"Moscow likely to see stormwater regulations; EPA plans to list city under Stormwater Phase II program"

What goes around, comes around. I actually hate to see any city subjected to these silly and expensive regulations, but Queen Nancy called down the thunder....

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

The Environmental Protection Agency has again stated its intention to make Moscow face intensive stormwater regulations, but this time the City Council is unlikely to fight it.

The council's Public Works/Finance Committee agreed Monday night that Moscow should accept being listed under the EPA's Stormwater Phase II program instead of trying to appeal the decision. Public Works Director Les MacDonald has estimated it will cost the city about $300,000 a year for the first five years of the program to meet its requirements.

Moscow will be required to develop a comprehensive stormwater management program and obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit if it is listed as a regulated small municipal separate storm system under Phase II.

The regulations are designed to manage the quality and quantity of runoff from development and to control stormwater discharge, as well as reduce downstream pollution and contamination.

Moscow was first alerted to the EPA's plans in June 2007. The City Council decided at the time to send the EPA a letter asking for control of its own stormwater system.

The EPA spent the last year reviewing Moscow's situation. MacDonald said EPA officials spoke to him in June and said the new data they'd found confirmed their decision that Moscow should be listed. For example, tests showed that fecal coliform contamination in parts of Paradise Creek is too high.

"City staff has been working on trying to track down where some of that's coming on so we can try to stop it where we can," MacDonald said.

MacDonald said Moscow already has some programs in place that will be required by the Phase II listing, although some of those will need to be beefed up. The city does not actively process stormwater right now, but will have to. The program also requires public education programs, detection and elimination of illicit discharge, and construction run-off control.

He said Moscow will have some flexibility within the program if it chooses not to fight it. The city likely will be able to set milestones for itself and gradually meet the requirements of the program over five years.

MacDonald conducted an analysis of the program's potential effects on the city last year. Based on the analysis, MacDonald estimated the city will need to add four-and-a-half staff members to cover the needs of the program, as well as buy an additional street sweeper and inspection equipment. He estimated the cost would be $300,000 a year on average.

City Supervisor Gary Riedner said Moscow likely will consider a stormwater utility fee to help cover the cost of the program, and MacDonald agreed.

The city of Pullman also is dealing with stormwater regulations from a Washington State Department of Ecology permit issued in early 2007. The estimated cost for the city to meet requirements in the permit's first five years is $4.4 million and the Pullman City Council is contemplating a stormwater utility fee to help recover the costs. Landowners' fees would be based on the amount of impervious surface on their property, and the city is hoping to generate about $800,000 per year.

MacDonald said he's not sure why there is such a big difference between Pullman and Moscow's cost estimates, and said his estimate was "very rough."

"It will likely change," MacDonald said. "It could go up. I doubt it would go down much."

Moscow Public Works/Finance Committee member Wayne Krauss initially expressed interest in fighting the listing.

"I think it's really unfortunate that the federal government, in this case the EPA, stands there with this big hammer over our heads threatening us with a bunch of fines if we don't bow under," he said.

He asked about the city's potential to fight the listing. City Attorney Randy Fife said Moscow has not historically been successful in fighting federal regulations and that the government takes the view that cities eventually comply, one way or another.

"Kind of what you're saying is we're screwed," Krauss said.

Krauss and committee members Dan Carscallen and John Weber eventually decided to recommend to the City Council as a whole not to fight the regulation. Weber said it would be better for Moscow to accept the program than put itself "in the middle of the radar screen" of the EPA.

Aquiferealists vs. Aquinuts

The Lewiston Tribune has been runnning a series about water issues on the Palouse. What follows below is a compilation of quotes (Aquiferealists in blue, Aquinuts in red) from several articles that were published in the Sunday issue of the Tribune, along with my comments:

King Solomon vs. Science:

"It's a little scary," says Mark Solomon, a longtime water watchdog and current hydrology doctoral student at the University of Idaho. "There is a looming water crisis."

Even with state-of-the-art technology, no amount of scientific probing will ever provide total understanding of the groundwater supply on the Palouse, says a University of Idaho hydrology and water quality professor.

"There are geophysical tools that you can use," Fritz Fiedler says of equipment designed to collect underground data. "But they aren't very accurate. And they don't work well in deep systems like we have. The main aquifer on the Palouse, which is the Grand Ronde, is about 1,000 feet deep."

"There's always going to be uncertainty that we're going to have to manage around," Fiedler says. So while more scientific data is desirable, cooperation between user groups and agencies is much more critical at this point.

"I don't think there's a looming crisis," Fiedler says. "I really don't think we're about to run dry by any means. But in the future, maybe 15 to 20 years out there, it's much harder to tell."

"I'm not saying the decisions will be here next year. I don't think the situation is that dire at all," [Jan] Boll [director of the Univeristy of Idaho Waters of the West graduate program] says. "But it's a planning process that we all need. And that's what our process is trying to develop."

In the meantime, Boll says no crisis is imminent. In fact, he says, the aquifers may be much deeper than realized at this point.

Surface water is plentiful. Reservoirs could be built. Treated runoff could be injected into the aquifers. The technology is even available to pump and pipe water from the major rivers to the south. While perhaps costly alternatives, Boll says the availability of water is more than adequate for the region.

One thing for certain, warns Boll, no amount of scientific investigation will ever provide enough answers to erase all questions about how much water is available. "The thing we need to come to grasp with is the uncertainty we will always have. There is always going to be uncertainty about how much water is left and how much we can keep pumping."

I think in this case I'll go with the professors over the "student." And since there is no way we will ever know how much water is left in the aquifer, it only seems logical to implement thoughtful conservation measures and develop economical alternatives versus the radical growth-killing solutions advocated by King Solomon and his Knights of the Water Table.

Larry Kirkland vs. Bill French

Larry Kirkland, former PBAC executive secretary, counters that there is no shortage. "The water is here. It's just a question of how we can get it."

Enough precipitation, for example, falls on the Palouse to make the shortage debate moot, say Kirkland and other experts. They contend capturing runoff in reservoirs or injecting treated surface water into underground aquifers, while costly, would meet future demands.

Kirkland, after leaving PBAC and being able to observe the big picture, warns that fears about lack of water can be used as both political and legal levers. "Water can become sort of a spotted owl to establish what you want as far as social engineering."

The spotted owl became the focus of national attention decades ago when
conservation groups used the bird's endangered species status to block logging of old-growth forests.

The potential for alternative water sources aside, [Bill] French [of the Palouse Water Conservation Network] says there's something "obscene" about the current situation. "I just think it's ethically wrong to take a 20,000-year-old resource like pristine groundwater that got into the ground during the last ice age and dump it on lawns or flush it down toilets."

"Obscene? ""Ethically wrong?" Kirkland is right. The Aquinuts ARE comparing the "pristine 20,000 year old water" to a living creature like the spotted owl to block growth on the Palouse. Let's illuminate Mr. French about the water cycle, shall we?


There will never be any more freshwater on Earth than there is now. No new water is being made and water can’t escape from the Earth. The water we use is recycled over and over again. It is never "destroyed." It just changes states or moves somewhere else. So that "pristine" water that got into the Grande Ronde aquifer during the last ice age was on the Earth's surface for hundreds of millions of years in various forms (clouds, rain, snow, ice, rivers, oceans) before that. And when it gets to the surface again to water your lawn or flush your toilet, it will stay around for hundreds of millions of more years before going back into the ground, into the ocean, etc. Water is not a living creature that can die off and go extinct forever. That same water will be here long after we are dead and gone. Arguing over water on the Palouse is as silly as arguing over dirt would be. If we can't get water from the aquifer, we'll get it from somewhere else. As the scientists above stated, this is a region that has ample water supplies through rainfall, snowfall, and rivers.

Proof that the Aquinuts are all about anti-capitalist socialism and not water conservation (as if their rejection of any proposal to recharge the aquifer or build reservoirs isn't enough proof) comes from this April 2003 Moscow Co-Op newsletter (notice that Spokane attorney Rachael Paschal Osborn, who is leading the legal fight against the WSU golf course, was at the meeting being reported on:)

...the idea that a community can only thrive with unlimited growth and development is a notion that must disappear, hopefully before the water does.

