What makes this controversial is the fact it concerns a traffic light for access to the Kroc Center. When the city began the process to bring the Kroc Center to Coeur d'Alene, I would have thought they would have done traffic studies as part of site selection. I'm wondering, why, after the city was granted the Center budgeting was not done for the installation of the light plus any other improvements to the roads that might be needed.
It would seem from the article they were depending on a grant for funding. Grants are tenuous at best. It does not seem to me to be a prudent way to plan for public safety issues when there is a concrete need; not a tenuous one.
The cost is $350,000 dollars. The Salvation Army, who owns the Kroc Center is putting up $100,000. This seems a disproportionate amount since the improvements are for their facility. Since the grant was for $247,000 the City now has to find that amount. Where?
While I think the traffic estimates are an "in your dreams" figure, the light is necessary. The need has been made known to LCDC, the urban renewal agency. They have already given $500,000 of tax payer money to a project that wasn't to cost the tax payers a dime.
Wisely, LCDC has told the City to exhaust all other funding sources before returning to them. If a return is necessary, however, is this the proper use of LCDC money? To bail out bad planning and budgeting by the City? I think not. But watch out folks. You've got the controversial Kroc Center and the controversial LCDC bubbling in the same cauldron once again.
Be careful or it may boil over.