(NOT Mary Souza!)
Mary Souza’s Newsletter
I went to the McEuen Field Open House at NIC Thursday night, presented by the City. What a show! It was awesome! There were so many fancy features! I can’t stop using exclamation points because of all the amazing things we have the opportunity to get! And we don’t need to worry about how to pay for them! Isn’t that great?!
Parks Director Doug Eastwood actually said to the overwhelming crowd that filled the room to capacity, with standing room maxed all around the edges, all across the back, out the door and completely covering the upper landing of the NIC Student Union building…it was an enormous turnout…anyway, Doug said, “Once the project has been generally accepted by the public and the city council has given its approval, then we’ll figure out how to pay for it.”
It was a Nancy Pelosi moment! (Just pass the bill then we’ll figure out what’s in it!)
Contrary to the city’s methods, we citizens do not operate our homes or businesses by committing to plans or purchases for which we have no pricing. That is irresponsible. We want reasonable, phased-in upgrades and improvements that we know we can afford, factored into the context of essential city services, and only when the time is right.
And we want a PUBLIC VOTE before any final action is approved.
So here are big opportunities for McEuen Field (and I am not making these up):
1. A huge 1/2 acre Freedom Fountain that resembles the Bellagio fountain in Las Vegas (it would mean taking out the Freedom Tree that’s been there forever, but it’s ok because they’ve plotted the angles and that spot is in the “emotional center” of the park. That’s how we think in North Idaho?)
Two more fountains are in the park: “Urban water” they called them. (but don’t we have a huge lake right there…?)
2. Not one, not two but there are three shell-like sitting areas for performances or gatherings, two of them are down by the lake and are south-facing concrete steps that will get the direct summer sun.
3. There’s a bridge from the old boat launch area (yeah, that’s gone…tune in next week) over to the Resort’s boardwalk. Again, very nice but bridges are expensive!
4. There’s a long, submerged sidewalk stretching way out into the lake near the old boat launch. It’s about 3 or 4” under water so people can walk along and get their feet wet! Cute! (oops, where’s grandma? where did she go?)
5. And you won’t believe this one: That submerged sidewalk turns into the perimeter for an ice skating pond when the lake’s water level goes down in the winter! They’ll put in ice freezing machines and turn it into a skating pond. And there’s also a “seasonal canopy” that is a huge tent-like canopy covering for the ice skating area (think of the Expo ‘74 pavilion in downtown Spokane before that canopy shredded from the weather and was too expensive to replace so they just left the bare wire supports)
6. The boat launch will be gone (let’s talk next week) but they want to expand the Public Mooring Docks. The docks have 42 spots now, they want to build out to more than 70.
7. And there will be a Harbor House which is a big building to have someone (a business?) manage the boat docks plus a water taxi service and kayak and canoe rentals and concession shops.
8. You will love this one: They want to improve the west entrance to Tubb’s Hill by expanding and improving the trail and making waterfalls on each side of the entrance.
9. No more baseball. Those fields will be gone. But now we’ll have Boce Ball and Pickle Ball! So North Idaho.
10. You think the kid’s play area at City Park is nice? You haven’t seen the slick, upscale, sophisticated set up for McEuen. Doug said it takes Ft. Sherman play area to a whole new level! And there will be a kid’s splash pad fountain there as well!
11. And a Pocket Dog Park too! (I think it’s for all dogs, not just pocket dogs.)
12. There will be a new and improved Skate Board Park right near the dogs!
13. A new trail will be made on Tubbs, going all across the north face of the hill. It will be ADA (Americans with Disabilities Accessible) and have observation areas and a tower at the top.
14. The eastern exit for this ADA trail will also have waterfalls!
15. Reminder: They don’t know how much these elaborate features will cost to purchase or maintain.
16. And they will cut away trees to make a sledding hill going from the upper north face of Tubbs all the way down onto McEuen Field.
17. But don’t get me started on the parking. The current parking lot will be gone, the boat trailer parking too. They are planning a partially underground parking structure for more than 1200 cars (there are 600 spaces now). Quick estimates done from internet sites on partly below ground parking show that this kind of building could cost more than $35 million dollars. But the city won’t give any cost info. They say they don’t know.