Post-World War II economy was based on a planned scheme for consumerism—and it worked. The economy grew, people consumed and planned obsolescence became an accepted norm. We become anxious when we consider voluntary reductions of any type. But, we must begin to imagine a “restorative economy” where having less is truly more satisfying, more interesting, and of course, more secure.

In the relatively near future, we must achieve a balance between what we are consuming and the capacity of the earth’s ecosystems to provide, according to author and businessman Paul Hawken. “We need to create an economy… that is not an either/or argument, but a means to create the best life for the greatest number of people precisely because we do not know the eventual outcome or impact of our current industrial practices. In other words, we need an economy based on more humility.”

Bill French vs. Michael Echanove

Not that PBAC would curb pumping if it could, suggests French, who likens the pumping entities to foxes guarding the henhouse. "I think the whole concept of PBAC is flawed. I think PBAC was mostly formed to have the appearance of doing something. And it kind of fooled the state of Idaho into not stepping in to regulate water."

"The state of Idaho has a couple of designations they can put on a groundwater basin," explains French. His and other groups, in fact, waded in amid the Naylor flap to petition the Idaho Department of Water Resources to intercede and regulate pumping from both the Wanapum and Grand Ronde.

After another round of hearings, the state backed away in favor of a local solution. That solution, suggested by the IDWR, was to form an 11-member citizens group to offer advice to the 19 representatives of PBAC. The group, says French, had the potential to be a watchdog over PBAC. "But in practice, it (the citizens group) has just become a mirror image of PBAC. It's a group of people who get together once a month and talk about stuff but they never do anything."

Michael Echanove, chairman of the citizens group as well as mayor of Palouse, disagrees with French's assessment of PBAC.

More regulatory authority, however, isn't needed, Echanove says. What's needed is more scientific data about just how big and how full or empty the aquifers really are. "Until we get that data, it's just a bunch of people with opinions. And you've got universities that have their own projects. You've got counties that have their projects. I mean, I could make a career just thinking about it."

The politics of Palouse water, Echanove says, are perhaps best illustrated by the differing opinions of his mayoral counterparts in Pullman and Moscow.

"Remember, you've got to get elected. And you've got to be able to lead and you've got to be able to look at the big picture, as such, and you can't come in with one opinion and run with it, because you're not going to get anywhere."

Yes, the Aquinuts would love nothing more than to have an unelected body of envirocrats, who would of course have to buy into the idea of "looming water crisis," to beat back every new big-box store, golf course, highway, or housing project on the Palouse.

The fact remains that PBAC HAS been successful, greatly reducing water usage on the Palouse since 1992 (8.3% less than was pumped in 2006 than in 1992) through VOLUNTARY guidelines.

Nancy Chaney vs. Glenn Johnson

Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney was accused of social engineering when she leaped across the state line into Washington to legally challenge water rights for development of the proposed Hawkins Companies shopping center.

She defends her actions as an attempt to ensure water "sustainability."

"I come from a scientific background," says Chaney, who holds a master's degree in environmental science. "I get the scientific principle. I understand objectivity. But having entered the realm of politics, I've sort of straddled that line."

Ultimately, newly elected members of the Moscow City Council usurped Chaney's political power by agreeing to not just abandon the legal appeals, but to actually supply water to Hawkins.

Chaney laments that while the politics of water continue to vacillate, the groundwater supply will continue to drop. "It's certainly political. I think we should be informed by science, but there are competing interests. So we're sort of waiting out a cost-benefit analysis. We're looking at long-term and short-term values and things we can afford to gamble with and things we cannot afford. Unfortunately, political cycles don't coincide with natural resource needs."

Eight miles away in Pullman, Mayor Glenn Johnson declines comment on Chaney's tactics. "To be honest with you, I'm leaving that one alone."

As for the politics of water on the Washington side of the border, Johnson suggests they're quite different than in Idaho, and especially Moscow. "What we're trying to do is, we're not going to discourage growth over here. We're telling everybody that 'Yes, we know we have adequate water supplies, we've had plenty of research on that. But at the same time, we want you to conserve. We want to make sure you watch your use of water.' So that's the message."

Chaney comes from a "scientific background?" Oh, brother. She's a nurse, for God's sake. The only line she is straddling is the line between San Francisco hippie and all-out barking moonbat. The Queen's "realm of politics" will be over next year. meanwhile, Mayor Johnson's pragmatic political views have earened him two unopposed terms in office.

Is the Cold War Between Moscow and Whitman County Back On?

It appears that the short period of Détente enjoyed between Moscow and Whitman County since January is (temporarily?) over.

If you read Queen Nancy's rambling and paranoid missive concerning Hawkins, it's not surprising really.

Now, to quote April, Hawkins needs to drill here, drill now, and worry less about Moscow.

From today's Lewiston Tribune:

Progress stalls on shopping center

Disputes over water have set project back two years, Whitman County commissioner says

MOSCOW - Development of the Hawkins Companies shopping center just across the border into Washington has been delayed again, a Whitman County commissioner confirmed Monday.

"They've lost a construction season, that's what it boils down to," Commissioner Jerry Finch said. "They're going to get some work done this fall, but they're not going to have any construction until next year."

Jeff De Voe, spokesman for Hawkins on what's being called the "state line project," declined comment about when construction might begin.

"He's speaking of his own opinion, not mine," De Voe said of Finch. "A lot of things are happening. I don't have anything for you quite now. As of today, it's just quiet."

In April, De Voe estimated earth-moving equipment would start work at the site around June 1, weather permitting.

But Finch, one of the principal proponents of the development, said he talked with De Voe last week and received an update on delays. The proposal calls for a 714,000-square-foot shopping complex with a Lowe's home improvement center as its anchor.

Finch blamed the latest and previous construction delays mostly on Moscow elected officials who've stymied progress by questioning the development's impact on regional groundwater supplies.

"I think this is a stalling technique to kill the project," Finch said, referring to an initial Moscow appeal of Hawkins water rights transfers by Mayor Nancy Chaney, and subsequent slow progress toward reaching a possible agreement for Moscow to provide water services over the state line.

"That, quite frankly, has set this project back about two years," Finch said of the water issues.

His words come two weeks after members of the Moscow Public Works Committee agreed to forward a draft joint powers agreement to Finch and the other Whitman County commissioners. The agreement is necessary before officials at the Idaho Department of Water Resources will consider interstate transfer of a municipal groundwater supply.

"We've been reviewing it," Finch said of the eight-page draft, adding his cursory assessment has left him thinking more negotiation might be needed. He said the county's legal counsel must review the document before anything is sent back to Moscow. The agreement is necessary because IDWR, which has authority over groundwater, wants the water transfer agreement to be between two governmental entities, not between a city government and a private company.

In the meantime, Finch said, De Voe assured him Hawkins will move ahead with or without Moscow's participation. "I was assured by Mr. De Voe last week that drillers would be on site," Finch said of the company's intentions to drill for its own groundwater. "They're going to drill regardless. Hawkins is doing this on their own. They are not willing to gamble with Moscow."

Finch, who has worked closely with Hawkins on promotion of the shopping center, said the company would "cap" any wells it drills and retire its water rights if an agreement is eventually reached with Moscow. He said drilling could start in two weeks.

But the 204-acre construction site appeared to remain untouched Monday. This despite De Voe saying in April that a ribbon-cutting ceremony would likely be conducted to publicly announce the start of construction. A sign promising arrival of the shopping center remained standing Monday.

Finch and fellow commissioners Michael Largent and Greg Partch have heralded the Hawkins shopping center as the beginning of retail development in the Moscow-Pullman corridor. Likewise, Pullman officials have endorsed the project as a much-needed economic catalyst.

Critics, mostly in Moscow, have said it's the beginning of unnecessary retail sprawl. Pro-development candidates who were elected last November to the Moscow city council have couched their support in terms of the development being "inevitable" and Moscow needing to tap into profits by supplying water.

