[Vision2020] Residents Squabble Over the Future of This QuaintRural Community

[mark seman]

Smart growth is not "no growth."  Smart growth is more like, "no growth, as
it has been."  The free-market economy does mostly nothing to assist with
Community Development.  Its focus is on ROI, not social & environmental
responsibility.  Citizens are aware of this and are looking for
alternatives.  There are processes that can provide a sufficient ROI as well
as provide social & environmental responsibile growth and develop Community.
Desire just needs to be applied to implement them.

"If we want to be a bedroom community for Pullman, Lewiston and Potlatch,"
warns Steve Busch, chairman of the growth-oriented Greater Moscow Alliance,
"then we can write regulations to secure that."  Current (& past)
regulations define the type of growth that will happen.  The public backlash
is also defined by these very same regulations.  A level of adjustment is
required to re-define land use regulations that allow Developer and
Community to be working towards a common goal of Community Development.

Community Development is not a narrow view of physically building homes and
businsesses.  It is the physical and psychological constructs that assist
citizens to live and work together.  The significant commonality is Common
Goal.  It is not one-sided, but communal, and a level of Community
commitment must be tangible for each party.  This has not been the case for
decades and adjustment will come.  The sooner this adjustment (mutual
understanding and resolution) occurs, the quicker Community Development can
occur to benefit the whole Community.

If the free market is harming a Community, then why allow it to occur?
Self-destruction is generally not a desired trait.  Self-preservation is
common.  Self-improvement is a noble goal.  The whole Community should be
striving for self-improvement - and the process is not a one-sided approach.
The opportunity is so obvious, it's a wonder that those with the financial
ability are so resistant to it and the opposite pole is also too entrenched
to even suggest it.  It's on the fringe of the free-market, not totally
separate from it.

Mark


mark r. seman, architect
       v=928.925.7617
       f=928.776.9107


-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
[mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]On Behalf Of Tom Hansen
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 8:05 AM
To: Vision 2020
Subject: [Vision2020] Residents Squabble Over the Future of This
QuaintRural Community


>From today's (January 28, 2007) Lewiston Tribune -

-----------------------------------------------------------

Residents squabble over the future of this quaint rural community; The
trouble with growth Everybody, it seems, has an agenda, but the debate over
the future of Moscow boils down to one of economics versus aesthetics

http://www.lmtribune.com/01282007/sun1ablurb.jpg
Bruce Livingston (left), president of the Moscow Civic Association, and
Steve Busch, chairman of the Greater Moscow Alliance are friendly neighbors
who just happen to be on opposite sides of the fence when it comes to growth
issues in Moscow.(Photo courtesy Steve Hanks/Tribune)

By DAVID JOHNSON
of the Tribune

MOSCOW -- On one side of the growth and development issue, we have CAVE
people and BANANAs.

On the other side, there are PIMBYs and YIMBYs, not to be confused with
NIMBYs.

Translation: CAVE people are Citizens Against Virtually Everything. They're
often accused of teaming with BANANA types who want to Build Absolutely
Nothing Anywhere Near Anything.

PIMBYs are people who blindly open their arms to development and shout,
"Please In My Back Yard." They sometimes declare, "Yes In My Back Yard."

NIMBYs, of course, have long subscribed to the notion of Not In My Back
Yard. But they can be on either side of the growth issue, depending on the
nature of the proposed development.

Amid all this pejorative alphabet soup, there are also people who exhibit
what's known as DBM, drawbridge mentality. They're usually rich rascals who
move from mainstream America to places like rural Moscow to soak up the
amenities and then pull up the drawbridge to fend off others seeking the
same.

Few people in Moscow declare or admit allegiance to any of these acronym
camps, but many suggest that others are devotees. And that, coupled with
genuine concern about this university community's future, seems enough to
fuel the growth debate for some time to come.

This, despite statistics that show Moscow has grown only slightly over the
past several years and Latah County has actually lost population. It's the
same story across the border where Pullman's population has grown a bit more
than Moscow's, but Whitman County has lost even more residents than Latah
County. (See related story.)

So the current debate seems to be more about economic growth. Aside from the
few who'll admit to being CAVE people or BANANAs, most everyone within the
fray say they want Moscow to prosper financially. The contention starts when
someone asks, "How?"

"If we want to be a bedroom community for Pullman, Lewiston and Potlatch,"
warns Steve Busch, chairman of the growth-oriented Greater Moscow Alliance,
"then we can write regulations to secure that."

"I've been a little perturbed by attempts to label us as anti-growth,"
counters Bruce Livingston, president of the Moscow Civic Association. "We
want the community to grow in ways that don't change its character."

The two men are neighbors who are happy to shake hands over the shrubs
between their yards.

"We had Bruce over for our Christmas open house," says Busch, co-owner of
Busch Distributing.

"I really enjoyed it," says Livingston, a federal death row defense
attorney.

Neither will call the other a PIMBY, YIMBY, BANANA or CAVE person.

But their views on growth and development, they concede, start on opposite
sides of the fence. Common ground, to date, appears to be a narrow
proposition.

