Bill 470 is facing some opposition in the Senate. Those opposed? Why, the state’s Urban Renewal Agencies, of course!
Bill 470 is often referred to locally as “Jim Hammond’s Bill.” It’s co-sponsored by District 5 (Post Falls) Senator Jim Hammond, with Jim Clark and Mike Moyle as the House co-sponsors.
The bill introduces good law. It prevents Urban Renewal Agencies from taking a cut of any citizen-passed levy, such as the $31M levy proposed by School District 271 here in North Idaho. Normally, the price we pay for that levy would be increased to make up for the amount collected by the LCDC and Hayden URA. The school district gets all its money, but everyone pays a higher rate because of the URA skim.
I don’t know anyone locally who has come out opposed to Bill 470. Well, at least they support it in public. The bill sailed through the House. But it’s cheaper to buy Senators because there are fewer of them. According to folks in Boise, the URA lobbyists are out in force.
Senator Hammond tells me that the main objection is over paragraph (d) in the proposed law, which deals with boundaries. Ryan Armbruster, who is the LCDC’s attorney, as well as Theresa Molitar, who is the LCDC’s lobbyist, have been working on that issue particularly. This does not imply that they are working on behalf of the LCDC, as they also represent the Capital City Development Corp. (Boise’s URA) and possibly other URDs around the state. In addition to Armbruster and Molitar, several URDs from around the state have testified against the (d) part of the bill.
Concerned, I sent an e-mail to my Senator, John Goedde (District 4). His reply:
Dan – I have not been following this but have listened to Jim Hammond explain it a time or two. From what I know now, I don’t see any problems with it and will vote for it. John
If this bill is of a concern to you, write your Senator:
And who exactly is working to defeat this bill? Why the LCDC lobbyists being paid by the tax payer.
Comment by Diogenes — February 29, 2008 @ 12:14 pm
I know that Armbruster and Molitar have come out questioning paragraph (d), as stated above. According to Senator Hammond, other URDs around the state are also questioning that paragraph. But Senator Hammond is fairly confident that the bill will pass.
Everything the LCDC does is paid for by the taxpayers of Kootenai County. Because their district collects tax increment from all taxing entities, even the schools, everyone in the county is affected. We all pay higher levy rates. We supply their funds. We pay Tony Bern’s salary. We pay for their studies, the PR Firm they just hired, everything.
Comment by Dan — February 29, 2008 @ 12:58 pm
What specifically is the problem with subsection(d)? What questions?
Comment by yabetcha — February 29, 2008 @ 11:13 pm
What really scares me is the comment by Sen. Goedde, that he was unaware of this bill. That he hadn’t heard anything aobut it. The lobbyists must be doing their job as “ignorance” on the part of legislators is a formula for defeat. Am I the only one who feels that our elected legislators should be aware of all pending legislation…and educate themselves in order to vote responsibly. A responsible politician, now there’s a concept!
Dan, could you list the Senators and name their districts. Thanks.
Comment by Diogenes — March 4, 2008 @ 11:03 am
Diogenes,
Here’s a link to the Idaho legislative site that lists Senators and their districts as you requested.
And here’s a link to the Representatives and their districts.
Comment by Bill — March 4, 2008 @ 11:22 am
After receiving the above info from Bill, I emailed my Senator, urging passage of this bill. So much for constituent input. I did not even receive the usual autobot response thanking me for my whatever. And we wonder why Northern Idaho is the way it is.
Comment by Diogenes — March 8, 2008 @ 9:03 am
Who is your Senator, Diogenes?
Comment by Dan — March 8, 2008 @ 9:07 am
District 3 Dan.
Comment by Diogenes — March 8, 2008 @ 11:51 am
FYI – I have used the automatic email system on the Idaho.gov site.
Be very careful when you use it. Once I personally emailed the former gov’s wife – Patricia Kempthorne. The wife of the governor is private – not an employee. That email was sent to a prisoner in South Dakota because he used the FOI in regards to another PRIVATE case and the dumb ***** in the administrative offices actually complied. they sent “gobs and gobs” of letters from children to the gov’s wife that had addresses and phone numbers of children on them. I have my own records validating my claim, but all of the public records relating to that particular incident are not available and to get them I have to sue in Ada county where the records are that supposedly do not exist.
In the past their eamil reply system has been fairly unreliable and one never knows if it really works or not. Sometimes ‘they’ are just too busy to check their email. One time, however, a year or so ago, I did my own official study and emailed every one of them. I got three responses including a phone call. It was an election year – probably why I heard from them.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 8, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
Sorry – for the quick above post. I want to clarify that the administrative offices sent the letters/hardcopy emails to the gov’s wife back then TO the prisoner. And, I certainly would not say this if I did not have PROOF.
Also, as an after thought I wanted to include that all email to any Senator is considered ‘public information’ and is subject to a public records request.
If I am wrong – let me know.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 8, 2008 @ 5:41 pm