Hawkins completed its $5.45 million purchase of the development site in April. In addition to Lowe's, plans show room for at least two additional big box stores as well as a number of other retail outlets.

In the Third Year of the Palousitics Revolution

Three years ago today when I started this blog, I wanted two things: Dino Rossi in the Governor's Mansion in Olympia and a Wal-Mart Supercenter under construction in Pullman.

God willing, I'll see both of those things happen by next January.

From its humble beginning, I'd like to think Palousitics' now nearly two dozen contributors have played an important role in recent events on the Palouse, such as:

Taking the WSU College Republicans' fight to promote free speech and expose racism, intolerance, and lack of academic diversity at WSU to a local, regional, and national audience. Ed Weber,the director of WSU's Foley Institute recently apologized to conservatives for kow-towing to the "hegemony of the left-leaning liberal viewpoint" and promised more conservative speakers on campus.

Arguably the most pro-growth Pullman City Council and Whitman County Board of Commissioners in recent times.

According to PARD's latest screed in the Daily News "unfairly and personally attacking" the millions of Wal-Mart haters in Pullman and forcing them into anonymity and silence. In actuality, many of the silent majority of Wal-Mart supporters have found the courage to speak out, prompting Wal-Mart officials to comment that, other than the PARDners, they have been overwhelmed with the positive response they have received in Pullman.

Since I started Palousitics, I have been interviewed by the New York Times, been a guest on a Seattle radio talk show, co-hosted a Pullman talk radio show, met Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott, rubbed elbows with members of the international mainstream media, seen Palousitics ranked as one of Washington's most influential political blogs, and most importantly of all, spoken at a troop support rally for our local National Guard troops deploying to Iraq. I always tell people that I never know from day-to-day what new thing blogging will bring.

But April pointed something out to me recently that made me the proudest I have been yet of this blog. It was a long, rambling, self-pitying, paranoid history of the Hawkins development in the corridor written from Queen Nancy's perspective.

In it, she blames the foiling of her efforts to stop Hawkins, in part, on:

political will and the public’s patience waned in the face of a publicity campaign that unfairly and inaccurately depicted Moscow as meddlesome, unreasonable, anti-business, greedy, and mean-spirited.

As I am not aware of any other "publicity campaign" that depicted Moscow as "meddlesome, unreasonable, anti-business, greedy, and mean-spirited" other than what we waged here at Palousitics, I'm more than happy to take credit for it.

The little blog that took on an out-of-control city government to bring millions of sales tax dollars to Whitman County.

An Army of Davids indeed.....Happy Third Blogiversary to all you Palousitics contributors and readers.

Hawkins 3-Fer, Part Three

As the Hawkins Stateline Retail Center gets closer to reality and a Revenue Development Area is created on the Washington side of the border, Moscow is not sitting idly by.

Brushing aside Queen Nancy's "Peace Through Sustainability" policy, the new Moscow City Council has now approved the Thompson rezone that was the point of such controversy two years ago when Wal-Mart wanted to build there.

Expect an announcement soon that Wal-Mart or another big-box store will be locating on the 41 acre property.

Instead of socialist meddling, now we have good old fashioned capitalist competition, the way it was meant to be. All we ever wanted was a level playing field

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Council OKs rezone of Thompson property; Land made controversial during 2006 rezone request now available for motor business use

A large chunk of farmland in southeast Moscow is now ready for business after a rezone request was approved by the City Council on Monday.

The Thompson Family Limited Partnership owns the 41.4-acre plot just south of the Troy Highway across from Sunset Memorial Gardens Cemetery previously zoned for agriculture/forestry uses. The land is now zoned for motor business, meaning it will be available for retail, professional and medical businesses, as well as bars, restaurants and other businesses.

The Thompsons attempted to have a larger parcel of the property rezoned in 2006. The controversial request stemmed from Wal-Mart's plans to build a super center on the 77-acre parcel and met resistance from the Moscow No Super Wal-Mart group.

The City Council at the time decided to reject the rezone.

Monday's approval came with two conditions: any future developer must provide a traffic impact study and make any needed traffic improvements or changes to accommodate drivers, and developers must preserve the natural area between the property and nearby Paradise Path.

No businesses are set to build on the property yet, but Susan Wilson, an attorney representing the Thompson family, said it is an attractive piece of land for retail and motor businesses.

"It seemed pertinent to give businesses some incentive to move in," Wilson said of the approval.

She said the plot is adjacent to two major arterials and near many other retail businesses, making it conducive to commercial use.

All but one City Council member voted in favor of the rezoning. Tom Lamar voted against it after expressing concerns about the city spreading its interests in too many places at once. The city's lack of direction could stunt further commercial growth, he said.

"I think we're all interested in seeing growth and development in Moscow," Lamar said. "We need to concentrate on one area."

Lamar also raised questions about public buildings like schools possibly constructing on the Thompson site. The new zoning makes it more difficult for schools to build on the property than businesses, he said.

Lamar said the timing isn't right for the city.

"This may be a great area to build on in the future," he said, adding there already are many scattered motor business zones in town that have remained vacant for years.

Other council members ultimately decided the family can do what it wants with the land. Councilman John Weber said the Thompsons are responsible developers in Moscow.

Wilson agreed, saying the family has contributed to the community over the years.

"The Thompson family is doing this because they truly believe the community needs to have something to offer," she said.

Hawkins 3-Fer, Part One

It seems the Whitman County Commissioners approved the formation of a Revenue Development Area in the Pullman-Moscow corridor over the objections of King Solomon's heir to the Aquinut throne, Prince Cornelius.

Cornelius is as factually-challenged about the Hawkins development as he is the Palouse Ridge Golf Club. Maybe he should spend more time Googling and less time putting.

Scotty seems to believe that Hawkins shouldn't be built because "the closest District 12 station is in west Pullman, more than 7 miles away." Apparently, Prince Cornelius didn't catch Item #7 in the draft Letter of Intent between Hawkins and the county:

On the Development site, Hawkins will build a rural fire station and donate the land and building to Fire District 12.

Oops. No wonder that whole golf course appeal thing isn't working out too well.

You can read Cornelius' RDA comments here, (is that a WSU fax number that he used?) as well as those from fellow Aquinut David Hall of Moscow, who quoted the New York Times (the case cracker!) to the commissioners, and Queen Nancy's pruned response.

UPDATE: Despite Chaney's downplaying of the matter, Dale Courtney at Right Mind is pursuing the blatant lie the Queen has been caught in. Seems she claimed at a council meeting that Whitman County sent a letter to Moscow soliciting input on the LIFT proposal. There was no such letter. Dale also has a copy of the original draft of Her Honor's LIFT comments, as well as the draft RDA proposal. Check them out here.

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Board moves forward with LIFT plans;
Approval of Revenue Development Area was necessary for grant request

Whitman County commissioners unanimously approved the formation of a Revenue Development Area in the corridor that runs between Pullman and Moscow at a public hearing in Colfax on Monday.

The formation of the RDA clears another hurdle for the county in its effort to secure $18.1 million in grants through Washington's Local Infrastructure Financing Tool program. The RDA - which encompasses about 300 acres, including the site of Hawkins Companies' retail development and surrounding properties - is a geographic area in which public infrastructure improvements may be financed with state-collected sales taxes.

The program awards $2.5 million annually to city and county governments across the state in an effort to create local jobs and increase economic growth. Counties and cities can apply for up to $1 million a year for the next 25 years under the program.

LIFT money is awarded from the state's portion of the county's 7.8 percent sales tax. The state will recoup its money and benefit from additional tax revenue from the developed land that might otherwise be left vacant.

The county hopes to use a significant portion of the grant money to cover the costs of bonds that will pay for the construction of public infrastructure at the site of the Hawkins development on the Pullman-Moscow Highway.

In February, the county approved a preliminary development agreement to enter into a public-private partnership with Boise-based Hawkins. According to the agreement, the county will finance the construction of public infrastructure at the site through the sale of $9.1 million in bonds.

However, Public Works Director Mark Storey said money still will be available for additional improvements within the RDA.

