[Vision2020] Question for Mr. Ament and Mr. Curley

[Donovan Arnold]

When did New St. Andrews become accredited?

Mr. Curley made his argument that NSA is violating the
law because NSA is an "educational institution" as
defined by city code. The city code does not allow
"educational institutions" downtown or in
commercialized zones. 

The trouble with this argument is that NSA does not
meet the legal city code definition of "educational
institution". Because in order for any entity to do so
it must be accredited by the state of Idaho or another
national or regional accrediting agency as recognized
by the state of Idaho through the Idaho State Board of
Education. 

Only one of the three board members caught this, and
he voted "no".  

In order for your argument that NSA is violating the
law to be correct, it must be an "educational
institution". 

And for those that are a little slow, I am NOT
defending or saying that I agree with NSA curriculum
or religious beliefs. I am simply saying, that if the
plaintiffs "claim" that this has nothing to do with
NSA or Doug Wilson and is about the law, should that
then not be their chief concern?

Mr. Dickison's comments, although I strongly disagreed
with much of the words and arguments he made, were
limited. He was only given 1/2 the total time to speak
as Mr. Curley. I would tend to think that in a fair
case, both sides would be given time to speak their
side of the issue.  

So I ask again, Mr. Ament, and Mr. Curley, when did
NSA become accredited and therefore an "educational
institution" validating your claim that NSA is in
violation of the law?

Inquiring minds want to know. 

Take Care,

Donovan J Arnold


--- aaron ament <citizenament at moscow.com> wrote:

> Last night I attended a public hearing held by the
> Moscow Board of Adjustment.  By a 2 to 1 vote, the
> commissioners ruled that Zoning Commissioner Joel
> Plaskon was wrong to say that New Saint Andrews use
> of its downtown property was allowed under existing
> code.  The board ruled for the complainants.
> Joel Plaskon spoke to the relevant issues as did the
> complainants attorney, Mike Curley.  Not so the
> representative for New Saint Andrews, a Mr.
> Dickenson[?].
> He refused to address the issue and spoke instead of
> the imagined motives of the complainants.  The
> commission chairman asked the N.S.A. representative
> more than once to refrain from attacking the
> complainants and speak to the issue.
> Joel Plaskon said that he used a "holistic" approach
> to reach his decision.  A "holistic" look at the
> actions of N.S.A. and its affiliated enterprises
> tells me they have yet to find a law they are
> willing to obey.
> 
>  "Citizen" Ament
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   >
_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step
> Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. 
>  
>                http://www.fsr.net                   
>    
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> 


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail