Rec district will seek bond for center

I'd rather have our dollars go to something simpler from the Rec District, which I once supported whole-heartedly. I now think that I'd rather go for the new high school, which could also be used by the community, and have the Rec center just build an indoor swimming pool or two, which also could be used at certain times by the PE classes from the junior and high schools. Is this feasible?

i dont think they need a walking track when there is a track available to the general publics use right across the street from where this will supposedly be going in .

So let me see if I understand this correctly... We have been paying for a building since 2002 and now we are being asked to approve even more money to actually build the building we have been paying for.

If we use the figures provided in the article they collect $250,000 in one year. If that is the average for all the years since 2002, that would mean they have collected $1,500,000 during that time period. My question is where has all that money gone? Surely not to upkeep the 20 acres of bare land for all these years.

Plus add into this equation that the school district is asking for $37 million to add onto a building to make it what it is supposed to be, a high school and one has to ask where are we expected to come up with the money?

So bottom line, I say rethink your plans and maybe the Rec and School Districts could join forces to build one facility for both to use.

We must be richer and our pockets must be deeper than I know. Why is it that with the costs of things on the rise (gas, food and electric to name just a few) and wages the same that our town has their hands out so much. We need to sell that land and scrap the idea of more money out of the pockets of the tax payers. Have you folks lost your minds (our elected officials)? This is a time to SAVE not keep asking for more money. Enough is enough already. You are going to tax us all right out of town. ENOUGH!!! I will be a "NO" vote on both of these bonds.

So...now they want us to believe that individual property owners will not have to pay an increase in taxes and that it will be the commercial property owners that are hit with this. This is a joke.

We may not (I do not believe this for a second) pay anymore for the building of this money pit but we most certainly will pay to maintain it. There are more homes to tax in our area than business so it would make sense that we will all pay. Cha-ching!!

Sell the land and buy some computers for the school. Where is all of the money collected since 2002 for this project? You do the math. What they say they have is NOT what they should have.

Statement in the article:

"Since its creation, Belt said the district has worked mostly on collecting funds from grant programs.

Last year the district applied for a grant from the Ray and Joan Kroc Corps Community Center grant. The Kroc's, of McDonald fortune, left the Salvation Army $1.6 billion to build community centers across the country. Belt said the Western Elmore Country Rec District finished second in the region to Couer d' Alene for the Kroc grant."

My Take: Well we came in second in the Kroc Grant - BUT, the article doesn't say how much - if any - money we received from the Kroc grant for this project. If we did not recieve money - Why? If we did receive money - then how much?

If I calculated correctly - then the approxiamte money collected since 2002 (based on 2007 money), should be somewhere around 1,500,000.00, plus this year of 400,000.00 for a total of 1,900.000.00. This seems to be just abut right for the numbers we have been given. I figure pretty darn close.

Now - let's go the next point - as per the article here is the next paragraph -

"Since its creation, Belt said the district has worked mostly on collecting funds from grant programs."

Now if the WECR has collected from taxes, as per my calculations, 1,900,000.00 and has saved and/or used this money - then did we receive funds from those other grants - if so - why aren't they calculated into the savings? If we didn't receive any funds - Why? Also, how many other grants, besides the Kroc fund has the WECR attempted?

Thirdly: Next point:

"Belt said businesses and commercial property taxes would be affected the most by the bond, since until the recent change in tax system by the district no taxes were collected on their property. "

Businesses would be affected the MOST - which means businesses will pay the most increase and we will also pay more as property owners but won't be affected quite as much. How much more no one knows yet because the WECR doesn't have all of the figures yet. As of right now we pay $34.50 for taxes to the WECR, and that will go up - but, by how much?

Lastly: Another point from the article:

"The exact figure of the bond has not been released yet. The district is expected to seek the bond in November, around the time of the general elections. "

Be very careful folks what you wish for:

By the end of the year - we could all be paying another $35.00 for school AND around another $5.00-10.00 or 15.00 (your guess - my guess)for a rec center. This could be around 40.00 to $50.00 MORE you pay in taxes PER MONTH.

The WECR has too many questions to answer before I determine if I will vote for it. But, I am not going to vote for both bonds.

The Rec center has cut their cost by half - smart move.

The School District is Not Willing To Budge AT ALL. The district needs to compromise also -

WHY do we need:

3 (THREE) gyms,

2 (Two) Tracks (in door and out door),

AND approximatel

6-8 rooms for Votec.

Go back and read EACH previous news article. Then add it all up together. We are being fed one article at a time so that the total numbers don't look so HUGE. They are giving us a small chunk once each week.