During the hearing, Pullman resident Darl Roberts questioned the location and the size of the RDA and its proximity to Moscow rather than Pullman. He said it would likely only perpetuate the problem of businesses choosing to locate in Moscow rather than Pullman.

Commissioner Michael Largent addressed Roberts' concerns by explaining that the grant money also would free up county money and expand the county's capacity to invest in other areas.

"This doesn't preclude us from spending county dollars outside of the RDA," Largent said.

Storey said extending the size of the RDA to encompass more area along the Pullman-Moscow Highway or Airport Road actually would decrease the county's chances of beating out other entities competing for LIFT money.

Commissioner Greg Partch said Pullman still stands to benefit from the RDA if the county and city can come to terms on a sales-tax sharing plan for the corridor. Both the county and city would receive equal portions of the sales tax generated in the corridor.

"It's good for both of us and we have become partners rather than competitors," he said.

Partch added that the RDA and LIFT grant would move Whitman County closer to controlling its financial destiny.

"We can't depend on the federal government and the state government," Partch said.

The state also stands to benefit in the coming years from growth in the RDA.

"A million dollars would be a very small percentage of what is generated in that area," Storey said.

Partch estimated that the state will generate $250 million in sales tax over 20 years. He said that was a conservative figure.

"It's a great investment for the state," he said.

Partch said Whitman County should have a strong chance against other entities vying for the money.

"I think we are going to be right on the top of the pile," Partch said. "We think we are going to be very competitive in this."

The county has until June 30 to submit its completed application to the state.

"We are in that time frame and everything is moving along," Partch said. "This is just one more step - and a big step - in the process."

LIFT money is awarded by the Community Economic Revitalization Board, which is expected to announce its decision Sept. 18.

The Queen is Dead! Long Live the Council!

One marvels at the sheer gall of Queen Nancy. She wanted to impose Moscow's business-killing big-box ordinance on Whitman County. But the Moscow City Council nixed that quicker than Sir Thomas More refused to endorse King Henry VIII's plan to divorce Katherine of Aragón (and Nancy can't even have them beheaded.) I told you those guys deserve our full support here in Whitman County.

Can you spell L-A-M-E D-U-C-K?

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Mayor, councilmen spar over LIFT letter; Public works/finance members take exception to Chaney's suggestions to Whitman County

Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney wanted to send a strong message to Whitman County commissioners.

Members of the City Council's Public Works/Finance Committee thought she overstepped her bounds.

Committee members met Monday and shot down all but one of Chaney's suggestions to Whitman County regarding a grant application to pay for infrastructure at the site of the Hawkins Companies' controversial development just across the state line from Moscow.

Whitman County is applying for up to $1 million a year for 25 years through the Washington state Local Infrastructure Financing Tool program. The money would help pay for $18.1 million of public infrastructure in a "Revenue Development Area" that includes the Hawkins Companies' retail development, as well as property south of Hawkins.

Chaney edited and approved a letter written by city Public Works Director Les MacDonald that included seven points of comment about the county's LIFT application.

"If we were applying for anything to that effect, I don't know that I would want Whitman County telling me, or telling us, what we should do about it or how we should approach it," Councilman Dan Carscallen said.

The lone point Public Works/Finance Committee members decided to let Chaney send asks Whitman County to use caution if it builds a wastewater treatment facility near Moscow drinking-water wells.

The original letter included information Chaney said needs to be pointed out to the state officials who review LIFT grant applications. For example, the original letter stated that water quality treatment and sanitary sewer booster stations will likely be needed to serve the development area, though they are not on the application's list of infrastructure improvements.

Chaney said Whitman County may have chosen not to include those items, but if they were forgotten it is "a serious oversight."

Chaney also questioned how Whitman County intends to provide water to the development areas outside the Hawkins project. Moscow has agreed to provide water to the county for Hawkins' development only.

The original letter further suggested that elements of Moscow's large scale retail ordinance, known as the big-box ordinance, could be used for projects within the development area.

Chaney said she doesn't demand that Whitman County adopt the whole ordinance. The point is meant to say, "Gee, Whitman County, take it or leave it, but you may not have to reinvent the wheel here."

Other points in the original letter praised parts of Whitman County's application, such as including a frontage road and improvements for bicycle/pedestrian trails.

Carscallen and Councilmen Walter Steed and John Weber said they felt the letter amounted to Moscow getting too involved with Whitman County's project.

Councilman Bill Lambert sent an e-mail to the Public Works/Finance Committee in agreement.

"I also feel strongly that we should not get our staff involved with doing research, writing letters and spending numerous hours on something that quite frankly isn't our business," Lambert wrote. "Our staff as well as our Mayor and Council needs to focus on what's happening here in Moscow."

Carscallen said Moscow shouldn't be offering up the big-box ordinance when "we haven't even gotten to try it yet to see how it's going to work."

Weber said parts of the letter seemed to be offering Whitman County free engineering advice.

MacDonald said it's normal for Palouse counties and cities to share such information. He declined to comment further on why he thinks the points the committee cut should be sent to Whitman County.

"Where I stand is immaterial," he said.

Chaney said Moscow is not stepping on Whitman County's toes because the city was invited to comment.

Whitman County Clerk of the Board Maribeth Becker said the county didn't not specifically solicit comment from Moscow, but sent out a notice of public hearing to many local communities, landowners and businesses asking for comments. The public hearing is scheduled for 10:30 a.m. Monday at the Whitman County Courthouse.

Chaney said she thinks the council members are being "gun shy" because the LIFT grant is related to the Hawkins project.

"I thought it was more about ideology and digging in the heels than it was the words on the page," she said.

Quote of the Day

We all have a responsibility to be environmental stewards. But that stewardship requires that science, not political agendas, drive our public policy.

Co-founder and former leader of Greenpeace Patrick Moore, "Why I Left Greenpeace," Wall Street Journal, April 22, 2008.

Attention Scotty Cornelius, Queen Nancy, and King Solomon....

This column by Moore is a must-read.

"Hawkins planning to break ground; Company to begin work on development as soon as land dries out"

When that first shovel of dirt is turned at the Hawkins development, things will change on the Palouse forever. We will finally break the iron grip of the anti-growthniks.

Hawkins represents all that they despise: "sprawl," big boxes, chain stores, automobile-based development, crass consumerism, and most of all, capitalism and free enterprise. But the leftists in both Pullman and Moscow were infected with Wal-Mart Derangement Syndrome and Hawkins slipped in under the radar. Queen Nancy's single-handed efforts to stop Hawkins were easily undone by a single election.

Now, a shopping devleopment three times the size of a Wal-Mart Supercenter is going in and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. What a great feeling! I only hope I can be there for the groundbreaking.

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Hawkins Companies officials expect to begin moving dirt for its 714,000-square-foot retail development just west of the Idaho border by the start of summer.

"The target is June 1, but if the land dries out it will be before that," company spokesman Jeff DeVoe said. "We've got two years of moving dirt ahead, so we've got to get moving."

A ground-breaking ceremony will take place once construction equipment has arrived on site, but an exact date has not been set, DeVoe said.

Several national retail chains have expressed interest in locating at the shopping center, even in the face of a struggling national economy. However, only one tenant - Lowe's - has formally committed to date.

DeVoe said the company expects the Lowe's store to be open in late summer or early fall 2009.

DeVoe said Hawkins doesn't anticipate any issues arising that could derail the project, considering water has been secured and a deal has been reached with Whitman County to finance public infrastructure for the development.

"At this point I don't think so," DeVoe said. "We are sitting ready to go."

Whitman County Commissioner Michael Largent expressed appreciation for Hawkins and its commitment to locating in the county.

"I am very pleased. This is a culmination of a long process," Largent said. "The Hawkins group and Jeff DeVoe worked very hard to bring this project ahead.

"We are very happy to see the project proceeding."

The county will benefit directly from the development in the form of increased sales and property taxes, and indirectly from other developers planning to follow in Hawkins' footsteps. Largent said Moscow business owner Travis Wambeke - who plans to develop a 15-acre business park on Airport Road - indicated his decision to locate in the Moscow-Pullman corridor was influenced by Hawkins.

