Can We Afford "Smart Growth?"

A new UW study of Seattle housing prices says "No":

Between 1989 and 2006, the median inflation-adjusted price of a Seattle house rose from $221,000 to $447,800. Fully $200,000 of that increase was the result of land-use regulations, says Theo Eicher — twice the financial impact that regulation has had on other major U.S. cities.

What land-use regulations you say?

A key regulation is the state's Growth Management Act, enacted in 1990 in response to widespread public concern that sprawl could destroy the area's unique character. To preserve it, the act promoted restrictions on where housing can be built. The result is artificial density that has driven up home prices by limiting supply, Eicher says.

And who is it that pushes for these onerous regulations?

According to the Wharton study, cities such as Seattle that have high median incomes, high home prices and a large percentage of college-educated workers tend to have the most land-use regulations.

Sjoblom says that makes sense: "People with higher incomes want the kind of amenities that regulation provides," he says. "If you're a homeowner and growth controls are imposed and housing prices shoot up, you're grandfathered because you own the place. In theory people will say it's [rising prices] a bad thing, but in practice it's not hurting them."

[...]

In the final analysis, Eicher believes Seattle's regulatory climate exists because its residents want it. "My sense is land-use restrictions are imposed to generate socially desirable outcomes," he says. "We all love parks and green spaces. But we must also be informed about the costs. It's very easy to vote for a park if you think the cost is free."

Ah, now I see. The same old unholy alliance of left-wing no-growthers and selfish NIMBYists.

Pullman suffers from the same sort of problem as Seattle does to a lesser extent: artificially high home prices created by regulations created by snobby eltitists. For example, the PARDners say they want affordable housing while at the same time pressing for even more restrictive land use regulations. And let's not forget Cheryl Morgan and the League of Women Voters who also work to do everything they can to make development more difficult in Pullman.

"We called them 'chicken'"

As you know, outspoken liberal Lewiston Tribune columnist and apparent Pullman/Whitman County hater Jim Fisher, has been bashing the Hawkins development and the Whitman County Commissioners. The latest subject of his ire, in a column last Sunday, was the WSU golf course. Fisher implied there should be some sort of linkage between the golf course and the Hawkins development:

Next for Palouse water talks: WSU golf course

Now that a reconfigured Moscow City Council has demonstrated its willingness to cooperate with other Palouse governments on water use, it is in a position to seek reciprocity on one of the least defensible projects to threaten the region's underground water sources.

That project is the new 18-hole golf course that Washington State University is building, and watering, before the water reclamation system intended to keep it green is even begun. The school projects it will pour 60 million gallons of water on the course each year, and until the system that is years off goes on line, each of those gallons will come from the aquifers whose sustainability is in question.

The school's rush to complete the course without a wastewater irrigation system like the one the University of Idaho uses has raised objections from more than local water watchdogs. It even became an issue in the election that seated new Moscow City Councilors Wayne Krauss, Dan Carscallen and Walter Steed.

All three ran in opposition to the former council's reluctance to approve substantial increases in water consumption.

During the contested election, Krauss told people attending a candidate forum he objected to "the idea for us to try to save water here in Moscow so it can be used downstream." And a newspaper advertisement for the three candidates said, "In Pullman they're developing a new golf course. In Moscow we've raised water rates to cut consumption."

The promise to help end such a disparity no doubt helped elect the three challengers. And the other day, all three helped reverse Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney's objection to providing water to a new shopping mall on the Washington side of the state line along the Pullman-Moscow traffic corridor.

None of the three has claimed the Palouse sits on an infinite supply of water, however. And their willingness to negotiate a water agreement with Whitman County for the mall for which county commissioners have obligated taxpayers to the tune of $9.1 million in bonds gives them the right, and the credibility, to seek discussion of other water issues in the region.

The first of those issues should be WSU's rush to waste water.

I could rebut Fisher's arguments, but Idaho Rep. Bob Nonini (R- Coeur d'Alene), another target of Fisher's temper tantrums, did it best in a "Turnabout" column from Tuesday's Tribune:

Turnabout: Cheap shots, no warning

As some of my colleagues tell me, if the editorial writers at the Lewiston Tribune are criticizing you then you must be doing something right.

Well, I must be doing something right. In the last couple of weeks, I've been branded as being anti-education, and more recently the Tribune editors lend the impression that I'm leading a one-man crusade to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The criticism doesn't bother me. Anyone who serves in this body, or in any other elected office, is subject to criticism. What is troubling is the methods employed by the editorial writers.

I don't know Jim Fisher or Tom Henderson, and they don't know me. All I know about them is when I pick up the Tribune and occasionally read editorials taking me to task. Again, I don't mind the criticism. I'm only disputing the antiquated method.

Mr. Fisher and Mr. Henderson are living examples of why newspapers are dying, and why newspapers are losing credibility. They read what somebody else writes, dish up a few cheap shots and present them as "cutting-edge" editorials. The tactics might have worked during the 1960s or 1970s, when Bill Hall was writing editorials. But the method strikes me as outdated by today's standards.

During Bill Hall's day, when the only practical way to contact someone was by telephone, contacting an individual was not always possible. But in 2008, when e-mails are used at least as much as telephones, there's no excuse for not making that effort.

It's my understanding that some of the nation's leading newspapers, including the Washington Post, have a policy to make every effort to contact an individual before criticizing him in print - if for no other reason than to give that person a heads-up. A conversation with a source may or may not change the direction of an editorial, but giving a fair warning shows that a newspaper has professional standards and a degree of class.

I'm sure that nothing I said will make a difference, so Mr. Fisher and Mr. Henderson can criticize me all they want. That's OK. I was born and raised in Wallace and put up with a lot worse than that in the school yards.

But in Wallace, we had a name for people who said or did something without first confronting you.

We called them "chicken."

Perception Becomes Reality

The Perception:

With the denial of a rezone that would have brought a Wal-Mart Supercenter to Moscow and the institution of the Large Retail Establishment Ordinance — aka the big-box ordinance — in February, some people say there is a perception Moscow isn’t welcome to new business, or is too selective on what it allows.

Some are concerned that Moscow will lose its status as “retail base of the Palouse” to Whitman County, while others say they are just trying to protect the Moscow they know and love.

- "Chilly climate for commerce?", Moscow-Pullman Daily News, December 19, 2006

The Reality:

From last Saturday's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Home Depot puts brakes on Moscow store

The Home Depot won't be locating in Moscow anytime soon.

The national home-improvement and garden retail outlet had been working toward an agreement to build a store behind the Palouse Mall in Moscow, but corporate officials have decided to take a step back, said Gerard Billington, real estate officer for the University of Idaho.

"We had been working with Home Depot vigorously and we thought we had an agreement, but they declined," Billington said. "They didn't think the deal worked out for them.

"They were crunching numbers, looking at site numbers, site prep costs, land costs, development costs and potential revenue from sales in smaller markets."

The University of Idaho owns the 600-acre piece of land where Home Depot was looking to build, and any deal between the UI and Home Depot would have been a ground lease.

Billington said as far as he knows, the fact that Lowe's - a national home improvement store planning to locate in a proposed retail development in Whitman County - could be coming to the area had nothing to do with Home Depot's hesitation.

