[Vision2020] no superwalmart and water
Jeff Harkins
jeffh at moscow.com
Thu Jun 29 15:50:34 PDT 2006
Mark,
Please think carefully about your position here. We receive about a
half a trillion gallons of water in the County each year.
If I concede your point that 80% of the rainfall is utilized (I will
research for that work as I am skeptical of this finding ...) that
leaves about 100,000,000,000 (yes, 100 billion gallons) available for
capture by Moscow. Only about 3% of the available remainder need be
captured to completely replace the current reliance on
groundwater. Since the 2-3 billion gallons of usage is the estimate
for both Moscow and Pullman combined - it would appear that we could
sustain reasonable growth for many years without ever tapping the
groundwater supply again.
Furthermore, the creation of a reservoir or a system of reservoirs
(this could provide local electrical generation and reduce reliance
on fossil fuels, recreational activities) would be a significant
economic development for the County.
I find your use of Weyerhauser's words interesting - coming from a
timber man like yourself.
Mr. Weyerhauser was looking to site a lumber mill and he needed a way
to get logs from the woods to the mill. Potlatch was chosen over
Moscow because Potlatch had a river (the Mighty Palouse). During my
eight years living in Palouse I owned property just above the holding
pond site for logs that were floated down the mighty Palouse to be
sawed there. Photos from that era document the use of the river for
that purpose. Last time I checked, the Palouse River still travels
through Latah County.
The ability to have reservoirs is well documented by the existence of
Dworshak. A good example of the ability of towns to utilize
reservoir water for citizen support is found in Troy.
As to drying up the farmland, I never suggested such a thing and as
the numbers above suggest, no threat to ag or wildlife is present.
As to your analysis of the water tables, I mean no disrespect, but I
question your credentials to analyze the data and postulate results
based on that analysis. I don't object to you making an argument and
presenting facts or having an opinion, but I have some concerns about
formulating public policy based on your analysis. Let's get some
properly credentialed scientists engaged in this issue.
I repeat my position on water - Latah County does not have a water
supply problem - we may or may not have a water distribution
problem. If we do have a water distribution problem, we certainly
have enough water to resolve any localized supply issues (e.g.,
Moscow, Genesee, Potlatch)
At 08:59 AM 6/22/2006, you wrote:
>Jeff:
>
>I've heard this argument from you (and now Kirkland) before and it
>doesn't hold water. First, water indeed does fall on all surfaces in
>the county but to argue that it is somehow available for use is just
>wrong. We do not live in a slick rock desert where most of the
>precip runs off. We have plants, including a lot of crops, forests
>and pasture lands. It is estimated by UI scientists that over 80% of
>the precip that hits the ground is utilized or evapo-transpirated by
>plants. Most of the rest finds it's way into the creeks with a very
>tiny percentage estimated to actually recharge to groundwater. I'll
>point out the obvious: if we had so much extra water here maybe
>we'd have lakes and rivers, too. Instead we have the famous words of
>Weyerhauser upon being asked by a local reporter back in 1901 where
>he was going to locate his new sawmill, Potlatch or Moscow. He said,
>"There's not enough water in Moscow to baptize a bastard." Nothing
>has changed to improve that assessment in the intervening 105 years.
>
>Are you seriously suggesting that we should dry up the most
>productive wheat farms in the world and the area streams so we can
>have a WalMart? You're a reasonable person so I don't think that is
>what you are recommending. So why throw out these numbers divorced
>from reality?
>
>As I've posted previously, the tipping point, based on past aquifer
>performance recorded in actual data, is likely to occur within 15-20
>years not 100 as you "conservatively" state. The reality is Moscow
>now draws 30% of it's water from the upper Wanapum aquifer. Moscow
>just about dried out the Wanapum by pumping about that same amount
>of water in the period from 1920-1960. The Wanapum recovered in the
>largely non-pumping period from 1960-1990 after Moscow drilled into
>the deep aquifer for its replacement supply. Actual well data is now
>showing declines in Wanapum static water levels closely following
>the data curve from the earlier period. We're at about the 1940
>point on the curve. That leaves us 20 years before the Wanapum wells
>go dry unless we do something now.
