March 23, 2025
Cautionary Pocatello Bond Tale
By: P.A.G.E. Co-founder Lydia Noble
Pocatello hasn’t had a “Capital Improvement Plan” (CIP) in years. At least nothing qualifying as a CIP that comprehensively identifies city-wide, long-term capital needs and associated costs. Yet, well-maintained CIPs are critical to successful city financial planning, and Pocatello financial policy actually requires a comprehensive 5-year CIP. However, five years ago, repeated pleas fell on deaf ears when 3 council members vehemently advocated for a CIP. Remaining council and mayor disagreed. Hence, no city-wide CIP.
Pocatello used about $7.5M (of $10.7M) in ARPA (COVID) funding to finally address long overdue deferred maintenance. With ARPA funding now expended, council was approached at the 03/13/2025 Work Session to consider hiring a consultant to prepare a CIP (estimate=$125K.) Perhaps council was finally “enlightened” that a long-term funding plan is necessary to address future needs? Turns out those earlier, maligned council members were indeed correct!
Council must have a clear grasp of upcoming critical capital expenditures (large dollar items/projects) to develop sustainable, balanced budgets. Without a CIP, our council has NOT had a clear grasp of critical, costly capital needs for years—despite claims otherwise. Result? Years of incomplete budgets requiring multiple, costly “budget amendments.”
Operating WITHOUT a CIP can have other negative consequences: infrastructure deterioration (Ross Park slide closed 4+ seasons and failing fire alert system); increased emergency repair costs (RPAC roof repair); reduced long-term stability of critical infrastructures; difficulty prioritizing critical needs when many items are unidentified; funding ability challenges; reduced quality of life and/or safety for local citizens; and vulnerability to natural disasters.
Council multi-year disregard of the importance of a CIP could prove costly. Critical expenditures must be re-identified, prioritized, scheduled and then costs assigned and funding sources determined. End result? Likely sticker-shock followed closely by “creative” city financing options—for taxpayers!
The CIP concept (commonly used and routinely updated elsewhere) is so foreign to council here, they didn’t even question WHY a consultant must take more than a YEAR to complete one—not until FY27 budgeting! Reportedly, individual city departments already prepare similar plans annually. With those, WHY is council considering spending $125K of taxpayer money and waiting more than a year for a basic CIP? Sounds more like a strategy to delay taxpayers learning about possible “sticker-shock” issues until AFTER 2025 elections!
A CITY BOND ASK was briefly mentioned as one possible solution for more funding. Perhaps a sizeable city bond payable over the next 20 years? Don’t bother pointing out if council had been using a CIP responsibly, a bond probably wouldn’t be necessary. Predictably, council will just offer trivial excuses, continue ignoring the obvious (and better) solution of keeping spending in-line with revenues, and expect the public to “invest in Pocatello!” Retirement of the animal shelter bond in a few years will factor in. Pay off one bond, open another—no break for taxpayers!
A cautionary Pocatello bond tale—if you’re really in the mood to finance a future city bond to correct years of financial short-sightedness by elected officials, then by all means keep reelecting these financial bunglers!
Lydia Noble is a long-time resident of Pocatello, a graduate of the University of Pittsburgh, and recently retired from a 30-year career at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) as a Business Professional. She co-founded Pocatello for Accountable Government Entities (P.A.G.E.) on FB out of concern about Pocatello’s high property taxes and to work to ensure that retirees on fixed incomes are able to continue residing in Pocatello.
