[Vision2020] Hawkins Water & Sewer Agreement

[Garrett Clevenger]

Chas writes:

"I have been following the discussion with some
attention, but not full
attention.  Still, even paying only half attention, I
have witnessed
the same questions posed repeatedly, and the same
answers given each time. "


Since Chas may not have read my response to Dan's
email (even if I may be one of "those making the
loudest noises on Vision2020.")  I will repost my
questions to Dan's email, which Dan has yet to respond
to.

If Chas is referring to me as being one of the
"uninformed" I will admit that I am still informing
myself about Hawkins.  Thus the need to ask questions.
 Thus the expectations that I will get answers.  If I
missed these answers somehow, I apologize and request
someone point me to these answers.

Chas can continue to remain in ignorance over the
details of this, but that doesn't mean I want to join
in.  We all deserve answers.  For him to pardon our
elected officials (one who he happens to know) as I've
been reading seems irresponsible, especially since it
appears he voted for these guys.  If their supporters
aren't willing to call them out, then those of us who
don't want them to give Moscow away are going to have
to be loud in order to be heard.

I've read emails that imply I'm a liar, yet don't
receive answers to sincere questions for those people.
 Perhaps I'm misinterpreting their views of me, but if
not, they are implying that I am not informed and
seemingly think I should stay that way.  That, or I am
a liar.

I admit, I am still learning.  You'll have to forgive
me for not knowing as much as you.  So perhaps you
will answer these questions for Dan.

Ignoring the questions, though, seems to imply that
people dish out name calling and red herrings without
facing the facts.  I hope discerning readers will come
to a reasonable conclusion on the facts, not the
personalities of the various posters.

So here are my questions to Dan:

1) Am I correct in assuming Moscow still had time
before we would have spent significant money on
litigation? In other words, there was a potential that
the {PCHB} would have ruled in Moscow's favor
regarding the appeal, and thus there would be no need
for an "agreement."

2) How does this jive with the potential litigation if
the city defends the noise ordinance in court? Since
that law is highly potentially unconstitutionally
vague and overbroad, it seems the city should be
concerned about wasting our tax dollars in a
consistent fasion.

3) Are you implying that since there are no similarly
situated customers, we can charge Hawkins what we want
(up to a limit)?  If we set a "premium" price that
Hawkins does not agree to pay, they can refuse
service.  What will be the process to determine that
cost to Hawkins?

4) Do you know what happened to those water rights? 
Did Whitman County gain control of them?  {as is
specified in Hawkins' agreement with Whitman County}
If so, then not only are we giving Whitman County our
water, but they get to keep the old water rights. 
Someone else in the corridor can apply for them, thus
there will be an increase in water use.

5) What kind of commitment did we get from them
regarding conservation?

6) What did Hawkins give?  They can still drill wells
and apply for water rights.  Plus, they are saving up
to $4 million due to not having to build their own
water and sewer system.  {on top of "The City shall
not directly or indirectly protest, contest, or appeal
any permits or governmental approvals sought by
Hawkins for the Stateline Project" except if they are
public safety or nuisance issues}

7) I also wonder, why was sewer part of the agreement?
 I thought this was about water rights. 


I asked this question of Walter Steed:

8) How do the other Moscow malls, and other businesses
feel about this agreement?  Were they consulted with
and given an opportunity to
affect the discussion?


I also asked the following questions to g, who said,
""repeat a lie often enough..." Well, droning on about
Moscow "subsidizing" the new development surely falls
into this category."

9) So you are saying there is no money beyond receipts
that will be
needed for upgrades?  There will be no potential need
for a public bond to help pay for future upgrades? 
That there is no money from the general fund that pays
for Moscow's water and sewer?

g writes:

"This is not a public works project."

I reply:

10) Then why is Whitman County having a $9.1 million
bond to pay for the public infrastructure of Hawkins?

What I want is some transparency and public
involvement before the council agrees to subsidizing
Whitman County's growth. Especially when the
councilors cutting the deal are GMA candidates whose
chair Steve Busch, who owns property right across the
steet from Hawkins, stands to profit off of this deal.

11) How can you not be concerned about this conflict
of interest?  Anytime special interests are able to
negotiate secret deals, and the public is not given
the opportunity to discuss the merits before voting on
it, is suspicious to me.

My last question for now:

12) Is it right to allow Hawkins to sell, for a
profit, the water we sell them to their end-users? 
The agreement leaves open the possibility that Hawkins
can set their own rates above and beyond what they are
paying to Moscow.

Chas and others may be satisfied with the answers
given thus far.  I, for one, am not.  I prefer to have
some light shown on this.  I don't think I'm alone.

I think it reflects poorly on people, though, when
they belittle others for not knowing all the details
but are trying to figure this out with the rest of
those interested on v2020.  That type of tactic
doesn't jive with me, and hopefully those more
open-minded to finding the truth will see their
approach as, really, a solid lack of argument in
support of Moscow's Settlement Agreement with Hawkins.

Perhaps, though, I am just, as Chas says, someone with
"sadomasochistic tendencies (i.e., the need to prolong
or provoke strife)" and just want to incite everybody
to rebellion.

Honestly, though, I just want what is best for the
people of Moscow, not the predatory developers in
Whitman County.

I wonder:

13) Where do the Hawkins supporters stand?  Are you
for Moscow, or Whitman County?  From what I can tell,
the agreement benefits Whitman County far more than
Moscow.

Sincerely,

Garrett