[Vision2020] Remarks concerning NSA at the BOA meeting

[DonaldH675 at aol.com]

What a splendid opportunity to correct any misconceptions Mr. Crabtree  might 
have about my remarks Tuesday evening at the BOA meeting.  
 
1.    Believe me, Mr. Crabtree, Ms. Lund and I  understand that NSA claims a 
tax exemption under IC  63-602E.   NSA is situated on a very desirable piece 
of real  estate in the heart of the central business district.  If the building 
were  on the tax rolls NSA would be sharing the cost of parking lots and 
street  maintenance with other Moscow businesses.  Instead, Moscow business  
owners have the burden of subsidizing a private religious  college.  By the way, 
the administrators of NSA have NEVER, repeat  NEVER, provided any specific 
financial records or independent audits to  substantiate their claim of  non-profit 
status to the Latah County  Board of Equalization or the Idaho Board of Tax 
Appeals - despite the  fact that they provide that information annually to 
their accrediting  agency.  Perhaps I am more sensitive than you, Mr. Crabtree, 
but the  specter of pigs gobbling at the public trough all the while squealing 
and  grunting about the dirty hand that feeds them is remarkably offensive to  
me.  NSA refuses "on principle" any government funding for their  college 
while at the same time they greedily insist that property owners in  Moscow have 
an obligation to give them a free ride.
 
2.  The notion that NIC or LCSC might find branch campuses in Moscow  an 
attractive idea is not some pie-in-the-sky, self-serving fantasy of  mine.  Nor is 
it unimaginable that the University of Idaho might like a  presence downtown. 
  What possible rationale could the City  legitimately advance that would bar 
a public institution from the central  business district after granting a 
private college free access?  Do  you really think that tax payers will be happy 
about the expensive  litigation which will follow if other educational 
institutions are denied  Main Street locations?  And, do you really think the City 
will have a  viable argument in a courtroom if they try to limit other 
institutions?
 
3.  In the material presented to the BOA, Dr. Atwood claimed that  NSA had 
invested  more than a million dollars in a “vacant  building.”  I understood 
Dr.  Atwood's remark to mean that the cost of the renovation and improvements 
were in  the hundreds of thousands dollars range.  This claim is not 
substantiated by the building permits issued by the  City of Moscow to NSA.   
     
Permit No.  
Date  
Contract Amt.  
Contractor   
EL2003-35  
11/27/2002  
4,000  
Heirloom  Electric   
BP2003-13025  
1/7/2003  
2,000  
Unknown   
ElL004-75  
1/13/2004  
600  
Heirloom  Electric   
EL2004-321  
8/10/2004  
150  
Heirloom  Electric   
PL2004-218  
8/12/2004  
600  
McCoy  Plumbing   
BP2004-13922  
8/12/2004  
2,200  
Gressard  Construction   
No Number  
5/3/2005  
3,000  
Gressard  Construction   
Total  
$12,550  

$12,550 dollars is the  total amount of reported construction contracts to 
remodel the  building.  Based on these city  records,  
I am left with two  possible explanations; either hundreds of thousands of 
dollars of construction  and remodel work was done 
without permits, or  Dr. Atwood mislead the BOA.  And, by  the way, the 
purchase price for the building was less than  $500,000.  
Old Roy, must have a mighty fine desk and  credenza in his office to account 
for the "missing" half a million  dollars. 
(The personal property at NSA - i.e.,  computers, furniture, decorative 
items, library books, etc - are not  investments "in a building") 
 
4.    I said that the  building was beautiful - even glorious.  It is.  I 
also said that the  fact that NSA students dressed nicely or
were polite was immaterial in reference to the CUP process.  I  didn't say 
(but wished that I had) that those kind of remarks in  defense of NSA's 
violation of the zoning code are as breathtakingly  superficial and silly as the 
people who said them.  You were correct in pointing out that  many people testified 
in support of NSA.  When we subtract the number of NSA students, who  frankly 
have a bias, and the usual number of Christ Church and Trinity  Reformed 
members who happily rally to the Kirk cause they aren't to many  other folks left. 
 You don't imagine that the majority of those supporting  NSA were just 
plucked willy-nilly from the streets of Moscow, do you?   Of  course, Shelly 
Bennett testified in favor of granting a CUP, but  then, she was the realtor who 
brokered the sale.  I guess that would  also make her the realtor who would have 
some responsibility to help her  client clarify any zoning issues prior to the 
sale - but maybe not.   Is that something a realtor might have an obligation 
to look  into?  There was also a banker who spoke.  I'm probably just  
suspicious by nature, but do you think maybe there is a financial interest  involved 
in that as well?  
 
5.    I have no idea if you are a hayseed or not, Mr.  Crabtree.  I'm happy 
to be a simple old county woman myself.
 
 6.    As I have said countless times I don't  care if Doug and the boys want 
to play school.  But I believe that  they have a legal and moral obligation 
to follow the same zoning code  regulations that the rest of us do.  I am 
baffled that they  whine when they are held to a common standard.  I am gob  
smacked that their tantrums work like a charm for them  every  time.  The sad thing 
is that good hearted people, as I presume you are, Mr.  Crabtree, continue to 
buy into it.  You are not, I hope some latte sipping  liberal, are you?  I 
mean, I have grown to expect that old liberal  knee-jerk response from the 
touchy-feely crowd, but somehow, I imagined that you  might have a more pragmatic 
approach.

Rose Huskey
"First  they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then 
you win."  Mahatma Gandhi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060331/fe2aaee5/attachment-0001.htm