[Vision2020] "Liberals" Slammed For Pro-Business CBD Stance?

[Pat Kraut]

"Has anyone considered that if a very successful business moved into the NSA building the parking problems might be worse?"
Yes, Yes I have and while I might find it amusing in a warped sort of way it won't make for any sort of peace and I do want some peace on the subject. I'm tellin ya the 1912 building needs to come down.  
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ted Moffett 
  To: thansen at moscow.com ; pkraut at moscow.com ; deco at moscow.com 
  Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 4:42 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] "Liberals" Slammed For Pro-Business CBD Stance?


  Tom et. al.

  When I wrote that those who seek to allow NSA to remain in the CBD represent a "liberal agenda," I meant that they appear to oppose the "intent" of what the CBD is about, that is, good old fashioned free market profit making (and tax paying) capitalism, with the possible motivation to allow a religious institution a pass because many have a soft spot for fellow believers, thus displaying a "religious oriented liberal agenda" that shows favor for promoting religion over capitalism in the CBD.  

  Of course, some argue NSA provides a service, education, purchased with dollars that fuel the economics of the CBD.  But NSA is not open to the public to use their "services," and the tax exemptions present another problem, though there are other tax exempt non-profits in the CBD, as well as private organizations that limit public use.  

  This whole issue is far more complicated and thorny than many wish to admit, though I think the zoning regs. for the CBD are clear that non-commercial higher educational institutions are not a permissible use, and there are legitimate concerns that NSA flaunted these regs. 

  The current and potential size of NSA, given a tax exempt status, is certainly cause for concern, along with the parking problems, as has been stated repeatedly.  Some cities in the USA have set limits on the number of tax exempt institutions that can occupy certain business districts because of the erosion of the tax base, and also mandate that tax exempt religious institutions must provide their own parking.  NSA does not own any property near NSA where they provide much parking, as we know, unless Anselm House has a few spots.  

  Pat Kraut says the parking problems will remain no matter what business is occupying NSA's building.  True, but if the NSA building was occupied by a profit making tax paying business offering goods or services open to all the public, the tax base would not be eroding, and the whole community could potentially have access.  

  Has anyone considered that if a very successful business moved into the NSA building the parking problems might be worse?  No one thinks NSA moving will solve Moscow's downtown parking problems.  The issue is those associated with NSA who park and take away customers from other profit oriented businesses in the CBD struggling to survive and pay those darned taxes.  

  It's no big secret why malls and Wal-Mart, etc. have huge parking lots that seem like overkill.  If someone can't park close to their shopping destination, they will go elsewhere.  How much business is lost in the CBD because potential customers have almost guaranteed convenient parking at the Moscow Mall, Eastside, or Wal-Mart?  I wish there more people willing to walk or bike, but these options would require a sea change in city planning and public thinking and feeling to become realistic options. 

  Here are a few interesting articles that relate to government regulation of religious institutions that reveals how complex and varied these legal problems are, and offer some legal insights into what we may see in court if the NSA case ends up in a legal battle: 

  http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/commentary.aspx?id=15633

  http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/rel_liberty/establishment/topic.aspx?topic=tax_exemptions 

  http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/analysis.aspx?id=15646

  Ted Moffett
   
  On 1/6/06, Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com> wrote: 
    I tend to agree on the most part, Mr. Moffett.



    For as long as I can remember, conservatives have fought against government influence in our private lives. 



    Ironic, isn't it?



    Tom Hansen

    Moscow , Idaho



    "Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, a drink in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming 'WOO HOO. What a ride!'" 




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

    From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Ted Moffett
    Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 4:48 AM
    To: vision2020 at moscow.com
    Subject: [Vision2020] "Liberals" Slammed For Pro-Business CBD Stance?





    All:



    I find it odd in the extreme that the decision to maintain the debate about the business focus of the CBD by the Moscow City Council and Mayor Nancy Cheney, in the resent decision to take more time to consider the granting of a CUP to NSA, has been labeled "liberal" and "leftist" by some in local media. 



    Are not "leftists" and "liberals" those who take a more anti-business stance regarding how government regulation impacts the so called "free market," than "right wingers" and "conservatives?" 



    If NSA could be replaced in the CBD by a free market profit making capitalist business (NSA could simply move outside the CBD), why is this not to the liking of those free market capitalist advocates (those who often are called conservatives or right wingers), who ostensibly seek to promote the inherent value of such institutions in our society? 



    It seems in this case that the so called liberals are championing capitalism in their critical view of NSA's activity in the CBD, while the so called conservatives are actually taking a stance in favor of a non-profit institution, whose goals are ostensibly not those of making a buck and getting rich offering goods or services.  Indeed, NSA is above this sort of crass capitalism, is it not?  Or am I wrong?  I might actually respect NSA in this regard, with some serious qualifications, if indeed they serve higher goals than making a killing worshiping the almighty dollar.  But business is business, and worshiping the almighty dollar is what the CBD is ostensibly about, I assume.  Again, am I wrong? 



    Are those who defend NSA "socialists," if they defend NSA against the pure goals of capitalism that the CBD might be considered to embody? 



    The simple minded labeling of those who oppose NSA's presence in the CBD as "liberals" or "leftists" reflects the common practice of utilizing a polarizing linear sort of thinking in political/economic thought, that does a disservice to a detailed critical political analysis that recognizes the full complexity of political/economic ideology, ideology that often does not fit the Procrustean bed that demands political opinions must be either "left" or "right." 



    This is reflected more broadly in the current muddle headed nonsense about President Bush being a "conservative," while he has recklessly spent half a trillion dollars on a foolish war in Iraq with little chance of success.  



    The war in Iraq strikes me as a classic wasteful liberal boondoggle of the most extreme sort!



    Promoting NSAs presence in the CBD also could be deconstructed as reflective of a religious oriented liberal agenda.



    Ted Moffett






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060107/28666075/attachment-0001.htm