The Cliffs' Entry Road
or
Watch ITD Follow the
Idaho Water Center into the Hall of Shame – Take Two

Editor’s Note – This post is a rewrite of the previous one on this subject.   The need for a rewrite was precipitated by a call from Mollie McCarty of ITD who took issue with some of my statements. To that end, I have cleaned up a few passages based on information she provided.  Mollie is ITD's Spokespersong and it is her job to make people like me see how reasonable ITD's actions are. She is a wonderful person and she is far more indulgent of my questions than I deserve. If anyone in state goverment deserves their salary, it is her. I don't envy her job. ITD’s involvement with The Cliffs still smells like something the dog rolled in.  Regards, tj)

Briefly, Skyline had always counted on using a portion of ITD land near the junction of Warm Springs Ave. and Highway 21. And, until the day before the first P&Z Hearing on The Cliffs, after much STP induced public scrutiny, ITD had never uttered so much as a peep in opposition to Skylines’ proposal.

When STP raised the issue of the legality of ITD using eminent domain proceedings, and federal dollars, for the benefit of a private company ITD started backpedaling. When they realized that giving the land to Skyline would also eliminate the possibility of ITD using the land for its intended purpose ITD formally stated they would be keeping the land in question for themselves.

As predictable as rain on a parade, Skyline went back to ITD for a second try. They have a new idea on how they can sucker ITD into violating state and federal laws for the purpose of allowing Skyline to illegally use state land for their grand entrance.

Their idea is for Skyline to build a full grade separated interchange for ITD at Warm Springs and Highway 21.  They, ITD and Skyline, think that if Skyline builds the interchange it will accomodate all of ITD’s future plans and, as a result, ITD won’t mind if Skyline also throws in an entry to The Cliff’s for good measure. To see a copy of an ITD letter on the subject click this link: ITD Letter.

STP thinks this apple is full of worms.

One, Idaho agencies, whether it is ITD, Ada County, Boise City, ACHD, or whomever, have a rotten record of anticipating future transportation needs. Anything that unnecessarily limits future options on the part of the various transportation departments should be avoided.

Two, the same regulation that prevents land purchased with federal dollars from being diverted to private individuals in total also prevents residual portions of the land from being diverted to private individuals.

Three, ITD seems to think that being given an interchange, instead of being given money to build an interchange, somehow makes it look like they weren’t bought off.  Dear ITD, compensation does not have to be in the form of money.   If Skyline gives you something, like a big ol set of on-ramps, in return for the use of state land, it still qualifies as quid pro quo for federally funded eminent domain acquired property.  That is against state law.

To whit:

Idaho Code, 7-701A.  LIMITATION ON EMINENT DOMAIN FOR PRIVATE PARTIES, URBAN RENEWAL OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES.
(2)  Eminent domain shall not be used to acquire private property: 
(b)  For the purpose of promoting or effectuating economic development;

Four, on the afternoon of September 28, 2006, Mollie McCarty of ITD told this author that ITD will not contribute a nickel to the project.  Conversely, at the September 14 P&Z hearing, as part of their public testimony, Tucker Johnson of Skyline Developemt, said that his company does not intend to pay for the entire interchange.

I can’t blame Skyline for wanting someone to help them foot the bill for an intersection whose cost could exceed $40 million.  And, while I don't have a very high opinion of Skyline Development's integrity, I don't see any advantage to Mr. Johnson lying on this subject. At the same time, when asked to verify in writing that ITD would not materially contribute to the interchange, Ms. McCarty refused.

One of them is wrong.

Partial summary: Any sort of quid pro quo deal between Skyline and ITD for this piece of dirt is probably illegal and any subsidy of Skyline's plans by ITD is just plain wrong.

Five, ITD acquired the property for future expansion needs.  Those  needs may well require a grade separated interchange at some point in the future.  However, they do not need it now.  Roads deteriorate with time. Will Skyline also pay for all the maintenance for the project for 5, 10. 20 years into the future until it is actually needed?  Don’t hold your breath.  If the maintenance of the extra road is paid for by ITD, it constitutes a subsidy from ITD to The Cliffs.

Six - A rhetorical statement.  Two state agencies, the Idaho Land Board and Idaho Department of Fish and Game were signatories to the negotiation of the Foothills Policy Plan.  ITD could support those two agencies by simply following their own procedures and not giving the land to The Cliffs.  Conversely, by giving Skyline access to the land, they will be undercutting their two sister agencies. 

The negotiation of the Foothills Policy Plan, culminating with the passage of the Foothills Levy, was one of the most popular things any Idaho governing agency has ever done.  One has to seriously doubt the intelligence of ITD’s directors and planners for even discussing granting Skyline passage across their property.

Seven, ITD should review the history of the Idaho Water Center as it relates to the merits of bending over backward to accommodate the schemes of the development community. If a state agency has to work really really really hard to find a legal way to do something, they are working way too hard.  And, it is probably not legal.

Robert Hoover got booted from the Presidency of the University of Idaho for getting a bit too cozy with the Boise development community in their effort to build the Idaho Water Center.  He was lucky enough to get another job at Albertson College.  What are the chances that the college also needs a dean for an engineering department?