>
>Large infrastructure projects such as reservoirs, rainwater
>collection (and the treatment plants that go along with them) take a
>lot of time to design, finance and construct. The time to start is
>now and throwing out red herrings "we don't have a water supply
>problem" only delay the political/community consensus needed to
>begin such a large and expensive undertaking.
>
>Mark S.
>
>
>
>At 7:45 AM -0700 6/20/06, Jeff Harkins wrote:
>>Matt and Mark,
>>
>>The scare tactics being used to limit growth and development in
>>Latah County are far from over. It is going to require a
>>substantial effort to counter the claims made about the negative
>>aspects of growth. But if the adults in this community rise to the
>>challenge, we will be able to promote growth and assure a
>>prosperous future for our children and grandchildren.
>>
>>Let me just offer a couple of insights on the "water supply" issue
>>raised by Solomon. He and his followers want you to believe that
>>we have a water supply problem. Of course, with an average
>>rainfall of 24 inches per year falling on the 1077 square miles of
>>Latah County, that equates to about 418,176,000 gallons of water
>>per square mile. Just run that out over the total square miles in
>>Latah County and one discovers that we have access to about half a
>>trillion gallons of water each year. Water consumption for Moscow
>>and Pullman is estimated to be about 2-3 billion gallons each
>>year. Of course Whitman County also receives about 24 inches of
>>rain each year. As you can surmise, we don't have a water supply problem.
>>
>>They usually counter with the claim that they are concerned about
>>the ground water system and that with the aquifer dropping about 1
>>to 1.5 feet per year, we are doomed to run out of ground water.
>>Although there is dispute about the actual size of the deep water
>>aquifers, testing seems to validate that the aquifer is at least
>>400 feet deep - some state it is deeper. Look at these numbers
>>- and lets assume that we can only use about 25% of the available
>>aquifer depth - about a 100 feet. Using these conservative
>>estimates, we might see a decline in our ability to provide ground
>>water in about 100 years. That would seem to be an adequate amount
>>of time to figure out how to contain some of our surface water (rainfall).
>>
>>Notice how the tax question you raised was shunted just to property
>>taxes. Once retail sales move to Whitman County, we will
>>experience an enormous loss of sales tax revenue.
>>
>>Matt - keep posting, keep raising the awareness of your friends and
>>neighbors to these issues. Today, the anti-WalMart group is
>>attempting to restrict where you and your family can shop - what
>>will they attempt to control next?
>>
>>At 05:21 AM 6/20/2006, you wrote:
>>>Matt,
>>>
>>>Read my previous posts and columns on why it is unlikely that the
>>>Hawkin's development will be built (water supply) and the
>>>difference in taxation structures between Idaho and Washington
>>>that diminishes the importance of sales tax revenues in the
>>>general scheme of things in Moscow. Sure, there would be an
>>>increase in property tax revenue if a building was built in
>>>Moscow, but that can be of a very fleeting nature witness the
>>>dark Tidyman's building and the 33% reduction in assessed value
>>>now that it is dark. That spiral down will continue each year it
>>>is empty as part of the commercial property assessment formula is
>>>an "income test".
>>>
>>>Mark
>>>
>>>At 10:25 PM -0700 6/19/06, Matt Decker wrote:
>>>>Mark,
>>>>
>>>>How was the party? Was everyone giving high fives to the fact
>>>>that Wally world is gone? Did we all have a good time since this
>>>>was the best for Moscow? I myself laugh in dismay wondering why
>>>>we push these companies 100 feet over the border.
>>>>
>>>>Now the new rumor is Walmart is trying to move in with the
>>>>Hawkins development. Well hey you won. You might have managed to
>>>>push them over to Whitman county, allowing hundreds of thousands
>>>>of dollars of tax revenue to be spent over there. My kids will
>>>>hopefully have a new school by the time they are 16, but not at this rate.
>>>>
>>>>Face it Mark, tax money is crossing the border. Why shouldn't we join in?
