vision2020
Re: Alturas
BJ-You have said it all. Let's give it a rest and dig in to make this
community asset a success.
Doug Whitney
----- Original Message -----
From: B. J. Swanson <bjswan@moscow.com>
To: bill london <bill_london@hotmail.com>
Cc: <vision2020@moscow.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2000 7:04 AM
Subject: RE: Alturas
> Bill,
>
> It appears we have differing views on Alturas. You are certainly entitled
> to your opinion of how the area would have developed without Alturas.
Here
> is my opinion.
>
> I believe Alturas had a great deal to do with resurrecting the Moscow Mall
> and the whole eastern side of Moscow. The Moscow Mall had been in trouble
> from the mid 1980's on, foreclosed several times, for sale for years and
> certainly in a state of decline and disrepair when the Bennett family
> finally bought it in the mid 1990's. It was not like Bennett's bought a
> golden egg; more like a white elephant that required a great deal of risk,
> work and investment to succeed. Without some kind of economic
stimulation,
> I strongly believe the east side of town along Highway 8 would be either a
> slum or the Motor Business zoning would have attracted more fast food,
> c-stores, car repair places, etc. These Motor Businesses would be paying
> taxes but probably not nearly as much or provide as many living wage jobs
> like Alturas is doing now.
>
> The Economic Development Council tried for years to entice private
> landowners or developers to do an Alturas. It was not our first choice to
> use Urban Renewal or Tax Increment Financing to create an Alturas. The
EDC
> would have preferred a private investor step forth to do an Alturas. But
> after months of negotiating with private landowners, it was obvious that a
> private development would never occur because of the time needed to
realize
> a return on investment. The private investor would not receive any of the
> long term tax benefits that a public project would. And while this
> negotiating was going on, Moscow lost Advanced Hardware Architectures and
> 50+ jobs to Pullman who offered over $250,000 in incentives to relocate
and
> low cost rent in a taxpayer subsidized Port District. The only thing we
> could offer in defense to Pullman and Washington's lucrative incentives
were
> Urban Renewal and Tax Increment Financing. Complicated; Yes. Illegal;
No.
> Taxpayer subsidized; Not if you look at the broader picture and realize
the
> economic advantage of living wage jobs now and a high return on investment
> to the public later when the infrastructure loans are paid. Shady and
> under-handed; No. Four years ago there were a great number of open public
> meetings, hearings and planning sessions to create the Urban Renewal
Agency,
> Urban Renewal District and implement Tax Increment Financing. If you
chose
> not to attend, give input or become informed, it is unfair to call it
shady
> and under-handed now.
>
> It is true that the taxes on Wingers and KFC are going to payoff the
Alturas
> bonds. However, I can verify that Wingers and KFC would not be at
Eastside
> without the economic activity going on in the Urban Renewal District, ie
> Alturas. The Urban Renewal District boundaries were drawn to allow
> sufficient tax payments to payoff the loans in a reasonable time frame so
> that the increased taxes will go to the proper taxing districts as soon as
> possible. The URA district was drawn after much discussion and compromise
> about payback times, related economic growth expected, etc.
>
> Neither of us can know for sure how many of those 47 jobs would have
stayed
> in Moscow. You must think they all would have stayed. I don't think so.
> Not with the incentives neighboring Washington can freely offer. John
> Walker would still be in Moscow but not in Downtown Moscow. He was not
> RECRUITED into Alturas. He was looking for a place to build a new office
> with room to expand and with adequate parking, ie, outside of downtown.
> There were lots available in Alturas and the zoning allowed his type of
> business. The reason the zone is called Research, Technology, OFFICE is
> that in all reality, research and technology based business also need
> support type businesses, ie, attorneys, accountants, financial, etc.
Please
> ask the other businesses in Alturas and most will tell you how much they
> appreciate John Walker's presence and his help in recruiting other
> businesses, contracts, tenant agreements, etc. This is an excellent
example
> of how RTO zoning is supposed to work with businesses supporting each
other.
>
> Anatek was bursting at the seems in their previous location near Columbia
> Tractor. They needed room to grow. They have another lab in Spokane and
> strongly considered moving the Moscow operation there. Without Alturas,
> they would be in Spokane now with their 10+ jobs and plans for further
> expansion. You may ideally think that businesses like Anatek and Pacific
> Simulation could relocate in the downtown area. However, both will tell
you
> they needed room to expand, parking, sophisticated wiring for computer
> systems, etc. Please tell me there is some well-kept secret in downtown
> Moscow that can offer this, complete with a cooperative landlord. Perhaps
> the URA should look at the downtown area next.