I am NOT voting for this school bond the way it sits right now.

"Go back and read EACH previous news article. Then add it all up together. We are being fed one article at a time so that the total numbers don't look so HUGE. They are giving us a small chunk once each week."

-------

We are breaking up the school bond information so that it is easier to read, not to be deceitful. There is so much misinformation out their, and we are doing our best to get the facts to everybody. We have broken down the bond aspects into smaller topic-oriented articles for the ease of reading, and a better understanding of what this bond will do for our community as a whole and specifically for it's youth.

If you still have questions about what you are voting for, then perhaps you should attend a school board meeting, or go to an open forum that the school districts have been holding. What questions are being answered by sitting behind a computer, ranting on a newspaper forum while secretely hiding behind your anonymity?

I've lived here all my life, and it saddends me that personal greed and penny pinching has reduced this fine commumity to the brink of rubble! You all complain about the condition of our city, but you all rush to the polls to shoot down anything that could improve it... Hypocrites!

Im Voting "NO"

Don't need to hide - Am not bashing - but, I am using the info that has come out of the Districts articles about the new building and or Boise paper. If those articles in the news are incorrect than please give the correct facts so that we may make intelligent comments. Please.

Also, if there is new info coming out of the forums - than maybe you would like to enlighten people as to some the answers to issues. I would think that you would prefer the GOOD info to be in the blog for all to see.

I for one would like to see the new info so that I can make a good decision. Thanks

bond_supporter,

When and where are these open forums that the school board has been having? I have not seen anything stating when and where they are. If something was sent home with the school then there lies the problem. Can you beleive that some of us that pay our taxes each year do not have children attending the schools? I know go figure.

As for being a hypocrite and hiding in this forum, I would gladly attend a public meeting on this topic but have not received any information as to when they are.

And I would glady vote for a bond that made sense like the new jail bond did but this one and the rec building just are not passing my common sense check but then again, I am just a normal TAXPAYING citizen of Mt Home.

I would like to see the business plan for the new rec center. How much am I going to be charged to use the facility...... I wish I could come to a meeting on this but I am too busy working to pay for all the other things that are eating up my paycheck, like food and gasoline.

How soon before the Mountain Home area becomes taxed out of the common man means.......and what about the effect of additional taxes on any prospect of new business, won't have to worry there won't be any new business......

bond_supporter:

A few points on what you have stated.

First:

"Go back and read EACH previous news article. Then add it all up together. We are being fed one article at a time so that the total numbers don't look so HUGE. They are giving us a small chunk once each week."

We HAVE read the articles to the point of being sick. The District is not breaking the facts down to make it easy on us. Give me a break. They hope that we will get lost in all of the red tape and bull. Some os us out here have average to better than average math skills and 2 + 2 is not always adding up to 4 here.

-------

Second:

"We are breaking up the school bond information so that it is easier to read, not to be deceitful. There is so much misinformation out their, and we are doing our best to get the facts to everybody. We have broken down the bond aspects into smaller topic-oriented articles for the ease of reading, and a better understanding of what this bond will do for our community as a whole and specifically for it's youth."

Much of the "misinformation" as you call it has been provided by the District but this time we have been smarter about what we are being fed and have found the facts on our own (buyer beware so to speak). Honesty is and always has been the best policy. The last time a bond was approved for a "high school" we ended up with a junior high. I wonder why we are ticked off. I was here when that was done and the District is misrepresenting how that went down. They have relied on the fact that nobody would remember. Well, we did.

Third:

"If you still have questions about what you are voting for, then perhaps you should attend a school board meeting, or go to an open forum that the school districts have been holding. What questions are being answered by sitting behind a computer, ranting on a newspaper forum while secretely hiding behind your anonymity?"

I am sorry...I noticed that you are also hiding behind YOUR anonymity and you call us the hypocrites! That is a joke. Maybe I just missed your name and where you work within the District. Give me a break. We tried to get certain info from the District. They have yet to respond on several points. Hmmmmm.

Last:

"I've lived here all my life, and it saddends me that personal greed and penny pinching has reduced this fine commumity to the brink of rubble! You all complain about the condition of our city, but you all rush to the polls to shoot down anything that could improve it... Hypocrites!"

This is not greed on the part of a citizen. It is called self-preservation from a greed filled District. I work VERY hard, long hours for the few things that I do have. I drive to Boise everyday to earn a living wage as opposed to the Mountain Home standard of $6.00 per hour. So please do not refer to me as the greedy one because I do not want to get bent over again on the same building and another school bond. We learn best what we learned first on this issue and that is to review EVERYTHING and take nothing as stated at face value. I am sorry that you feel that I am greedy.

