PRIVATE: RE: [Vision2020] A uniform legal challenge

[Saundra Lund]

Hi Again Phil & Other Visionaries,

I appreciate you putting out for public view (well, for V2020) the specifics
of your concerns.

HOWEVER, I find it odd & even offensive for you to basically *demand* that
others take on what you perceive (and I don't necessarily disagree with you)
as problems.

Perhaps I'm reading your email wrong, but since you seem to be demanding
action from others rather than asking others to join you in your efforts, I
have to ask:  why, Phil, aren't you trying *yourself* to have your concerns
addressed rather than demanding that others do the work for you?  Perhaps
you have valid reasons, but if that's the case, then you cannot just assume
that those you name (i.e., Tom Hansen and Rose Huskey, but you could have
just as easily included me and any number of other individuals) don't have
other just as valid reasons for *not* adopting your causes as their own.

If you have attempted to have your concerns addressed, then I'd be
interested in learning the results.  When trying to interest others in your
causes, I've found that it's usually best to explain the steps you've
already taken because not too many people are interested in reinventing the
wheel  :-)

My suggestion would be for you to attempt to have your concerns addressed by
the appropriate officials.  After all, there are folks who are actually
*paid* to address the questions you raise, and I'd think that would be the
logical first step rather than *demanding* that unpaid citizens volunteer
for your causes.  There are lots of governmental entities I've not had
dealings with, but I do have to say that I've found our local government to
be very approachable and helpful.


HTH & JMHO,
Saundra Lund
Moscow, ID

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
nothing.
Edmund Burke

***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2005, Saundra Lund.
Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside the Vision 2020 forum
without the express written permission of the author.*****

-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Phil Nisbet
Sent: Saturday, 18 June 2005 1:25 PM
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] A uniform legal challenge

Well, well, well.

A level playing field in all of the community's endeavors has been called
for by our leading luminaries.  Specifically they have called for all and
sundry in the community to play by the law.

That being the case and seeing that they are active in the pursuit of any
who break the law, a challenge to see if they are serious about it or just
blowing the typical smoke up all of our rectums.

So here are three cases of specific illegality occurring right here in
Moscow Idaho which the law pursuing committee of vigilance can take on.  As
a mater of fact, they should immediately take them on, or we will all know
for a fact that they are simply using the law as a way of scapegoating
others who disagree with them.

Case One

TITLE  54
                    PROFESSIONS, VOCATIONS, AND BUSINESSES
                                  CHAPTER 28
                                  GEOLOGISTS
    54-2818.  STATE AND POLITICAL SUBDIVISION CONTRACTS -- EXCEPTIONS. This
state and its political subdivisions, such as county, city, or legally
constituted boards, districts, commissions or authorities, shall contract
for geological services only with persons registered under this act,
provided further that nothing in this section or act shall be construed to
prevent registered professional engineers from lawfully practicing soils
mechanics, foundation engineering, geological engineering, and other
professional engineering, as provided in chapter 12, title 54, Idaho Code,
and licensed architects from lawfully practicing architecture as provided in
chapter 3, title 54, Idaho Code.

CE Brockway and his firm were hired to perform geological services for the
County of Latah, which is a political subdivision of the State of Idaho.  CE
Brockway is not registered to perform geological services by the Idaho Board
for Professional Geologists.  His contract was initiated by Mr. Thompson,
the County Prosecutor of the County of Latah, who was well aware of the lack
of registration of the firm who he engaged and attempted to hide his wrong
doing by suggesting that hydrological services were unrelated to geology.

So, when are the lords of the law abiding going to turn in the County
Prosecutor and Mr. Brockway for what is an obvious breaking of Idaho Code?  
When can we expect them to initiate a letter writing drive to insist that
the Attorney General of the State of Idaho take action on this criminal act?

Case 2

Idaho Law is very specific with regards water rights.  Persons with a
domestic water right are authorized to use water from a well to provide they
and their households with a maximum of 2500 gallons of water per day which
may be used solely to provide for household consumption and for the watering
of no more than a quarter acre of lawn and or garden, which is for domestic
consumption only.  Domestic consumption may not be used to irrigate
commercial crops nor for industrial uses or to provide commercial
stockwater.

A tour via internet of the Mary Jane Farms website shows the presence of PVC
used to drip irrigate crops sold commercially to the Moscow Coop.  
Inspection of the records of that area for a well registered to provide
irrigation water indicates that no such permit exists and that in fact, a
domestic water well is currently in use as the source for irrigation of the
commercial crops sold by Mary Jane Farms.

This clear violation of Idaho water law is a theft of water from existing
water users who have followed the law and have legitimate permits for the
use of water.  It is a serious depletion of the water resource when the
community as a whole is being asked to conserve water.

Surely people who want a level playing field and insist that the law be
uniform in application will want to file a complaint with the Idaho
Department of Water Resources to halt this illegal use of a public resource.

  Further, civic minded individuals who abhor selective enforcement and
insist that everything be uniform in legal application, will insist that the
Moscow Coop refuse further purchases of food produced illegally using stolen
water.

Case 3

SECTION 6. RELIGIOUS TEST AND TEACHING IN SCHOOL PROHIBITED. No religious
test or qualification shall ever be required of any person as a condition of
admission into any public educational institution of the state, either as
teacher or student; and no teacher or student of any such institution shall
ever be required to attend or participate in any religious service whatever.

No sectarian or religious tenets or doctrines shall ever be taught in the
public schools, nor shall any distinction or classification of pupils be
made on account of race or color. No books, papers, tracts or documents of a
political, sectarian or denominational character shall be used or introduced
in any schools established under the provisions of this article, nor shall
any teacher or any district receive any of the public school moneys in which
the schools have not been taught in accordance with the provisions of this
article.


This being the case, surely the folks who are so diligent in seeing that the
law is uniformly carried out will be at the Moscow City Council Meeting to
insist that the Virtues Project by immediately shut down.  A fast review of
the project website at http://www.virtuesproject.com/ shows that the program
is taken from the "sacred Texts" of several cultures.  The program is
designed to teach virtues in the context of sacred (That is simply to say
religious) literature.  Since the programs goal is to train 50 teachers to
use this sacred literature in the Moscow Public Schools and will be using
Public funds to promote these religious goals and objectives, not only from
the City of Moscow, but also from the Moscow School District and the
University of Idaho with a planned expenditure of $75,000 over the next
three years, this attempt to give religious instruction in the public
schools in contravention of Idaho's Constitution would naturally be opposed
by such leading luminaries as Saundra and Rose.

So, please get going on these obvious actions by the nasty old scofflaws, so
that we can see that indeed your actions on so many other things in zoning
and water law and religious separation of church and state are not just you
using the law to bring down your opponents.

Or is Tom's

"The law is the law.  These allegations of conspiracy and "lynch mobbing" 
are groundless."

Just another smoke screen?

Or how about Rose's;

"I ask that they obey city, state, and federal regulations.  That is not an
unreasonable or bigoted request.  It's the same standard that I am expected
to follow."

If she is serious, then of course she will take action against those nasty
people who are breaking the law in the above three stated cases.

We wait with baited breath to see what actions they will take.