vision2020
RE: Gritman's expansion
"Barbara Richardson" <edc@moscow.com> said:
>The City's Comprehensive Plan shows Gritman expanding over
Eight Street and Eight Street being vacated.
This statement is false.
Philip Cook
> Gritman cannot afford to build a new hospital in a wheat field ( which would
> serve to create sprawl and have a negative impact on downtown) and if they
> do not expand, eventually, they will no longer be able to meet new hospital
> codes and therefore, close patient rooms and services. If we think that
> Gritman will magically decided to expand by creating skywalks if the
> vacation of Eighth Street is not allowed, we are mistaken. The Board of
> Directors have worked on this expansion for 2 years and have openly talked
> with the media and residents about the expansion. The changing of Lewis and
> Seventh Streets into one-ways is the suggestion of the City of Moscow and
> not Gritman. Therefore, if the major concern is with making those streets
> one-way, this issue should be addressed to City officials.
>
> Barbara Richardson
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Cronin [mailto:jaycron@turbonet.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 11:09 AM
> To: "Vision 2020 (E-mail)" <Vision 2020
> Subject: Gritman's expansion
>
>
> My thanks to Evan Holmes and Dianne French for raising the issue of Gritman
> Medical Center's request to vacate 8th Street between Washington and Main
> Streets in this forum.
>
> As a homeowner in the neighborhood east of the proposed expansion, I am
> concerned about the impact the expansion will have on what is now a nice,
> quiet residential neighborhood. With the opening of the South couplet ,
> getting to my home from the West side of town is already difficult.
> Vacating Eighth Street and changing Seventh and Lewis into into one-way
> streets will further reduce east-west routes and will result in having to
> drive a maze to get to our homes. The best interests of the community is
> not served by isolating the people in this neighborhood from downtown. The
> reality is that when the south couplet opened, the value of Eighth Street
> to the community increased as a east-west route. It seems to me that
> Gritman's did not fully consider the impact to its neighbors with this
> plan. As I understand it, once Eighth Street is vacated, the community
> would have no recourse if the current plan to allow bike and pediastrian
> traffic on Eighth Street is set aside. Finally, I question the wisdom of
> having helicopters landing and taking off downtown. I assume that
> patients are best served by this arrangement but are there safety and noise
> concerns that should be considered? What is the anticipated frequency of
> these flights? What is the risk to patients by using the current heli-pad
> near Tidymans?
>
> Barbara Richardson is amazed that a community which prides itself on fiscal
> responsibility would ask that Gritman spend additional revenue to maintain
> Eighth Street. I am equally amazed that the Moscow and Pullman communities
> could not find a way to consolidate to meet the health care needs of both
> communities. On what basis do we allow ourselves to feel pride in our
> fiscal responsibility when duplication of medical services is allowed at
> the expense of our neighborhoods and communities?
>
> John Cronin
>
> > From: Evan & Nancy Holmes <ncmholmes@moscow.com>
> > To: vision2020@moscow.com
> > Subject: more city business
> > Date: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 12:16 PM
> >
> > 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