This town has been "reduced" to what it is because of our elected officials. They are unable to think "outside the box." I am not unwilling to spend for the kids BUT...3 gyms and 2 tracks. Come on. Get real.

You are the real hypocrite here and I hope that you are not a teacher based on how you have presented yourself. Debate is healthy and a right when you live in the US in case you forgot that.

Where are these forums and when do they take place? We have asked you that at least 2-3 times. I am sure that they do not want us to know the when/where because then the District will have to answer the questions and they do not want to have to do that.

This blog works pretty well for sharing information. Too well from your response. We have all let the cat out of the bag on this deal and that has made you mad. Oh well. The article today on the bond has really made me want to vote NO. It was insulting to read. 3 gyms? 2 tracks? What a joke.

To Senior Lady - I don't think the community will be able to use the rec facilities/equipment at the school. Most school do not let the general public use their facilities for the most part. Maybe a track could be used by the public, but probably not a weight room. There could be issues with liability if someone was injured, or having unknown adults (think of sex offenders, drug dealers, shootings) there during school hours. So I can see while facility use by the general public is limited. I could be wrong on this, but that has been my experience, even at the university level. Also, a community center would be open more hours (again from my experience) to include weekends, I would think.

I have to say, back a few years, when $250,000 was spent on 20 acres of property, I was pretty upset. That seemed way more expensive than market value. I do like hearing they have gotten $300,000 in Fed $$. I also like that they have cut the budget from 10 million to 5 million. Appears they may have learned from the over-priced land mistake, so I am open minded and would like to hear more. It's something everyone can use here.

The school bond is another issue. Can someone tell me why it costs 5 million to build an entire rec center from scratch and 37 million to ADD ON to a school. I just think the amount they are asking for is crazy.

froggie and Senior Lady:

Good point you made Senior Lady.

I do believe froggie is correct though. There are liability and safety issues, so normally , as said , the general public cannot use school facilities.

Would be one of the reasons I would support the Rec Center versus the school.

But, I can't make a decision on the Rec Center yet until I see the facts.

Granted the town does need something like the Rec Center for kids and families to go to. But, I don't want to see a large fee to use it and eliminate lower income families from being able to use the facility.

Good point, midea, that we need to find out what the rec center might charge. Again, I think the rec center is a better idea, b/c it will be accessable to all, rather than just select high school atheletes. I think the swimming pool would be great for our seniors, who may have to limit what physical activities they can do.

The govt asking for ridiculous amounts of money needs to stop. Go back even a few weeks about the library charging $70 per year, per person to those county folks who want to use it. If a 37.5 million bond is going to cost - and I quote here: "(Editor's note: The bond would cost $14.59 a month for every $100,000 of taxable assessed valuation-- i.e. after homeowners exemptions, etc.)", how in heavens name is the library charging $70.00 per person. This is getting nuts. So yeah, maybe we ought to find out what the rec center is going to charge. If the library costs that much, I can't image what the rec center might charge per person. Hopefully, the rec center will be more reasonable.

Maybe the Editor (isn't he still heading the library board) ought to put in some quotes about how much the city is paying per "$100,000 of taxable assessed value" that go toward the library or something of that effect. I sure would like to know what the city folks have to pay to the library and I bet it isn't $70 per person.

My sentiments exactly. Especially about seniors being able to use the pool.

I love the idea that it could be used by all. It's the way it should be.

I don't think it matters where you live- everyone who owns property will be taxed on the rec district.

Again - the library. Good point - maybe that is something you might like to research and get back to us on. What do you think?

What if the public could use school facilities in the evenings, for example? That used to be the way some time back, I think. Naturally a registration and moderate fee could be charged I suppose. Insurance, now, that could be a problem, and perhaps a volunteer or affordable "manager" on site would be also.

Would the school's auditorium be availabe for hire?

I just think if we scale back our expectations and dreams to fit our beer wallet, instead of demanding champagne, well...maybe the needs of both the community and the school kids could be met. I'd really like to see the powers that be in both agencies (school board, Rec district) explore the possiblities of working together.

The challenge to using the school at night is a tough one. What if someone gets hurt, what if someone were to get into the classrooms or onto the computer systems, things like that. Granted - it would be an ideal situation. But, I think there are too many legalities and stumbling blocks.

But, I do firmly believe that a Rec Center in this town - can serve everyone , and not just a few as far as recreation goes.

The Nazarene church I believe, correct me if I am wrong please, has said that they will build an auditorium type building when they build their church and it could be used by the city or whoever needs it. But, they don't want to build theirs quite as large if the school is going to go ahead anyway and build one.