"I don't think Hawkins is the end of the story," Largent said. "We are excited about the economic development and other opportunities this will bring."

"IDWR: Intergovermental agreement needed for city to sell water to Hawkins"

Queen Nancy thinks "it'll be time-consuming." Of course she does.

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Moscow and Whitman County will have to enter into an intergovernmental agreement if the city wants to provide water to the Hawkins Companies development.

Moscow City Supervisor Gary Riedner said Idaho Department of Water Resources officials told Moscow leaders last week that such an agreement will be required for the city to move forward with its application to modify Moscow's water service area to serve the Hawkins retail development just across the state line.

The city agreed to make "prompt application" to IDWR in a settlement with Hawkins, reached during closed-door mediation in February.

The process to create the intergovernmental agreement is just beginning, Riedner said. Moscow and Whitman County leaders have not been able to find a suitable date for an initial meeting.

Whitman County Public Works Director Mark Storey said he expects a meeting to occur within the next few weeks. It will then take a month or two for Moscow City Attorney Randy Fife, Whitman County Prosecutor Denis Tracy and other city and county officials to work out the agreement.

"I think the basic agreement's kind of simple," Storey said. "They agree to sell us water and we agree to pay for it, then we pass it on to Hawkins."

Riedner said intergovernmental agreements are fairly commonplace. The city and county already have mutual aid agreements for police and fire services in emergencies, for example.

IDWR Public Information Officer Bob McLaughlin said a 2005 letter to Fife from Deputy Idaho Attorney General Steve Strack explains the need for the intergovernmental agreement.

Strack wrote Idaho cities are authorized to enter joint service agreements "where it is more practical to construct and maintain a unified water or sewage system than for each city to provide separately such services to their respective residents." The municipalities' water rights would be amended to include the joint service area.

Strack wrote that similar agreements across state lines are potentially available under a section of Idaho Code that authorizes Idaho public agencies to "enter into cooperative agreements" with out-of-state public entities. Any agreement to extend services across state lines "would have to be carefully crafted to address issues such as authority to levy and collect taxes and fees."

The letter includes other rules and regulations regarding out-of-state water use and delivering water across state lines.

McLaughlin said he could not comment on the Hawkins situation aside from referring to the Strack letter, which was written in response to a separate inquiry from Fife.

Riedner said at Monday's City Council meeting that the city will see if it can send a letter to IDWR stating the city and county are pursuing the agreement, and move forward with the application while the agreement is being finalized.

The Moscow City Council and Whitman County commissioners will discuss and vote on any agreement publicly. Riedner said Hawkins officials also will review the agreement.

Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney said the city will make an effort to move expediently on the agreement, as stated in the settlement with Hawkins, but it may not be easy.

"I think it'll be time-consuming," she said.

Quote of the Day

We’d like to thank Moscow and Latah County for their wonderful work.

- Whitman County Commissioner Jerry Finch on Moscow’s restrictive business climate, "Business Park zone change gains county okay", Whitman County Gazette, April 3, 2008

Read the whole story below:

Business Park zone change gains county okay

County commissioners Monday gave unanimous approval to Moscow business owner Travis Wambeke’s request for a rezoning of 15 acres near the intersection of Pullman Airport Road and O’Donnell Road, east of the Moscow-Pullman Airport, for a proposed business park.

The land’s designation was changed from agricultural to limited heavy industrial.

Wambeke is planning to site a business park for construction related companies on three five acre parcels. One of those businesses would include Wambeke’s company, Strata Engineering.

“Obviously, I’m very happy Mr. Wambeke has seen fit to want to do things in Whitman County,” said Commissioner Jerry Finch.

Wambeke’s firm provides geotechnical engineering for construction companies. He said the lack of affordable space in Moscow, coupled with a potential boom in construction in the Pullman-Moscow corridor prompted his company to seek the move.

“We see a lot of work coming in the corridor,” said Wambeke. “The city just could not provide us the latitude and opportunity that an open piece of ground provides.”

Wambeke expects construction to begin on his building later this year, with the other lots to be developed as tenants need.

Finch seized the opportunity to take a dig at Moscow’s restrictive business climate. Finch has repeatedly criticized the city of Moscow for attempting to obstruct development in the corridor

“We’d like to thank Moscow and Latah County for their wonderful work,” he chided.

"Legal arguments linger over Hawkins water sale; Lamar questions whether IDWR will approve extension"

I'm glad someone on the Moscow City Council realizes the hypocrisy that was involved with Moscow obtaining a water right to drill a new well while opposing the Hawkins Companies attempting to do the same thing.

From yesterday's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Moscow City Councilman Tom Lamar suspects the Idaho Department of Water Resources may deny the city's application to extend its water service area into Whitman County.

Lamar was the lone council member to vote against accepting Public Works Director Les MacDonald's report about the application at Monday's City Council meeting. The city seeks to provide water for the Hawkins Companies' proposed retail development on the Pullman-Moscow Highway, just across the state line.

"I guess I still haven't acquired any additional comfort in doing that, so I just wanted to state my continued concern for this process," Lamar said.

The city agreed to make "prompt application" to IDWR in a settlement with Hawkins, reached during closed-door mediation in February. MacDonald will send a copy of the application to Hawkins for review before it is sent to IDWR.

City Supervisor Gary Riedner said the city will notify the public when the application is sent to IDWR.

The application requests a modification of the city's service area, which usually is the same as the city's corporate limits. The application states the water will be supplied to Whitman County for use by "a commercial development located immediately adjacent to but outside of the city's corporate limits."

MacDonald said the application would not modify Moscow's water rights in any way other than extending services. It does not ask for additional water rights, surrender any rights or make other changes to current services.

Lamar said after the meeting he has doubts there is room in Idaho law for selling water across state lines. He does not know of any example where it was allowed.

He also is concerned that the request could be seen as water mining, which is illegal in Idaho.

"We're taking water out faster than it's being recharged, and now we're going to sell it as a commodity," he said.

City Attorney Randy Fife said he sees no legal problem with Moscow's request "because the Idaho state code provides a mechanism to deliver water outside of the state, and because IDWR agrees that that is an appropriate mechanism."

Fife said IDWR officials want the city to enter a joint powers agreement with a Washington political entity, likely Whitman County, to extend the water service area.

He said he would prefer the city and county reach an agreement before the application is sent to IDWR.

Mayor Nancy Chaney, who does not support selling water to Hawkins, said there should be more communication between the parties involved in the settlement agreement "to ascertain whether being fast or being thorough is preferable" before the application is submitted.

Councilman Walter Steed reminded the council that Hawkins still would have access to 45 acre-feet of water rights should the application be denied.

"Once this is approved and we are able to physically supply water then they are to abandon those water rights and they will be given back to the state of Washington and not be used," he said.

In other business:

MacDonald reported on the city's preparations for Well No. 10, which is scheduled to be drilled on the west end of A Street in 2009.

The city will apply to IDWR to utilize Well No. 9's existing water right for the new well. The amount of water the city can pump will not be increased, but it will be able to pump from either Well No. 9 or Well No. 10. Riedner said the purpose of Well No. 10 is to provide backup in case Well No. 9 temporarily shuts down.

MacDonald said at an earlier meeting he would prefer to apply for a new water right. Councilman John Weber agreed, and voted against accepting the report on the application.

Weber said after the meeting it seems like a waste of time and money to drill a new well but not obtain a new water right.

Steed and Councilman Wayne Krauss said Moscow should not apply for a new right just after asking Hawkins Companies to relinquish its water rights in exchange for the water sale.

"Walgreens will make home in north Moscow; Motel to come down, drug chain to go up"

More "smart growth" in Moscow. Despite Queen Nancy's objections to chain retail in the corridor ruining our "small town charm," wasting our water, not providing "living wage" jobs, and destroying local businesses that are sustainable and don't "siphon money out of the community," a third major national retailer has located in Moscow on her watch. This time it's Walgreens. Where are the petitions? Where are the angry pony-tailed mobs? The environmentally friendly torches? The non-aggressive pitchforks? Where is the concern for poor locally-owned Hodgin's Drug? Remember B.J., when one store goes in to Moscow, another goes out.

