<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Whoa, whoa, WHOA! How's about we cheese it with the
key to my heart eyewash. The next thing I know you'll be degenerating
our disagreement into doggerel ala the oil, toil, goyl debacle and setting it to
ear piercing, mind numbing music. Exactly the sort of thing the new
noise ordinance was designed to prevent. Wouldn't it be ironic if the initial
citation was yours? For the sake of my, the communities, and humanities
collective aural sanity, please stop now.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Yours for hope and change,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>g</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>P.S. I've been recycling keys since you were in
middle school. The likelihood of your coming up with any that might
possibly compromise the security of ANY of my internal organs
is vanishingly small. Go with the string. I'm tellin ya it's a wide open
category with growth potential. Can you do it? YES YOU CAN!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>g</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>From: "Garrett Clevenger" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:garrettmc@verizon.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>garrettmc@verizon.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To: "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@roadrunner.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>; "vision
2020" <</FONT><A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:11
AM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] 65 acre feet of water
equals $2 million of food</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><BR><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></DIV><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>g writes:<BR>> <BR>> "I don't see the problem with an end user
reselling<BR>> water provided by our city at a profit. It happens all<BR>>
the time."<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Hawkins is not "reselling water provided by
our city<BR>> at a profit." The city will not profit from the
water<BR>> it sells Hawkins. While you meant that Hawkins will<BR>>
profit from the water it sells, the main difference<BR>> here is that the
city has guaranteed an out of state<BR>> developer 1% of Moscow's
water. No body else has this<BR>> guarantee. If this were in
Moscow, at least Moscow<BR>> would be getting the tax from that profit,
but<BR>> instead, Whitman County gets it.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> g
writes:<BR>> <BR>> "I think that you are trying awfully hard to
find<BR>> reasons to be upset<BR>> about a development that most folks in
Latah and<BR>> Whitman county are just fine with."<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
Just because most people may be complacent about<BR>> Hawkins doesn't make it
right. You can interpret<BR>> things the way you want, but that doesn't
mean the<BR>> arguments against Hawkins are hard to find. In
fact,<BR>> they seem fairly apparent to me, but I just see things<BR>>
differently then you.<BR>> <BR>> I don't think I would ever convince you
of the need to<BR>> plan our water use wisely, or how we subsidize
growth<BR>> in another state. Some people think every thing
will<BR>> always be peachy keen, so why limit our right to grow<BR>>
forever?<BR>> <BR>> But for the people who are able to see clearly,
I<BR>> believe they understand the negative consequence of<BR>>
Hawkins.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> g writes:<BR>> <BR>> "It's good to have
a hobby but the one you have chosen<BR>> seems a trifle <BR>> useless.
Perhaps you could take up recycling string<BR>> (not twine)
into<BR>> the worlds largest ball. The record for this feat<BR>>
seems to be up in the air and I just KNOW you could be<BR>> a
contender."<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> While this may be funny, it just goes to
show what<BR>> sort of person you are in trying to belittle me, my<BR>>
passion about insuring a sustainable future, and my<BR>> desire to engage the
reasonable people on this list.<BR>> <BR>> But to go along with your joke,
I think I would<BR>> recycle keys, stringing them all together.
Perhaps<BR>> one of those keys would be for your heart and you<BR>> would
see how ridiculous it is to belittle those who<BR>> are just trying to
prevent what too many other areas<BR>> on this planet are experiencing.
While it may be<BR>> useless, it's better than remaining apathetic.<BR>>
<BR>> gclev<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> --- "g. crabtree" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:jampot@roadrunner.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>jampot@roadrunner.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>>
wrote:<BR>> <BR>>> <BR>>> I don't see the problem with an end
user reselling<BR>>> water provided by our <BR>>> city at a profit.
