<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1561" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I think the V2020 has performed well (or at least
as we hoped when it was created) during this controversy about Weitz'
suit.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The discussion has -- for the most part -- been
interesting and well-conceived. And the posting by BJ Swanson (suggesting
some mediated settlement) and now Bruce Livingston (about the limitations of
that mediation) have been both ground-breaking and well beyond what is offered
in the regular media.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>BL</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=jeanlivingston@turbonet.com
href="mailto:jeanlivingston@turbonet.com">jeanlivingston</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=privatejf32@hotmail.com
href="mailto:privatejf32@hotmail.com">J Ford</A> ; <A
title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, May 13, 2007 7:40 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] [Bulk] Re:
Weitz Lawsuit: A Challenge</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<P>JFord asks:</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<P>> What about asking for a "judicial opinion" or judicial review" of
the facts <BR>> as presented by the interested parties? Does Idaho have
such an option or <BR>> would a judge(s) be willing to do this? How about
the AG looking at the <BR>> "facts" and issuing an opinion? If those come
back negatively opinoned, <BR>> wouldn't that at least be a "warning" to
other potential filers?</P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>The <EM>Weitz</EM> 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. </P>
<P>
<P>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.</P>
<P>
<P>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. </P>
<P>
<P>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. </P>
<P>
<P>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.</P>
<P>
<P>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?</P>
<P>
<P>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. </P>
<P>
<P>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 <EM>are</EM> 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.)</P>
<P>
<P>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. </P>
<P>
<P>Bruce Livingston</P>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>
http://www.fsr.net
<BR>
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>=======================================================</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>