[Vision2020] Certificates of Occupancy are not Zoning Certificates

[Donovan Arnold]

Scott,

This has nothing to do with zoning permits. If it
turned out an entire neighborhood of people where
still living in an agricultural zone because of a
clerical error that was missed two years ago, we would
not be demanding that all the residents move out and
their homes be deemed unlivable because it was in the
wrong zone.

Same thing here. According to the clerk in charge of
zoning, Joel Plaskon, they are in the correct zone. It
is two years later that people are complaining. They
are ONLY complaining about NSA. They are not
complaining about the other businesses and non-profit
organizations downtown that are also in violation of
zoning law.

It is politics and a dislike for NSA and Doug Wilson
that is driving this. Anything else is just bullshit.

Donovan J Arnold

"Not a member of Christ Church or NSA"



--- Scott Bauer <scottbauer at mail.com> wrote:

> Visionaries,
> 
> I would like to correct some of the misinformation
> that's been floating
> around the community for awhile.
> 
> First, the Zoning Administrator never issued a
> Zoning Certificate to NSA
> pursuant to Moscow City Code 4-11-2(A)(1)
> (http://zonemoscow.com/code/11-2.html).
> NSA does possess a Certificate of Occupancy. But
> despite their
> assertions, this is not a Zoning Certificate.
> 
> Nevertheless, if for the sake of argument we grant
> that a Certificate of
> Occupancy, under some conditions, could be
> characterized as a Zoning
> Certificate, then please note that the Zoning
> Administrator did not
> completely fill out NSA's certificate. He left the
> "Zoning
> Classification" blank, and he did not even sign it.
> (http://zonemoscow.com/city/coo.html). It is
> difficult to conceive that
> NSA would rely on the supposition that a Certificate
> of Occupancy doubles
> as a Zoning Certificate when the certificate is
> improperly signed,
> incomplete, omits the zoning district, and under the
> International
> Building Code is voidable on discovery of a zoning
> violation. (http://zonemoscow.com/city/ibc.html)
> 
> Second, the City does not issue "only one"
> permitting document
> authorizing an entity to legally operate within the
> City. The City issues
> a series of permitting documents, which together
> constitute permission
> for an entity to operate, e.g., building permits,
> certificate of
> occupancy, and a zoning certificate. Apart from
> obtaining all of these
> requisite certificates, an entity does not have the
> City's complete
> permission to operate in a specific building.
> 
> Moreover, City officials (elected or otherwise) do
> not have the authority
> to waive the permitting and certification
> requirements of Moscow City
> Code. And to the extent that an official, under
> color of law, attempts to
> waive a legal restriction, his action is ultra vires
> and not binding.
> Under Idaho State law, the developer bears the
> responsibility of knowing
> the City's development regulations, the developer
> must ensure it has the
> required permits. (See County of Ada vs. Walter, 533
> P.2d 1199)
> 
> Furthermore, before NSA moved downtown, but after
> its second zoning
> violation (the Verizon building is NSA's third
> violation), City officials
> notified NSA that the City is not liable for NSA's
> zoning compliance
> (http://zonemoscow.com/code/11-3c.html).
> City officials did this in person during a meeting
> and, according to
> public records, they also handed hard copies of the
> Zoning Code to NSA
> representatives
> (http://zonemoscow.com/past/notliable.html). These
> communications make clear that NSA is culpable for
> its own zoning
> violation, not the City. NSA representatives have no
> one to blame but
> themselves.
> 
> Finally, in my experience as a land-use prosecutor,
> I have never seen a
> case where an entity had two prior documented zoning
> violations on its
> record, and then upon the third violation demanded
> legislative relief on
> the basis that they were being singled out. Quite
> frankly, I marvel at
> NSA's continuing demand that the City accommodate it
> by amending the
> Zoning Code. To be sure, NSA representatives should
> be thankful for any
> legislative relief, because I suspect that if the
> offender had been Joe
> Six-pack, this controversy would have ended one day
> after we filed our
> zoning complaint in January.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Scott Bauer
> 
> -- 
>
___________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
> http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
> 
> >
_____________________________________________________
>  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 - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com