[Vision2020] Kai's comments and questions

[Michael Curley]

Kai:
You have raised once again the "motive" issue regarding the complaint 
against NSA.  The complainants have assiduously avoided that 
discussion because (a) it is irrelevant to the legal issue, and (b) 
it would not be a one-sided discussion and would circle back around 
ultimately to not being relevant to the legal issue.  And, since many 
people have weighed in on the issue, there may be many "motives," 
many of which might actually be inconsistent or in conflict with one 
another.

It seems to me that your post lumps motive and the legal issue 
together.  I would like to invite you to separate them for a moment 
and see where that gets us.

Assume, for the sake of argument only, that you are right that SOME 
people at least want to attack Doug Wilson and his related 
enterprises as part of an ideological battle.  I suggest that someone 
who approaches the issue knowing nothing about the parties involved 
might STILL find that NSA should NOT be downtown.  Why?  Well, for 
the very reasons that the City Council did, in fact, do exactly what 
you say is against common sense--they made a very clear distinction 
between three types of schools--K-12, college/university, and 
commercial/trade schools, and excluded the first two from downtown.

Why did Council specify that commercial schools were permitted 
downtown and NOT grade schools, jr. high schools, high schools, 
colleges, or universities?  Well it could be because the "principal 
purpose of [Downtown] is to provide a location for compatible 
commercial uses. . . for example enterprises dispensing retail 
commodities, and those providing professional and personal services 
to the INDIVIDUAL." (from the "intent" section of the downtown zone; 
emphasis mine ).  

Downtown is identified in the comprehensive plan as "one of the  
city's major shopping areas, provide a pleasonat environment for 
shopping and working, provide an opportunity for socializing, and act 
as a focal point for the community."

Colleges and universities tend to grow.  They tend to need more and 
more space as they grow.  Colleges and universities are not 
commercial enterprises, they do not provide professional and personal 
services to the general public (as we would usually interpret that 
term), they tend to eat up available parking, and they break up the 
pedestrian mall" concept detailed in the Comprehensive Plan for 
downtown.

While elementary and high schools might not tend to expand as a 
college or university might, they still present the same "non-
retail," "non-personal service," parking, pedestrian traffic 
problems.

Hence, there is good reason to exclude schools (K through college) 
downtown.  We don't know why each individual Council member voted as 
s/he did, but the reasons outlined above are certainly consistent 
with other measures they passed in the zoning code and the comp plan.

Commercial schools by their very name are commercial.  There is some 
"retail" aspect usually associated with them.  That is a significant 
distinction upon which Council might have based its decision to allow 
them downtown.  Any member of the public--not just a student--can get 
a massage;  can have a haircut or styling.  

I would agree with you, should you raise the issue, that ALL possible 
commercial schools might not be compatible downtown.  That some might 
be detrimental to the stated intent for the downtown area.  I think 
the Code should be modified.  I think it should allow commercial 
schools by conditional use permit so that the city can control the 
size and nature of the commercial school--and insure that there IS a 
retail aspect.  I do not, however, think that either K-12 or colleges 
or universities should be allowed even by conditional use permit--
because I agree that downtown should be preserved for retail and 
personal service establishments and no K-college school meets those 
needs.

Finally, I respect YOUR right to disagree about what should be 
allowed downtown.  You and others might think an elementary school 
would be a nice addition, or a college or part of the University of 
Idaho.  It is a matter for reasoned, rational, and I sincerely hope, 
respectful, public debate.  And that is what is required--two public 
hearings--to change the Code or the Comp Plan.  And intentions will 
have, should have, nothing to do with the discussion.

Let's move our thinking off downtown for a moment.  Someone filed a 
complaint against the Alternative High School being located where it 
on Main Street/Hiwy 95.  It seems clear to me it is NOT allowed to be 
there as the code is currently written.  So, the ruling should be 
made accordingly and if the AHS wants to stay there, the school 
district needs to ask for a change to the code--and we will all get 
to be part of that debate as well.  Whatever the "motives" of the 
people who filed the complaint, they are right about the law, and 
there is an important PUBLIC INTEREST to protect by following the 
law.  And the same applies to NSA, regardless of the motives of its 
founders or the motives of the complainants.

Regards,

Mike Curley


  

On 23 May 2005 at 13:02, Kai Eiselein wrote:

> Joan, I would have expected better of you.
> You've resorted to name calling now? Gee, when I was on the
> speech/debate team in high school and college, I would have been
> granted the win. That aside, let me state I am not cowed by the
> current fashion of attacking people personally when one doesn't agree
> with a view. When it happens, it is nothing more than a desperate act
> of emotion rather than reason. I am veiwing the proceedings of the
> "NSA problem" from a "common sense" point of view. And common sense
> says that people are "splitting hairs". The ONLY differences between
> the other schools and NSA are: 1. Mr. Leons and the massage school are
> "doing business" as schools. NSA is recognized as a school. 2. Mr.
> Leons and the massage school are "for profit" enterprises. NSA is not.
> 3. NSA is a religious school, the others aren't. There was no outcry
> about NSA moving into the downtown area, the outcry only happened
> after Wilson's book came out. Then there was a HUGE backlash,
> including vandalism to a coffee shop owned by a CC member. Since then
> the over-riding battle cry has been "Get them out!" "Not on the
> Palouse, not now, not ever!" "They are a cult!" The zoning issue
> turned out to be NSA's achilles heel and, thus, has been used as a
> legal means of countering Wilson's views without seeming to be a part
> of the frenzy. Thinly veiled, but effective. Of course the most
> obvious defense to that is. "but I'm a (your church here) member". As
> if a Christian wouldn't attack a Christian. Ummmmm sorry, history
> doesn't bear that out. I didn't just fall off the turnip truck
> yesterday. This is an ideological battle, pure and simple. Call it
> what you want, but if it walks like a duck and talks like a
> duck.............
> 
> Kai T. Eiselein
> Editor
> Latah Eagle
> 521 S. Jackson St.
> Moscow, ID 83843
> (208) 882-0666 Fax (208) 882-0130
> editor at lataheagle.com
> 
> 
> _____________________________________________________
>  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
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