[Vision2020] city taxes
Donovan Arnold
donovanarnold@hotmail.com
Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:18:44 -0700
Barbara,
I have the greatest respect for you. I voted for you, and will again.
However, you are incorrect about your interpretation and understanding
about the operation and costs to students and taxpayers at the University of
Idaho. I have all the documentation to prove what I am saying and would be
happy to take you around the University. You are listening to what UI
Administrators are publishing and saying. I spent 3 years working with Dan
Schoenberg, the head of Auxiliary Services, which runs the vandal cards,
streets, parking, and housing. I also spent two years working with
Administrators on the students Health Insurance.
I would be happy to produce all the documentation I have saved for the last
three years working with students, administrators, and other government
officials. I will run down each of your points and explain where you
misunderstand.
"the university of Idaho transfers more than $1 million
>per year to the City of Moscow to cover police expenses, etc."
Yes, this is true, but they produce more than 1/2 the costs to the Police
department.
" University also paid for 1/2 of the wastewater treatment plant"
The University of Idaho Fisheries Department alone uses more than 40% of the
water in Moscow. Combine that with all other water uses it has for gardens
and occupants and other departments and it does not cover its share of the
need for water treatment plant.
"and maintains all the City streets located on campus"
Which is no maintenance at all. The University acquired the "rights" to the
streets so they could charge $45 a parking space. See here:
http://www.info.uidaho.edu/parking/default.asp?page=map and here:
http://www.info.uidaho.edu/parking/default.asp?page=regs# under purple
permit.They say they are to maintain it. When in facts there are NO real
requirements to maintain the road. They are not required to do anything to
the road except rake the leaves once a year. Nor are they required to remove
snow from the streets. Sidewalks are also not under the jurisdiction, the
owners of the property in front of the sidewalks are legally required to
maintain that area. What this means is that even though the Moscow taxpayer
bought the roads and paid for there construction, they would have to buy a
parking permit to park there because the University has the rights to the
road. They paid zero in the original construction of the road.
"The University has no "legal domain" over health insurance - a student may
purchase health insurance from any carrier - but they must have insurance."
This is incorrect as well. Any student that cannot meet the requirements of
the University is automatically enrolled in the "University of Idaho"
"Student Health Insurance Program (SHIP)". Those requirements are designed
so that only dependant students that are covered by more extensive coverage
plans such a "Blue Cross" are allowed out of the requirement. The University
also uses tax dollars to promote the program over local coverage and try to
sell it to parents that are sending their children to the University even if
they already have the qualifying Health Insurance and/or better health
insurance. In addition, the Health Insurance does not cover dental, skin,
and eyes. These are the leading problems and costs of students at the
University. That is probably why they cut them out of the program. Students
had this coverage before this program was required. Moscow Dentists were
willing to work with the University to allow students health insurance of
dental coverage at a very low rate. However, the University denied this
opportunity for the students because it opted to go with a national
insurance provider that would not allow local Dentists to be a part of the
plan. The only thing the University Health Insurance program is good for is
for purchasing drugs and if you are in a horrible accident. I insist that if
you don't believe this to go to any dentist office in Moscow or at least
visit this site: www.uidaho.edu/ship/PDF/SHIPenrollmentform.pdf
"But, no private developer can build apartment complexes that they rent for
less than market."
This is incorrect, in fact, the total opposite is true. The Moscow City
council just approved a low income housing project that will be located at
the South entrance of Moscow off of Highway 95 in the next year. Rent here
will be about $370 for a two bedroom apartment. They are making a profit.
You are ignoring three important facts, one, that the University asks for
requirements of Builders that are not needed by the majority of students and
will cost huge amounts of money. Second, that builders are going to complain
about what they can rent an apartment for on the market no matter what. Go
to Taylor avenue, it is full of tiny apartments that were built many years
ago and the rent is outrageous check this site out: . Just run the numbers,
a complex that has 6 unites and rents each one for $1000 dollars will bring
in $72,000 a year. Unless you are getting a 15% interest rate on your loan
you have to make a profit on a 20 year loan.
