[Vision2020] [Bulk] Hawkins Mega-Mall

[Paul Rumelhart]

Like you stated in your first paragraph, we are in a good bargaining 
position.  They don't want to put the mall there simply as a random 
choice.  They want to tap our population as customers.  Pullman doesn't 
wan to have to extend it's utilities out eight miles to this mall, and 
I'm sure Hawkins doesn't want to pay for it.  So we should make the most 
of our bargaining position.  If they don't want to play, they can put 
the mall on the other side of Pullman and lose some of their potential 
customer base.

So the big question is: what do we want?  Do we want to protect our 
aquifer?  Then maybe we should work out some kind of a deal where they 
pay us for the extra water usage.  We could then use that money to build 
our water infrastructure, however that is done.  Do we want to lessen 
it's impact aesthetically?  Contract with them to plant some trees or do 
some landscaping.  Do we want to lessen it's affect on the carbon chain, 
like Ted suggested?  Force them to take some steps to balance that.  We 
can't make any of this happen through laws normally because they are not 
in our state, but we can make a binding contract if they will agree to 
one.  The question for them will be: should we move this elsewhere and 
lose the easy revenue stream?  Should we deal only with Pullman for 
everything, eight miles away?  Or should we play ball and help to 
benefit our neighbor city that's a few hundred yards away?

We can't be the only city ever to exist on the border between two states 
with the other town close by.  What has been done elsewhere? 

Paul

roger hayes wrote:
> Hawkins is pretty desperate to tap into the Moscow market or else they 
> would be looking for a location closer to Pullman. The Whitman county 
> commissioners would be happy to infuse their county with the tax 
> dollars sucked out of Moscow citizens. I do not think the city of 
> Pullman is very interested in running sewer and water all the way to 
> the Idaho border.  Why would they want to encourage business 
> development that would be detrimental to their local businesses and tax 
> base?
>
> That brings us to the question of why the Moscow city council seems 
> interested in negotiating with Whitman county and Hawkins. Last week 
> Hawkins proposed that Whitman county float a bond for around 10.5 
> million dollars to lay infrastructure to their development. It doesn't 
> look like that is going to happen. Probably the commissioners see that 
> Whitman county voters are not dumb enough to fall for that. And as I 
> said earlier, Pullman does not seem dumb enough to allow injury to 
> their growing economy.  So now, who is dumb enough? Eyes turn to the 
> Moscow city council.
>
> There's gonna be some explaining to do if our city council falls for 
> this scheme. I already can see the hoards of angry tax payers with 
> pitchforks and torches surrounding the chamber council demanding an 
> explanation.
>
> Who will profit? Moscow? Hardly. Sprawl without even the benefit of 
> taxes. No legal control over the development. Continued depletion of 
> our water resources. Improvements to Moscow's water and sewer, police 
> and fire departments will fall on already overburdened residential tax 
> payers.
>
> Who stands to profit? That some members of our council seem interested 
> in this is very suspicious.
>
> Roger Hayes
> Moscow
>
>
>
> =======================================================
>  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
> =======================================================
>
>