If we have a Rec Center, and an auditorium type place for guests/programs in our city, we can begin to establish some basis of livability in our small town. These 2 amenities are small but, we have to begin somewhere. We can build as time goes on and add slowly if the population ever deems it necessary. But, in the meanwhile, we will give everyone something to do in town for recreation.

As far as trying to get the Rec Center and the school to work together and come up with some ideas - I think that is like looking in my backyard for gold. Heck - the hand held out by the church was turned away. If the church built an auditorium type room - then the school would have a more difficult time with bond. Apparently school wants it all. Why not share? Why not cut the bond cost if there is a way? Like a spoiled child.

I truly do feel that the school can't allow individuals to use gyms, tracks, weight rooms etc. because of a lot of legalities.

Ok after some searching, I actually found out the Rec District has public meeting dates which are the 4th Wednesday of the month, at 7:00 pm in the City Hall Chamber. I found this on the Rec Dist web site in small print at the bottom of the page. What I could not find was much information about the building and the funding request. Guess we will have to depend on them to feed us little bits of information over the next few weeks.

Mule:

Very nice to see you back as the others have stated. I hope that you had a nice spring break and got some well deserved down time.

midea:

I called the District Office today and they said that they knew nothing of the "public forum(s)" for the school bond. Did you get any info?

All of this bond stuff is crazy. I am attempting to stay employed AND keep my house. This is too much.

We should all join forces on this bond thing and try to get more "facts" and answers. We should maybe assign "homework" so that we are all working on different answers. The election is very close and there is much to do. Just an idea to save time. 2 or more heads are always better than one.

Oh Bond_Supporter : The Web We Weave.

You have become so quiet since you were last here!!

Old guy

Thank you - I have printed the info out and will probably see you there.

Midea: I went on the Mountain Home Church of the Nazarane website. Under 'Share the Vision' there is a brochure that can be downloaded. The back side of the brochure shows some plans of the building. This is what I could make out. Outside, there are 2 softball fields and a soccer field. Inside there is a Fellowship/Conference room, a Sanctuary, Kitchen, quite a few Adult Education Classrooms, and some youth rooms. I called the church and asked them when the building is built, can the public use the facilities as well. I was informed that the church has priority (of course) but that anyone in the community could use the building as well. How cool is that.

I'm going to try and find out more about the library. I have a friend that found out some pretty interesting details and she is going to give me that info to blog about. So I hope to have more info later....

froggy:

You are so awsome. Thank you for the help. You have no clue how helpful this is . Yes, please let us know all that you fine out.

Gotta get to work.

Midea - it was b/c you and the others on this blog that I started to get interested in all this, so thank you guys. Good info here.

Well, I called the City Treasurer & the Library (Director??). Neither are in today, so I couldn't get the info about the city budget for the library. But here is the info I received from a friend who did some research.

The library wanted to raise prices b/c their library cards are now 'more valuable' b/c the MH Library joined the 'Links Consortium.' She visited quite a few Idaho libray websites. ALL were part of the 'LINKS.' The only LINKS benefit I have been able use from is being able to download audio books. There is not a large selection. Most books are the classics (good, but I have already read most of them). I have 'listened' to three books using this. The selection of audio books available at the library is much better. If I would have to pay for this online service, I probably wouldn't use it - so I wouldn't say it's a great improvement for me.

I did vote for the library bond at the time. I was very excited about 'LINKs.' I misunderstood it when I voted for it though. I thought we would then be part of the interlibrary loan, which I thought meant I could 'order' a book from the Boise Libary and I could pick it up at this libarary. Most of the other Treasure Valley libraries do this. However, I found out this was not true. I can 'order' a book from the Boise libary, but I have to go to Boise to pick it up and return it. So no improvement there, as I BELIEVE we already had this service b/f the bond. So other than the few audio books I can download, the only other benefit from 'LINKS' is that I can go on line and see what books other Idaho libraries have that I don't have access to. Again, there may be more to LINKS, but nothing I see that makes the library cards SO much more valuable. And from what I see, ALL the libraries have the same service. So, what are the other libraries charging for their non-resident fee? Here's what my friend found out:

Boise: $69.30

Pocatello: $45

Coeur d'Alene: $25

Nampa: $52 PER FAMILY

There were more, but you get the picture. By the way, she was not able to find a more expensive non-resident fee than our OWN library's $70 fee. So it looks like folks, we have one of the highest, if not the highest non-resident fee in the state. Laughable, esp with what is available at this libary and with the high standard of living we have here.