Third, the University misconstrues to total costs of living in a resident
hall versus that of an off campus apartment. A Student living in a resident
hall sharing a room with one other student, and a rest room with an
adjoining room of two others pays $6000 for nine months for room and board.
That is $666 a month for just the rent and food. Now, those same four
students get a two bedroom apartment for $1000 they pay $250 each for rent,
about $50 for utilities a piece, $6 for local phone, about $5 for basic
cabal and another $100 for food. That amount equals $411 a month.
The University plays with the numbers. When it states the rent, it excludes
the meal plan they are required to buy when living in the Resident Halls. So
rather than saying it costs in $6000, they can say it costs $4000. They than
use the term "school year" rather than month. That is cheaper on paper. But
not in reality. The fact is 90-95% of students move out of the Resident
Halls after the first year contract is up after they figure this out. The
ones that usually stay are students that get Resident Hall paying positions,
don't have cars or computers, enjoy the social life, or have parents that
refuse to pay for them to move out. A 5% return rate is a sign of something
when 95%+ of students are first year students at the University. See this
site:
"what about married graduate and law students, many of whom have children?"
Oh, I would love to give you some papers on the University Budget. I would
also like to take you on a tour of Family Housing and Graduate Housing. I
could introduce you to some people and take you into some apartments. You
would not be happy and your image of the University would change.
Graduate housing is NOT Cheaper. Family Housing is cheaper. But the
conditions that 3/4 of them are living in are well below what they are
paying. They have mold on the ceilings, broken utility boxes, loose
railings, and virtually no lighting. The bark on the playground is 6 inches
long, hard, and has gagged edges. I had to fight for three months to get a
piece of slide replaced that had a hole large enough for a childs leg to
fall through. I had to fight for young Asia women to get another apartment
elsewhere on campus after she moved out the apartment it was condemned
because the ground it was build on. Another lady had the city sewer system
go up her drain and it spilled all over inside her apartment. Another lady
pulled her child off the floor and his knees were all scratched and sore
from the carpet of an apartment she just moved into. I have a million
stories to tell and would love to tell them all to you.
One might think that Family Housing is subsidized by other Student Housing.
But in fact it is the opposite. South Side Vista Apartments in Family
housing are so old that the University has them paid off. The money that
they pay does not go to repair and maintenance of the old mold infested
apartments. In turn it goes to Resident Halls. The Resident Halls pay out to
Sodexho, which takes the profit of $120,000 a year. Almost the exact amount
of money that South Hill Vista pays in total rent after expenses are paid in
Family Housing.
That $120,000 should go back to family housing to maintain it not to some
international corporation the invested in third world country prisons that
have many prisoners that were not even guilty of a crime and live in
conditions that are so horrible many people all across the world have
protested.
I have a copy of the Sodexho contract if you would like to see it or copy
it. It is not online and is difficult to get a hold of. You have to fill out
a request form giving your reasons and wait about 3 months. Two other ASUI
Senators before me could not get a copy. I never got it from the office I
applied for it, I had to ask Director Schoenberg for the copy.
"The University supported and supports legislation to allow the use of the
>Vandal Card off campus. Many in the banking industry do not."
You are incorrect about this too, in part, the important part. The part you
are correct about is the part of the Vandal Card being used as a credit card
or checking card. This competes with local businesses. The Banks have no
problem with making the Vandal Card run by the Banks. This would in fact
benefit from it. ASUI and UI Lobbied to have the banking laws changed,we
dropped our idea when the students and banks agreed to change our tactic of
lobbing for private banks to take over the Vandal Card program. It is the
University that is blocking this agreement. The University will not allow
private banks to take over the Vandal Card program and make a profit.
Although it would make a profit, it would cost less for students because the
Private Banks can run the program for less and students could buy products
off campus for cheaper than on campus.
