RE: Gritman's expansion

["Barbara Richardson" <edc@moscow.com>]

Philip,

The Comprehensive Plan completed prior to the 1999 update does show this
Expansion.  The 1999 Update does not show Gritman expanding over Eight
Street, however, Gritman and many other downtown merchants and property
owners' were never contacted in 1999 to discuss their expansion plans.

Barbara Richardson
-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Cook [mailto:pcook@uidaho.edu]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 1:25 PM
To: vision2020@moscow.com
Subject: 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
> >
>