they can’t afford. And what happens when the mortgage payment can’t be met? And, lest we overlook, the NIC board deciding to pay off the 4 plus million for the swamp ahead of time because, whoop de do, suddenly they have more money than expected. The hubris of the timing is a corker…just weeks after the election. You mean to tell me, they didn’t know they had that money before the election. Riiiiight!
And why does this continue to happen year after year? Easy answer. Because not enough voters pay attention, let alone vote intelligently. Because too many of the voters who do vote have the IQ of an inch worm. Knuckle dragging Idy-ho trogledytes. An example for those who would say I’m too harsh in my description. There was a letter to the editor this week from an apparently nice lady who very politely suggested that Jim Brannon not go forward with the appeal To accept defeat graciously. She clearly doesn’t get it. Hadn’t any idea that the suit is really about honest elections. How do you deal with something that? A head full of rocks.
Comment by rochereau — November 20, 2010 @ 11:58 am
I wonder if the Idaho Constitution, Article VIII, Section 4, applies to LCDC? But even if it did, our public officials would ignore it, too. Too inconvenient, don’t you know?
Comment by Bill — November 20, 2010 @ 12:09 pm
How about this one – I think it applies to many of us who work hard and don’t ask for any government assistance who are in the “suck hole” paying taxes for crap that doesn’t benefit us. I wish the legislature would include women. They amend everything else.
Section 1.Inalienable rights of man. All men are by nature free and equal, and have certain inalienable rights, among which are enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property; pursuing happiness and securing safety.
I get sick of government screwing with my happiness factor. I don’t need or want any government handouts. I have been doing it for years without their help. Unfortunately, there are many people who think of government as their savior and protector and don’t care about their own liberty.
Comment by Stebbijo — November 20, 2010 @ 12:21 pm
That law is pretty darn clear, Bill, so of course it will be ignored!
Rochereau, good points. I’ve heard rumor that the NIC board was quick to the payoff because they feared Ron Nilson and Robert Ketchum would be elected to their panel and might check up on them. I’m so sad that didn’t happen!
Also, on the Jim Brannon appeal: It’s good for all of us that Jim and Starr have the cojones to continue. You’re right, this is not about a city council seat, it’s about ELECTION INTEGRITY!
Comment by mary — November 20, 2010 @ 12:30 pm
I see Dave Price made it home and Bozeman, MT decided to care about people without coats. Even homeless people care. People in CDA only care about their elitist image. CDA is out to help those poor people who make 60K plus so they can afford that home for 180K. I will never forget – about 5 years ago when my husband and I were barely making it and I went to the laundry mat (we didn’t have a washing machine at the time) to wash my coat and then I went back to get it and someone had taken it. Things were so bad anyway – then someone takes my frigging coat – in the winter! The state tax commission had taken 100 per cent of my husband’s check – a mistake we had to fight and was very ugly to get through. We were dirt poor but they were breeding HOMELESS. If you have never been there – I hope you never get there. Bad things happen to GOOD people. Good thing Price was a national news story or he would be in a cardboard box without gloves – homeless in CDA.
Comment by Stebbijo — November 20, 2010 @ 2:46 pm
Bill, thanks for adding the links. Let’s see…my Social Security has been frozen for a couple of years, my health insurance premiums go up and up, my homeowner’s insurance and auto insurance both increased and the cost of living in the city has increased. Need I add that I am concerned about the tax bill? Now I read LCDC is considering giving tax dollars for housing for people who cannot qualify for the house they desire. It is not my responsibility to subsidize someone’s home ownership through tax funding in perpetuity. Isn’t this the local equivalent of subprime lending? If they have that much money, why not refund it to the taxing agencies for disbursal to each property owner? As an aside, who benefits from this sweet little notion?
I would like to thank Steve Bell for his efforts to gather blankets for the homeless. For those of you who don’t know Steve, he is the man who led the fight to save the boat launch at Mc Euen Field a number of years ago.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — November 20, 2010 @ 4:20 pm
Re: Lori Eisenberg – When you think like a socialist there is no limit on what the imagination can bring forward to spend the taxpayers money. (Shaking my head with disgust!)
Comment by Gary Ingram — November 20, 2010 @ 5:15 pm
Mary, I too cannot believe the people that would rather keep paying millions of dollars in taxes over the next ????????? years to keep lining the CdA elites pockets instead of this ONE TIME small investment into legal, ethical and moral elections as promised by our constitution.
Comment by concerned citizen — November 20, 2010 @ 5:21 pm
Exactly, Susie. Why should citizens, many of whom are barely keeping their noses above water, be forced to subsidize home ownership for anyone else? (by the way, I’m the one who linked up the articles for you, not to brag. My technical skills are getting better because Bill and Dan have been teaching me.)