>
> I am dismayed that there seems to be continual misinformation and
negativism
> spread about Alturas. If you are concerned about tax collections, then be
> positive and promote Alturas so that more research-technology businesses
> will relocate there, payoff the bonds faster and tax revenues will flow
into
> the coffers quicker. Those $45,000 a year jobs DO contribute to the
> community now and support other jobs. Businesses do not want to relocate
> into controversy. As a community, do we want to move forward, be
> progressive and self-sustaining or keep bickering, stagnate and turn into
a
> slum with no activity and high unemployment?
>
> Can we give this a rest now? We've aired both sides of Alturas over and
> over. Alturas is there. Let's not kill it or continue the bickering and
> discourage other businesses from relocating there; giving our community a
> bad name. Please become involved up front in the next URA project or any
> other community project so that your input and ideas can be relevant and
> helpful instead of negative after the fact.
>
> B. J. Swanson
>
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bill london [mailto:bill_london@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 4:25 PM
> To: bjswan@moscow.com; escape@alt-escape.com; vision2020@moscow.com
> Subject: RE: Alturas
>
>
> BJ-
> Sorry, but I think you are offering a pair of false dichotomies here.
>
> 1. No, I do not prefer the old 18% occupied Moscow Mall. But I do
honestly
> believe that the development of Alturas has virtually nothing to do with
the
> resurrection of the mall.
> The only impact I see is that the new businesses at the mall (Wingers,
KFC,
> etc) are not currently paying their full tax load to the city but are
> helping pay off the Alturas bonds.
>
> 2. No, I am glad that the 47 jobs are here in Moscow. Without Alturas,
how
> many of those 47 jobs would be in Moscow? The attorney's office would
have
> stayed downtown. Perhaps Anatek would have stayed at their place on Main
> Street or at some other location in Moscow. Perhaps PacSim would have
moved
> to some other town--or maybe like First Step, it would have gone downtown,
> too. We won't know. But I do think it is not correct to assume that
those
> famous 47 jobs would not be in Moscow without Alturas.
>
> BL
> ---------------
>
> >From: "B. J. Swanson" <bjswan@moscow.com>
> >Reply-To: <bjswan@moscow.com>
> >To: "Bob Hoffmann" <escape@alt-escape.com>, <vision2020@moscow.com>
> >Subject: RE: Alturas
> >Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 16:11:18 -0700
> >
> >Bob & Bill,
> >
> >Would you prefer that we still have the old foreclosed Moscow Mall that
was
> >less than 18% occupied? It would probably be a real slum area by now.
And
> >would you prefer that the community be without the 47 jobs in Alturas
that
> >pump $2 million annually into our economy?
> >
> >B. J. Swanson
> >
> >---------------------
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Bob Hoffmann [mailto:escape@alt-escape.com]
> >Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 3:39 PM
> >To: vision2020@moscow.com
> >Subject: Alturas
> >
> >
> >[do not forward]
> >
> >Bill,
> >
> >One juicy detail that I forgot to mention:
> >
> >Shelley Bennett (formerly of the LEDC) spoke. She said that when looking
> >for a location, and the issue of the Troy Highway area came up, she was
> >quite enthusiastic, because her family had just bought the mall across
the
> >street, and what a great selling point that would be for filling the mall
> >vacancies.
> >
> >I was astounded that she was speaking in public about how her influence
> >over a decision involving public funds could result in substantial
> >financial gain for her family. She must have felt really comfortable
with
> >her audience.
> >
> >According to the agenda, the man in charge of questions and answers was
> >Rich Levengood, Latah Economic Development Council, Alturas Outsider
> >Extraordinaire. Question & Answer period did spill over about an extra
15
> >minutes, although Ken Medlin took up most of that. Aside from Ken's
> >questions/comments, there was only one other written question that was
> >submitted.
> >
> >Bob Hoffmann
> >229 East C St., Suite B
> >Moscow, ID 83843 USA
> >Phone: (208) 883-0642
> >Fax: 1-800-683-3799
> >http://www.alt-escape.com
> >
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>
Back to TOC