vision2020
RE: more city business
The median age in Moscow and Pullman is 24. However, the median age in
Gritman's Service area is completely different than in the market area.
Comparing apples and oranges seems to happen quite a bit when people take
statements out of context.
Thank You
Barbara Richardson
Latah Economic Development Council
121 Sweet Ave.
Moscow, Idaho 83843
(208) 885-2832
(208) 885-3803 (fax)
edc@moscow.com
www.moscow.com/edc
-----Original Message-----
From: Evan & Nancy Holmes [mailto:ncmholmes@moscow.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 12:16 PM
To: vision2020@moscow.com
Subject: more city business
Dear fellow visionaries;
I have been so pleased to see the recent dialogue about the fire station
and the school bond that I thought you might want to consider another
matter of city business.
Linda Pall's most recent communique about the city didn't mention that the
November 5th City Council meeting was one of the longest in recent history,
ending at about 11:30 P.M., even though discussion of one agenda item was
tabled, remaining agenda items were dropped and an executive session was
postponed. The main cause of this was a public hearing about Gritman's
request that the city vacate one block of 8th street to facilitate
southward expansion of the hospital.
This hearing began with Randy Fife, city attorney, reminding the council
that they would be acting in a legislative capacity for this decision
(rather than quasi-judicial) and thus would not be strictly limited to
considering only that information/evidence presented at the hearing.
Furthermore, the decision to grant a vacation of right-of-way must include
a statement of facts/findings that clearly demonstrate such an action is
in the public interest.
Gritman's CEO Jeff Martin, various members of Gritman's staff or providers
of adjunct services, and Roz Estime, a professional medical planner from
Portland argued convincingly that the decision would benefit Gritman in
many different ways. Barbara Richardson, director of the Latah Economic
Development Council spoke in favor of the vacation because of the economic
activity generated within the community by Gritman. Written or spoken
testimony in favor was given by Paul Kimmel (although I don't remember if
he was speaking for the Chamber of Commerce, the Latah County Board of
Commissioners or as a private individual), U of I President Bob Hoover and
Crites-Moscow. In short, positive testimony was submitted by the usual
suspects and satisfactorily demonstrated that the vacation was in the best
interest of Gritman.
Testimony against was presented by a number of people for a variety of
reasons. Most of this was rebutted in a thorough point-by-point manner by
Jeff Martin or Roz Estime. Information from a traffic study performed at
Gritman's expense was also used in the presentation and rebuttal.
I emerged from all of this feeling certain that the vacation of 8th Street
would be in the best interest of Gritman and would probably do no harm to
the public interest. But demonstrating that something does not jeopardize
the public interest is not the same as proving it to be "in the public
interest".
Gritman has already spent a quarter of a million dollars in this planning
process. It is distressing to me that more effort (a publicity campaign?)
wasn't made to enlist general public support for the proposal before it
reached the formal public hearing plateau. I don't believe that anyone can
speak for the general public interest better than the general public.
Often in local governance throughout our esteemed democracy one only needs
to persuade a handful of voters in order to sway policy, elicit funds or
enact legislation. In this case three votes are required and Gritman seemed
to be focused on the five members of our community that can grant those
three votes.
I think the burden is upon the applicant to bring appropriate evidence to
the decision making body. In this case that would include testimony by
those without conflicted interests that live in the area. Apparently the
only effort of this sort was made by (I think) Diane French who went
door-to-door in the residential area east of the hospital and brought
petitions to the hearing that suggested that the public was ignorant about
or opposed to the application.
Personally, I commend Jeff Martin and Gritman's Board of Directors
(including JoAnn Mack of city council) for their efforts during the past
year to gather public input during this design and planning process.
Simultaneously, I chide them for not bringing as evidence to the public
hearing specific information about 1) the number and frequency of public
meetings they've sponsored, 2) the attendance at those meetings, and 3)
other attempts at outreach and the responses to those attempts.
I would like to see some postings on V2020 to find out what you think of
this application to vacate a block of 8th Street. Before doing so keep in
mind a few additional points:
Gritman employs more people than any other private enterprise in Moscow.
(Although if you consider the Palouse Empire Mall to be one entity, there
are more employees there. However, the total wages paid at Gritman may
exceed those paid to mall employees. Anybody know if this is true?).
Without doubt, a lot (majority?) of the Gritman jobs pay better than the
local average.
Gritman does not pay property taxes. The expansion of Gritman's medical
operations onto adjoining property essentially removes that property from
the tax rolls.
The disruption of traffic flow across Washington on 8th Street may be a
good thing. Without a traffic bypass around Moscow it will become
increasingly competitive and dangerous to drive, walk or bicycle across
Washington Street.
There are aesthetic issues to consider. Large multi-block buildings in
downtown areas contribute to an "urban" ambience which some people find to
be unappealing. (I brought this up at the hearing but the point was quickly
dismissed during rebuttal with a little head shaking, under-the-breath
laughter and "better get with it" commentary). Also, a critical element of
the hospital expansion is the addition of a helipad on the roof. Helicopter
noise may be an aesthetic factor worth considering.
Other options for Gritman expansion that don't require closing 8th Street
would cost significantly more. But I don't know how much more in relation
to their total annual gross dollar intake.
Once the property is given to Gritman there is no control over what they do
with it.
Although they operate as a not-for-profit tax-exempt entity Gritman
continues to amass equity, including real estate. The corporation, though
not making a profit does gain assets. I don't know what happens to the
assets if the corporation is dissolved. It seems likely that somebody would
benefit.
Gritman has been part of Moscow for over a century. A significant portion
(25% or more) of the dollar value of economic activity that occurs in the
downtown region can be attributed to Gritman. It is hard to imagine an
economically viable downtown that does not include Gritman.
When Gritman expanded eight years ago they said the next big thrust would
be to renovate or replace the older parts of the hospital on the same
block.
The proposed expansion would, among other things, increase hospital bed
capacity by 25%, from 40 to 50 beds.
The health care industry does not generally follow the same growth and
recession curves as the economy in general and is certainly more stable
that most other private industries.
At the hearing the hospital's representatives and Barbara Richardson told
us that our population was aging, suggesting a need for expansion of health
care activities. At last night's downtown revitalization meeting the
consultants told us that our population was young (median age of 24).
That's enough. Any questions? Just for once, you pretend to be a member of
city council. Are you in favor of the proposal to vacate 8th Street or are
you against it? Thank you for your time and attention.
- Evan Holmes
Back to TOC