It happens all the time. Were I to<BR>>> run my tap into some <BR>>>
pretty light blue bottles and slap on a label that<BR>>> read "Aqua de
Mosque" and <BR>>> retail it to the gullible at fashionable coop
type<BR>>> stores, what would be the <BR>>> problem?<BR>>>
<BR>>> Beer producers take municipal water and add some<BR>>> barley
and hops and people <BR>>> like me beat a path to their door.<BR>>>
<BR>>> Bartenders mix a little scotch or bourbon with water<BR>>>
and sell it at a fairly <BR>>> exorbitant markup.<BR>>> <BR>>>
The guy that maintains my yard mixes fertilizer and<BR>>> pesticide with
water and <BR>>> sprays it onto my yard a couple times a year and
I<BR>>> gladly pay for the <BR>>> privilege.<BR>>>
<BR>>> I think that you are trying awfully hard to find<BR>>>
reasons to be upset about a <BR>>> development that most folks in Latah
and Whitman<BR>>> county are just fine with. <BR>>> It's good to
have a hobby but the one you have<BR>>> chosen seems a trifle <BR>>>
useless. Perhaps you could take up recycling string<BR>>> (not twine) into
the <BR>>> worlds largest ball. The record for this feat seems<BR>>>
to be up in the air and <BR>>> I just KNOW you could be a
contender.<BR>>> <BR>>> g<BR>>> <BR>>> ----- Original
Message ----- <BR>>> From: "Garrett Clevenger" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:garrettmc@verizon.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>garrettmc@verizon.net</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial size=2>><BR>>>
To: "vision 2020" <</FONT><A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
face=Arial size=2>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2>><BR>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 10:04 PM<BR>>>
Subject: [Vision2020] 65 acre feet of water equals<BR>>> $2 million of
food<BR>>> <BR>>> <BR>>> > Pat writes:<BR>>>
><BR>>> > "So you weren't at the meeting last night or
heard<BR>>> any<BR>>> > of the<BR>>> > explainations for
the vote?? Too bad you might<BR>>> have<BR>>> > learned some
things."<BR>>> ><BR>>> ><BR>>> ><BR>>> > I'm
not sure why Pat writes this as my post had<BR>>> > nothing to do with
an explanation for the vote.<BR>>> ><BR>>> > However, I was at
the meeting and learned that my<BR>>> > suspicions about the deal are
well founded.<BR>>> ><BR>>> > The questions I asked
were:<BR>>> ><BR>>> > Since Hawkins is responsible for
collecting fees<BR>>> from<BR>>> > end-users of water in the
mall, what's to prevent<BR>>> > Hawkins from profiting from the water
we sell<BR>>> them?<BR>>> ><BR>>> > According to Wayne
Krauss, nothing will prevent<BR>>> them<BR>>> > from
profiting. In fact, if I understood his<BR>>> answer,<BR>>>
> since Hawkins is a corporation, they are entitled<BR>>>
to<BR>>> > profit from the water.<BR>>> ><BR>>> >
Yes, that was about his answer, as unbelievable as<BR>>> > that seems.
Krauss thinks it's ok for Hawkins to<BR>>> > profit from the water we
sell them, even though<BR>>> Moscow<BR>>> > cannot profit from
water it sells Hawkins.<BR>>> ><BR>>> > My second question
was:<BR>>> ><BR>>> > Since Moscow can't profit on water it
sells, is<BR>>> the<BR>>> > council justified in saying we can
charge Hawkins<BR>>> a<BR>>> > premium for the water we sell them
since we can<BR>>> only<BR>>> > charge what it costs to deliver
the water.<BR>>> ><BR>>> > Krauss's answer was basically we
can charge them<BR>>> > appreciation of infrastructure and went into
the<BR>>> way<BR>>> > fees will be charged to Hawkins for
water. He<BR>>> failed<BR>>> > to answer the question, I
thought, and only said<BR>>> what<BR>>> > we already know.
The problem with his answer is<BR>>> that<BR>>> > those fees are
exactly what everybody else pays,<BR>>> so it<BR>>> > isn't a
premium.<BR>>> ><BR>>> > The rest of the forum pretty much
said how Hawkins<BR>>> > will not be beneficial to Moscow, but more
than<BR>>> likely<BR>>> > is bad for Moscow.<BR>>>
><BR>>> > I'm not sure what Pat got out of the meeting
as<BR>>> she<BR>>> > didn't go into detail about what she
learned. <BR>>> Perhaps<BR>>> > she will enlighten us with what
she learned?<BR>>> ><BR>>> > gclev<BR>>>
><BR>>> ><BR>>><BR>>
=======================================================<BR>>> > List
services made available by First Step<BR>>> Internet,<BR>>> >
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>>>
>
</FONT><A href="http://www.fsr.net"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>http://www.fsr.net</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>>>
> </FONT><A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT face=Arial
size=2>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>>> ><BR>>><BR>>
=======================================================<BR>>> >
<BR>>> <BR>>> <BR>>> <BR>></FONT></BODY></HTML>