My name is Leanna Whitney and I am running for a position on the Western Elmore County Recreation District Board. I’ve lived in this community all my life and I love it dearly. I was elected to three terms in the Idaho House of Representatives and have been City Treasurer for 20 years. I’ve had occasional questions about my job as City Treasurer – is it a conflict? The answer is no. I verified this with the City Attorney and the Attorney General’s office before running. Like school district employees currently serving as City Council members, a city employee can serve on the WECRD Board. Hopefully, my knowledge of government budgeting and my ability to collaborate would be helpful to the district.
I have tremendous admiration for my opponent, Mollie Marsh. She’s a committed community volunteer, with many years dedicated to this project. I respect Mollie and I like her. So why run against her? It isn’t personal. It’s not about who Mollie is, or who I am. It’s about recent decisions of the board, the course of the district’s future and my desire to give voters a choice.
First, a little rumor control about my intentions: I do NOT want to see the district dissolved or its assets liquidated.
I believe the district has a tremendous opportunity to do good for this community, as long as they communicate openly, keep taxes low and provide affordable, financially sustainable recreation opportunities in a changing economy. At this point, after seven years of existence, the WECRD Board has not yet produced a detailed financial plan to prove their vision is do-able within a reasonable timeframe, and is affordable to access and operate. Economic signs are pointing to a very difficult recession. So the most important question is “Where is the financial plan spreadsheet?” Send out newsletters. Post financial specifics on your website. If a financial plan exists, put it out for all to see. The public is entitled to full disclosure with solid, realistic numbers.
However, in volatile financial times, I believe one plan is not enough. If elected, I would help develop a Plan A, a Plan B, and a Plan C and then actively communicate the details of those plans to the public. Given the national economy, we must be realistic and calculate not only the best case scenario, but also the worst-case scenario. Using those numbers, if pools are affordable to build, operate and access – great. If not, if costs are impractical in the midst of tough financial times, then let’s be honest and move forward with other proposals to provide much-needed benefit to the community now. WECRD has close to $1 million and land that’s purchased but undeveloped. I’m concerned the board is so rigidly attached to aquatics – the most costly portion to build and operate – they are holding back all of the dollars for that purpose, even though a facility without aquatics, or other recreation programming for youth, seniors and families, might provide affordable benefits to the community immediately. These options need to be explored with an attitude of openness. Board members should accept input and criticism gladly, as an opportunity to fine tune their decision-making.
Secondly, I strongly disagree with the board’s decision to change from a per household fee to a property tax levy. This increased taxes from $250,000 to over $413,000 annually (more than a 60% increase in one year) without a vote of the public. When the district was sold in October of 2000, the Mountain Home News noted the Blue Ribbon Committee (the organizing group) “is actually recommending a hearth tax, a $35 per household per year tax rather than a levy based on property valuations…” Many citizens voted in favor of the Rec District because a per household fee seemed reasonable. As more houses are built, more revenue is raised. Business property, equipment and farms weren’t taxed. After using the household fee for six years, the board suddenly changed to a property tax levy on the assessed value of homes and businesses, offering minimal communication to the public. Businesses that paid zero before were now paying several hundred dollars. This was legal, but it wasn’t right. It also created a credibility issue for the board. If elected I would work diligently to reverse this decision.
Finally, the board is using ten year old data to develop their Phase I design. That simply doesn’t make sense to me. Before spending a million dollars, wouldn’t you want the most accurate, most current information possible? This community has changed a lot in ten years, and recreation has too. If elected I would work to obtain updated facts based on current recreation needs. This is a wonderful opportunity to bring groups to the table, engage the community, and plan strategically. Also, collaboration should be discussed and duplication of services avoided, so the WECRD board must be leaders in reaching out to the School District, the City and the County. Currently, there seems to be resentment or suspicion toward other jurisdictions, based on a perceived lack of cooperation in the years since WECRD was formed. It’s time to set that old baggage aside, join hands and get things done for the good of the community. Sometimes it takes a fresh perspective to move in that direction.
