[Vision2020] Advanced Real Estate Question

[Garrett Clevenger]

Pat writes: 

"how can it be a subsidies or give away if they are
paying the going rate? ...I do not understand how it
is a 'give away'."

I reply:

>From my perspective, we will subsidize Hawkins by the
fact that they won't have to pay the $4 million they
intended to pay for providing their own water and
sewage.  Whitman County didn't want to pay for it. 
Instead, we will provide those services to them, and
they are not obligated to pay for bonds for upkeep. 
Since the contract lasts forever, Moscow has to
account for the fact that Hawkins is using what
potentially would be left for Moscow.  Moscow will
have to upgrade at some point sooner due to the
increased demand Hawkins poses.

They are saving $4 million, and the taxpayers of
Moscow are subsidizing that.  That sounds like a "give
away" to me.


Pat writes:
"If we needed a new sewer system with or with out
Hawkins and they are now going to help pay for it I do
not see how that is not to our advantage."

I reply:

Hawkins is not obligated to pay for anything other
than the water we sell them and the sewage we take. 
The contract does not say Hawkins has to pay for
upgrades.

It does say that they sell the water to their
end-users, meaning they could profit on that water. 
Maybe that's not a subsidy, but it's a commodity they
could use for their bottom line.  Water that should be
left in Moscow for our growth.  So we are also
subsidizing them with our water.

Garrett