[Vision2020] BOE Meeting, July 6, 2004

DonaldH675 at aol.com DonaldH675 at aol.com
Fri Jul 2 14:41:14 PDT 2004


Dear Mr. Kimmell, Mr. Stroschein, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Fiscus, Mr. Dickison, Mr. 
Whitney;

We learned today that Mr. Greg Dickison, counsel for Christ Church, did not 
receive official notification until yesterday of our appeal on the property tax 
exemptions granted to New St. Andrews and Anselm House in May 2004.  As you 
know, we filed our application for appeal of these property tax exemptions June 
22, 2004.  Our hearing is scheduled for July 6, 2004 at 1:00.  

After visiting with Deputy Prosecutor, Mr. Doug Whitney, today (who is acting 
as BOE counsel in this matter), we learned that the hearing will open as 
scheduled, but pending receipt of a letter from Mr. Dickison asking for a 
continuance, the hearing proper may be rescheduled.  Our revocation request is an 
unusual event in Latah County and every appropriate courtesy is being extended to 
the participants.  We support and appreciate this gesture, and we know that 
the same courtesy will be shown to us if rescheduling is necessary.  

Can you help us to understand why this hearing now involves three parties?  
It is our understanding that the BOE determines property tax exemptions.  That 
being the case, our petition to revoke the exemptions granted to Anselm and 
New St. Andrews appear to us to be limited to the BOE and Saundra Lund and Rose 
Huskey.  If the BOE decides in favor of revocation, wouldn't that be the 
appropriate time for representatives from Anselm House and New St. Andrews to 
appeal the decision?  How are they party to our action?  While we understand their 
interest as property owners, unless there is an issue for them to appeal (and 
there certainly is not at this point), we are unable to understand why the 
hearing proper may be rescheduled at their request.  

When Anselm House and New St. Andrews made their request for property 
exemption in May 2004, public notice on the BOE agenda, which was posted in the Court 
House, was legally sufficient.  How does our request for a hearing differ in 
substance from theirs?  

We look forward to meeting with you on Tuesday.  We appreciate the 
opportunity to bring our property tax exemption concerns into the public forum.

Cordially,

Rose Huskey and Saundra Lund 
Once you lose integrity everything else is easy.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20040702/aa12e2d8/attachment.htm


More information about the Vision2020 mailing list