If the issues I’ve raised make sense to you, I would deeply appreciate your vote. Whether I win or lose, this has been a lively and educational race and it’s giving people a choice between two approaches. Voters are better informed about district decisions, and the board will feel a greater level of accountability. That’s all good. At the end of the day, no matter how you vote or where you stand, we’re all neighbors who care about each other and the strength of this community.
I have tremendous admiration for my opponent, Mollie Marsh. She’s a committed community volunteer, with many years dedicated to this project. I respect Mollie and I like her. So why run against her? It isn’t personal. It’s not about who Mollie is, or who I am. It’s about recent decisions of the board, the course of the district’s future and my desire to give voters a choice.
First, a little rumor control about my intentions: I do NOT want to see the district dissolved or its assets liquidated.
I believe the district has a tremendous opportunity to do good for this community, as long as they communicate openly, keep taxes low and provide affordable, financially sustainable recreation opportunities in a changing economy. At this point, after seven years of existence, the WECRD Board has not yet produced a detailed financial plan to prove their vision is do-able within a reasonable timeframe, and is affordable to access and operate. Economic signs are pointing to a very difficult recession. So the most important question is “Where is the financial plan spreadsheet?” Send out newsletters. Post financial specifics on your website. If a financial plan exists, put it out for all to see. The public is entitled to full disclosure with solid, realistic numbers.
However, in volatile financial times, I believe one plan is not enough. If elected, I would help develop a Plan A, a Plan B, and a Plan C and then actively communicate the details of those plans to the public. Given the national economy, we must be realistic and calculate not only the best case scenario, but also the worst-case scenario. Using those numbers, if pools are affordable to build, operate and access – great. If not, if costs are impractical in the midst of tough financial times, then let’s be honest and move forward with other proposals to provide much-needed benefit to the community now. WECRD has close to $1 million and land that’s purchased but undeveloped. I’m concerned the board is so rigidly attached to aquatics – the most costly portion to build and operate – they are holding back all of the dollars for that purpose, even though a facility without aquatics, or other recreation programming for youth, seniors and families, might provide affordable benefits to the community immediately. These options need to be explored with an attitude of openness. Board members should accept input and criticism gladly, as an opportunity to fine tune their decision-making.
Secondly, I strongly disagree with the board’s decision to change from a per household fee to a property tax levy. This increased taxes from $250,000 to over $413,000 annually (more than a 60% increase in one year) without a vote of the public. When the district was sold in October of 2000, the Mountain Home News noted the Blue Ribbon Committee (the organizing group) “is actually recommending a hearth tax, a $35 per household per year tax rather than a levy based on property valuations…” Many citizens voted in favor of the Rec District because a per household fee seemed reasonable. As more houses are built, more revenue is raised. Business property, equipment and farms weren’t taxed. After using the household fee for six years, the board suddenly changed to a property tax levy on the assessed value of homes and businesses, offering minimal communication to the public. Businesses that paid zero before were now paying several hundred dollars. This was legal, but it wasn’t right. It also created a credibility issue for the board. If elected I would work diligently to reverse this decision.
Finally, the board is using ten year old data to develop their Phase I design. That simply doesn’t make sense to me. Before spending a million dollars, wouldn’t you want the most accurate, most current information possible? This community has changed a lot in ten years, and recreation has too. If elected I would work to obtain updated facts based on current recreation needs. This is a wonderful opportunity to bring groups to the table, engage the community, and plan strategically. Also, collaboration should be discussed and duplication of services avoided, so the WECRD board must be leaders in reaching out to the School District, the City and the County. Currently, there seems to be resentment or suspicion toward other jurisdictions, based on a perceived lack of cooperation in the years since WECRD was formed. It’s time to set that old baggage aside, join hands and get things done for the good of the community. Sometimes it takes a fresh perspective to move in that direction.
If the issues I’ve raised make sense to you, I would deeply appreciate your vote. Whether I win or lose, this has been a lively and educational race and it’s giving people a choice between two approaches. Voters are better informed about district decisions, and the board will feel a greater level of accountability. That’s all good. At the end of the day, no matter how you vote or where you stand, we’re all neighbors who care about each other and the strength of this community.
.JPG)
.JPG){kind=link}