"I'm sure Lowe's would impact a future Home Depot and Home Depot would impact a future Lowe's, but I don't know that it was a decision point," he said.

UI officials have had a couple conversations with Home Depot since last fall in an attempt to work out an agreement, but no commitment has been made.

"They wanted to take another look at the agreement," Billington said.

He said he hasn't heard anything from Home Depot since the UI's last conversation with company officials in December.

"Home Depot continues to review and monitor the market and trade area for a site that will work for us and serve the community well," Home Depot spokeswoman Kathryn Gallagher said. "To date, an economical solution has not been found. However, we are constantly turning over new ideas, leads and solutions."

"Hawkins decision was best for all"

I've never met Art Schultheis, but I'd like to. He has quite the way with words.

From yesterday's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

First of all I would like to congratulate the new City Council in Moscow for accepting the mediated settlement with the Hawkins Companies. Finally, sound minds understood that the Hawkins development was going to move forward, whether the city of Moscow continued to fight it or not. I think the council made the only decision it could, stop spending money on lawsuits and attorneys, and help the process along. I think it realized that getting something out of the deal (water and sewer revenue) is a lot better than nothing.

I was unable to attend the Moscow council meeting, due to another meeting, but I was able to watch it live on the Internet when I got home. When I tuned into the meeting they were in the middle of a public hearing on a new subdivision development that is being proposed within the city limits of Moscow. For 1 1/2 hours, I listened to testimony regarding the new development. Arguments were presented regarding building heights, view sheds of existing homes, increased traffic, and safety concerns for children and pedestrians. Not once while I was watching during the public hearing was it brought up about what effect the new homes would have on the aquifer the city of Moscow draws from.

Once the discussion of the Hawkins water rights settlement began, environmentalists came out of the woodwork to complain about what these new businesses would do to their precious aquifer. I find it ironic that only businesses that will provide jobs and might make a profit will cause irreversible damage to the water table.

If you want to stop economic growth in the city of Moscow, that is your decision. Just keep your attitudes and lawsuits out of Whitman County and the state of Washington.

Art Schultheis, Colton

Amen, Art.

"Hawkins's development closed-door dealings under scrutiny; Moscow council members maintain their decision was in city's best interest"

Ah, right out of the ol' liberal playbook. You lose an election, you bitch about the people that won for the next few years and constantly demand they be removed from office.

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Moscow's newest City Council members have spent the last several days defending their decision to sell water to a development firm that wants to build just across the state line in Whitman County.

Some residents are so unhappy they're considering a recall.

Dan Carscallen, Wayne Krauss and Walter Steed voted Monday along with Bill Lambert and John Weber to approve a settlement that offers Boise-based Hawkins Companies 45 acre-feet of potable water and 20 acre-feet of irrigation water on an annual basis for use at its proposed 700,000-square-foot retail development just west of Moscow. The Idaho Department of Water Resources must approve the offer before it is official.

The settlement was drafted after two days of mediation last week in Spokane.

Hawkins has about three months to decide whether to purchase wastewater treatment services from Moscow. The settlement also means the city will drop its appeal of water-rights transfers granted to Hawkins, which in turn will relinquish 45 acre-feet of water rights when it has access to Moscow water.

Confidentiality

Moscow resident Bill French, a member of the Palouse Water Conservation Network, said he and others have considered calling for a recall of the council members who voted for the settlement.

A recall is worth considering because "five of our six council members, at least in my opinion, betrayed the public trust by conducting this closed-door negotiation and settlement," he said.

Moscow's representatives at the mediation - Steed, Krauss, Mayor Nancy Chaney and Public Works Director Les MacDonald - agreed to keep the proceedings confidential, as demanded by the mediator. The council had to vote on the settlement without disclosing its content to the public.

Krauss said the confidentiality was necessary because the information discussed in mediation couldn't have been used in later litigation if no settlement was reached.

French said Moscow's representatives should have walked out rather than sign the confidentiality agreement.

"I think it was very imprudent for the council to enter negotiations and make a decision before the public had any opportunity to weigh in on what they were thinking," he said.

Dennis Baird, owner of the Wine Company of Moscow, agrees.

"They could have said, 'I'm sorry, we're not going to do that,' " Baird said. "If the mediator didn't like that, then they could have gotten another mediator."

French said Moscow should have continued with its water rights appeal.

"I'm not of the opinion that (the appeal) was destined to fail," he said. "At the very least it might have delayed Hawkins long enough to change the whole situation."

Krauss and Steed said they decided it was best to go ahead with the mediation.

"I went up there to reach a settlement to conclude the Hawkins situation," Steed said.

Krauss said city representatives had two other options: They could have proceeded with costly litigation on the appeal, or dropped the appeal altogether, but "that would have allowed a private entity to pump from the same aquifer we do without any public entity to monitor them on a regular basis."

Chaney said she was not surprised that the mediation session was kept confidential. To disclose things in a legal dispute would be counterproductive to Moscow's interests.

However, Chaney said the council could have proceeded differently after mediation concluded.

She said the council could have declined the settlement and opened discussion to the public. They could have discussed the elements in the settlement without disclosing the agreement itself, and returned to mediation later if the other entities were open to it.

Control issues

Carscallen, Krauss and Steed said Whitman County was going to help Hawkins move forward one way or another. Moscow had the opportunity to get as much as it could out of the deal.

"We didn't do this to sell out Moscow or to harm or to help Hawkins," Steed said. "We saw an inevitable development that we felt that we could to some degree control, to some degree reduce the amount of water (it used) that we all draw from and to make some money for the city."

The councilmen said the settlement ultimately reduces the net effect on the Grand Ronde aquifer, compared to the water Hawkins would pull if all its water rights were approved and Moscow was not involved.

Chaney said the settlement means "the Hawkins group will end up with more water than was otherwise authorized."

Hawkins had only secured rights to 45 acre-feet, but the settlement guarantees 65 acre-feet.

Chaney said she also dislikes the portion of the settlement in which Moscow agrees not to protest, directly or indirectly, "any permits or governmental approvals" sought by Hawkins for the project. The city can protest "based on public safety or nuisance."

The project was "too ill-defined" for such an agreement, Chaney said.

She also is concerned that the city does not control utility-related issues at Hawkins it would control within city limits. For example, Moscow can't regulate how much grease a restaurant in the development can release into the wastewater system.

Economic issues

Steed said people who shop at the Hawkins development may continue across the border and spend money in Moscow. Shoppers who don't find what they want at Hawkins could come to a similar store in Moscow.

"It's Marketing 101 - you put in a Burger King across the street from a McDonald's," Steed said.

Baird said Hawkins is more likely to hurt Moscow businesses. Because Hawkins will benefit from city infrastructure, which businesses help pay for, the council is forcing business owners to "pay for their own death."

Rate issues

French said he is concerned the agreement doesn't specify what Hawkins will have to pay for water or wastewater treatment.

"We should be making sure we're getting as high a rate as we can from them for providing that service," he said.

Carscallen said city representatives did not set a specific rate because they do not know what Moscow's water rates will be when the development is built.

The settlement states that Moscow "shall be fair and reasonable and consistent with rates and charges set for similarly situated customers of the city."

Steed said this does not mean that Hawkins will pay the same as a business within Moscow city limits.