Gary, it reminds me of Margaret Thatcher’s famous quote, “Socialism is great until you run out of other people’s money!”
Concerned Citizen, You hit the nail on the head. Let’s make sure our elections are clean, honest and accurate. That’s a priority that jumps straight to the top of the list.
Comment by mary — November 20, 2010 @ 6:09 pm
So what about the City paying for Mike Kennedy’s legal fees? I heard that ICRIMP, the state employees’ insurance company, might cover Kennedy’s legal fees. Anyone else hear that?
Two interesting angles on this: 1. Mike K. was named in the lawsuit as a candidate, not a city employee. It was required by law that the winning candidate be named. It had to be whatever person was running. So how could the public employees’ insurance cover Kennedy’s costs when he was not named as a city employee? 2. The attorney who represents ICRIMP is Peter Erbland. He’s also one of Kennedy’s attorneys from the election trial…oops, how is that not some kind of conflict? Erbland sends his invoice to Kennedy then Erbland decides his bill should be paid by ICRIMP?
Remember that Kennedy did not have to have any attorneys. He chose to have not just one, but two. He didn’t have to actively participate in the lawsuit, it’s just required by law that he be named. That’s it. No one ever accused him of any wrongdoing so he did not have to defend himself.
Comment by mary — November 20, 2010 @ 6:17 pm
Mary, The answer is simple. Mike Kennedy knows its not HIS money that will be paying for it.
Comment by concerned citizen — November 20, 2010 @ 6:25 pm
Mary and concerned citizen,
Whimpering Mikey was named in the lawsuit because Idaho Code 34-2008 explicitly required that the incumbent be named in the complaint in an election contest lawsuit. Whimpering Mikey can blame the legislators, no one else, for it. Further, Idaho Code 34-2002 defines “incumbent” as “the person whom the canvassers declare elected.” And who were the canvassers? None other than the Mayor and City Council, which included City Councilwhimperer Mikey Kennedy voting to accept the canvass.
The judges, Benjamin Simpson and Charles Hosack, could have dismissed Kennedy from the complaint naming him, but they didn’t. Maybe Whimpering Mikey should ask them to pay his attorneys?
Mary, you are absolutely correct. Kennedy hired attorneys unnecessarily and on his own volition. He could offer no remedy and had no liability to do so.
Whimpering Mikey had hired Erbland before the lawsuit was even filed, at least according to the December 1, 2009, email from City Attorney Mike Gridley to “jcafferty@kcgov.us” (That is likely John “Witch Hunt” Cafferty, one of McHugh’s subordinates.), subject: election lawsuit meeting at 4:00 today. The email said,
So Whimpering Mikey had engaged Erbland before the lawsuit had even been filed. One wonders why Whimpering Mikey felt he might need an attorney for election matters before any legal action had ever been filed. Did Whimpering Mikey know something was badly wrong with the election? Sure sounds like it.
Comment by Bill — November 20, 2010 @ 7:14 pm
And could that something have been in email form and ordered to be deleted from a certain computer? I’m just sayin’.
Comment by concerned citizen — November 20, 2010 @ 7:28 pm
concerned citizen,
That’s a fair question.
Comment by Bill — November 20, 2010 @ 7:32 pm
I wonder if they’re shredding away and “cleaning” computers now at the Elections Dept., in preparation for the newly elected Clerk?
Comment by mary — November 20, 2010 @ 7:39 pm
Mary,
I doubt it. I believe Carrie Phillips would go straight to Cliff Hayes (thus bypassing Tote-a-Vote Dan) if she saw any evidence of spoliation or destruction of evidence. Hayes would go to Watson – Watson would go to McHugh – McHugh would go to a judge – McHugh would come back to Watson – Watson would go to English – English would go to jail. The names might change, but the outcome wouldn’t. Not now.
The smart thing for Tote-a-Vote Dan to do now would be to go play with his melamine.
Comment by Bill — November 20, 2010 @ 7:46 pm
ICRIMP will most likely try to find a way to pay for all of this mess so they can keep everyone in business. The picture is crystal clear. I don’t know if that particular board is current or not – it’s all that is available on the web at this time.
Comment by Stebbijo — November 20, 2010 @ 8:45 pm
The CDA council and LCDC motto: “We will hold your hand while we pick your pocket”
Sign on council chamber entrance: ” Check integrity, morals, honesty and all the Idaho constitution statutes before entering”.
Sign on Dan English desk, “Wha’ happened?”
Comment by rochereau — November 21, 2010 @ 10:21 am