>>>>
>>>>Matt
>>>>
>>>>>From: Mark Solomon <msolomon at moscow.com>
>>>>>To: Jeff Harkins <jeffh at moscow.com>, "Bill London" <london at moscow.com>;,
>>>>> vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] no superwalmart -- Tribune report
>>>>>Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:13:00 -0700
>>>>>
>>>>>Jeff,
>>>>>
>>>>>I never said I was not concerned about the loss of sales tax
>>>>>dollars. I did say that due to the ID sales tax distribution
>>>>>formula and the difference in tax structures between WA and ID,
>>>>>the weight of sales tax revenue in the decision to approve or
>>>>>disapprove a motor business rezone in Moscow was a minor part of
>>>>>the issues to be considered, especially as the Pullman
>>>>>supercenter was expected to siphon off the Pullman trade that
>>>>>had been coming to Moscow. Let's remember that we were not
>>>>>given a choice between building a store in Pullman or Moscow:
>>>>>the Pullman store was well on the path toward approval while the
>>>>>Moscow store had not even been heard of. And to answer your
>>>>>question ahead of time: I would have opposed a Moscow
>>>>>supercenter even if it was the first out of the blocks as we
>>>>>already have a Walmart and a Winco.
>>>>>
>>>>>Beyond that, hats off to Schweitzer for building their business
>>>>>in the Palouse. We all benefit.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mark S.
>>>>>
>>>>>At 12:27 AM -0700 6/18/06, Jeff Harkins wrote:
>>>>>>Commissars
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes, this was disappointing news - the loss of this retail
>>>>>>investment is tragic. But, perhaps WalMart will reconsider the
>>>>>>Pullman location and move the supercenter store to the corridor
>>>>>>(and close the current Moscow location).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Grocery patrons can then enjoy sales-tax-free grocery purchases
>>>>>>- and get all the shopping benefits of a supercenter - without
>>>>>>actually having to have one in Moscow. I recall Solomon and
>>>>>>others not concerned about loss of sales tax revenue since
>>>>>>there is not a direct return on those dollars to city coffers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>With the new four-lane road, access should be great and my
>>>>>>guess is that there will be more than adequate parking. In all
>>>>>>likelihood, WallMart will allow the Moscow-Pullman shuttle bus
>>>>>>to use their location for a bus stop. Proximity to Bike trail
>>>>>>will make two-wheel access easy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I had the chance to visit the new Kennewick WalMart supercenter
>>>>>>store a couple of weeks ago. They had a very good organic food
>>>>>>section (most of the produce locally grown - Tri-Cities area)
>>>>>>and the best selection of Mexican/Spanish condiments I have
>>>>>>seen outside of Mexico.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Oh, that hissing sound you hear - don't worry about it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Perhaps it passed your noting, but front page of Daily News
>>>>>>also carried a story about job growth in Pullman. It was
>>>>>>noteworthy to see that Schweitzer Eng. will expand its
>>>>>>manufacturing facilities in Pullman and add another 300 jobs.
>>>>>>Presumably the initial infusion of salary dollars to Pullman
>>>>>>will be approximately $20 MM dollars annually (300 jobs at
>>>>>>$65,000). As those salaries are converted into product (all of
>>>>>>which are exported utility grid and related components), the
>>>>>>gross effect to the Pullman area could exceed $50 MM annually -
>>>>>>as a point of reference, that is about $15 to $20 MM higher
>>>>>>than the total annual gross production of agriculture in Latah County.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Meanwhile, our own local brain trust is busily crafting their
>>>>>>vision of the ultimate planned economy ... high rise condos and
>>>>>>apartments within one mile of downtown? Mixed use
>>>>>>neighborhoods with easy access shopping, electric car repair
>>>>>>and laundramats - ???????? Will neighborhood taverns be allowed???
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ... and Beebe withdrew his proposal for Grain Elevator Condos????