Livingston's Moscow Civic Association was first to become part of the growth
glossary here. While he and other members blanch at anti-growth labels,
Busch and founders of the Greater Moscow Alliance admit their organization
was formed to counter the MCA.

"I don't know that we'd back away from being called pro-growth," Busch said
seven months ago when the GMA was formed. Asked at that time if the alliance
was an antidote to the MCA, Busch said, "I don't think we'd admit that, but
from what I can see, they're well organized and have sincere beliefs about
what they want to do."

Sandwiched between these two citizens groups, is the Moscow City Council, a
seven-member legislative body (including the mayor) with a political
identity that's hinged greatly over the last five years on the growth issue.


In the last election, most observers agree, the pendulum swung to the left.

The former council, headed by then Mayor Marshall Comstock, a get-it-done
construction company owner who touts free enterprise, was considered
business friendly, if not outright pro-growth.

"The council when I was mayor was definitely more pro-growth," Comstock says
without hesitation.

The current council, under the guidance of Mayor Nancy Chaney, a soft-spoken
former nurse who was endorsed by the MCA and leans "green" on environmental
issues, is prone to keeping a tighter rein on free enterprise, at least at
the corporate level.

"I don't think this council is anti-growth," says Chaney, who was a council
member under Comstock's administration, "but I think we can afford to be
choosy."

Enter Wal-Mart, the corporate behemoth that became a touchstone for the
growth debate here nearly two years ago when plans for a super center were
announced.

"I'm not a Wal-Mart defender per se," says Busch, "but I know we've had a
free-market economy in the United States that's worked pretty well for more
than 200 years. And if the business climate in Moscow is such that the
biggest retailer in the world wants to locate here, that's the way it is."

Livingston counters that Wal-Mart in a super-size portion would mark the
beginning of the end of Moscow's small-town character.

"There certainly are some people who don't want a Wal-Mart at all, but I'm
not one of them," Livingston says. "However, I'm not sure you need a super
center."

The proposed site for the super center and possibly other big-box stores is
in the southeastern corner of town, across State Highway 8 from the Moscow
Cemetery.

"Over their dead bodies," people organized against the Wal-Mart-anchored
development seemed to say. A "No Super Wal-Mart" group was organized, a
required zoning change was shot down and the big retailer at this time seems
focused on locating in neighboring Pullman where the city council, to this
point, has left the welcome mat out.

Meanwhile, members of the Moscow Planning and Zoning Commission on Wednesday
voted to recommend a 130,000-square-foot cap on retail stores; a proposal
that if adopted by the city council will effectively prohibit most big-box
stores. A public hearing on the matter has been scheduled for Feb. 28. It
promises to be an airing of ideas by PIMBYs, CAVE people and everyone in
between.

Busch and Comstock warn that Moscow has an ever-growing reputation of being
anti-business and Chaney recently reinforced the reputation by writing
letters of concern about developments across the border in Washington.

"I think it's legal for her to do that," says Comstock, "but I disagree with
it. I think the mayor has gone a little bit too far."

Chaney defends questioning the proposed 110-acre Hawkins Co.'s shopping
center and an automobile dealership within a mile of Moscow city limits as
prudent, if not necessary. "I had the council's full support to do that,"
she says of her letters addressed to Whitman County Planner Mark Bordsen.

Moscow Chamber of Commerce President Mike Nelson last week sided with Busch
and Comstock.

"We must commit to eliminating any obstacles in the way of building true
long-term regional economic cooperation," Nelson wrote in a
letter-of-concern to Chaney in which he expressed "disappointment" with the
mayor's cross-border intervention.

Bordsen, after reviewing all of Chaney's comments, decided none of them
raised issues worthy of changing his initial approval of the development
plans.

Chaney, who holds a master's degree in environmental science from the
University of Idaho, suggests that growth and development should be
tethered, rather than given a free rein.

"I am vocal and trying to make it clear that the green light is on for
development in Moscow within the principals of smart growth."

Jim Anderson, vice chairman of the GMA, a local businessman and a former
city council member, doesn't buy Chaney's pitch. "What she's doing is making
us look like a bunch of jerks over here. I don't think she's stating the
opinion of most people in the city of Moscow."

Anderson also chastises a majority of the city council.

"They're quoting smart growth, which equates to no growth. I think the
present council has demonstrated that they're not in favor of growth. I
don't care what they say, that reputation is there."

Bill London, a co-founder of the MCA and advocate of smart-growth
principles, says free enterprise of the kind that spawns Wal-Mart super
centers in town's like Moscow and shopping centers in farm land is "stupid."
He contends that residents have a right to work through representative
government to design and build "a unique community that doesn't want a
Wal-Mart."

-----------------------------------------------------------

Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

***********************************
Work like you don't need the money.
Love like you've never been hurt.
Dance like nobody's watching.

- Author Unknown
***********************************



=======================================================
 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
=======================================================


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070128/197d12da/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 178803 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070128/197d12da/attachment-0001.jpe