Krauss said there are no "similarly situated" businesses, so the city will have to create a new rate for businesses across the state line.

The current rate for businesses outside the city limits is twice that of businesses in town, Krauss said. The rate for Hawkins could be as much as three times the in-town rate.

"We will work out a fair rate for them based on who and what they are," Krauss said.

The councilmen said the city also could save money if Hawkins decides to help pay for upgrades to Moscow's wastewater treatment plant in order to speed the availability of treated wastewater for irrigation.

What's next?

French said people who are unhappy with the settlement should speak out when the Idaho Department of Water Resources evaluates the sale.

"We need to see if there is any way to prevent this agreement from being followed through," he said.

Chaney said the settlement could bring positives.

It could encourage the Washington State Department of Ecology and Idaho Department of Water Resources to manage the Palouse Basin as a common watershed, she said. Any well drilled by Hawkins prior to hooking into Moscow's water could later be used as a test well for the Palouse Basin Aquifer Committee to assess aquifer levels.

"I think we are all coming at this from the perspective of wanting to do what we think will be beneficial to water in the Palouse Basin," she said. "We may not agree on what that is but ... we will make the best out of whatever the outcome is."

"Moscow council takes heat over Hawkins vote; Councilors voted 5-1 to provide water and sewer to developer; some question closed-door talks"

The Moscow City Councilman shouldn't sweat the "heat" very much. People like Bill French and Betsy Dickow are the usual suspects who are always against everything. That crowd had their shot at the polls last November and lost big time.

From today's Lewiston Tribune:

MOSCOW - Members of the Moscow City Council voted 5-1 late Monday night to provide water and sewer services across the state line to the proposed Hawkins Companies shopping center.

Members also agreed to drop the city's appeal against Hawkins' attempts to secure its own water rights to drill wells.

The action, taken shortly before midnight, stems from an agreement hammered out last week during 22 hours of closed-door mediation in Spokane. The agreement calls for the city to provide a total of 65 acre-feet of water annually to the development in Whitman County.

Mayor Nancy Chaney, who initiated and signed the earlier appeals, said after the vote that she would have given thumbs-down to the agreement if a tie had resulted between the six councilors. [Like that was going to happen - tf] But councilors Bill Lambert, John Weber, Wayne Krauss, Walter Steed and Dan Carscallen approved the measure, while Councilor Tom Lamar voted against it.

The entire council took a verbal lashing from several citizens who voiced their displeasure with the behind-doors negotiations that led to an agreement that they feared could change the area economy and threaten groundwater resources.

"By conducting our business in secret, you are taking away our government," said Bill French of Moscow, a self-described water watchdog on the Palouse. "And far beyond whatever you're poised to decide about our water resources, the damage to our government by this action I think is the real issue."

Betsy Dickow of Moscow echoed those sentiments. "I'm disappointed that the council would agree to consider something in confidentiality. I'm concerned that the city is willing to do things in secret. It concerns me greatly and I don't think it brings the confidence of the populace."

Steed responded that the confidentiality and secret nature of the mediation process was thrust upon the city. "We didn't ask for it," he said, explaining that he and other newly elected council members inherited an existing legal action. "We didn't start it. We didn't have anything to do with it. But we were handed it as new council members."

The water appeals came last year after members of the old city council and Chaney met in executive session. No vote was taken in the session, but Chaney came out of it with enough approval, apparently, to exercise her executive authority to file the appeals.

"The objective was not secrecy," Chaney told the Lewiston Tribune after the meeting. "I don't think there was any effort by any of the council members previous or present to keep the public in the dark." [Riiiight - tf]

By law, the council can meet in executive session to discuss legal matters. Whether city-initiated legal actions can or should stem from those talks, especially with no prior public discussion, seems to be the area of concern for citizens.

"We sought legal advice in this and it was advised to handle it in this manner," Chaney said. "It was not any effort to usurp the public process."

Chaney reiterated that the appeals were filed because of concerns for groundwater, not to stop economic development.

But Whitman County officials have said Moscow's leap into the legal arena across a state line had the potential effect of stopping retail development in the Moscow-Pullman corridor. The Whitman County commissioners earlier Monday, in fact, agreed to issue bonds in the amount of $9.1 million to help Hawkins get infrastructure, including water and sewer services, to the construction site.

"It's like voting for something and holding your nose while you're doing it," Lambert said. "That's what I'm doing here in this process. At least we're getting some type of control factor out of this." He warned that if Hawkins continued to move ahead and drill its own well, Moscow would have no control whatsoever. "At least we've got the right to determine how much water we can give them."

According to the agreement, Moscow will provide 45 acre-feet of water annually to the 14,000-square-foot shopping center for indoor use.

Another 20 acre-feet annually will be provided for irrigation. In addition, the agreement allows for 2,500 to 3,000 gallons per minute to be available for fire protection. Hawkins would become a water utility customer of the city.

The agreement also allows for Hawkins to receive sanitary sewer treatment service from Moscow. Water and sewer rates for the shopping center, according to the agreement, will be made according to the city's regular fee schedule.

The agreement also bars the city from protesting or appealing any construction permits sought by Hawkins for the project. Hawkins, according to the agreement, will not challenge the city's plans to drill a new well near the shopping center site.

Lamar said he could not, in good conscience, vote in favor of the agreement. In addition to groundwater concerns, Lamar has maintained since being appointed to the council last year that he's against retail development in the corridor. He wants the eight-mile stretch to remain a transportation corridor only between the two university communities.

"I'm concerned about this proposal and I don't see clearly that this will benefit the residents of Moscow," Lamar said. "It makes me uncomfortable to not even be able to discuss the details of it with the public before making a decision."

While concerns continue to be voiced on the Idaho side of the border, officials in Whitman County keep touting the Hawkins shopping center as the beginning of retail development throughout the corridor that will provide shopping for consumers and tax dollars for government.

Hawkins spokespeople have said they plan to begin construction this year. The proposal calls for a Lowe's home improvement center to anchor the development, with room for at least two additional big-box stores.

"SEL announces plan to add 300 new jobs; Most of the new positions will be located in Pullman"

If it were not for Schweitzer Engineering both the City of Pullman and Whitman County would likely be facing negative population, jobs, and income losses. Because of the underdeveloped retail trade, service, and housing sector in Pullman, Moscow may be benefiting as much from the growth of Schweitzer Engineering as Pullman.

- Steve Peterson, "Moscow at a Tipping Point: An Economic Analysis of the Retail Trade Sector, the Local Economy, and the Effects of Locating a Super Wal-Mart in the Moscow, Idaho Regional Economy"

Thanks to the courageous efforts of the Whitman County Commissioners and the Hawkins Companies, the development logjam created by the unholy alliance of local NIMBYists and left-wing nutjobs has been broken up. Whitman County will now start to benefit from the expansion of SEL. Now, all we need is for the Appeals Court to dismiss PARD's pointless appeal of Wal-Mart, and Pullman can start to benefit as well and we will have total victory!! What a great day for Whitman County!

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories plans to expand operations and add hundreds of new jobs in Pullman.

The Pullman-based company announced Monday that more than 300 new employees will be needed to help the growing company.

