[Vision2020] 65 acre feet of water equals $2 million of food

[Garrett Clevenger]

g writes:

"I don't see the problem with an end user reselling
water provided by our city at a profit. It happens all
the time."


Hawkins is not "reselling water provided by our city
at a profit."  The city will not profit from the water
it sells Hawkins.  While you meant that Hawkins will
profit from the water it sells, the main difference
here is that the city has guaranteed an out of state
developer 1% of Moscow's water.  No body else has this
guarantee.  If this were in Moscow, at least Moscow
would be getting the tax from that profit, but
instead, Whitman County gets it.


g writes:

"I think that you are trying awfully hard to find
reasons to be upset
about a development that most folks in Latah and
Whitman county are just fine with."


Just because most people may be complacent about
Hawkins doesn't make it right.  You can interpret
things the way you want, but that doesn't mean the
arguments against Hawkins are hard to find.  In fact,
they seem fairly apparent to me, but I just see things
differently then you.

I don't think I would ever convince you of the need to
plan our water use wisely, or how we subsidize growth
in another state.  Some people think every thing will
always be peachy keen, so why limit our right to grow
forever?

But for the people who are able to see clearly, I
believe they understand the negative consequence of
Hawkins.


g writes:

"It's good to have a hobby but the one you have chosen
seems a trifle 
useless. Perhaps you could take up recycling string
(not twine) into
 the worlds largest ball. The record for this feat
seems to be up in the air and I just KNOW you could be
a contender."


While this may be funny, it just goes to show what
sort of person you are in trying to belittle me, my
passion about insuring a sustainable future, and my
desire to engage the reasonable people on this list.

But to go along with your joke, I think I would
recycle keys, stringing them all together.  Perhaps
one of those keys would be for your heart and you
would see how ridiculous it is to belittle those who
are just trying to prevent what too many other areas
on this planet are experiencing.  While it may be
useless, it's better than remaining apathetic.

gclev


--- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:

> 
> I don't see the problem with an end user reselling
> water provided by our 
> city at a profit. It happens all the time. Were I to
> run my tap into some 
> pretty light blue bottles and slap on a label that
> read "Aqua de Mosque" and 
> retail it to the gullible at fashionable coop type
> stores, what would be the 
> problem?
> 
> Beer producers take municipal water and add some
> barley and hops and people 
> like me beat a path to their door.
> 
> Bartenders mix a little scotch or bourbon with water
> and sell it at a fairly 
> exorbitant markup.
> 
> The guy that maintains my yard mixes fertilizer and
> pesticide with water and 
> sprays it onto my yard a couple times a year and I
> gladly pay for the 
> privilege.
> 
> I think that you are trying awfully hard to find
> reasons to be upset about a 
> development that most folks in Latah and Whitman
> county are just fine with. 
> It's good to have a hobby but the one you have
> chosen seems a trifle 
> useless. Perhaps you could take up recycling string
> (not twine) into the 
> worlds largest ball. The record for this feat seems
> to be up in the air and 
> I just KNOW you could be a contender.
> 
> g
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Garrett Clevenger" <garrettmc at verizon.net>
> To: "vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 10:04 PM
> Subject: [Vision2020] 65 acre feet of water equals
> $2 million of food
> 
> 
> > Pat writes:
> >
> > "So you weren't at the meeting last night or heard
> any
> > of the
> > explainations for the vote?? Too bad you might
> have
> > learned some things."
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure why Pat writes this as my post had
> > nothing to do with an explanation for the vote.
> >
> > However, I was at the meeting and learned that my
> > suspicions about the deal are well founded.
> >
> > The questions I asked were:
> >
> > Since Hawkins is responsible for collecting fees
> from
> > end-users of water in the mall, what's to prevent
> > Hawkins from profiting from the water we sell
> them?
> >
> > According to Wayne Krauss, nothing will prevent
> them
> > from profiting.  In fact, if I understood his
> answer,
> > since Hawkins is a corporation, they are entitled
> to
> > profit from the water.
> >
> > Yes, that was about his answer, as unbelievable as
> > that seems. Krauss thinks it's ok for Hawkins to
> > profit from the water we sell them, even though
> Moscow
> > cannot profit from water it sells Hawkins.
> >
> > My second question was:
> >
> > Since Moscow can't profit on water it sells, is
> the
> > council justified in saying we can charge Hawkins
> a
> > premium for the water we sell them since we can
> only
> > charge what it costs to deliver the water.
> >
> > Krauss's answer was basically we can charge them
> > appreciation of infrastructure and went into the
> way
> > fees will be charged to Hawkins for water.  He
> failed
> > to answer the question, I thought, and only said
> what
> > we already know.  The problem with his answer is
> that
> > those fees are exactly what everybody else pays,
> so it
> > isn't a premium.
> >
> > The rest of the forum pretty much said how Hawkins
> > will not be beneficial to Moscow, but more than
> likely
> > is bad for Moscow.
> >
> > I'm not sure what Pat got out of the meeting as
> she
> > didn't go into detail about what she learned. 
> Perhaps
> > she will enlighten us with what she learned?
> >
> > gclev
> >
> >
>
=======================================================
> > 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
> >
>
=======================================================
> > 
> 
> 
>