[Vision2020] Say What? Discrimination

Tue Sep 18 20:34:26 PDT 2007

Bruce,

  Let me see if I understand you correctly?

  MCA wants to force poor, disabled, and elderly people through a CUP process with the city council for the right to continue to live the way they do?
  MCA wants to prevent building new houses
  MCA wants to prevent the expansion of industry and jobs
  MCA wants to eliminate property rights for security and predictability
  MCA wants to force low income people to pay higher rent prices
  MCA wants to make Moscow less affordable
  MCA wants to reduce the city population
  MCA wants to present four more candidates to the city council candidates
  MCA wants to increase taxes

  Where am I wrong here?

  Best,

  Donovan

jeanlivingston <jeanlivingston at turbonet.com> wrote:
    The answer to your question, Tom, is "yes, it does."  If someone has more than the allowed number of unrelated people living together under the ordinance that was passed Monday night, that household can seek a C.U.P. to obtain approval for the extra renters.
    And I would suggest to the alleged protecters of "property rights" who opposed this ordinance, the Greater Moscow Alliance among them, that the ordinance does exactly that, by protecting the property rights of the neighbors to these "boarding houses" in low density residential neighborhoods that were not experiencing the low density uses to which they were entitled under the code -- due to commercial, high density, apartment/boarding house-style uses that were foisted on the neighborhood by those bringing in numerous renters.  

  There is a pattern developing in the issues to which the GMA takes an interest:  the defense of property rights for a fe! w, often at the expense of the property rights of the many, and all too frequently at the expense of our quality of life.  The property rights advocates at the GMA that opposed this ordinance also failed to oppose both Proposition 2 and the Naylor Farms conditional use permit application last fall, while they opposed any regulation of big box stores in the large retail store ordinance (which imposed reasonable regulations on parking lot size, screening and lanscaping, sign size, and other similar regulations on big boxes).   The GMA property rights zealots fail to recognize that we passed a zoning code in this town that reasonably and constitutionally regulates property rights in part to prevent neighbors from ruining the value and enjoyment of adjoining parcels through unfettered infringing uses that spill over onto the property of others.  

  The zoning code gives all of us the benefit of predictability; in enacting the zoning code we surrendered the! ability to use property in a particular zoning category for certain uses that are not allowed, in return for the security of knowing that our neighbors could not use their adjoining property in the same zone for those same disallowed uses.  When people push the limits of reason, straining credulity in asserting that the code does not distinguish  low density, single-family residences from a commercial boarding house with a single family plus numbers of additional renters, restoration/clarification of the zoning code's intent and purpose was entirely appropriate.  By passing a definition of a family that addresses the number of unrelated people who may live in a single family residence without obtaining a conditional use permit, sanity returned to our neighborhoods and the quality of life in those neighborhoods was preserved and enhanced.  

  I commend the four votes for the ordinance, Pall, Ament, Lamar and Craine.  Hopefully, in time both Weber and! Lambert will reconsider their opposition to the ordinance.
    In the meantime, without regard to the effects on our community's water supply or the adjoining neighbor's property, the GMA failed to oppose the operation of (a) the Naylor's proposed strip mine and (b) a crowded boarding house with many additional people or cars in a low density residential neighborhood, while the GMA did oppose (c) an ordinance that sought to regulate garish 24-hour big boxes with inadequate screening and landscaping.  Defending the "property rights" for the few, without regard to related, associated trampling on the property rights of others, is not the sort of "protection" of private property rights that this town needs.
    Bruce Livingston

-----Original message-----
From: Tom Ivie the_ivies3 at yahoo.com
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:41:57 -0700
To: Moscow Vision 2020 vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Say What? Discrimination