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Moscow is a blip on another corporate radar screen.

Walgreens, the nation's largest drug store chain, is coming to Moscow.

The business will locate at 414 N. Main St. The site was the home of an America's Best Value Inn, formerly the Mark IV Motor Inn.

"We have 24 stores in Idaho now. A year ago we had 20 stores there and two years ago only 17," said Carol Hively, Walgreens corporate spokeswoman. "Our expansion in Idaho has been steady and we're looking for locations in areas where we see increasing demand for prescription drugs, either due to a growing or older population."

The motel closed March 1 and the contents were sold. Demolition will begin soon with the appropriate safety precautions taken during the process.

The new Walgreens will have 14,800 square feet of space and parking for 45 vehicles, including three handicap spaces.

Construction is slated to start after the building permits are issued by the city in a few weeks.

The business is tentatively scheduled to open in the summer of 2009, but "that's just an approximation, so the opening could move up to spring or even back to fall, depending on a number of factors, including weather," Hively said.

Walgreens is a full-line drug store with more than 25,000 items.

The store will feature one-hour and digital photo services and a drive-thru pharmacy window.

Patients will have several options to refill medications including touch-tone service. Touch-tone allows a patient to enter a prescription number and request a time for a refill without having to speak directly to pharmacy staff. Patients may also arrange for automated refills and receive e-mail reminders of refill status.

The cosmetics department will have full-time beauty advisors to help customers.

The Illinois-based Walgreens had $53.8 billion in sales during fiscal year 2007. The company operates more than 6,200 stores throughout the United States and Puerto Rico. On average, a Walgreens store will have $8.9 million in annual sales.

The Moscow store will employ about 25 people

"Hawkins reactions reflect unneighborliness"

Another masterpiece from Michael O'Neal in today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Two weeks ago, I offered some observations about the Moscow City Council's decision to peddle water to a proposed retail development over the state line. I took a tongue-in-cheek view of the kerfuffle based on frenzied reactions to the council's "betrayal" of Moscow and the preposterous notion that the five who voted for the sale should be booted from office.

This week, let me offer some less tongue-in-cheek observations, all admittedly based on utter ignorance of the intricacies of water law, though I suspect those intricacies perplex people who are smarter than I.

In the Bible, God gave humans dominion over the animals by giving us the power to name them. There's a class of amateur geologists in Moscow who seem to believe that if they can name the aquifer we sit on, it belongs to us.

But the water under our feet no more "belongs" to the city of Moscow than does the air surrounding us - as though, if a wind blows through, we have to go to the recorder's office and reassert our ownership rights to the new air. The aquifer, like the air, is an amorphous mass whose boundaries are difficult to define and whose contents alter over time. The water isn't Moscow's water, like a huge bottle of Evian. (Legally, it belongs to Idaho.) Rather, what Moscow owns is the right to pump the water out of the ground and deliver it. When we say we "buy water," that's a bit of a misnomer. We don't buy water, strictly speaking, as much as we buy a pumping and delivery service.

When you get down to it, it's no different from a brothel, where you buy a service, not a product (so I'm told). And as in a brothel, no matter how often you breathlessly pant a name, you don't own anything. Some people, though, think that by selling water over the state line, Moscow and its people are the ones getting screwed and the City Council members are the pimps.

But how so? Presumably, if the retail development goes in - and Moscow has no say in that matter - the developers will obtain the right to use water. They're going to get that water from either Moscow or Pullman. But it's the same aquifer. So what real difference does it make who sells the pumping and delivery service? The answer, I would argue, is simple. None.

What strikes me, though, is a kind of mean-spiritedness, a lack of neighborliness, about many of the reactions to the sale of the service, as though by driving over the state line, you enter an alien land populated by, I don't know, Romulans - or Republicans. But that's absurd. Moscow and Pullman are intimately connected. People who work in Pullman live in Moscow, and vice versa. Shoppers smuggle goods across the state line. The universities cooperate. The economic, social and cultural fortunes of Moscow and Pullman are symbiotically linked, and enhanced. But to read some of the feverish letters to the editor, we should be installing armed border guards.

Here's another way to look at it. Say my neighbor asks for an easement or a lot-line adjustment to access his property from mine. The only alternative for him is to cut in access from elsewhere, with tree cutting, blasting, and disruption to the landscape, all at huge expense. If I can provide that access, and indeed can sell it to my neighbor, it strikes me that refusing to do so is pure cussedness, a kind of me-first attitude that's indecent. At best, it leads to a misallocation of resources.

Similarly, if it would cost the developer piles of cash to dig in water lines from Pullman, but far less to pipe water - and not very much water - a hop, skip, and jump from Moscow, the neighborly thing to do is sell that service. Everyone benefits, including Moscow shoppers, who now maybe won't have to gas up to drive to Spokane or Lewiston, or even over to Bishop Boulevard.

But see, none of this is really about water. It's about development, which threatens the city's regressive "progressives." Development makes the pond bigger. And in a bigger pond, some of the fish start to look like sprats.

"Thompson: City Council did not violate open meeting law

No surprise there. If secret meetings were illegal, then Queen Nancy would be sitting in the Moscow hoosegow for the executive sessions she held in 2006 and 2007 to initiate first a SEPA appeal and later water rights transfers appeals against the Hawkins development.

From yesterday's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Latah County Prosecuting Attorney Bill Thompson has concluded the Moscow City Council did not violate the Idaho open meeting law in its actions involving the Hawkins Companies settlement agreement.

Moscow resident Dennis Baird filed a complaint with Thompson on Feb. 12 alleging the council violated the state's open meeting law Feb. 4. During that meeting, the council and Mayor Nancy Chaney met in executive session to discuss a settlement agreement, drafted during confidential mediation with Hawkins and other entities, that proposed selling water and sewer services to Hawkins' 700,000-square-foot development in Whitman County, just across the state line from Idaho.

Thompson responded to Baird in a letter dated Friday. He concluded that the council legitimately entered executive session based on the law's allowance for meetings "to discuss the legal ramifications of and legal opinions for pending litigation."

Based on discussion during the Feb. 4 meeting, "it appears that the Council and Mayor discussed with their legal counsel the City's legal options in regard to possible settlement of the pending appeals," Thompson wrote.

Thompson stated that the settlement agreement showed the legal matters and the water and sewer deal are "so intimately intertwined" that the sale could legally be discussed during executive session. The council did not vote to approve the settlement agreement until its regular, open meeting.

Thompson also wrote that the council and mayor could have asked for public input before finalizing their decision on the settlement, but "the Idaho Open Meeting law does not mandate that they receive public input; it only requires that their decision be made in public."

"Moscow meetings will face legal review"

As I predicted, an "onslaught of efforts" to overturn the Moscow-Hawkins water deal is underway. Dennis Baird, owner of the W(h)ine Company in Moscow, has asked for legal review of the council's executive sessions with regards to the deal. Five will get you ten, however, that Baird could really give whit about the secret exectutive sessions between Chaney and the previous council that led to the various Moscow appeals that stopped Hawkins.

From today's Lewiston Tribune:

MOSCOW - Downtown businessman Dennis Baird said Thursday he asked for a legal review of circumstances surrounding several city council executive sessions because government secrecy shouldn't be tolerated.

"The results of secrecy in government are almost always awful," said Baird, owner of the Wine Company of Moscow.

Latah County Prosecutor William Thompson Jr. accepted Baird's request and will be reviewing the matter next week. City Attorney Randy Fife, meanwhile, has said the city acted well within Idaho's open meeting law.

The debate swirls around the city council's recent 5-1 decision to provide water and sewer service across the state line for the proposed Hawkins Companies shopping mall. That action stemmed from an initial executive session last year after which the city appealed water rights transfers Hawkins had secured in neighboring Whitman County.

"The process was really terrible; making major substantive decisions on city resources in executive session is simply not a good way to run a government," Baird said.

There was no public discussion prior to the appeals being filed. Nor was there any public input prior to or after another executive session that resulted in a 180-degree turnaround to dismiss the appeals and ultimately offer water and sewer services to Hawkins. What's more, the deal with Hawkins was hammered out during a 22-hour secret mediation session in Spokane.