I’m going to allow myself a personal rant right now, so tune out if you wish:
Remember last Spring when I wrote a Newsletter on the possible renovations to McEuen, stating I had heard there would be a partially underground parking structure where the old tennis courts used to be? The Mayor went wild! She called me out, by name, in the middle of an official city council meeting and said I was a liar. *(please see note below)
Guess what? The parking structure in the proposed plan? Just like I described. In the exact spot. Two levels below ground, precisely as I reported.
Steve Adams, who is a great guy, went to the following city council meeting last Spring and told the Mayor that he was the source of my information, details he learned directly from City Treasurer Troy Tymeson. Steve respectfully asked the Mayor to apologize for calling me a liar. She refused.
Ok, I’m done now and we can return to our regular programming.
Does this plan say “North Idaho” to you? Is this us? Does this concept for McEuen enhance the reasons you chose to live in this beautiful town?
In my opinion it does not. It doesn’t feel natural; it seems contrived. But that’s just me and I’m absolutely willing to go along with any design that is approved by a PUBLIC VOTE. I hope there will be one.
Stand up, people. Give your opinions. Go to their web site at www.mceuenpark.com They have a questionnaire for you and, if you agree that there should be a PUBLIC VOTE before any plans are finalized, please include that in your comments. Also please tell them you’d like open public questions at the next meeting on Feb. 3rd.
Thursday’s meeting had an outstanding turnout. You have their attention. Please take the time to read about it and weigh in with your own view.
Oh, by the way… Happy New Year! Tune in next week and we’ll talk more about McEuen by trying to answer the question: Why Now?
Have a great weekend. –Mary
*****************
Mary Souza is a 23 year resident of CdA, local small business owner and former P&Z Commissioner. Her opinions are her own. To sign up for the free weekly newsletter, or access a free archive of past columns, visit www.marysouzacda.com
***********
*1/8/2011, 10 am: I have a correction to this newsletter. The Mayor publicly called me a liar on the Spokesman Review blog last year, then she would not apologize when nicely asked by Steve Adams during the following official City Council meeting.
The interesting thing about this is that council meeting was almost exactly one year ago. A full year ago there were plans for a parking garage on the old tennis court site at McEuen, but the Mayor said, at the time, it was “lies”? Here’s my question: Did Sandi know and was…being untruthful? Or, even scarier, did she really not know? And if she didn’t, who is pulling the strings?
Have a great day!
************
There are other point’s of view!
Eagle Eye: Let LCDC Fund McEuen Plan
And another great quote! (Love those exclamation points!)
Comment by justinian — January 8, 2011 @ 7:25 am
Thanks, Justinian, those a good quotes. The author of those also goes on to suggest that LCDC figure out their revenue stream for the rest of their timeline, subtract any obligations and devote the rest of their money to the McEuen project.
Interesting. Please remember that LCDC is taxpayer money. Without a vote. The downtown LCDC district goes until 2021…so that’s ten more years.
Also remember that LCDC has the ability to Bond. Again without a vote. Could they commit to a long term bond, putting the public in debt? Could it go beyond their 2021 end date? I think so but am not sure.
Comment by mary — January 8, 2011 @ 8:07 am
One of my readers sent this:
Comment by mary — January 8, 2011 @ 8:19 am
I remember when the Mayor called you a liar and Steve asked for an apology and she refused. I believe they tampered with the minutes as well. So now we know the Mayor is a liar.
Nothing surprizes me anymore – CDA is full of global world class thinkers who are not on the same page as the local folks. The local folks are just little gnats in their visions that they have to smooze over with their meeting efforts rather anyone likes it or not – then they go forth with their desires. They don’t care about a North Idaho feel. It’s also good timing to build this facade when Idaho is dirt cheap and people need jobs. A gold rush of hope.
Ask not what CDA can do for the you, but what Destination CDA! can do for the world.
Comment by Stebbijo — January 8, 2011 @ 8:48 am
My feelings about the citys plans for the proposed ‘McEuen Park’are:the
city is inundating the public with so many concepts and ideas, that something is bound to pass and be implemented on McEuen Field.The question is:”what will be acceptable to the public, that can be implemented on McEuen”?
To me,as a longtime resident of this CDA area, there are things that are non-negotiable and should not be considered for the proposed McEuen Park.(1)the third street boat launch should stay.(2)the freedom tree should stay.(3)Don’t mess with Tubbs Hill, beyond adding some handrails and a few benches etc.
