[Vision2020] Boarding House information

Sat Apr 15 17:04:58 PDT 2006

Michael, your post made quite a bit of sense right up to the last half of the last sentence. What do the feds have to do with as trivial a matter as this? How is the SPLC going to parlay this matter into additional treasure? It seems that you are leaving something out. Something I have asked after in the past, to no avail. Will this be the time that you provide me with, or direct me to an answer?

Hoping,
Gary
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Michael 
  To: vision2020 at moscow.com 
  Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 3:40 PM
  Subject: [Vision2020] Boarding House information

  Tom Writes:

  No, no, no, gc - You may file Don Huskey's complaint under "the totally objective scrutiny of team Huskey/Opyr/Hansen" all you friggin' want.  I personally don't really care. You can go as far as filing my portion of this action under "Hansen Hates Wilson", "Asshole Hansen is Pickin' on 'Just Call Me Comb-Over' Courtney", etc. etc.  I don't care. It's a simple matter of the Moscow City Zoning Code.  If you are aware of ANYBODY in violation of the code, PLEASE feel free to sing along with us, ok? If you really feel that this is all a matter of religious persecution, file a statement with the MOscow City Council to that effect, or do you lack sufficent quantity of the proper genetalia to do so. The bottom line is: If somebody is subletting their residence without the proper permit, IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.  You remember the law, dontcha?  That's the stuff we are ALL required to abide by.

  Me:

  I think there is a mild problem here-perhaps for both sides in the debate-with respect to the role law actually plays in our town, or any US town.  I think there is probably a fair chance that a significant portion of us have technically violated law or code over the last five years in some way and to some degree.  This might include jay walking, going over the speed limit, making some innocent tax calculation mistakes, engaging temporarily and ignorantly in an activity contrary to city code (perhaps because we are accustomed to a different city's code), etc.  This is why there the difference between a litigious culture and a non-litigious culture is so practically important to all of us.  I would propose (in my own stupidity to make a point) that law is most effective in a culture somewhere in between; perhaps this middle ground is secured when folks are educated in the law and practice a professionalism that often seeks legal counsel, and yet also understand that litigation, or filing and pushing through complaints, is usually not a 'win' situation for anyone and a last resort.   This is why I think we should all be concerned about the general equity at issue here.  Do we want to endorse and encourage a use of the law that might come and bite us next year?  Keep in mind, anyone can file a law suit about anything anytime they want.  This becomes particularly problematic when it is an attorney doing this over a personal gripe.  I have felt the teeth of this latter scenario myself: just make bogus claims, keep filing things, deceive your opponent into a default judgment, and then enjoy the negotiation money as your opponent spends his parents' inheritance on attorney fees so that he can finally go on with life. It is possible to abuse the law, whether you have the facts and the correct interpretation of law on your side or not.  This doesn't happen often here, but it is perhaps a bit more frequent in Southern CA.   

  If we suspect there might have been a murder, then it makes sense to start turning up rocks to find a culprit and have the law do what it is supposed to do-enact its own vengeance so that we don't try to enact our own.  But residential code serves a different purpose. This is perhaps why the city will wait until a particular complaint is filed before they would enforce some aspects of the code.  If folks are living in harmony with one another then there is perhaps not usually reason for enforcement. For example, if there is a code with respect to exterior lighting on my house (e.g. wattage limits and direction of lighting), and I break that code because of some cool lights I just bought at Costco, then I would sure hope that it is my neighbor who files a complaint after first talking to me about their concern, and not someone who doesn't like the philosophical stances I take on my web site.  I think this opens the question of 'standing.'  

  In sum, I think that the question of standing should be considered by the city if it is legally possible for them to do so, while at the same time giving those who filed the complaint full opportunity to defend their standing.  From my point of view, I have heard good arguments on both sides.  And yet, I must still go back to a previous post of mine and say that all of this will be in vain if the underlying issues potentially motivating this are not addressed in more sufficient fashion.  Perhaps Christ Church and NSA would like to finally offer a humble stance in this community before the FBI and Southern Poverty Law Center make another trip.

  My Two Cents

  Michael Metzler 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _____________________________________________________
   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
  ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060415/61a0b396/attachment-0001.htm