The city of Moscow issued a release Thursday stating the Washington Pollution Control Hearings Board ordered the dismissal of all water rights challenges on Feb. 13 based on the negotiated settlement agreement.

And it's that process leading to the settlement Baird is challenging.

"It stayed awful from day one to day three," Baird said. "The problem is the process, the secrecy. The second part of the process problem was the rush to approve the secret deal. They could have waited another week."

The city had been taking heat since last summer from Whitman County officials who claimed Moscow overstepped its jurisdiction by filing the water rights appeals. The appeals, said the county's three commissioners, unjustifiably held up construction of the mall.

Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney, who signed the appeals, said they were filed out of concern for the region's groundwater resource. Critics across the border, however, said the legal maneuver was taken mostly to stymie retail development in the Moscow-Pullman corridor.

Baird said he doesn't like the city's decision to extend services across state lines. But he's most concerned about the action stemming from attempts to circumvent Idaho's open meeting law. "There's plenty of blame to pass around," Baird said about city officials who participated, including members of the past and current city councils.

Chaney, Fife and council members said they acted legally. The law allows for executive sessions to "discuss the legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be litigated."

Baird said litigation usually refers to legal actions taken by others against the city, not actions initiated by the city. "Since the city had filed an administrative appeal in the state of Washington, I suppose that could be called litigation," he said. "But the things they discussed went way beyond anything that was subject to litigation, including committing the city's resources outside the state."

Shiny Happy People

According to yesterday's Lewiston Tribune, that could have ben the title of Queen Nancy's "State of the City" address Wednesday in Moscow. Nothing says "economic development" more than a bank teller that knows your name:

Moscow mayor reflects on city's 'evolving vision'
Chaney delivers her annual address to chamber

MOSCOW - Amid lists of accomplishments, goals and challenges, Mayor Nancy Chaney on Wednesday voiced some of the governing philosophy that continues to guide her into the next two years of her four-year term.

"One of the objectives of city government is to put in place the rules, plans and resources necessary to guide a community toward its collective, evolving vision," Chaney told members of the Moscow Chamber of Commerce during her annual State of the City address. "Moscow is doing just that as we revise our guiding document, the comprehensive plan, last drafted in 1999."

Through what she characterized as public outreach on a "grand scale," Chaney said a series of objectives, ranging from preserving small town community character to providing employment opportunities for all residents, has been established as a template for the future.

Chaney has been criticized for attempting to rein in economic development that doesn't fit her vision. She continues to question, for example, retail development across the border in the Moscow-Pullman corridor. Instead, she touts the concept of a "knowledge corridor" geared less to physical development of the eight-mile stretch of highway and more to educational exchange between the University of Idaho here and at Washington State University in Pullman.

The mayor spoke to a crowd of about 75 during a noon luncheon at the University Inn-Best Western.

"The state of a city is undoubtedly reflected in economic statistics, and they are important," Chaney said. "What sustains a community through good times and bad, including economic downturns, are personal connections and place identity."

She listed various price discounts and gestures like bank tellers knowing people by sight as "the stuff of community, and what keeps so many of us ferociously protective of whatever it is that makes Moscow, Moscow."

Chaney said the deaths last year of City Councilor John Dickinson in an automobile mishap and police officer Lee Newbill in a multi-death shooting showed that Moscow is not immune to tragedy, but is filled with "extraordinary support and compassion."

The mayor took office with a city council that leaned toward not only her politics, but her vision. That, according to most observers, changed last November. "Our new city council begins its journey in the midst of the comprehensive plan revision," Chaney said, comparing the route ahead to what Alice took in Lewis Carroll's "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland."

"If, like Alice, we didn't much care where (the city is going), we wouldn't be at this meeting today," said Chaney, "and frankly, probably wouldn't have government or State of the City addresses at all."

But people who live in a community, said Chaney, want and seek order, safety and social structure. And to that end, they create rules, guidelines and government. All of it adds to the complexity and costs of ensuring a community's future, she said. "Because we are Moscow, we endeavor to accomplish those objectives Moscow's way."

"As the nation enters a period of economic downturn, it is especially important to focus on local assets and strengths in our regional economy and ways we can reinvest in Moscow," Chaney said. She listed education, health care and technology as logical areas of focus. The town can be insulated from negative outside economic forces by increased interest in renewable energy, green building and a buy local mentality, Chaney said.

She challenged those attending to make a list of Moscow characteristics that attracted and kept them here. "They are the same things that will attract new businesses, academics and families here," Chaney said. "With active marketing, Moscow is on the path to becoming the model for solid economic development and coveted quality of life."

Chaney solicited questions at the end of her address, but none were asked.

Too bad. I can think of at least a couple.

"Madam Mayor, you mentioned your opposition to retail in the corridor and a 'buy local' mentality. Would you care to square this with the reality that the two largest businesses to open in Moscow during your administration are national retailers Old Navy and Bed, Bath and Beyond, the University of Idaho's negotiations with Home Depot to locate behind the Palouse Mall, and the plans for national chain drugstore Walgreen's and chain restaurant Shari's to open soon in the city?"

"Madam Mayor, one more question. You have focused on what you call the 'sustainable revolution' and developing a so-called 'knowledge ccorridor' of high-tech businesses. But did you realize that the employees of the Alturas Technology Park and their families consume 2.07 times the annual water use of a Wal-Mart Supercenter?"

It Ain't Over 'Til The Hippie Lady Sings

As you may have noticed by letters and stories in the Daily News, the anti-growthniks in Moscow are not going gentle into that good night with regards to the Moscow-Hawkins water deal. Accusations of smoke-filled backroom deals, juicy quid pro quos for Greater Moscow Alliance members, and cries for a recall of city council members have been flying faster than a pair of stretched tights ripping at the Renaissance Festival.

But a more sinister threat is growing behind the scenes. King Solomon, ominously quiet during the drama these past few weeks, is working behind the scenes to thwart the evil plot of the running lap dogs of capitalism.

Exhibit 1: The following e-mail exchange between Solomon and the Deputy Attorney General for the Idaho Department of Water Resources.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rassier, Phil
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 5:58 PM
To: 'Mark Solomon'
Cc: Haynes, Bob; 'rfife@ci.moscow.id.us'
Subject: RE: Moscow out of state sale of water

Mark,

This is a brief informal response to your request for my thoughts on your discussion set out below relating to the authorities under which the City of Moscow could seek authorization to provide water across the Washington state line. Many of the statutes and issues you discuss were addressed in the attached June 16, 2005 letter from Steve Strack of the Idaho Attorney General's Office to Randy Fife.

For the reasons stated in the Strack letter, the provisions of I.C. 50-324 do not provide usable authority for the City of Moscow in the present case. That statute provides authority for a city in Idaho to acquire and operate an out of state private water distribution system in order to supply water to the Idaho city from an out of state source.

The Strack letter also addresses the provisions of I.C. 42-401 governing applications for use of public waters outside the state. While this statute certainly governs applications by persons from outside the state it also governs applications from persons within Idaho who intend to "withdraw water from any surface or underground water source in the state of Idaho and transport it for use outside the state ..." To read the statute otherwise would mean the Legislature intended to withhold from Idaho citizens a benefit required under the Commerce Clause that is being provided to non-citizens. In my view, this would not be a plausable reading of the statute.

I appreciate your inquiry and hope you find this response helpful.

Sincerely,

Phil Rassier

________________________________

Phillip J. Rassier
Deputy Attorney General
Idaho Department of Water Resources
322 East Front Street
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0098
Phone: (208) 287-4808
Fax: (208) 287-6700
Email: phil.rassier@idwr.idaho.gov

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Mark Solomon [mailto:msolomon@uidaho.edu]
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 11:22 AM
To: Rassier, Phil
Subject: Moscow out of state sale of water

Dear Phil,

I am writing you today to seek your assistance in clarifying the statutory authorities under which the City of Moscow may seek IDWR permission to sell water across the Washington state line to a private entity. The city attorney, Randy Fife, and I have discussed this matter and come to diametrically held opinions. In the interest of resolving this issue as expeditiously as possible, informal guidance from IDWR, short of a court's determination, may serve all the interests at hand - especially if provided prior to an actual application from the City of Moscow to IDWR.

