[Vision2020] [Bulk] Fwd: [Bulk] Hawkins Mega-Mall

[Paul Rumelhart]

It's always wise to keep an eye on our elected officials.

I haven't seen the proposal, so I don't know if there is anything 
worthwhile in it or not.  I don't think that any mall would be bad, just 
one that's done poorly and without a good design.

Paul

roger hayes wrote:
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>   
>> From: roger hayes <rhayes at turbonet.com>
>> Date: Sun Jan 13, 2008  10:18:10 AM US/Pacific
>> To: Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Bulk] [Vision2020] Hawkins Mega-Mall
>>
>> Paul,
>> Thank you for the reply. However, I reiterate that this is a deal that 
>> will create much more economic, esthetic, and environmental harm than 
>> it ever will produce benefit for Moscow. I smell a foul smell here. 
>> Maybe we should look at places like Hayden, Post Falls, Newport, Wa. 
>> and Priest River to see what has been done. However, there is little 
>> in common there. Our "neighbor city" is not a few hundred yards away. 
>> It is more than 6 miles. And Pullman does not want this to happen 
>> either. Again, I smell a bad smell. It is the smell of agreements 
>> being made behind closed doors to benefit some to the detriment of the 
>> city as a whole. Also, the argument that "it is going to happen 
>> anyway" is a fallacy and is contrived to pull the wool over our eyes. 
>> That is a foul way to conduct city business, and I suggest we look 
>> very closely at our elected officials for conflict of interests.
>> Roger
>> On Sunday, January 13, 2008, at 09:58 AM, Paul Rumelhart wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> 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
>>>> =======================================================
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>
> =======================================================
>  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
> =======================================================
>
>