>Perhaps the Moscow park system is so limited that we only think of East
>City Park when we think of music in that park. Certainly this sound issue
>became an issue because Mr. Probasco has thrust it in front of the Council.
>
>We can't forget the related issues that are being overlooked here:
...[issues edited out]...
Tom,
It's a nice try to drag those other neighborhood annoyances into the
discussion. But I don't think it is going to stick. for these reasons:
1.) The music in the park issue is the only one of your list that the city
"feels" that it has the authority and the political will to address. The
County Fair? Messy. Drags in the county, and other entities. Commercial
parking lot lights? The council would never even consider any restricitons,
that's business you know. Frat parties? How do you enforce that? Besides,
those are the Future Bank Vice Presidents of America.
But East City Park belongs to the City, the City issues the noise variance
permits, the whole scene depends on cooperation from the City. It is
contained within the administration of the City. Therefore, it is the only
annoyance that the city feels it CAN address.
Actually, this is the part that is relevant to Vision 20/20. it has to do
with the range of actions and issues that governing bodies feel that they
have license to deal with. If there is overlap with another body, they shy
away from dealing with the problem. Just like the zone of impact. Or, the
Moscow P & Z Commission that maintains that it CANNOT, MUST NOT look at the
transportation impacts of development or annexation.
2.) Hempfest, for cryin' out loud! The problem is not just the annoyance,
but the socio-political nature of the annoyance.
Fritz
** p.s. So, what are the restrictions on music that is NOT electronically
amplified? Just wondering.