I’d also, agree that changing McEuen Field too much, would tarnish the legacy left by Mae McEuen. We need to remember, that once the city gives the green light to proceed with changes to McEuen Field; the skys the limit on what they may do in the future to changing the face of McEuen Field imo.
Comment by kageman — January 8, 2011 @ 10:30 am
I was told about the subterranean parking garage a year prior to Steve Adam’s comment to Mary.
It appears that not much thought has been devoted to traffic circulation. Where does Third Street return to one way traffic? One exit for a multitude of cars? The closure of Fourth Street will divert traffic to Seventh Street, a residential street, rather than through the million dollar plus recently renovated Midtown area.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — January 8, 2011 @ 11:10 am
All of their ideas would be fine to present, Kage, if they would just promise this thing will go to a VOTE of the people.
Remember back late 2004 when the Mayor and Council were ready to call for a public advisory Vote on the proposed Hagadone Gardens project? That’s when Hagadone was offering a $20 million dollar botanical garden AND it’s maintenance in perpetuity (forever). It was going to cost the taxpayers ZERO.
So, if we needed an advisory Vote then, we should definitely have a full, real Vote now…this thing will cost taxpayers huge money to build and continuing big money to maintain.
Comment by mary — January 8, 2011 @ 11:14 am
Someone told me the following timeline for McEuen field:
The person who told me this has been here a long time and they are in a position to know the city’s MO quite well. I believe it.
Comment by Dan — January 8, 2011 @ 11:39 am
Parking lots and garages are the second most frequent place for nonviolent crimes and the third most frequent place for violent crimes in the United States (U.S. Department of Justice, 1999).
Comment by Pariah — January 8, 2011 @ 11:59 am
So, did the Mayor know or not?
Comment by Stebbijo — January 8, 2011 @ 12:35 pm
I believe the underground parking garage will not happen on Front Street, the City is just going to recieve public support to rule it out. Then the only location available will be near the old Fed. Bldg. and the big push will be on to build a parking garage in order to provide parking for those visiting the downtown area.
Changes will happen to capture the tourist dollar at the expense of us locals.
Comment by LTR — January 8, 2011 @ 2:16 pm
Mary: “Could it (the life of the bond) go beyond their 2021 end date? I think so but am not sure.”
You can be sure that it cannot. No investor would buy a bond that extended beyond the life of its revenue stream. Not one investor would do that. Like Eagle Eye implied elsewhere, LCDC can only bond for the amount of their revenue stream that is not already committed, from now until the end of their life in 2021.
And, they would be wise to bond. Bonding at sub-4% rates over 10 years is a better deal than building elements of the plan one year at a time because the cost of engineering one project at a time and the construction inflation over 10 years would eat them alive.
Mary, if you don’t like it that there is no election required, talk to your legislators about changing the law. Don’t bash your elected officials if they use the avenues available to them by law.
Comment by JohnA — January 8, 2011 @ 2:40 pm
But, Mary, it is your right and duty to bash them when they abuse the avenues available to them by law.
Comment by Dan — January 8, 2011 @ 4:03 pm
John, legislation was introduced to specifically forbid URAs from “bonding out” last session, so please tell me why the URAs around the state fought such a modification?
Comment by Dan — January 8, 2011 @ 4:04 pm
Dan, can you show me where “URA’s around the state” fought that?
Comment by JohnA — January 8, 2011 @ 4:06 pm
I’m getting a lot of responses. Here’s another example of reader feedback today, telling me how they voted on the http://www.mceuenpark.com questionnaire:
Hi Mary,
I voted ‘Strongly disagree’ to the whole kit and caboodle and encouraged my kids to do the same.
We moved here to escape California, not to bring it with us.
Comment by mary — January 8, 2011 @ 4:41 pm
I just filled out my McEuen questionnaire, online. Here are the comments I left at the end:
Comment by mary — January 8, 2011 @ 6:32 pm
John, your disrespect for members of the public showing. I am not an elected official, but I am a concerned citizen. I flew to Boise on my own dime. I testified before the Rev. Tax Committee. I’ve done it many times. Every time, lots of men in suits and women in fine dresses get up and testify that Urban Renewal law is fine and that the legislature need not touch it. They lie and say that there is but a small number of people who are being critical, “a vocal minority.” They lie and say it’s only a problem in Coeur d’Alene. These liars are lobbyists, paid by URAs around the state: Here, Post Falls, Nampa, Rexburg, Boise, Eagle, Caldwell — around the state.
