Politics from the Palouse to Puget Sound

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

"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.


April E. Coggins said...

I am hoping Idaho Water Resources denies the transfer of water over the border or at least makes the offer temporary. I want to see Whitman County secure the water rights as originally planned and build the infrastructure necessary to see the corridor developed into it's full potential. I do not want to have to revisit this scenario again, which we will have to do if we don't have our own water rights and the infrastruture to support it.

Moscow has kindly extended an offer of water and sewer into Whitman County and I am grateful. We can't continue to depend on our neighbors for future development. They have their own politics and businesses to support. Even though Hawkins is proposing to pay for the services, we are imposing on them, as everyone can tell from some of comments that are being made.

Mattwi said...

You're right April...

If those services come from Moscow then Moscow or any future Moscow City Council will have tremendous leverage over the development...

May sound tin-foilish.. but they pulled a Sun Tzu with agreeing to go ahead with the services across the State line.

Scotty said...

I have had the same gut reaction April. I am happy this will help the Hawkins development start, but we *need* to complete the infrastructure into the corridor so we can have more businesses move our way.