Once again in a follow up to last night's predictable Council vote to give religious-based halfway houses special considerations in zoning issues in the wake of a lawsuit against Metro by a religious-based halfway house, one local paper avoids laying any fault at Metro Legal's or the Mayor's Office doorstep in rehashing their time-line of precipitating events.
I've admitted that I'm torn on this bill given that I don't think rural areas should generally be exempt from social and charitable services. However, I don't think that history should be revised to saddle Metro Council with the responsibility for this mess. Red lights and alarms did not seem to be going off in Karl Dean's Legal Department back in late 2006 and early 2007 when the thorny rose first bloomed. But the mayoral honeymoon being what it is, even with the media, that is an ignored narrative, a boat they dare not rock.
The Federal Fair Housing Act far precedes the Bush Administration... Metro Council was out of line for passing this zoning change to begin with, and they got what they asked for.
ReplyDeleteIt's not about special considerations for religious groups. It's about whether or not Metro can discriminate against individuals with disabilities. It's not ok to do that, even in rural areas.
As I said, I am torn on this issue, but I do believe that the Bush DoJ would not give a tinker's damn about fair housing were a religious institution not involved.
ReplyDeleteAnd if the Metro Council was out of line to begin with, so was the Purcell Administration--and Karl Dean's Legal Department--for not doing more to kill it in the beginning. If nothing else, it could have been vetoed. It was returned to Council in 2007 unsigned, which is basically the same as signing it into law.