I know that you think I’m lying here as well, because you’re post #15 is incredulous. But the truth is that URAs around the state are fighting any change to the law. My friend Paul Aldrich from Caldwell bumped in Teresa Molitar, who is the LCDC’s lobbyist. (One of them.) She told Aldrich that URAs around the state will be fighting any and every change to the law. And why not? They have a huge bucket of property tax dollars to spend.
Again, I’m sorry that I am only a mere peon and not one of your elected buddies, a government flack, or some well-connected insider who grabs public money in the name of “urban renewal.” I’m sure you’d believe me without question if I were. But I’m not. I am only a concerned citizen, and I will fight to represent citizens on this issue until we get officials elected who realize the gravity of the scam. That’s going to be soon, BTW.
Oh, and I’m still waiting for that P&L I asked you for via email over a week ago. If PAC is transparent, then send me the P&L like you promised.
Comment by Dan — January 8, 2011 @ 7:08 pm
Dan, as you know I am a contractor with PAC, not an employee. Any financial information you want needs to be directed to them. I also have several other entities with whom I contract and I would be happy to direct you to them as well.
Meanwhile, I’m curious which legislation dealt with bonding authority for URAs, and any testimony from URA advocates. As one of several on this site who require verification of statements made here, I am requesting the same of you.
Thanks in advance for your information.
Comment by JohnA — January 8, 2011 @ 10:24 pm
Ever notice E. Coeur d’Alene Drive as the centennial trail courses down to Bennett Bay? Does the city own and maintain that trail and those lovely trees along the lake? Imagine if those trees were trimmed up. Imagine those trees illuminated at night. My point is this. There are some exceedingly simple and relatively inexpensive things begging to be done around CdA that would make a HUGE difference in its appearance that go wanting. Why do we have to re-do a major section of downtown when we cannot even properly maintain parts that we already own?
Comment by Wallypog — January 9, 2011 @ 8:01 am
Wallypog,
That is a silly question. 🙂
The “STAKEHOLDERS” do not own property in the other areas you mention. No one is entitled to a THING unless you are of the elite “IN” crowd. They have to keep us poor peons out of the loop. They need servers and servants ya know.
Comment by concerned citizen — January 9, 2011 @ 8:54 am
Assume that we have the McEuen project complete and a qualified prospective buyer comes to town. They see all that glitters downtown and are impressed. This is the caliber of town they would enjoy living in and one which would make them a proud citizen. Then they head east and just outside of town is 1.5 miles of ill kept lakefront with overgrown scraggly looking trees and scrabbly grounds. It is an obvious public draw because the centennial trail is highlighted right through the area. Then the prospective buyer sees the real CdA; unpolished, rustic and not artfully sophisticated. Then they easily recognize that they were taken in by a window dressing project designed, constructed and intended to draw them in based on lies.
Have we seen this play before? How many qualified buyers came and looked at Riverstone and were impressed but did not buy? How many other pearl projects have gone upside down? It is not all due to the recession. The money people who can afford these properties are not susceptible to such economic fluctuations. They can afford Blackrock, etc. But still they do not buy and that is because they see that in reality this is a rural arena with a few baubles tossed in to gain their attention.
In other words ritzy, glossy projects like McEuen do not work unless they do reflect the fabric of the community. The Mayor is convinced that she can spruce the place up in a few high visibility areas and the dollars will roll in. Vail offers a cohesive sense of wealth. It is high dollar snooty and it shows everywhere one travels in Vail. Mayor, stop kidding yourself and wasting our tax dollars. Bring improvements to this city that reflect the citizens who live here, not the ones you WANT to attract.
Comment by Wallypog — January 9, 2011 @ 9:50 am
Very well said, Wallypog.
Comment by mary — January 9, 2011 @ 10:03 am
JohnA: Nice dodge. PAC is a private entity that spends public money without any opportunity for the public to ask financial questions. I shall ratchet up the heat, and the people who will be uncomfortable with that have to give the credit to you.
Wallypog: the Centennial Trail is run by the non-profit Centennial Trail Foundation.
