<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE type=text/css>DIV {
MARGIN: 0px
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18852"></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Among other things, it seems clear that a majority of the city
councilpersons have little or no farm experience. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In making laws or doing almost anything else, it is important
to begin by setting out clear goals whose achievement can be measured or
observed. Although several council members claim to have business or
supervisorial experience, apparently they never learned that goal setting is an
essential first step in most successful endeavors. A few seem not to
understand that reality is complex, so that decisions cannot always be correctly
made just by considering a few simple things and ignoring the less simple
ones.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I cannot claim this to be true of all people, but in my
experience most people get used to fowl/animal sounds just like they get used to
trains, planes, etc -- unless they purposely focus, the sounds do not
register.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>W.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=garrettmc@verizon.net href="mailto:garrettmc@verizon.net">Garrett
Clevenger</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, November 17, 2009 11:24
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [Vision2020] The Fowl, Council
and Right To Grow Food</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Thanks, Tom, for posting the video of the city council's poultry law
discussion. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>It was a long, drawn-out and sometimes surreal discussion. You all
should watch our council in action. It's only an hour.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN><A href="http://www.moscowcares.com/111609_06_DraftPoultryOrd.htm"
target=_blank>http://www.moscowcares.com/111609_06_DraftPoultryOrd.htm</A></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>They passed the ordinance mostly to my liking. Up to 6 turkeys will
be allowed to be raised in Moscow (like you'd really ever get rid of them!)
but the city won't allow mature toms. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I don't see why a mature tom needs to be banned, especially if they, like
all the other animals, are covered under the city's nuisance laws. If a
tom becomes a problem, then deal with it then.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>They lessened the distance chickens, ducks and geese can be placed next
to a neighbor dwelling from 40 feet to 25 feet, which will allow more
residents in town to raise birds, but turkeys have to be kept 40 feet from the
neighbor dwelling. That discrepancy makes no sense to me, especially if
mature toms are banned and you cannot keep as many turkeys as the
others.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Would you rather have 25 ducks 25 feet from your house, a horse,
cow, sheep or goat that has no such distance constraint, or 6 turkeys 25
feet away? 6 turkeys are somehow considered more of a nuisance now,
though, and have to be kept 40 feet away. Strange.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>One problem with having two distinct limits for chickens compared to
turkeys (besides it being arbitrary) is that it could require two separate
coop structures for people who would like the option to grow any of these fowl
if they were able to meet the space required to raise turkeys in the first
place.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>I will still be able to raise turkeys on my property, but the 40 foot
rule will shut out a lot of people in town.</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Wayne Krauss wanted to require fowl be kept 25 feet from the
property line, which would shut out most people from raising birds
altogether.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>John Weber said he "misread" the ordinance he voted to bring to the
full city council in his administrative meeting. He thought it said it
they WERE required to be 25 feet from the property line, concurring with
Krauss's firm feeling.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Weber said, "I have to rescind my agreement. I personally don't want
somebody eles's chickens within 25 feet of my house." Well, that's not what
the proposal said. Did he mean "25 feet from my property"? I was
confused.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>He got a good line and response when he asked. "Do chickens smell?"
Someone replied, "only when they're wet."</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Both Weber and Krauss changed their mind after Amy Gray's testimony,
including the comment that a neighbor's dog run can be placed right next to
your house on their property line {not to mention a cow}, so why should fowl
be required to be more than 25 feet away?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Tom Lamar was the one who suggested no mature male turkeys. He also
got a good line in, saying, "...prohibit, I can't believe I'm going to
say this, mature toms in the city of Moscow." </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Lamar wanted fowl to be allowed as close as 20 feet from the neighbor
dwelling. He also wanted to increase the original 4 hen limit in the
proposal to 12 hens. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Walter Steed said, "I don't want to do this again." I think he
was reffering to having to talk about chickens. And it was
apparent, as he rescinded the 3 vote rule in his amendment to the proposal
that passed and is now law.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Gary Reidner was the one who reminded Steed that he had not specified
rescinding the rule in his amendment. I can understand a city supervisor
wanting to get it over, too, and not have to spend too much time making the
law as good as it can be.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>The council seemed to rush this through. Why don't they vote to
keep the rule to let the public get a chance to comment on it before making it
law? </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I feel shut out from the process, especially seeing there are flaws that
could have been ironed out to make this law better. There's a reason the
3 vote rule exists. To thwart it dilutes democracy.<BR> </DIV>
<DIV>We have a right to grow food on our property. This council, with
all its rhetoric about property rights, just limited your right to use your
property compared to the law we had before. That is something that
shouldn't be rushed through, especially seeing the council could use input
from the citizens they are supposed to represent. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Amy Gray was the only one who testified, and she was able to sway at
least 2 votes. What would have happened had the public been given two
weeks to think about this law and let the council know their thoughts? I
know I would have given them more suggestions on how to improve it.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Criticism aside, I want to thank Dan Carscallen for bringing up the
turkey issue to begin with at the meeting and for the whole council who
dropped the turkey ban in the final law. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I also want to thank city attorney Randy Fife for conveniently having a
copy of a modified proposal that included the request I submitted, except for
the 40 foot limit as I think 25 feet with the other fowl is fine. Fife
did allow for toms in his draft, too, which I'm disappointed the council
modified.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Special thanks to Mayor "Mom" Nancy Chaney who thankfully provides much
needed maturity to the council. What she does requires a lot of patience
and composure to keep from telling the council to settle down, we don't have
all night for banter.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>People have a hard time sitting through the meetings to begin with, so it
seems some of the nonsense should be kept out. Speaking as someone who's
had to sit through meetings where people don't get to the point and seem to
make it more of a game than it should be, I'll say it's unfair to those who
have to commit their evening to attend the meetings. That would try any
person if you had to go to every one. Time should be spent getting the
issued solved as best as possible, not telling jokes and going on
tangents.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>If I got anything out of this council episode, it's that they need to not
pass laws with only one vote when they have a rule requiring 3 votes.
They should give citizens a chance to provide input before passing laws
that will affect us all.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Gobblegobblegobble, they keep gobbling on.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Garrett Clevenger
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="POSITION: fixed"></DIV><!-- cg6.c202.mail.ac4.yahoo.com compressed/chunked Tue Nov 17 09:23:20 PST 2009 --></DIV>
<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>