OK, there is more. Counsilman Urquidi stated he was in favor for the price increase because (summarization here) that the libary hasn't raised fees in 15 years. My friend called the Twin Falls Libary whose non-residenct fees are $40 PER FAMILY. The librarian there told her the non-resident prices have been going DOWN in the last 10 years b/c there population (tax base) has increased.

So, let's do the math here. County residents now have to pay $70 per person, because the library and city counsel thought that would be fair. So, if the (estimated) population of Mountain Home is 12,550 and we times that times $70, the library's income would be $903,700.00. If we do the math using the old non-resident fee of $35 (12,550 x 35) it would equal $451,850. Does the libary even have a budget of that much now???

And yes, I know, the city doesn't collect $70 from each Mtn Home resident, but if you want to slice the pie equally.....So looks like the library pulled a fast one on our city council. So, now you know. Mountain Home has one of the most expensive libaries in the state for non-residents to use. Do these people think we are stupid.

And here's another kicker. Even with the $70 per non-resident increase, they still have the nerve to charge a dollar an hour to use the computer.

I had no say in this recent fee increase at the libary, but folks I am tired of these astronomical fee increases. I'm not buying the BS anymore. I can tell you that I think 37.5 million is crazy for an school addition and I'm voting NO until I see something that convinces me it is worth that MUCH. That is a LOT of money.

Oh, I forgot to add this on my last comment as we are on the topic of the rec center. I like the idea of the rec center and I am pleased at their cutting the budget. What I worry about though, is what are they not telling us. Like vote for a HS bond and you get a Jr. High. Like vote for a library bond and LINKS isnt' all that, and the non-resident fees become the highest in the state. We really need to find out what will be available and what additional costs are they going to tag us with later. OK, I think that's enough of my outrage!!

froggy:

It's amazes me that city council would approve this before doing their homework. I wonder if they were even give or had asked for comparisons. Sounds to me like NOT.

I think before any other bonds are passed NOW or in the future that there be at least 6 (yes I said 6) OPEN forums for Question and Answers from the public.

Those forums MUST involve all persons responsible for the planning of whatever bond is being brought to the people.

Each forum should be one evening a week for 6 (yes six) weeks.. Hey, if the bond is that important - then those involved should wanting to get it out there so people will vote.

Froggy:

Would you mind copying your post about the library and pasting it into the Banter blog on the main page? I think more people will see it. Thanks

I just have a couple of questions on things I am probably missing on the new Recreation Center. First, WECRD is the Western Elmore County Recreation District....doesnt that mean that it is governed by the County rather than the City Council? Doesnt that mean that those who live in the County would feel the tax raise rather than those in city limits?

I also have to agree with Senior Lady that I too would like to see a much simpler and less grand plan out of WECRD, seems to me if built to suit the needs of the community as a whole rather than those who can afford to use the facility that it wouldnt cost near as much as they are proposing.

The saddest part is the kids who really need a facility like this are the ones who will not be able to afford to use it. Hence the Youth Center that already exsists in bar district, has been very poorly run for many years and will continue to remain that way if the same organization continues to run it. We need to look at what the entire family needs, not just the workout jockies who need a fancier facility to go to after work.

Im Still Voting "NO", sorry out of money

I just think the timing is unfortunate. We are heading into a receision. The price of gas is at an all time high and is forecasted to go significantly higher. There are many people who are out of work due to the Teton Valley and North American Foods plant shut downs. Our senior citizens can not afford more increases in their tax obligations. Most of those of us who are fortunate to have jobs are not getting pay raises that would cover the bond increases. State employees were recently given a 3 percent pay raise but their health care portions (which they pay) will increase 29 percent. These increases only affect property owners. Look at all those who rent in town and will not feel the real weight of these bonds. Someone got to say wait a minute sometime.

I'll be voting NO on both bonds.

Best wishes,

anyways why would I want too pay a tax on something I can't use, I don't get it a Rec Dist for whom ? don't that fall under Education. seems our government is becoming a caretaker government. what Next, free housing / health care/ what else, why do we need this?

Um, it's a Recreation District for all people to use and enjoy.

You would be paying for something you WON'T use, not CAN'T. Let's make sure you have the correct meaning behind your words. It's not that you CAN'T use these facilities, it's that you WON'T.

Then again, if your physical condition prohibits you from using a Rec Building, then my apologies. You are well in your right to vote no either way. I respect that.

Recreation is recreation... Education is education... how can you posibly think that they are the same? That's like saying Legacy park is an educational facility.

then why not have a "YMCA" instead of a Rec Dist at the expense of the taxpayer