In other news, the LCDC gave them $2.5M to purchase the extension of the trail outside the LCDCs district. Supposedly, that land was to be “swapped” with trail land inside the district after the railroad abandoned its property. I’m not sure if the “swap” ever took place or was ever intended. Nor am I certain that the foundation is repaying the LCDC’s money. Because the LCDC is as transparent as a brick wall, we’ll never know. All Tony Berns has to do is clinch his teeth and say, “Oh yes, it’s all square now.” and that’s all we’ll ever hear about it.
Comment by Dan — January 9, 2011 @ 10:04 am
Wallypog,
Very well put but I would like to ad to your last comment “Rich retirees ALSO do not retire to areas with uncontrolled taxation.”
Comment by concerned citizen — January 9, 2011 @ 10:05 am
Here’s another observation. In this morning’s Press, the “In Person” segment they run every Sunday features architect Dick Stauffer. I don’t know Dick, or his business partner Monte Miller, but have seen them at many meetings. They seem very nice and well spoken. I’m sure they are talented architects. They are the team who created the McEuen Park redesign and, along with the engineers and landscape professionals, were paid $125,000 by the city & LCDC for that work.
But Miller-Stauffer architects also designed and own McEuen Tower and ParkSide Tower, the two very tall condo building right next to McEuen. They are true “stakeholders”. They stand to gain significant financial reward from any park improvements paid with taxpayer dollars. (and don’t forget that LCDC and gov. grants or bonds are all taxpayer dollars)
My thoughts, as I read about Dick Stauffer this morning, were that their tall condo buildings with the shiny, glass shells, are very nice buildings but seem out of place in downtown CdA. They don’t go with the natural elements of Tubbs, the lake & the trees. They would seem more comfortable in Vegas or LA. Much of their park redesign seems that way too.
Comment by mary — January 9, 2011 @ 10:26 am
Miller Stauffer has been trying to change the appearance of the great Northwest for years. They need to go to Vegas if that is what they wish and leave the Northwest the Northwest. An acquaintance of mine has a beautiful home in Sanders Beach across from the water that recently has been remodeled. She told them that she wanted to keep the charm and originality of the home. She told me they came in with plans to remove walls, modernize and totally change the appearance of early 1900’s masterpiece. The plans had to be redone many many times. I believe they are responsible for some of the once what were quaint little water front homes in the Fort Grounds that are now monstrous eyesores. The sad thing is, this city gives NO incentive to preserve the charm.
The powers that be have destroyed the very reason that people fell in love with CdA to begin with, small town America. A time of success for all that were willing to work for it.
Comment by concerned citizen — January 9, 2011 @ 11:05 am
Dan, PAC is an Economic Development Corporation serving the five northern counties of Idaho. It is a dynamic non-profit that has been helping local govenments to meet their economic and infrastructure needs since 1972. PAC’s business incubator has spawned many successful companies, employing hundreds, and continues to be a resource for businesses just starting up.
You can learn more at http://www.pacni.org, including contact information for PAC’s financial officer, Kay Kitchel. PAC is subject to an annual audit, which should answer all of your questions about this great community asset.
Comment by JohnA — January 9, 2011 @ 12:29 pm
Did anyone else notice on the CdA website that there are no references pertaining to the LCDC, URA, URD nor any questions under “Frequently asked questions” regarding taxes?
Comment by concerned citizen — January 9, 2011 @ 12:44 pm
Wallypog, I heard something like that during the last two political seasons…… “lipstick on a pig is still a pig.” I’m not saying Cd’A is that bad but the Queen and her court must realize “you can’t fool all the people all the time.”
Comment by Ancientemplar — January 9, 2011 @ 7:36 pm
Miller Stauffer should never be granted another opportunity to influence the public again in Cd’A. RFP’s be damned, (if the city uses them.) Anyone who knows bidding and influence knows that after two or three successful bids you disqualify the repetitive successful bidder just to keep them honest. Thishas gone on way too long especially across for their two development across the street from McEuen.
Comment by Ancientemplar — January 9, 2011 @ 7:46 pm
You know, someone pointed this out to me, and it has ringing relevance: It took no skill to do what Team McEuen did. Dreaming isn’t a talent. The Emperor truly has no clothes in Coeur d’Alene if this kind of B-S passes as good government.
Comment by Dan — January 10, 2011 @ 8:29 pm
What (another) Kroc! Another giant feel good giveaway to the Inside Connections crowd and a jobs program for the sheep.
Comment by Pariah — January 11, 2011 @ 6:35 am