[Vision2020] Hawkins Water and Sewer Infrastructure Costs

[Garrett Clevenger]

According to g's estimate at close to $6 million of
cost savings for water and sewer infrastructure
Whitman County will not have to pay for if Hawkins
uses Moscow's, that's around 66% of the $9.1 million
bond Whitman County agreed to pay. 

Whitman County passed this bond right before Moscow
passed the Hawkins agreement, probably knowing it
would place fire under Moscow's council to vote for
the agreement knowing that Whitman County was backing
Hawkins with their subsidy.  It was a brilliant move
on their part, and their gamble paid off, saving them
$6 million.

While I agree Moscow taxpayers are not sending a $6
million check to Whitman County, the $6 million
savings certainly gives Whitman County more money to
develop their side.  I can't blame Whitman County for
wanting to develop near the border, but with Moscow's
help in providing infrastructure to an out of state
developer, Moscow is enabling direct competition to
Moscow.  Whether that is wise or not is up to the
discerning citizens concerned about the future of this
region to decide.

Moscow will make money selling these services to
Hawkins, but whether that matches lost tax revenue in
Moscow, lost revenue for business owners in Moscow who
will have to face greater competition with Hawkins
around, or covers the cost of upgrading the system
that will be stretched even more by Hawkins, without
the need for Moscow rate-payers to pitch in and pay,
too, remains dubious.  

There is a finite amount that Moscow's infrastructure
can be used before it needs to be upgraded.  If rate
payers have to upgrade the infrastructure sooner
because of Hawkins' use, I would say Moscow
rate-payers are subsidizing Hawkins by having to pay
for upgrading due to Hawkins.  

g says Moscow didn't give anything away.  While we
don't agree about the financial giveaway, I hope g
agrees that one thing Moscow gave away as spelled out
in the agreement is the right for Moscow to "protest,
contest, or appeal any permits or governmental
approvals sought by Hawkins for the Stateline Project"
beyond "permits or governmental approvals based on
public safety or nuisance." 

g may not think this is much of a giveaway as he seems
to think Moscow has no right meddling in Whitman
County's affairs, or developments in general. 
However, I don't think Moscow should be legally bound
to such a sweeping obligation.  I don't think it's
smart to limit the ability to have a voice in being
able to appeal things which may not be thought of now
as being a big deal, but may pop out in the future. 
Such as Hawkins applying for water from elsewhere and
still being guaranteed 1 to 2% of Moscow's water. 
Thus, Hawkins would be drawing more water than they
would have otherwise, while Moscow continues to get
the short end of the stick. The city gave a lot of
power way by agreeing to that provision.

It may seem a stretch for me to include "the
anti-Bush, anti-Wal-Mart,  anti-"aggressiveness"
screed" g mentions, but in my head, this is all so
related.  You have unaccountable, greedy people making
bad decisions that less powerful people have to live
with, and eventually pay for.  

I may be strong in my opinions regarding this, but no
less than the paloustics bloggers who take a cranky
tone towards those they don't agree with.  Read the
posts on the blog and I think you will see that while
g doesn't think paloustics Tom is cranky towards him,
from the view over hear, he seems cranky, aggressive
and willing distort those who he disagrees with views
in a disrespectful way.  But kudos to him for
providing many of the local Hawkins articles, if
albeit with his snide remarks intertwined.  Sometimes
he makes me laugh and think of the situation from a
different perspective. Something I hope we all try to
do.

Respectfully,

gclev


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

> Now that you seem to have the anti-Bush,
> anti-Wal-Mart, 
> anti-"aggressiveness" screed out of your system (the
> world view parts I 
> mentioned earlier that have nothing to do with the
> current topic) back to 
> the matter at hand.
> 
> $3,217,975.00 for water and 2,738,604.00 for sewer
> comes a lot closer to 
> being 6 million. My point remains the same. Not one
> penny of that amount 
> will be covered by the taxpayers of the City of
> Moscow. (the dreaded 
> subsidy) While you were at the Whitman Co. site I
> assume that you also took 
> a look at the Preliminary Development Agreement I
> referred to previously. In 
> it you will note that Whitman Co. is ready, willing,
> and able to float the 
> bond necessary to make the Hawkins development
> happen whether or not Moscow 
> steps up and provides "an alternative source." It
> also makes no mention of 
> reducing the amount of the bond should this happen
> although, in all 
> likelihood, it would. By refusing to partner with
> our Pullman neighbors we 
> do absolutely nothing to hinder the shopping center
> you so abhor and succeed 
> in depriving Moscow rate payers of a very
> significant amount of money. The 
> only thing that Moscow is "giving away" is the exact
> same water that would 
> have been pumped either way and placing a slightly
> greater burden on our 
> existing waste water facility. We gain by having
> Hawkins/Whitman in the 
> revenue pipeline to help pay for any future upgrades
> to these systems that 
> may be required. The choice for our city government
> was obvious, come to the 
> table and enjoy its measure or stand back and look
> on longingly while 
> licking its ravenous chops. Either way, supper was
> served.
> 
> With regard to the paloustics site, I am very aware
> of it and visit it 
> relatively often. Since I am an evil Latah Co.
> conservative and the site is 
> mainly an evil Whitman Co. Conservative blog, I
> seldom post there. Tom 
> Forbes and I agree in a great many areas but, we
> don't always see exactly 
> eye to eye on all matters. I did have the great
> pleasure of hoisting a few 
> with him last year and found him to be a good guy.
> When we did disagree he 
> didn't get all cranky. I enjoy that in a person.
> 
> g
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Garrett Clevenger" <garrettmc at verizon.net>
> To: "vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:08 PM
> Subject: [Vision2020] Hawkins Water and Sewer
> Infrastructure Costs
> 
> 
> > Who needs newspapers when you have access to
> > government records on the web?
> >
> > Doing a little digging on Whitman County's website
> > gives this link, which includes the cost of water
> and
> > sewer infrastructure Whitman County would be
> paying
> > for if not for the "agreement."  I calculate over
> $4
> > million, but I'm not sure of all the itemized
> costs.
> > What do you think?
> >
> >
>
http://www.whitmancounty.org/PDFs/Infrastructure_Cost_Breakdown.pdf
> >
> >
> > This blog has a lot of articles (and cute banners
> such
> > as "Liberal Advisory I Am An Evil Conservative"
> (at
> > least he's honest) and other right-wing
> blatherings)
> > regarding Hawkins.  Maybe g is familiar with this
> > site?
> >
> >
>
http://palousitics.blogspot.com/search?q=hawkins+water+rights
> >
> >
>