As I described yesterday, the Mississippi Supreme Court has held that the zoning awarded the Fairview Inn to have a restaurant is spot zoning and therefore arbitrary and capricious, and should not have been awarded. Problem, noted in today’s Clarion Ledger: The Inn is already serving food, and at least one city alderman just doesn’t think the Supreme Court has it right (failing to understand that “right” as far as the law goes is the utterance of a court with final review. By that remark, you can tell I’m a realist and not a natural law man). From the Clarion Ledger:
Peter Sharp, who owns the inn with his wife, Tamar Sharp, said the Fairview’s restaurant, Sophia’s, is open today as they wade through what the court’s decision means for his business.
“First of all, we’re not clear ourselves. We’re waiting to hear from our lawyer what it means,” he said. “Obviously we want to make available to the community dining options at the inn.”
Ward 7 Councilwoman Margaret Barrett-Simon, who represents the Bellhaven neighborhood where the inn is located, said the city is exploring its options to keep the Fairview operating as a restaurant.
“I did and still do believe that the city acted correctly and legally in this matter. I’m disappointed with the court in their decision. There are some legal avenues that I’m sure the city will explore, but what that is I don’t know,” she said. “I think the Fairview is one of the most attractive assets that this city has. It’s unique; it’s one of a kind. It’s part of our tax base. It offers amenities that you don’t see in most places.”
Along with the inn and restaurant, the Fairview also operates a day spa and hosts special events.
And then there are folks in comments who wonder if this could all have other interesting repurcussions of the “it’s a small world after all” variety….
I just recently found out that Fairview had been the home of Bill Simmons. I think he grew up there as a child before turning it into a B&B. Simmons did as much harm to Mississippi as anyone I can think of at the moment.
The Fairview Inn is located ADJACENT to the rear of a five story office building.
How in the world is that ‘spot zoning’ ??
Interesting topic for debate.
Simmons vs. Ross Barnett?
Anderson’s second graph in the other thread would certainly ignite a local firestorm if it came to pass. In fact it is hard to see how Ridgeland did not engage in spot zoning.
I wonder whether one can become a “guest” at the Fairview for some nominal fee, checking in around 12 noon and checking out around 1 p.m.? Along the lines of the “private clubs” in Salt Lake City, which the bartender would have you join quickly before pouring your booze.
What does Simmons’ history have to do with the current zoning debate? First, the Simmons don’t own the property anymore. Second, the rezoning was approved 5-0 by a majority African-American City Council, supported by an African-American Mayor (Johnson) with the blessing of an African-American attorney (Terry Wallace). So the zoning reversal is fair because Simmons harmed MS? And further that’s a basis for harming a struggling Jackson by closing this business? Puh-lease.
Modak-Truran is a complete nut-job. Witness this exchange with film director Kevin Smith from his blog:
http://silentbobspeaks.com/?p=333
Xenos: I was just making a related comment about Simmons, certainly not trying to connect the two issues. I had just recently found out that Simmons had owned – and I think grew up in – Fairview.
I certainly wasn’t trying to make anything racial out of the situation, I don’t know anything about the zoning issue.
NMC: Yep, ole Ross would certainly be up there, wouldn’t he? When I wrote that about Simmons, I was trying to think who else would be in contention. Most of the figures I think about come from the civil rights era, because I think race issues do us the most harm now. Would any of Mississippi’s earlier citizens – Bilbo, for example, or perhaps someone from the Civil War period – have set back our fortunes as much?
That’s hilarious, Cochran.
I saw Anita Modak-Truran reviewing a movie on a local channel Friday morning and I don’t remember a thing about it because the whole time I was fixated on whether those were her real eyebrows.