Susan Fagan, SEL director of public affairs, said "most" of the open positions will be needed in Pullman. She said about 100 positions already are listed online, while nearly 200 more will be added during the next two quarters.

In 2007, SEL added 248 new positions and now employs about 1,000 people at its Pullman headquarters.

With roots in manufacturing parts used in generating electric power, SEL introduced the world's first digital relay in 1984. Since then, the company has created products used in oil refineries, wind farms and high-voltage substations. Its products include clocks that are accurate to the microsecond, encryption equipment used to protect secure equipment and systems for the U.S. Navy that allow ships to run on electrical power rather than steam power.

The company's products are sold in 120 countries.

Fagan said the new batch of open positions are a reflection of growth caused by "new products, new locations and new companies."

"Hiring these new people will help us grow and continue to meet the demand of our customers," she said. "We're creating new markets by inventing, designing and manufacturing new products."

Fagan said the company seeks employees to work in the flight department, production, engineering, manufacturing, administration and more. Open job listings can be viewed at www.selinc.com.

In 2006, SEL's manufacturing facilities doubled to more than 200,000 square feet, which allowed for new equipment, expanded lines and room for additional employees. More than half of the company's Pullman employees work in manufacturing operations.

Fagan said the increase of employees will equate to more products for vendors and more business for shipping companies. She said the impact will resonate in the local economy.

"It's an exciting time for our company ... and it's exciting for our economy in our area," Fagan said. "There will be more families, and they'll need homes. They'll have kids that go to schools. They'll need services."

Pullman Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Fritz Hughes agreed. He said the SEL employee expansion will be a benefit to the entire region.

"It's a good quality of life that SEL provides for the community and that's a big benefit," he said. "It's a tremendous asset to our community.

"This brings in people and gives good stable employment for people so they don't have to leave" the area.

SEL was founded in Pullman in 1982 and employs more than 1,500 people in 64 locations around the world.

"Hawkins to tap into Moscow's water; City to sell services to development company looking to build retail center in Pullman-Moscow corridor"

That's a headline I never thought I would post here!! Hawkins and Colton get their water and the Department of Ecology can no longer hold up our development! The Border War is over and Moscow and Whitman County can start cooperating again on issues that matter.

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

The city of Moscow has changed its stance on a proposed development in Whitman County.

The City Council voted 5-1 Monday to sell water to Hawkins Companies for use at its proposed 700,000-square-foot retail development, which would be situated just across the state line in the Pullman-Moscow corridor.

The city also agreed to drop its appeal of a water rights transfer by Hawkins.

A settlement agreement between the entities was developed during two days of mediation between Moscow, Hawkins, the Washington State Department of Ecology and the city of Colton last week in Spokane.

The council had to vote on the settlement without disclosing its content to the public because of a confidentiality requirement of the mediation.

Councilmen Walter Steed and Wayne Krauss, Mayor Nancy Chaney and Public Works Director Les MacDonald attended the mediation. The full council discussed the settlement in a private session before Monday night's meeting.

Tom Lamar was the only council member to vote against the agreement.

The agreement states that, pending permitting by the Idaho Department of Water Resources, Moscow will provide up to 45 acre-feet of drinkable water per year and up to 20 acre-feet of irrigation water per year, unless Hawkins uses reclaimed water for irrigation. The city also will provide water for fire protection for the development.

The city also is offering Hawkins sewer treatment services. Hawkins has 90 days to decide whether to accept the services and must build a sewage treatment facility on its property if it does not accept the deal with Moscow. Hawkins has estimated it will cost $2 million to build a sewage treatment plant at the site.

If Moscow develops a reclaimed water supply for irrigation, Hawkins can negotiate a deal to use it. Steed said the 20 acre-feet designated for irrigation will be removed from the deal if Hawkins uses reclaimed water, whether from Moscow or its own treatment plant.

The city will charge Hawkins rates that are "fair and reasonable and consistent with rates and charges set for similarly situated customers of the city," the agreement states.

According to the agreement, Hawkins is responsible for the capital costs of extending water utilities from the city to the development. Whitman County has agreed to sell bonds to pay for public infrastructure at the site.

Moscow will withdraw the appeals of three Hawkins water rights that it filed with the Washington State Pollution Control Hearings Board.

Hawkins will withdraw its appeal of one water right, an annual 63-acre-feet draw from the Wanapum aquifer, that was rejected by the board.

Colton will get 100 acre-feet of annual water rights it negotiated in a deal with Hawkins.

Hawkins will have the right to exercise two of its water rights until city water service begins, at which time Hawkins will relinquish its rights and retire them permanently.

Krauss said he went into the mediation knowing the final decision would make some people unhappy, but it had to be reached.

"This a real case of being caught between a rock and hard spot when you do something like this and you make a decision," he said.

Steed said the agreement provides revenue for Moscow and causes no net increase in withdrawals from the Grand Ronde aquifer.

He said Palouse Basin Aquifer Committee officials believe the agreement will create a net decrease in water usage compared to the usage that could happen if Hawkins had all its water rights approved and Moscow lost its appeal.

"We believe there are benefits to the city of Moscow and its citizens in the agreement," Steed said.

Lamar said he voted against the proposal because he doesn't see a clear benefit for Moscow and its residents. [Waaahhhh. Get used to being the single "No" vote Lamar - tf]

"Personally, I'm concerned with the details and the precedent that may be set with decisions if we are to accept this," he said.

He said he doesn't think the city should sell water rights across the state line because Moscow has no ability to annex or tax the development. The development also could have negative ramifications for Moscow businesses.

"Once we decide to sell water to Hawkins, it's no longer just the water issue, it's the city of Moscow helping to make that development happen," he said.

Chaney said she would have voted against the agreement if given the chance. [Of course she would have. Luckily Mayor Moonbat has become Mayor Irrelevant - tf]

She said the agreement saves Hawkins money, which will expedite additional development in the corridor that will draw even more water from a declining aquifer.

"I'm not comfortable that we have all the information in hand yet," she said.

Several Moscow residents who spoke before the vote on the agreement said they were upset with the confidentiality.

"The people here are concerned (about water issues). They are interested," Moscow resident David Pierce said. "The fact that you are willing, it appears, to approve a mitigation and a compromise on this thing without involving the people of the area I think is a great travesty to the people of this area."

Several people also were concerned that the council is jeopardizing the future of Moscow's water resources by agreeing to extend services to Hawkins.

"I also am concerned that the city is willing to mortgage our children's future and put their water rights at risk and destroying possibly two existing wells and our downtown in order to put money in other people's pockets," Moscow resident Betsy Dickow said.

Moscow resident David Hall said selling water to Hawkins causes Moscow to lose its credibility as a city concerned about water.

"Moscow needs to do a full water budget before it can even consider providing water to outside entities," Hall said.

Many council members said they were uncomfortable about not being able to discuss the agreement before the vote.

Steed said confidentiality "was placed upon us. We didn't ask for it. We didn't particularly want to do it that way."

Lamar said Moscow residents will have the chance to share their opinions about the agreement during the Idaho Department of Water Resources permitting process, which will be conducted by the state.

Lambert said Moscow's representatives at the mediation could have just walked away, but it would have left the city with no control over how Hawkins uses its water rights.

"This issue is not a cut-and-dried issue where we've got the right to stop what they're doing over there, and everybody in this town needs to understand that," Lambert said. "At least we've got the right to determine how much water we can give them."