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I wonder if the town center will be paved in red bricks?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>At 04:09 PM 6/16/2006, you wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wal-Mart shelves Moscow super center
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>By ELAINE WILLIAMS
>>>>>>>of the Tribune
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wal-Mart has put plans for a super center in Moscow on the back burner.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wal-Mart will not pursue a location on the southeast corner of
>>>>>>>Mountain View Road and Highway 8, east of a former Tidyman's
>>>>>>>site and near Eastside Marketplace, said Karianne Fallow, a
>>>>>>>spokeswoman for Wal-Mart in Boise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Wal-Mart has decided to re-evaluate our opportunities for a
>>>>>>>super center in Moscow,'' Fallow said in a Thursday announcement.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"While we're fully committed to continuing to serve our
>>>>>>>customers on the Palouse, we can't continue to delay our
>>>>>>>relocation plans at this time,'' Fallow said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wal-Mart will continue to operate its existing Moscow store,
>>>>>>>Fallow said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wal-Mart will also seek to open a 223,000-square-foot super
>>>>>>>center on Bishop Boulevard in Pullman, Fallow said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That project has been appealed by Pullman Alliance for
>>>>>>>Responsible Development in Whitman County Superior Court.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And Wal-Mart will also look for alternative super center sites
>>>>>>>in Moscow, Fallow said. "We still continue to view Pullman and
>>>>>>>Moscow as two very distinct markets.''
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Fallow said Wal-Mart has no plans to build a super center in
>>>>>>>Lewiston at this time. Rumors about such a store have been
>>>>>>>circulating in Lewiston for months.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wal-Mart's decision is directly related to action taken by the
>>>>>>>Moscow City Council last month, Fallow said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The panel rejected a request to rezone 77 acres from
>>>>>>>agriculture-forestry to motor business, a designation that
>>>>>>>could have opened the door for a number of big-box retailers on the site.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>At the time, the council indicated that a rezone request for a
>>>>>>>lesser amount of property might be acceptable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>But Wal-Mart isn't interested in following up, Fallow said.
>>>>>>>"The city council has continually changed the rules of the
>>>>>>>game. And creating a guessing game for any kind of development
>>>>>>>is a very expensive endeavor.''
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>First the land needed to be rezoned and then how much needed
>>>>>>>to be rezoned wasn't clear, Fallow said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Then it wasn't possible for the store plans to be reviewed
>>>>>>>before the rezone and other parts of the process were settled, Fallow said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Attempts to reach the city's elected officials Thursday
>>>>>>>afternoon by e-mail were not successful. All of them were out
>>>>>>>of town, most of them attending the Idaho Association of
>>>>>>>Cities conference in Lewiston.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"We certainly respect the decision Wal-Mart has made,'' said
>>>>>>>Bill Belknap, assistant city supervisor. "We wish them the
>>>>>>>best in their endeavors.''
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Mark Solomon, a coordinator of No Super Wal-Mart, said Moscow
>>>>>>>already has the services a Wal-Mart would have provided at its
>>>>>>>own store and in retailers owned by Palouse residents.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"It's great news that the most predatory retailer on the
>>>>>>>planet won't be gaining any larger presence in Moscow,'' Solomon said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Solomon's group already had a party planned for 7 p.m. tonight
>>>>>>>at the 1912 Center in Moscow to mark the previous zoning
>>>>>>>decision of the city council. "There will be additional cause
>>>>>>>to celebrate Moscow's vitality,'' Solomon said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>But Fallow said it's wrong for Moscow residents to view her
>>>>>>>employer's decision as a victory. "With a super center comes
>>>>>>>additional jobs, additional tax revenue. You name it, there
>>>>>>>are a lot of benefits to having a super center in the city.''
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Solomon disagreed. Wal-Mart jobs replace better paying ones in
>>>>>>>existing local businesses, Solomon said.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Williams may be contacted at ewilliam at lmtribune.com or at
>>>>>>>(208) 743-9600, ext. 261.
>>>>>>>=====================================================
>>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>>>>>http://www.fsr.net
>>>>>>>mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>>>>====================================================
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>=====================================================
>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>>>====================================================
>>>>
>>>>_________________________________________________________________
>>>>On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice
>>>>on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list