Anderson’s right–that Kevin Smith thing is totally hilarious. I love how she continues to argue with him when she is obviously wrong. She just makes herself look like a damn fool. As far as her eyebrows go, check this out: http://www.facebook.com/people/Anita-Modak-Truran/606018324 Yikes! Looks aside, I think what she and her crew are doing is just awful. I live on Fairview, less than a block down from where this battle is taking place. The Sharps (owners of the Fairview Inn) are unbelievably nice people who have given so much back to their community. Belhaven has benefited greatly from their being here. Apparently, they can’t step outside to walk their dog without being shouted at by the plaintiffs. (Which, in my opinion, is more disruptive to the neighborhood than a restaurant.) As a neighbor of the Fairview Inn, I have absolutely no problem with their having a restaurant. I see it as a great thing–a fine dining establishment within walking distance of my house? Yes, please! The Sharps have done everything in their power to alleviate any parking problems, and I have never felt like there were too many cars on the street. Even during weddings, things are well-controlled. I find it very interesting that Modak-Truran & co. didn’t have a problem with the Inn at all when Bill Simmons and his wife owned it. I guarantee you they just don’t like the Sharps and are being mean and tacky. I wish the Modak-Trurans and the Bakers would just move far, far away. At least we wouldn’t have to suffer through Anita’s awful movie reviews anymore.
That image on facebook scared my two year old!
I live in Belhaven, one street over from Fairview. I’m thinking about parking my car in front of their house and just walking to mine.
Fellow bloggers,
I respect your right to express your opinions concerning the Fairview Inn and my movie reviews. You are also correct that I made a mistake in one of my written reviews for the C-L and that Kevin Smith called me on it. He was correct to do so, and I have apologized for that mistake. Kevin is a good guy, and while the circumstances were most unfortunate to say the least, I enjoyed speaking with him about his movies and his film career. However, I would appreciate if you would keep me eyebrows out of it. They are the only pair I own. (And yes they are real!). I never knew before today that they were so distracting…. The Brow-Monster
NMC, can you rig this site so that you can “share” posts on facebook? You have had several I would share if that capability were there.
As far as her eyebrows go, check this out
Yikes! I think those must be implants.
Perhaps she will move to Paris to pursue a career as auteur. Except in Paris, I believe it’s considered a *good* thing to have a nice restaurant across the street from one’s home.
Jacksonian, the way I share them on Facebook is to highlight the post so it shows a URL like this:
http://nmisscommentor.com/2009/08/14/trouble-looming-about-that-fairview-restaurant-zoning-decision/
Then I click “share” on a Facebook tookbar that I’ve got installed on my browser. If you don’t have the toolbar, I’m not sure the easiest route. Anyone?
NMC, this looks like a plug-in that would do what Jacksonian wants.
Okay I’m on her side now. She’s got moxie. And I guess I’m not an “eyebrow” person, so I really couldn’t tell they were anything more than just that, eyebrows. Since I don’t read or listen to movie reviews, no-harm-no-foul there either. But having eaten at the Fairvew for business functions several times, I guess I’m surprised people would go there for a meal. But hey, Taco Bell is a billion dollar company too, so what do I know.
Picking up on your attempt at being provocative in the 20th post to this thread, wouldn’t the most obvious natural law argument against the re-zoning be that the neighborhood, for over a hundred years now, has always limited commercial establishments to the major outlying arteries, i.e. Fortification, State St., and Riverside. Is that a natural law argument?
No, WTBAL, that’s “just” a legal argument. Natural law involves the notion that there are principles out there in the clouds that are constants in human society that by their nature produce certain legal rules.
I’ve never seen any sign of principles at that level of generality that would help resolve any actual case. As noted, I tend toward the realist response that law is what judges say the law is.
Oddly enough, glancing about the web, I see that Anita Modak-Truren’s husband seems to be an expert on this subject. In any event, I’ll have to commend the graciousness of her response to the comments here.
BTW, WTBAL, I let the word “attempt” slide here.
My own attempt at being provocative was “attempt”, along with “20th”.
NMC, At’ll work.
That is odd — AMT’s comment is timestamped before mine, but wasn’t visible to me when I posted.
But I seem to live in a temporal flux anyway, since my wife texted me today & her message was two minutes *later* than when I received it. Somehow I should be able to use this skill in Vegas ….
Anderson, her comment was held for moderation because it was her first comment. When you wrote yours, hers was invisible to blog readers.
I hope she doesn’t advise her clients using the same kind of logic (meaning lack thereof) she used with Kevin Smith, just blindly sticking to a position without questioning whether it was right or wrong. Leave that to Sarah Palin.
SARAH PALIN!!! Who brought up Sarah Palin? You guys just can’t leave her alone can you? Loved Leonard Pitts today “…where there is incoherence, naturally, there is Sarah Palin.”