Plausible Deniability

Last week, Judy Krueger was using the Watergate-era political tactic of the non-denial denial. Now, the Pullman Alliance for Responsible Development is using another favorite Nixon technique: plausible deniability. Obviously PARD has been feeling the heat after getting their hand caught in the cookie jar. They can't publicly attack the merchants they say they are "defending," so obviously the best thing to do is to offload responsibility for the petition opprobrium to someone else.

Accordingly, Cynthia Hosick (coincidentally enough a very active supporter of Judy Krueger) wrote a a laughable letter to the editor that appeared in today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News taking sole credit for the infamous "Nineteen Merchants Letter." She can't seriously expect us to believe that she was acting as an "impartial private citizen" and "represented no one but herself" when she collected signatures from Pullman merchants asking for an economic impact study of the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter. Ms. Hosick neglected to mention that she is an active member of PARD. She is also a prolific writer of letters to the editor against Wal-Mart. In fact, she was writing letters to the editor well before PARD was even formed. For example, from October 2004:

No please. No Wal-Mart superstore in Pullman, especially on Bishop Boulevard. We have two fine grocery stores already. Which one, like Tidyman's, will be put out of business? We already have a big discount store. Will ShopKo be ousted? Where is this marketing plan coming from? Two Wal-Marts, a ShopKo and six grocery stores for a total Pullman-Moscow population of less than 50,000?

By Ms. Hosick’s own admission, the cover letter that went to the city was the idea of only one of the signers. How many other of the 19 signers did not get a chance to see the letter that was being submitted on their behalf? Did all those merchants also know the ultimate purpose of the petition? I think we can safely say the answer is "No," as one merchant who signed the petition has already publicly claimed he was duped into signing and knew nothing of any cover letter or the purpose.

Ms. Hosick claims the purpose of the petition was "simply to ask the city to consider that an independent economic study could help Pullman." Baloney. The letter and petition were submitted as a SEPA DNS comment to Mark Workman and filed by the city with the "anti-Wal-Mart" comments. Just go down to City Hall and ask to see the letter signed by "Nineteen Pullman Merchants" (Ms. Hosick's name is not attached to the letter, even though she wrote it). Now, PARD has filed an appeal of the city's final DNS determination, partially based on the lack of an economic impact study. That letter and petition could very well be used as evidence at the appeal hearing. So much for impartiality.

These are all facts, not "rumors." In her letter to the Daily News, Ms. Hosick conveniently doesn't mention her affiliation with PARD, her undeniable anti-Wal-Mart stance, Jerry Griebling's complaint, the use of the petition as a SEPA DNS comment and how that dovetails with PARD's appeal. Given how much Ms. Hosick leaves out, there is no doubt in my mind that Jerry Griebling's allegations are true. I urge the Daily News and the Pullman Chamber of Commerce to conduct an investigation to get to the truth in this matter. Ms. Hosick's assertions are not enough to put this matter to rest.

I hope everyone in Pullman can now see the lengths to which Wal-Mart opponents will go.

And Ms. Hosick, rumors are started by disingenuousness, hidden agendas, and lack of full disclosure, not a lack of a "regular public forum."