"No decision or change happens in a vacuum. What may be good for
>one group of businesses may devastate another group."
I agree, but if someone has to be devastated, let us choose to devastate
national corporations where Moscow is only .0000001% of the profit versus
devastating local businesses where jobs are located in the community.
"Ultimately, Moscow needs to increase its business base and decide to live
>within its means"
I agree, but you can't just say it, we have to have a plan. My idea is to
allow businesses not to have to compete with the University which is
subsidized by the State taxpayer.
"We have lots of government - federal, state, county, local - in Moscow and
Latah county that
>do not pay taxes."
Yes, but they provide direct services for the community. The University is
not providing services by cornering the market in Health Insurance,
Computers, and Housing. the University provides jobs, which helps the city
of Moscow. But when it doesn't go much beyond that in helping. It could
allow local businesses in on the sales of Health Insurance, computers, food,
housing, and many other services and products that it purchases from
non-local businesses.
I don't think we should be allowing the University to walk all over people.
Many Moscow residents are suffering from Battered Wife Syndrome when it
comes to their rights. Just because the University brings us a pay check,
doesn't mean it has the right to take businesses away, take our water, and
get what ever it demands upon the people of Moscow. Like I said, when was
the last time a Moscow Politician said "no" to the University instead of
giving them what ever they wanted. I can't recall a time in the 10 years
they did this.
Thanks!
Donovan J Arnold
>From: "Barbara Richardson" <edc@moscow.com>
>To: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanarnold@hotmail.com>, <strand@pacsim.com>,
><jdanahy@turbonet.com>, <vision2020@moscow.com>
>Subject: RE: [Vision2020] city taxes
>Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 09:55:51 -0700
>
>All,
>
>Please be aware that the university of Idaho transfers more than $1 million
>per year to the City of Moscow to cover police expenses, etc. The
>University also paid for 1/2 of the wastewater treatment plant, and
>maintains all the City streets located on campus. The University has no
>"legal domain" over health insurance - a student may purchase health
>insurance from any carrier - but they must have insurance.
>
>Earlier this year, the University met with local builders in a meeting
>sponsored by the City of Moscow. They told the local communities exactly
>what housing needs the University will have over the next 10 years. But,
>no
>private developer can build apartment complexes that they rent for less
>than
>market. Most students and families that live on campus do so because they
>cannot afford to live in Moscow. It is only cheaper to live off campus if
>you are single - what about married graduate and law students, many of whom
>have children?
>
>The University supported and supports legislation to allow the use of the
>Vandal Card off campus. Many in the banking industry do not. If students
>can use their vandal card off campus - will they still opt for local bank
>accounts. No decision or change happens in a vacuum. What may be good for
>one group of businesses may devastate another group.
>
>Ultimately, Moscow needs to increase its business base and decide to live
>within its means. That may include limited the number of parks and
>programs
>operated by the City. Also, how many buildings have been removed from he
>tax roles by the City of Moscow in the past three years? But on the other
>side of the coin, we save about $4 per year having a volunteer fire
>department. It is not simply a University issue. We have lots of
>government - federal, state, county, local - in Moscow and Latah county
>that
>do not pay taxes. Please take a look at your property tax bill - what
>percentage goes to what governmental entity?
>
>It is difficult for government to live within its means, citizens always
>want more services - but lower taxes.
>
>Barbara
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com]On
>Behalf Of Donovan Arnold
>Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 1:41 AM
>To: strand@pacsim.com; jdanahy@turbonet.com; vision2020@moscow.com
>Subject: RE: [Vision2020] city tazes
>
>
>Mr. Strand,
>
>I agree with you in part. We must provide more business opportunities in
>Moscow. I also agree that Moscow remains to dependant on the University.
>
>Where I disagree is where you have one student that contributes to the
>running of Moscow and another doesn't. One business pays taxes and another
>doesn't. One farmer pays taxes and another doesn't. One restaurant pays
>taxes to the community and another doesn't. I don't like that concept. I
>think it is unjust. I am student. I choose to live off campus for two
>reasons. One, Moscow is my hometown and I want to help support it. Second,
>it is actually cheaper to live off campus than on campus.