I understand from communications received by the City from IDWR that an application might be considered under 42-401 I.C. et seq. There is another statute within Title 50 (Municipal Corporations) that I believe may control in this instance as it is specific to the powers of a city regarding transfer of water across a state line.

50-324. CITIES AUTHORIZED TO JOINTLY PURCHASE OR LEASE, MAINTAIN OR OPERATE A JOINT WATER SYSTEM. All cities of this state are empowered by ordinance to negotiate for and purchase or lease, and to maintain and operate, in cooperation with adjoining cities of states bordering this state, the out of state water distribution system, plant and equipment of privately owned utilities used for the purpose of supplying water to the purchasing or leasing cities from an out of state source; provided, the legislature of the state in which such water distribution system, plant, equipment and supply are located, by enabling legislation, authorizes its cities to join in such purchase or lease, maintenance and operation. The city council of the cities acting jointly under this section shall have authority, by mutual agreement, to exercise jointly all powers granted to each individual city in the purchase or lease, maintenance and operation of a water supply system. (Emphasis added).

Here the state has spoken specifically to the conditions under which cities are authorized to distribute water across the state line. By my understanding of the rules of statutory interpretation, when a statute speaks specifically to a circumstance, it then excludes the extension of the power in question. In other words, by specifically granting cities the power to cooperate with adjoining cities in bordering states, the state excludes the cities' power to cooperate with other entities in the operation of a joint water system across state lines. If my interpretation is correct (and while I've read a lot of law, I am not a lawyer), then deciding how to proceed under 42-401 is a moot point.

If it is not mooted, then consideration of the other statutes is required. It is the City's position that 42-401 provides the authority and permitting process for its sale of water across the state line. A simple reading of the Chapter's title "APPROPRIATIONS FOR USE OUTSIDE STATE" would appear to support that position. However, a plain reading of the statute accompanied by its legislative history indicates that this statute speaks to a set of facts that do not fit the City's circumstances.

42-401 I.C. seems to be intended to address facts similar to those that gave rise to the U.S Supreme Court decision in Sporhase v. Nebraska ex rel Douglas, 458 U.S. 941 (1982) and the subsequent test of New Mexico's statute interpreting that decision in City of El Paso v. Reynolds (El Paso II), 597 F. Supp. 694 (D.N.M. 1984). 41-401 I.C. repeatedly refers to an applicant's use of water in an adjoining state as in Sporhase, not the provision of water by an entity in Idaho to a different entity in another state:(

2) Any person, firm or corporation or any other entity intending to withdraw water from any surface or underground water source in the state of Idaho and transport it for use outside the state or to change the place or purpose of use of a water right from a place in Idaho to a place outside the state shall file with the department of water resources an application for a permit to do so.

(3) In order to approve an application under this chapter, the director must find that the applicant's use of water outside the state.

(7) Upon submittal of the application, the applicant shall designate an agent in the state of Idaho for reception of service of processs.

Taken together the various sections of 42-401 seem to clearly imply that the applicant is an out-of-state entity with a water right in Idaho who intends to use the water outside the state. This interpretation would coincide well with the facts in Sporhase, but not with the intention of the City of Moscow to apply for a permit to sell water across the state line. Even if 42-401 could be read so broadly as to include such a sale, it appears the applicant could not be the City of Moscow but would have to be the out-of-state entity who intends to use the state's water. It is my reading that 42-401 et seq simply does not apply to the situation at hand no matter who is the applicant.

I understand that you would not want to comment on whether a legally viable application will or should be granted, but here, it appears that there is no legal means for the city to obtain the permit they have contracted to request. An informal opinion from you (perhaps to your director that could then be passed on to the city informally?) might save the city a lot of embarrassment, time, money, and public protest. If the City then chose not to file its application, the merits of the question "should the water use be allowed" would never need to be debated and protested in public hearings.

Your thoughts and guidance would be most welcome.

Sincerely,

Mark Solomon
Moscow, ID

Knowledgable observers believe this is just the beginning of an onslaught of efforts to bring pressure upon the Idaho Department of Water Resources and their upcoming decision to approve the water supply agreement.

The 2005 Moscow Water Transfer opinion by Deputy Attorney General Steven W. Strack attached to the e-mail is not promising. Click here to view a copy of this opinion. But that was a past IDWR director's interpretation of Idaho Code. The new IDWR director, Dave Tuthill, interprets the law somewhat more favorably for the extension of water services to occur across state lines. However, this will not stop the Aquinuts from trying to push this as far as they can. The Hawkins cause célèbre, as Gordon Forgey has called it, is still very far from over.

The pro-growth Moscow City Council members, or the "Hawkins 5" as they are being derisively dubbed, are being lambasted publicly in the most concentrated smear campaign we have seen on the Palouse since Jerry Weitz had the temerity to challenge the school levy.

I admit, it is tempting to sit this one out. A business-unfriendly Moscow is very business-friendly to Whitman County and Pullman. And Whitman County is covered with the infrastructure bond and Hawkins still has water rights it can pursue if IDWR doesn't allow Moscow to sell water. Hawkins can still build their mall. Many, including myself, would like to see Whitman County control the water for development in the corridor and not be dependent on Moscow.

BUT WE CANNOT LET THE LEFTISTS WIN THIS ONE!!!!!!! Thw Moscow City Council vote to drop the appeals and agree to sell water and sewer services was a HUGE kick in the teeth to the local socialists. The constant screeching and dramatic rhetoric is evidence of that. But if they manage to stop the water sale to Hawkins, they'll be emboldened to stop every new project by beating down everyone who supports it they way they have this time. And don't forget, there will be other developments in the corridor besides Hawkins. If they win this one, King Solomon and the Knights of the Water Table will oppose every one of them. The Moscow-Hawkins deal has thawed the Cold War between Whitman County and Moscow. It has reestablished relations between our two communities. And this is important. We are a regional economy sharing regional resources. We either work together or fail alone. Plus, as I have stated before, if you believe in preserving the aquifer, Moscow municipal water service will ultimately save more water than the original Hawkins plan for development of new wells.

Someone told me yesterday that, "I attended Mayor Chaney's State of the City address today. The elephant in the room (Hawkins) was never mentioned but many could smell the peanuts...."

What can you do? Consider writing a letter to the editor in support of common sense and the Hawkins-Moscow water deal, whether you are a resident of Pullman, Moscow, Whitman County, or Latah County.

Also, consider sending the Moscow City Council members an e-mail expressing your support:

Bill Lambert
Dan Carscallen
John Weber
Walter Steed
Wayne Krauss

You can also leave a phone message for the council members at (208) 883-7080.

Picking and Choosing

I agree with quite a few of the Moscow-Pullman Daily News editorials. They seem quite reasonable, anyway, compared with what comes from Tribune columnists Tom Henderson and Jim Fisher.

However, when Daily News editor Doug Bauer wrote this in an editorial last Saturday, it caught my eye:

We've already voiced our support for Hawkins' plans to build in the corridor that runs between Pullman and Moscow, and that hasn't wavered.

However, the decision to sell city services should not have been made until the public had a chance to voice its thoughts and concerns.

Understandably, some people are upset they were left out of the process, so much that some have uttered the word no elected official likes to hear - recall.

Uh, excuse me, Doug, but where was the similar editorial regarding Queen Nancy's decisions, after secret executive sessions, to first file a SEPA appeal and then water rights transfer appeals against Hawkins? Did the public not have a right to voice its thoughts and concerns on decisions that cost Moscow taxpayers tens of thousands in legal fees?

And what about the voice of Whitman County citizens, who cannot vote for or against Chaney or the Moscow City Council? Yet Chaney & Company's decisions to oppose Hawkins to the bitter end could have cost Whitman County millions and millions of dollars in tax revenue. Talk about disenfranchisement.

Sorry, this editorial was just pandering to a few loud-mouth Moscow malcontents. You can do better.