Whitman County Commissioner Jerry Finch said Moscow's decision takes "a big impediment off the process."

"I think it is a win-win for both the county and the city of Moscow," Finch said. "We've come a long way. Six months ago I would have never thought they would sell Hawkins water."

"Whitman County steps in to move Hawkins project forward; Shopping center has been embroiled in water rights disputes with Moscow"

From today's Lewiston Tribune:

A proposed shopping center in the Moscow-Pullman corridor is expected to generate enough tax dollars on its own to pay for $9.1 million worth of infrastructure financed through Whitman County, officials said Monday.

"It won't cost the (other) taxpayers anything," Sharron Cunningham, the county's director of administrative services, said after commissioners Michael Largent, Greg Partch and Jerry Finch signed a preliminary development agreement with Jeff De Voe of Hawkins Companies.

The development hinges, among other things, on whether a water source can be secured.

Hawkins, a Boise-based company, wants to build a 714,000-square-foot shopping center, with a Lowe's home improvement center as the initial anchor, on 204 acres abutting the Idaho border and Moscow city limits. Because of delays revolving around water rights disputes with Moscow and resulting rising construction costs, Hawkins asked the county last month to foot the bill for water and sewer service, roads, curbs and gutters.

The commissioners agreed to the request during their Monday morning meeting.

In addition to detailing financing of the infrastructure, the preliminary agreement hints of possible cooperation with Moscow officials. Construction might be modified, the agreement reads, "if an alternative water and/or sewer system is found and both parties agree to this change."

There had been early talk of Moscow providing water and sewer hookups to the shopping center. But that potential appeared to evaporate when the city failed to act and Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney later signed an appeal of Hawkins' attempts to secure water rights to drill its own wells.

Members of the Moscow City Council were expected Monday night to take action on the appeals after formal mediation with Hawkins representatives last week. However, any decision by the Moscow City Council on the issue occurred after press time. All negotiations have been behind closed doors.

The agreement calls for the company to build all improvements and then be reimbursed by the county. The county, in turn, will issue bonds. The bonds, Cunningham explained, are purchased by a private entity or entities intending to make a profit off interest. "They're purchasing the debt," she said.

Cunningham said Hawkins, upon start of the project, will immediately begin paying construction taxes to the county, plus property taxes and eventually sales taxes in amounts expected to pay the $9.1 million bond plus interest.

De Voe said Hawkins wants to begin construction this year.

Finch, one of the most vocal advocates of the Hawkins development, said the shopping center could be the beginning of more retail construction throughout the eight-mile corridor between the two university towns. Cunningham confirmed that success of such development could translate into much-needed county revenue stability and even a possible surplus.

"We can project all we want," she said, "but we have to cover the debt first."

According to county estimates, tax revenues over the 20 years of the bonds will exceed $9 million above costs in principal and interest. If the Hawkins development fails, according to county documents, other money sources are available, including money from the state and real estate excise taxes.

The infrastructure agreement will be null and void, according to the preliminary agreement, if Hawkins fails to secure water rights, or "firm commitments from Lowe's (or reasonably suitable replacement) to either lease or purchase a portion of the development."

All the infrastructure improvements and water rights for the development will be transferred from Hawkins to the county at no charge, according to the preliminary agreement. The county is exploring the creation of a water district to supply the development, according to the agreement. In addition, Hawkins has agreed to build a rural fire station on the site, according to the agreement, and donate the land and building to Whitman County Rural Fire District 12.

All of this, Finch said, wouldn't have happened if Moscow officials had simply agreed to supply water and sewer service to Hawkins. Moscow's water rights appeals further impeded progress, said Finch, to the point where he feared Hawkins Companies might abandon the project if Whitman County hadn't stepped in with help.

"Clarkston Wal-Mart plans steaming ahead"

Meanwhile, kookless Clarkston will have a Wal-Mart Supercenter summer after next...

From today's Lewiston Tribune:

Wal-Mart could open across the street from Costco in Clarkston by June 2009.

That's the prediction of Jim Martin, Clarkston public works director, who has been working with the nation's biggest retailer on its plans to open a super center there.

Much is taking place behind the scenes, even though little activity is happening at the proposed 26-acre site on Fifth Street that has yet to be purchased by Wal-Mart, Martin says.

Consultants with the big-box chain continue to follow the schedule that's been developed in communication with city officials and has been happening for about a year, Martin says.

Wal-Mart has completed a traffic study. Comments about the study are due soon from the Washington Department of Transportation and the architecture and engineering firm USKH, Martin said.

The city of Clarkston hired USKH with money from the Lewis-Clark Metropolitan Planning Organization, Martin said.

The city will look at the information provided by all those parties and then negotiate with Wal-Mart about what kinds of changes it will require.

City building officials also will be sending out notices to agencies such as the Department of Ecology and Fish and Wildlife as part of following the State Environmental Policy Act. Those agencies will be invited to comment on any additional pollution Wal-Mart might create, such as more lighting, noise and car exhaust. The city might request additional mitigation based on those remarks, Martin said.

But Martin doesn't expect any of those steps in the process will present major obstacles. The property is located in a zone that allows big-box stores and he's not aware of any significant environmental issues. "The consultants for Wal-Mart do not leave any stone unturned. They've been going over the property with a fine-tooth comb."

Once Wal-Mart gets its building permit, which could be as early as June, Martin expects it will take between 12 and 18 months to complete. "This isn't their first time at the prom. So I don't imagine it will be a slow process."

Opening super centers in other communities has taken longer.

Wal-Mart has discussed seeking a super center site in Lewiston since at least 2001, but any steps the retailer has made toward that goal have never been made public.

In Pullman, Wal-Mart has acquired 28 acres in the 400 block of Bishop Boulevard. Plans for a super center there were first announced in October 2004, said Pete Dickinson, city planning. But plans for the store continue to be stalled in litigation.

Three judges in Washington's Division III Court of Appeals in Spokane heard arguments in the case on Dec. 19. Typically the judges take three to six months to issue their opinions, according to an employee in the office of the court's clerks.

The case involves an appeal by the Pullman Alliance for Responsible Development of an initial decision by the city of Pullman to allow the super center.

Wal-Mart also examined opening a super center in Moscow, where it already has a discount store. But that idea was put on the back burner because it found the city's process for a proposed site too cumbersome.

The recent shift in Moscow's city council doesn't seem to have changed Wal-Mart's stance. "We'd still like to serve our customers there with a super center, but at this point, it's kind of on hold," says Karianne Fallow, a spokeswoman for Wal-Mart in Boise.

Farther north, in Hayden Lake, the process has been complicated too. City Manager Jay Townsend estimates Wal-Mart has been working on its plans for at least five years.

Initially Wal-Mart wanted to locate on two parcels of land, but only one of them was zoned for the development. The city denied a request to rezone one of the parcels after a packed public hearing, and Wal-Mart went back and redid its design so it could use a single parcel, Townsend says.

Doing so is costing Wal-Mart hundreds of thousands of dollars in mitigation, such as replacing a sewer lift station that has to be moved and creating an additional travel lane on U.S. Highway 95, Townsend says.

