[Vision2020] [Bulk] Re: Weitz Lawsuit: A Challenge

Sun May 13 10:57:21 PDT 2007

Sadly, Moscow has many people to whom public schools are not only unimportant, but oppressive and evil by definition.  That they, just like the rest of us, benefit from them only makes their delusion and vitriol more disturbing.keelyFrom: thansen at moscow.comTo: jeanlivingston at turbonet.com; privatejf32 at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.comDate: Sun, 13 May 2007 08:36:56 -0700Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [Bulk] Re: Weitz Lawsuit: A Challenge

Bruce
 Livingston stated:

“I fear that the only folks unharmed
by this lawsuit are those to whom the public schools are unimportant, because
the lawsuit will not damage their thoughts about whether Moscow is a good place to live or establish a
business.  For the rest of us, the day this lawsuit was filed remains a
dark day.”

Quick Question, Mr. Livingston:  Who
do you consider “those to whom the public schools are unimportant”?

We ALL should consider public schools to
be important, VERY important.  Public education is not merely something
neat-o to have, like an ice rink.  Public education is an absolute
necessity.  It affords opportunities for each of us to learn as
individuals and all of us to grow as a community.  Without public
education, we might as well set our clocks back 300 years and restrict
education to only those that can afford it.

I am certain that there are many local
citizens, like myself, without children who believe that a community’s public
education to be a measuring standard of its future. 

Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen

Moscow, Idaho

"I think one of the best ways to
support education is to make successful private schools like Logos prosper
through tax exemption."

- Donovan Arnold (July 11, 2005)

From:
vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of jeanlivingston
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 7:40 AM
To: J Ford; vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [Bulk]
Re: Weitz Lawsuit: A Challenge

JFord
asks:

> What
about asking for a "judicial opinion" or judicial review" of the
facts 
> as presented by the interested parties? Does Idaho have such an option or 
> would a judge(s) be willing to do this? How about the AG looking at the 
> "facts" and issuing an opinion? If those come back negatively
opinoned, 
> wouldn't that at least be a "warning" to other potential filers?

The Weitz lawsuit is styled as one seeking a
"declaratory judgment and injunctive relief."  The declaratory
judgment portion of the lawsuit asks the judge to do precisely what you
suggest.  That is what is happening.  

One may
seek an opinion on the merits of an issue of Idaho law from the Attorney General, but
this is only "authority" in support of whatever position the A.G. decides
is the correct outcome under! the law, and not "precedent."  A
judge, and the ultimate arbiters of state law questions, the Idaho Supreme
Court, would be free to decide this case differently from the opinon issued by
the Attorney General, and the court system's answer would be the final say.

As
authority but not precedent, an Attorney General opinion will suggest an answer
but it could be "wrong" in the eyes of a later reviewing judge. 
I suppose an A.G. Opinion could "warn" of a probable
outcome, but it will not carry any weight in terms of forcing those, who might
bring a lawsuit that suggests an answer different from the A.G. Opinion, to
face any additional consequences for doing so than already exists under
existing law.  

I suppose
the upshot of this is that the declaratory judgment action is designed to get
to an official statement of what the law is.  An A.G. Opinion or Idaho Tax
Commission ruling will merely suggest what the law possibly/probably i!
s.  

BJ
Swanson has suggested that the parties mediate and agree to abide by the
answers suggested by the Attorney General and the Idaho Tax Commission. 
As I think about this, a potential problem arises, one raised by Gary
Crabtree and Sue Hovey already, i.e., the lack of binding effect on non-parties. 
Entering into such an agreement would bind the MSD and Dr. Weitz from
contesting the decisions of the government agencies, but other concerned
citizens could still contest the validity or invalidity of the outcome reached
in the proposed mediation decision.

Until
thinking the process through in writing this answer, I had been initially
receptive to BJ Swanson's mediation suggestion, but the lack of a decisive
answer that could come from mediation gives me pause.  On the other hand,
a year (or three or five) of operating the Moscow Schools without the
significant portion of the money (a fifth, a quarter, a third?) that is
provided by the indefinite, per! manent supplemental levy, will be
so harmful to our children, schools, and this town as a
whole  that I hate to contemplate it. What alternatives do others
see?

Moscow's
attractiveness to business and prospects for growth with people that value and
support public schools would seem to be damaged significantly in the near term
by this lawsuit.  I think that Dr. Weitz is hoping, somehow, to
help the schools in the long run with his lawsuit by forcing a re-vote
ultimately of money for the schools and hoping to see money allocated for his
pet projects.  However, it seems unlikely to me that there is much
hope for that prospect to amount to much for a very long time, no matter
how favorable the outcome from Dr. Weitz's perspective, given the short term
damage.  

That is
why I think his approach was misguided and unhelpful, no matter how much I
support Dr. Weitz's desire to increase professional technical
education ("PTE") offerings for our ! children in the Moscow public
schools.  I fear the backlash against his approach will damage the
long-term prospects for needed PTE offerings in which the Moscow schools indisputably are lacking.  (Assuming that
Dr.Weitz's lawsuit had not been filed, I note that some new PTE
programs that came out of November's MCA forum were being put into place at the
alternative school.  I hope that still happens.  Those courses need
to be made available to the kids at the high school, too, and not be
stigmatized as "just" alternative school offerings, but I am willing
to get there with smaller steps that will allow some experimentation and
time to establish a track record of success.)

I fear
that the only folks unharmed by this lawsuit are those to whom the public
schools are unimportant, because the the lawsuit will not damage their
thoughts about whether Moscow
is a good place to live or establish a business.  For the rest of
us, the day this lawsuit w! as filed remains a dark day.  

Bruce Livingston

_________________________________________________________________
Change is good. See what’s different about Windows Live Hotmail. 
http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/learnmore/default.html?locale=en-us&ocid=RMT_TAGLM_HMWL_reten_changegood_0507
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070513/1ca5a1a6/attachment.html 