[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index]

RE: DN editorial on corridor

Perhaps the cities of Moscow and Pullman could purchase the development
rights to the land between them and then sell them as they see fit for the
development they would like to see. They would be in a position to control
their own "externalities" and land owners would not be force to forgo the
opportunity cost of undeveloped land. Local tax payers could express their
demand for a particularly type of development through their elected
I could work.
Steve Cooke

-----Original Message-----
From: Priscilla Salant []
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 10:40 AM
Subject: DN editorial on corridor


The Daily News had a good editorial this morning about Whitman County
Commissioners and their vote on permitting a concrete plant in the
Moscow-Pullman corridor.  The paper took the position that the
commissioners are unwilling to take public opinion into account in the
permit decision.

I agree about the importance of public input.  And I dread the day when we
have four or five traffic lights on Highway 270.  Nonetheless, I've always
had a sinking feeling that the Whitman County Commissioners simply have no
other option but development -- WHATEVER they can get -- between Moscow and
Pullman.  Like elected officials in most rural counties, they face
unrelenting fiscal pressure.  Residents want more services but are
unwilling to pay higher taxes.  And there is a very small tax base in a
sparsely developed area like Whitman County.

The Daily News editorial board advocates "quality" development in the
corridor.  But to my knowledge, not a lot of quality developers have
stepped up to the plate.  I once had a pie-in-the-sky idea that the two
land grant universities might help come up with some creative, bold
thinking about how to address the commissioners' dilemma.  Boy, was *I*
dreaming ...

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Priscilla Salant

Back to TOC