The city of Hayden also successfully negotiated with Wal-Mart to make the facade of the store tan and brown with rock veneer instead of the standard gray with red, white and blue. The idea is to blend with the rustic flavor Hayden Lake is trying to develop as part of a revitalization project. "We wanted something that was going to fit within the community itself," Townsend says.

Technorati Tags: wal-mart walmart

"Settlement could be near in Moscow-area water rights dispute"

From yesterday's Lewiston Tribune:

MOSCOW - A potential water rights settlement between the city of Moscow and Hawkins Companies appears possible by Monday, according to a city council agenda.

Councilor Wayne Krauss confirmed Friday the council will meet in executive session prior to Monday night's regular meeting to discuss the matter. A public discussion of the appeals, recent mediation and a potential settlement is scheduled as the last item on the council's agenda.

Both Krauss and Councilor Walter Steed said they would not comment on the potential settlement, after signing confidentiality documents earlier in the week at Spokane where the mediation session took place. Krauss, Steed, Mayor Nancy Chaney, Public Works Director Les McDonald and a water rights attorney joined others, including Hawkins representatives, at the session.

According to the council agenda, members are now ready to "discuss and take such action deemed appropriate including approval of settlement."

No public input has been taken on the appeals issue.

Hawkins wants to build a 700,000-square-foot retail shopping center just west of the state line in Whitman County. To do that, the company sought and secured from the Washington Department of Ecology the transfer of water rights to drill wells for the development.

But Moscow filed an appeal, signed by Chaney, with the Washington State Pollution Control Hearings Board. While hearings on the appeal are scheduled for later this spring, parties agreed to mediation last week.

To date, little of the issue has been discussed publicly. Chaney filed the appeal after meeting in executive session with members of last year's council. The mediation session was closed to the public. So the scheduled discussion at the end of Monday night's meeting will be the first time council members have addressed the matter in an open forum.

Moscow's appeal asserts, among other things, Hawkins secured water rights in two different groundwater locations and the transfers might be contrary to the legal intended use. The city of Colton had agreed to swap water rights with Hawkins, but that agreement stalled when the Moscow appeals were filed.

Chaney said the appeals stem from a concern for the region's groundwater. Critics, however, said the shopping center would use relatively little water and Moscow's action is really about slowing or stopping retail development in the Moscow-Pullman corridor.

The Whitman County commissioners, meanwhile, are poised to make a decision about a $10.5 million bond issue to build infrastructure, including water service, for the Hawkins development. Proponents said the cost to county taxpayers would be retrieved in sales and property taxes from the development. As proposed, the shopping center would be anchored by a Lowe's home improvement center and possibly other big-box retail stores.

"City Council to discuss settlement with Hawkins Companies"

Hopefully Queen Nancy's ill-begotten appeal will soon be over. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in that executive session. From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

The Moscow City Council will discuss and potentially approve a settlement between the city and Hawkins Companies during its meeting Monday.

Councilmen Wayne Krauss and Walter Steed and Mayor Nancy Chaney attended a mediation hearing in Spokane earlier this week in an attempt to reach a settlement with Hawkins on three water-rights transfers approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology.

Hawkins plans to use the water rights for its proposed 700,000-square-foot retail shopping center just west of the Idaho state line.

Moscow filed an appeal over Ecology's decision with the Washington State Pollution Control Hearings Board, arguing that the water rights are located in two different bodies of public groundwater and the transfers will impair existing water rights, not be in the public's interest and will improperly modify the manner of the rights' intended use.

The appeal also cited the Department of Ecology's failure to conduct an analysis of the average amount of water use from the rights over the past five years. The City Council will have to approve any decision reached at the mediation before it will be official.

Steed said he could not comment on the mediation between representatives from the city and Hawkins Companies.

"Arguments finished in WSU water rights appeal"

"...the appellants have been unable to meet their burden of proof." Where have we heard that before? From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Washington Pollution Control Hearings Board expected to render decision within 90 days

Attorneys for a group of area water activists had one last chance to state their case during Thursday's closing arguments in a hearing regarding Washington State University water rights.

Attorney Patrick Williams said the Washington State Department of Ecology erred when granting the university the ability to consolidate - an act that will decrease the water levels in the region's Grand Ronde aquifer.

"Every expert witness ... testified to the historic decline of the Grand Ronde aquifer," he said.

The hearing before the state Pollution Control Hearings Board was a continuation of two days of proceedings last week in Pullman. The closing arguments were made via videoconference.

The Palouse Water Conservation Network, the Palouse Group Sierra Club and Pullman-area resident Scotty Cornelius - claim the consolidation will allow the university to pump more than three times as much water per year as it currently does. They argue that the university has contributed to the dropping levels in the Grand Ronde aquifer, and point to an 18-hole golf course under construction as a project that will create more drawdown of the area's primary water source.

Cornelius, who lives outside Pullman, has said his well is decreasing at a rate of 10 inches per year.

WSU currently has the rights to operate seven wells, though two large wells pump a majority of the water needed on campus at 2,500 gallons per minute. The consolidation allows the university to pump up to 5,300 acre feet, or 1.72 billion gallons, of water each year.

Williams said the state should have done more strenuous pump tests to ensure the university's consolidation would not harm domestic wells in the area. He added that equations used by a responder's expert witness to estimate WSU's potential effect on Cornelius' well were inaccurate.

The method used assumes the aquifer is not confined to an infinite area, and it is not isotropic or uniform in thickness, among other things - most of which do not pertain to the Grand Ronde. University of Idaho hydrogeologist James Osiensky testified last week that with WSU continually pumping water the aquifer will decrease 1.95 feet in 10 years. The aquifer will decrease only another half-inch in the same time frame with WSU operating wells under the consolidation.

"If Ecology will not act now ... under what circumstances will they act?" Williams asked.

It has been up to the appellants to prove the state was wrong to grant the university the consolidated water rights in 2006, and that WSU is interrupting or interfering with the availability of water in the Grand Ronde aquifer for residents throughout the Palouse. The general decline of the aquifer is not relevant to the appeal, nor is the estimated water use on the golf course.

Alan Reichman, who represented the state, said Ecology would not have granted the consolidation if the university would impair the water rights of others in the area

Reichman said "everyone knows there's a decline" in the aquifer, but that the appellants have been unable to meet their burden of proof.

"They have not met the first test, which is that the changing of the water configuration (at WSU) ... will affect Mr. Cornelius' ability to draw water," he said.

The three-member board is expected to issue a decision on the case within 90 days.

"Government officials, developer negotiate water rights"

From today's Lewiston Tribune:

Representatives of the Hawkins Companies, the Washington Department of Ecology and the cities of Moscow and Colton continued mediation talks in Spokane late Tuesday night over disputed water rights transfers.

Moscow City Councilor Wayne Krauss, reached by cell phone at around 9:30 p.m., said the talks were still in session. All participants, Krauss added, signed a confidentiality paper when the talks began in the morning and he declined further comment about the negotiations.

Krauss said he expected the talks to end late Tuesday night and members of the Moscow City Council might discuss the outcome during an executive session Monday.

Hawkins has proposed building a 700,000-square-foot shopping center adjacent to the Moscow city limits just over the state line in Whitman County. The development company secured water rights transfers for the development, then Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney, with council approval, appealed the transfers.