>
>What many people don't realize is that the University has established
>"legal
>domain" over many services and products. A few examples are computers and
>health insurance. The University unfairly claims rights of products and
>services that render other Moscow community businesses profitless.
>
>I find it unjust for a health insurance company to pay money to a system
>that in turn creates health insurance that is cheaper than what they can
>provide. Likewise, computer companies have to pay the University which
>requires some students to buy computers from them. To me, this is like
>requiring Safeway to pay a certain percentage of its' income to Tidyman's
>so
>they can make their prices cheaper than Safeway. This kills businesses. It
>is a monopoly that can't be fought.
>
>The reason I support more businesses to come in is to lessen our dependence
>on the University so that we can say "NO" to the University every time it
>wants something. To many politicians in Moscow cave into the University
>demands that hurt students and residents of Moscow.
>
>We need to have Resident Halls run and managed by Moscow Businesses. We
>need
>to have the University do Health Insurance through local and Idaho
>businesses. We need to have all construction done by area workers in Idaho.
>We need to have computers purchased through Moscow and/or Idaho computer
>companies. We need to have all the University banking go through local area
>branches.
>
>Moscow Businesses are in competition with the University. I don't think
>this
>economy can grow as long the University sucks up the profit margin and
>gives
>all profits to national and foreign corporations or wastes it on water
>fountains and poorly constructed building that cost a fortune. I have been
>to meetings on campus where they told the students not to buy from local
>businesses. The University has policies and contracts that prevent local
>businesses from even being allowed to compete for business from Students.
>Any student that lives on campus is required to put money on a Vandal Card.
>The Vandal Card cannot be used off campus.
>
>I also don't think businesses like Naylor Farms are the solution either.
>Naylor Farms will use more water than the entire cities of Pullman and
>Moscow combined. The area does not have the resources nor can we tolerate
>the environmental damage it would bring.
>
>Moscow needs to grow. But it needs to grow intelligently and within the
>structure of Moscow culture. I don't want Moscow changing its' face or
>turning into another American sprawled suburb. Moscow is Unique. I hope to
>keep its' flavor. Unfortunately, the University has become a corporation
>and
>not a school, and it hijacking the local community from being able to move
>in the friendly direction of helping Moscow residents and more toward the
>interests of the University of Idaho Incorporated to make more money and
>expand to an ever fattening bureaucracy that has the purpose of only
>feeding
>itself even more. This must stop for any Moscow Community businesses to
>move
>in here and be able to survive. We must first stop the annihilation of
>businesses before creating new ones.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Donovan J Arnold
>
>
> >From: "Bill Strand" <strand@pacsim.com>
> >To: "'Donovan Arnold'" <donovanarnold@hotmail.com>,
><jdanahy@turbonet.com>,
> > <vision2020@moscow.com>
> >Subject: RE: [Vision2020] city tazes
> >Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 22:56:41 -0700
> >
> >Donovan,
> >
> >The issue of high property taxes will remain as long as the city of
> >Moscow remains dependent upon entities such as the University of Idaho
> >and Gritman that pay no property taxes. Think about the land that has
> >come off the tax rolls in the last few years (such as Cavanaugh's
> >Landing). This means that a larger percentage of property taxes will be
> >placed on homeowners. I was once told that Latah County has one of the
> >highest proportion of taxes coming from the homeowners in all of Idaho.
> >
> >The answer isn't to tax the students and/or visitors to Moscow - the
> >answer is to develop the business community in this town. These entities
> >require the minimum amount of increased services (fire, hospital, water,
> >garbage, etc...) and thus have the highest return on investment for
> >their taxes.
> >
> >However, this takes a long term commitment in a wide range of areas.
> >
> >Bill Strand
> >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>
>_____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
>
>_____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail