Why Moscow is Growing (at Our Expense)

A new study by Jon R. Miller, U of I Professor of Economics, Steven Peterson, U of I Research Economist and Instructor, and Hank Robison, EMSI Senior Economist, has just been completed on behalf of the Moscow City Council. The report, titled "Growth in Moscow: A Study of Modest Population Growth and Rising Economic Prosperity", can be found here.

One of the major reasons Moscow has been growing is the anti-growth attitude in Pullman and Whitman County in the past few decades.

Some excerpts from the study:

...2300 individuals live in Latah County and commute to Whitman County to work in the year 2000, while only 978 live in Whitman County and commute to work in Latah County. As many of these individuals are likely Washington State University, Schweitzer Engineering, or Pullman City employees, and these jobs have higher than average wages and salaries, this commuting imbalance could explain some of the differences in income growth.

...

In total, there are 2.28 workers who live in Latah County and work elsewhere in the Quad-County region for every worker who commutes the opposite direction. In some sense, Moscow is the bedroom for the Palouse.

...

In 1989, Latah County real median family income was $1,832 lower than that in Whitman County, a ratio of .94. One decade later Latah County's real median family income was $1,473 higher than in Whitman County, a ratio of 1.03. Some of this change could be the result of residential location decisions by high-wage workers.

...

By far the largest change [between 1990 and 2000] in commuting patterns occurred between Latah and Whitman Counties, as the number of Latah County residents who commuted to Whitman County rose from 1,550 to 2,300.

...

...since the early 1980s Latah County has had a positive and rising net residence adjustment. By contrast, over the same period, Whitman County has almost the mirror image, a negative and declining net residence adjustment. This reflects the income differences from the rise of net out-commuting in Latah County and its decline in Whitman County. Again, if this net out-commuting is by high income workers, it can explain much of the rising prosperity in the Moscow area.

...

...the population of Whitman County is lower today than it was in 1973.

...

...Whitman County has experienced low or negative annual rates of population growth since the late 1990s

...

It’s another form of Moscow’s economic base, however, that gives a more distinct shape to the puzzle. We strongly suggest that the general amenities of the Moscow community have attracted and continue to attract high-income residents of the Quad-County Region to live here and work somewhere else. Furthermore, we suggest that one particular amenity stands out in the last decade. This is the availability of quality, upper-income housing and a willingness on the part of the community to create more of it.

Meanwhile, the "pull up the drawbridge" crowd in Pullman want to preserve out "viewscapes" and yet talk about economic prosperity.

With the current no-growth Moscow City Council and the pro-growth Pullman City Council and pro-growth (mostly) Whitman County Commission, now is the time to strike. The first move is to scrap the ridiculous proposed changes to the rural residential housing ordinance, other than eliminating the three year moratorium on development.