Hawkins representatives have said they need the water rights before drilling their own wells. Moscow had refused to offer water and sewer service to the development.

The city of Colton got involved when officials there agreed to swap water rights with Hawkins before Chaney's appeal brought the transfer to a halt. The appeals, said Colton developers, have brought a halt to construction in their town.

Several people, including a pro-development citizens group in Whitman County, have called on members of Moscow's new city council to rescind the appeals and let Hawkins start construction. The appeals remain scheduled for hearings later this spring. The mediation gathering was organized recently in hope of finding a quicker resolution.

In the meantime, the three Whitman County commissioners indicated they may make a decision by Monday whether to issue $10.5 million worth of bonds to build infrastructure, including water service, for the Hawkins development. The commissioners have championed the Hawkins shopping center and criticized Moscow officials for jumping over a state line to take legal action.

Chaney said her appeals were filed because of concern for the region's groundwater. Critics continue to say the mayor and members of the former city council in Moscow really want to stop retail development in the Moscow-Pullman corridor. The Whitman County commissioners have all gone on record that they hope the Hawkins development will be the start of even more retail development throughout the eight-mile corridor.

As planned, the Hawkins shopping center would be anchored by a Lowe's home improvement center and could include other big-box retail stores.

"Mediation between city, Hawkins under way"

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Moscow City Councilman Walter Steed said he could not comment on ongoing mediation between representatives of the city of Moscow and Hawkins Companies.

Steed, Councilman Wayne Krauss and Mayor Nancy Chaney are attending the mediation in Spokane, which started Tuesday. Steed said Tuesday afternoon that the rules of the mediation require him to keep information confidential.

He said he could not comment on how long the mediation would take. Krauss said earlier this week that the mediation would likely run through today.

Moscow has appealed the Washington State Department of Ecology's decision to grant the Boise-based development company water-rights transfers for a proposed retail development in the Pullman-Moscow corridor, just west of the Idaho state line.

The appeal, which was filed with the Washington State Pollution Control Hearings Board, argues that the water rights are located in two different bodies of public groundwater and the transfers will impair existing water rights, not be in the public's interest and will improperly modify the manner of the rights' intended use.

The appeal also cited the Department of Ecology's failure to conduct an analysis of the average amount of water use from the rights over the past five years.

Krauss and Chaney could not be reached for comment.

Councilmen Dan Carscallen, Tom Lamar, Bill Lambert and John Weber said Tuesday they had not heard any news about the mediation.

Weber said Peter G. Scott, a Montana-based lawyer who is representing the city in the appeal, will speak for Moscow in the mediation.

"I think Wayne and Walter were there to show moral support and the fact that we're serious about it, and so is the mayor, but as far as them giving any testimony I think the testimony would have been given by our mediator or experts," Weber said.

The City Council will have to approve any decision reached at the mediation before it will be official.

The Mirror Has Two Faces

I also agree with others who have written in before on these issues who have complained the driving all the way from Pullman to the sprawl area where Hawkins would wish to build is a waste of gas and not environmentally sound.

- PARDner Christopher Lupke, online comment, Moscow-Pullman Daily News website, January 30, 2008

Burma seems to have forgotten there is a Wal-Mart seven miles away. If she has trouble getting there, I’d be happy to do the neighborly thing and take her. She has a right to shop for shoddy sweatshop-made goods if she wishes.

- PARDner T.V. Reed Monday, letter to the editor, Moscow-Pullman Daily News, January 1, 2007

10. We already have a Wal-Mart 7 miles away, and a new Supercenter is being planned for Moscow

- "Top 10 Reasons a Wal-Mart Supercenter Would Be Bad for Pullman," PARD Poster at 2005 National Lentil Festival

While we understand some people in Pullman who think it only fair turnabout to gain sales at the expense of Moscow, for a number of reasons that is highly unlikely to happen. Moreover, at a time when the Pullman and Moscow governments are seeking to cooperate on a number of projects, including responsible development of the Route 270 corridor, this is no time for store wars to ruin good will.

- PARD Position Paper

The Hawkins "sprawl area" to which Lupke refers is directly adjacent to the existing Wal-Mart that the PARDners direct folks to, as well as the Moscow businesses which they are so deeply concerned about.

If you are getting motion sickness trying to follow all of PARD's gyrations on the various issues, don't worry. You're not alone. Fortunately, Lu Laoshi's hypocritical rantings on the Hawkins development will remain just that: the inane, incoherent, illogical ramblings of an academic with a hugely overblown sense of self-importance. PARD has no big labor sugar daddy to bankroll an appeal of the Hawkins project.

The Geographically Challenged

Let me get this straight. Hawkins, a development company from Boise, got a good deal on some Palouse farmland and wants to build a sprawl-mall there. However, because the land does not have all utilities and is distant from either Moscow or Pullman, Hawkins wants either the Whitman County taxpayers to underwrite this mall with a bond, or the Moscow taxpayers to underwrite this mall with utility access.

- Bill London, Moscow-Pullman Daily News, January 29, 2008.

The Hawkins development, of course, will be directly adjacent to Moscow, hard against the state line. Don't laugh. It's sad, really, that our no growth moonbats have been reduced to this level of intellectual bankruptcy. It's much more fun when they have a sporting chance.

Numerous conservative commentators in our own community find time to comment on their lack of faith in the environmental certainty of global warming, as well as their belief that there is a vast liberal conspiracy behind anything to do with environmental protection.

- Chuck "Mr. Civil Discourse" Pezeshki, Moscow-Pullman Daily News, January 29, 2008.

You have to forgive Chuckie Sandiego's poor timing on today's column. He's in Denmark at the moment, not shoveling a foot of snow out of his driveway like the rest of us in Pullman.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

"Hawkins vote could come Monday in Whitman County"

"...the best way to keep shoppers in Pullman and, crucially, attract shoppers from Moscow and other nearby communities, is for Pullman to 'differentiate itself' from its neighbors, to offer shopping and dining opportunities not already available in our area."

- PARDner Chris Lupke, Moscow-Pullman Daily News, June 16, 2006

"I see Whitman County and Latah County as having somewhat of a fixed revenue source. I don't know if there is enough dispensable income to support this kind of project."

- PARDner Don Orlich, Moscow-Pullman Daily News, January 29, 2008, on the Hawkins Companies retail development in the corridor which will bring a variety of new shopping and dining opportunities to the Palouse, including a Lowe's Home Improvement and another undisclosed large retailer.

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Commissioners say they won't be rushed in making decision to sell bonds to pay for infrastructure at development site

Whitman County commissioners have tentatively set Monday as their target date for a vote on the proposed public-private partnership with Hawkins Companies and the selling of roughly $10 million in bonds.

The bonds would be used to pay for public infrastructure at the site of Hawkins' proposed retail development in the Pullman-Moscow corridor, just west of the Idaho state line.

Commissioner Michael Largent said at a public meeting Monday in Colfax the commissioners would not be rushed in making their decision.

"We will not make a decision until we are ready, regardless of a timeline," he said.

Monday's meeting was not as well attended as the previous two public meetings on the topic, with only four Whitman County residents attending.