> My original question wasn't answered, if anyone wants to field it. "Doesn't this include a CUP process?
> 
> Donovan Arnold wrote: Tom Ivie,
> 
> Lowering the number of occupants per housing unit by law increases demand for more apartments and housing units, driving the cost up. With rents up even more, renters are further soaked again by limiting the number of people they can split rent with. 
> 
> Moscow is a college town. Students cannot afford much more that $300 piece for rent. IF Moscow raises its rents, the number of students returning to UI will reduce because they cannot afford to live in the city with no jobs and unaffordable housing. Many of them will elect elsewhere to attend like BSU, Albertson, NNU, ISU, LCSC or the new junior college in Nampa. But this is a good move for the socialists agenda of destroying the Moscow economy through relentless un! needed government regulation. 
> 
> Best,
> 
> Donovan
> 
> Tom Ivie wrote:
> Doesn't it include a CUP process? As I understand it, and I could be wrong, lowering the number brings Moscow more in-line with the codified number that the majority of cities our size use. 
> 
> Donovan Arnold wrote: "These three people [(Pall, Ament and Lamar)] feel that counting unrelated people in a
> dwelling will solve noise and parking problems in residential
> neighborhoods."
> 
> Mr. Busch is correct on this point. I think counting the number of unrelated people is discriminatory. When I worked at Inclusion North there were often several people with disabilities living in one home because they cannot afford their own place on a $660 a month SSI check, especially in a city like Moscow. There are many poor, disabled, and elderly pe! ople that MUST live together in one dwelling for economic survival. This code is a raw deal for those that are in need of affordable housing. Another example of elitist socialists trying to make everyone live like them regardless of their financial situations. The City Council members are saying, "Let them eat cake", or in this case, let them live in an apartment with only two people if they can only afford to live in an apartment with four others. 
> 
> And on the other side of the coin, a family of two adults with two teenagers can be very noisy and make life for their neighbors intolerable. Why not limit how many teenagers can live in one household, or how many babies a single mom can have? It would be just as unfair. 
> 
> An unjust law, clearly invented by people living in nice homes with secure incomes. I hope the newly elected city council will reverse this piece of discrimination. 
> 
> If Moscow would allow for the bui! lding of affordable housing for what people actually earn in Moscow we would not have 5 students or 5 people on SSI living in one housing unit. And BTW, Moscow has more people per housing unit then any other city in the state according the BLS. 
> 
> Best,
> 
> Donovan
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Hansen wrote:
> In a letter to the editor of the Lewiston Tribune, published today
> (September 16, 2007), Steve Busch suggests that "enforcing existing law
> [Moscow Zoning Code] is all that is necessary."
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Comments made in a letter to the editor authored by local attorney Jack
> Porter and published in the Sept. 12 Lewiston Tribune cannot be ignored. On
> Sept. 4, the current city council voted 3-2 to change Moscow's city code in
> an attempt to deal with a real! problem. 
> 
> Unfortunately, the majority (Pall, Ament and Lamar) threw the baby out with
> the bath water. These three people feel that counting unrelated people in a
> dwelling will solve noise and parking problems in residential neighborhoods.
> 
> 
> The Greater Moscow Alliance feel enforcing existing law is all that is
> necessary. We said so in a letter presented to the council on Sept. 10 (to
> see a copy visit www.greatermoscow.org). Mr. Porter thinks this is evidence
> the GMA is insensitive to Moscow citizens' cherished life style. Nothing
> could be further from the truth. GMA is working hard to educate the public
> about issues and candidates. 
> 
> I urge all Moscow voters to ask candidates for city council tough questions.
> Listen carefully to the answers and vote your conscience.
> 
> Steve Busch
> President
> Greater! Moscow Alliance
> Moscow
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Questions, Mr. Busch: How often, and how selective, should enforcement of
> zoning codes be enforced? Instead of amending the current code ad nauseam
> and allowing for conditional use permits every time somebody violates
> "existing law", should we draw the proverbial line in the sand, much like
> the Raven, strongly proclaim "Ne'er more", and further demand that those
> entities that are currently in violation of the zoning code move elsewhere?
> 
> Reminder, folks!
> http://tinyurl.com/36ghxk
> 
> Seeya round town, Moscow.
> 
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
> 
> "We're a town of about 23,000 with 10,000 college students. The college
> students are not very active in local elections (thank goodness!)."
> 
> - Dale Courtney (March 28, 2007)
> 
> 
> 
> =======================================================
> 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
> =======================================================
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. =======================================================
> 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
> =======================================================
> 
> 
> 
> Tom & Liz Ivie 
> ---------------------------------
> Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos. =======================================================
> 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
> =======================================================
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV. 
> 
> 
> Tom & Liz Ivie
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! 
> Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
> 
=======================================================
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
=======================================================

---------------------------------
Building a website is a piece of cake. 
Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070918/78bbb700/attachment-0001.html 