<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=4><STRONG>To the curious and those, if any, Moscow Citizens who
believe in the Rule of Law:</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>It appears from City of Moscow Meeting minutes posted earlier,
which are far from clear, there may be a small problem with the so-called
amendment to the comprehensive plan.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Cited below is the <STRONG>Conflict of Interest</STRONG>
section of the state statutes on Planning and Zoning. It has been alleged
on this forum that JoAnn Mack's son is the owner of the property at
issue.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000 size=6>If </FONT></STRONG>so, then
clearly:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>1. Mack should disclosed such a
conflict,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>2. Mack was prohibited by law from
voting on the issue, hence it would not have passed, and</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>3. Mack has committed a
misdemeanor.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Appeals on Planning and Zoning quasi-judicial matters are
limited to 28 days after the action (see code below). However, amendment
of the plan is a legislative, not a quasi-judicial matter. Hence, it is
possible that the amendment could be challenged and be declared void <EM>ab
initio. </EM>If so, then the rezone requested would not be legal
either.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Maybe, if anyone is interested a competent attorney could be
retained to help pursue this matter. I have noticed that Mike Curley has
had some success in this area with the City of Moscow. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Perhaps if a misdemeanor by a Good Old/Boy has occurred, the
city might be persuaded to pursue that also -- if for no other reason that to
attempt to shed part of its corrupt image when it comes to
development.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Of course, I am but a legal layman and my analysis may be
totally wrong, but it may be worth a tiny, tiny look by someone
competent.</FONT></DIV><FONT size=4>
<DIV><BR>Wayne A. Fox<BR>1009 Karen Lane<BR>PO Box 9421<BR>Moscow, ID
83843</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>(208) 882-7975<BR><A
href="mailto:waf@moscow.com">waf@moscow.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><PRE>67-6506. CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROHIBITED. A governing board creating a
planning, zoning, or planning and zoning commission, or joint commission shall
provide that the area and interests within its jurisdiction are broadly
represented on the commission. A member or employee of a governing board,
commission, or joint commission shall not participate in any proceeding or
action when the member or employee or his employer, business partner, business
associate, or <FONT color=#ff0000 size=5><STRONG>any person related to him by affinity </STRONG></FONT></PRE><PRE><FONT color=#ff0000 size=5><STRONG>or consanguinity within the second degree has </STRONG></FONT></PRE><PRE><FONT color=#ff0000 size=5><STRONG>an economic interest in the procedure or action.</STRONG></FONT> Any
actual or potential interest in any proceeding shall be disclosed at or before
any meeting at which the action is being heard or considered. For purposes of
this section the term "participation" means engaging in activities which
constitute deliberations pursuant to the open meeting act. No member of a
governing board or a planning and zoning commission with a conflict of
interest shall participate in any aspect of the decision-making process
concerning a matter involving the conflict of interest. A member with a
conflict of interest shall not be prohibited from testifying at, or presenting
evidence to, a public hearing or similar public process after acknowledging
nonparticipation in the matter due to a conflict of interest. <STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000 size=5>A knowing
violation of this section shall be a misdemeanor.</FONT></STRONG></PRE><PRE><STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000 size=5></FONT></STRONG> </PRE><PRE><STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000 size=5></FONT></STRONG> </PRE><PRE><STRONG><FONT color=#ff0000 size=5></FONT></STRONG> </PRE><PRE><PRE><PRE> 67-6521. ACTIONS BY AFFECTED PERSONS.
(1) (a) As used herein, an affected person shall mean one having an
interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance
or denial of a permit authorizing the development.
(b) Any affected person may at any time prior to final action on a permit
required or authorized under this chapter, if no hearing has been held on
the application, petition the commission or governing board in writing to
hold a hearing pursuant to section 67-6512, Idaho Code; provided, however,
that if twenty (20) affected persons petition for a hearing, the hearing
shall be held.
(c) After a hearing, the commission or governing board may:
(i) Grant or deny a permit; or
(ii) Delay such a decision for a definite period of time for further
study or hearing. Each commission or governing board shall establish
by rule and regulation a time period within which a recommendation or
decision must be made.
(d) An affected person aggrieved by a decision may within twenty-eight
(28) days after all remedies have been exhausted under local ordinances
seek judicial review as provided by chapter 52, title 67, Idaho Code.
(2) (a) Authority to exercise the regulatory power of zoning in land use
planning shall not simultaneously displace coexisting eminent domain
authority granted under section 14, article I, of the constitution of the
state of Idaho and chapter 7, title 7, Idaho Code.
(b) An affected person claiming "just compensation" for a perceived
"taking," the basis of the claim being that a specific zoning action or
permitting action restricting private property development is actually a
regulatory action by local government deemed "necessary to complete the
development of the material resources of the state," or necessary for
other public uses, may seek a judicial determination of whether the claim
comes within defined provisions of section 14, article I, of the
constitution of the state of Idaho relating to eminent domain. Under these
circumstances, the affected person is exempt from the provisions of
subsection (1) of this section and may seek judicial review through an
inverse condemnation action specifying neglect by local government to
provide "just compensation" under the provisions of section 14, article I,
of the constitution of the state of Idaho and chapter 7, title 7, Idaho
Code.</PRE><PRE> </PRE><PRE> </PRE></PRE></PRE></DIV></BODY></HTML>