Donald Orlich, a Pullman resident, was one of two residents who spoke against the proposed development. He told the county commissioners it was not the government's place to provide money for private businesses. He also said it was not the time to burden the county with debt, given the declining state of the country's economy.

"What we have in front of us is whether the county will commit to financing public infrastructure," Orlich said. "I don't think we should be subsidizing private companies.

"I really think this would be bad timing all around and I am opposed to this."

Orlich also questioned the profitability potential of the proposed 700,000-square-foot shopping center.

"I see Whitman County and Latah County as having somewhat of a fixed revenue source," Orlich said. "I don't know if there is enough dispensable income to support this kind of project."

Commissioner Jerry Finch responded to Orlich's comment by citing a recent study that concluded the Palouse loses $80 million a year in potential retail sales to nearby cities like Spokane and Lewiston.

"If we capture 10 percent of that, which I think is realistic, those numbers are doable," Finch said.

Finch also said the county and Hawkins have been careful in their estimates.

"Everywhere we have done this we have done this very conservatively," Finch said.

Russ Coggins, a Pullman resident, spoke in favor of the bonding and the development.

"I think the proposed bond as proposed is going to be a good thing for Whitman County," Coggins said. "It is a heck of a bargain. I don't see how Whitman County can pass on it."

The commissioners also said during the meeting that representatives from Hawkins have indicated that a second "major retailer" is ready to commit to the development.

The county has made available an informational packet on its Web site (whitmancounty.org) in response to the many questions raised by residents during last week's public meeting and to clear up some of the public's questions.

One of the questions addressed in the packet was what would the total cost of the bond be to the county once interest is included. According to the packet, the county has not decided on the length of the bond, but if the county elected to sell 20-year bonds, the cost of a $9.1 million bond ultimately would be $14.2 million.

Another question addressed how the county will pay for the bonds. According to the packet, the county expects sales and property taxes generated from the development will "more than pay for the costs to the county."

The county also expects to see a tax revenue profit from the development of $9 million over the first 20 years, "over and above the costs in principal and interest to pay for the infrastructure."

If the estimates aren't reached, the county still would have several options to pay for the bonds, including using .09 funds - money provided by the state and awarded by the county to assist rural communities with economic development - or dipping into the county's general fund, according to the packet.

Hawkins representatives were scheduled to meet with Moscow representatives today in Spokane, with a goal of resolving their differences over a water-rights transfers granted by the Washington State Department of Ecology.

Moscow has appealed the Department of Ecology's decision, arguing that the water rights were located in two different bodies of public groundwater and the transfers would impair existing water rights, not be in the public's interest and would improperly modify the manner of the rights' intended use. The appeal also cited Ecology's failure to conduct an analysis of the average amount of water use from the rights over the past five years.

New Motto for Moscow

"Moscow - We Are Appealing"

Courtesy of Bill Weed, The Morning News on NewsTalk 1150, KQQQ

Mixed Econuts: The Moonbat Open

Even after appellant Scotty Cornelius stated "I can't say it's because of anything WSU did ... There's not enough data for me to draw any conclusion." and after being eviscerated by a Palouse hydrogeology expert from the University of Idaho who testified that the golf course will not be a threat to existing wells, the attorney for the aquinuts opposing the Palouse Ridge Golf Course at WSU "said she plans to take the case to the Washington Supreme Court regardless of the outcome of the hearing." Can someone please tell me where in the hell these people are getting the money for all these lawsuits and appeals?

From last Thursday's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Expert: WSU wells not threat to nearby wells

Opponents will have opportunity to rebut testimony of UI professor

A local hydrogeologist said Wednesday the well system at Washington State University should not impair the wells of neighboring domestic properties.

James Osiensky, a professor at the University of Idaho, testified on behalf of WSU and the Washington State Department of Ecology during the second day of an appeal hearing over the state's decision to allow WSU to consolidate its water rights.

The first two days of the appeal to the Washington Pollution Control Hearings Board took place at the Lighty Student Services building at WSU. Each side was given six hours to present testimony, and the board will render a verdict within 90 days after the hearing is complete.

That could be some time after a board decision allowing the group of appellants to provide rebuttal to Osiensky's testimony.

The appellants - the Palouse Water Conservation Network, the Palouse Group Sierra Club and Pullman-area resident Scotty Cornelius - claim the consolidation will allow the university to pump more than three times as much water per year as it currently does. They argue that the university has contributed to the dropping levels in the Grand Ronde aquifer, and point to an 18-hole golf course under construction as a project that will create more drawdown of the area's primary water source.

Cornelius, who lives outside Pullman, has said his well is decreasing at a rate of 10 inches per year.

WSU currently has the rights to operate seven wells, though two large wells pump a majority of the water needed on campus at 2,500 gallons per minute. Additional wells can be used in case of emergency.

Wednesday's testimony was dominated by expert witnesses who said measures were taken to ensure the university's consolidation would not decrease water availability on neighboring properties.

Osiensky said he has determined the drawdown of the Grand Ronde aquifer should not exceed two feet every 10 years through any combination of the university's seven wells pumping water. His research has shown that the aquifer will decrease 1.95 feet in 10 years if WSU continually pumps water. The aquifer will only decrease another half-inch in the same time frame with WSU operating its wells under the consolidation.

"Drawdown is a necessary evil," he said. "You can't get water without drawdown."

Rachael Paschal Osborn, the appellants' lead attorney, made a motion to strike Osiensky's testimony from the record. She said the respondents pulled a "bait and switch" by bringing in Osiensky when another expert witness could not take the stand due to a scheduling conflict. She added that the respondents did not disclose Osiensky's testimony and strayed from questions relevant to his deposition, which was taken last fall.

"We think allowing Dr. Osiensky's testimony is a violation " Osborne said. "They come in and it's trial by surprise."

Board members met in private to discuss the motion. Board Chairwoman Andrea McNamara Doyle said Osiensky's testimony does violate the respondent's duty to disclose, but instead of striking the testimony from the record she allowed the appellants to provide rebuttal to his testimony at a later date.

The board will have a conference call this afternoon with attorneys from both sides to set a time and place for closing arguments and the appellant's rebuttal to Osiensky's testimony.

The appellants agreed to proceed with the cross examination of Osiensky on Wednesday, questioning the equation he used to formulate the data from his testimony. They argued the method he used assumes the aquifer is not confined to an infinite area and is not isotropic or uniform in thickness, among other things - most of which do not pertain to the Grand Ronde.

Osiensky said there may be "some discrepancies" because the data used in his method was not spot-on regarding the Grand Ronde. He noted that the drawdown would be slightly more in some cases, although the "relative impact would stay the same."

Osiensky said the drawdown in Cornelius' well is a sum of drawdowns from all pump wells in the Pullman-Moscow area.

Guy Gregory, a senior hydrologist with the Department of Ecology in Spokane, testified that he did an analysis of wells that could be affected by the consolidation. He found no evidence that the change would impair the water rights of other wells.

"We know there's water in the area," he said.

Osborn said she plans to take the case to the Washington Supreme Court regardless of the outcome of the hearing.

She said the appeal in front of the board only addressed whether WSU was impairing the water rights of other residents in the region. It's on more-complex issues, such as the university allegedly "water hording" unused water rights and the interpretation of the municipal water law, that demand an appeal to a higher court.

"This isn't over," she said.