No Super Wal-Mart

P&Z drafts proposed dark-store ordinance

Commission will forward recommendation to Moscow City Council

By Omie Drawhorn, Daily News staff writer
Friday, October 6, 2006 - Page Updated at 12:23:16 PM

Large retail stores that become abandoned in Moscow may have to submit reuse plans to the city and pay fees at the City Council’s discretion.

The Planning and Zoning Commission recently finalized a “dark-store” ordinance recommendation that will be forwarded to the Moscow City Council for approval. A size-cap recommendation will soon follow and be forwarded to the City Council concurrently.

A Planning and Zoning subcommittee formed in May to draft a version of the dark-store ordinance as a companion to the large-scale retail establishment ordinance passed in February.

The subcommittee presented a draft ordinance to Planning and Zoning in August, and the commission made changes based on recommendations from committee members.

The ordinance approved by Planning and Zoning requires businesses larger than 64,000 square feet that are going “dark” to submit a reuse plan for the facility within 90 days of abandonment. The owner must provide regular updates to the city, and after three years, the City Council can assess fines if it doesn’t think the entity is acting in the best interest of the city.

Dark-store committee member Bill Morscheck encouraged the council to take such an approach as opposed to assuming every entity is in violation.

“My overall objection to the original report was that it makes the assumption that all parties would never invest in our community; it’s like everyone is guilty,” he said. “I think the council needs to make the affirmative decision that they are doing something intentionally that’s not in the best interest of the city.”

Morscheck said although he doesn’t think a dark-store ordinance is that important, the council likely will want to do something.

“The council will make the determination that there has been an abandoned store and make the determination that the abandonment was intentional,” he said.

Art Bettge, Planning and Zoning member and chairman of the subcommittee, said the committee accomplished its goals.

“We weren’t interested in making life difficult for developing or existing businesses,” he said.

Bettge said the committee wanted to prevent situations where businesses would deliberately let their stores go dark and refuse to resell or reuse the building.

“If businesses are legitimately having problems, we want to exempt them from payment through the ordinance,” he said.

If a business does go under, all it has to do is be an active participant and take care of the building until it’s sold or leased, Bettge said.

“All we ask is that they try,” he said.

The only businesses in Moscow large enough to be affected are Wal-Mart and Moscow Building Supply.

Tri-State’s building is 55,000 square feet, but the store could fall under the criteria if the store expands.

Gerard Connelly, owner of Tri-State, said he is philosophically opposed to a dark-store ordinance.

“It is an unwarranted intrusion on private property rights,” he said.

If for some reason his business had to close, he said it would be in his best interest to see the building leased out.

“To have the city intrude on the scenario is unfair and unfortunate,” he said. “I don’t think any building is dark intentionally; the stakeholders are motivated to get the thing leased out and income flow into the building,”

Connelly said even large chain stores are unlikely to let their stores go dark intentionally because many have mortgages to pay.

Wayne Krauss, chairman of the cap-size committee, said the group will have recommendations to present to Planning and Zoning in a few weeks.

Omie Drawhorn can be reached at (208) 882-5561, ext, 234, or by e-mail at odrawhorn@dnews.com.

It might explain why I needed to bring 20 extra folding chairs when I went to these meetings, in order to be able to sit down.

Found on the Wakeup Wal-Mart website:

PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2006 2:54 pm Post subject: moscow, id.

so there is/was a huge debate with the city and walmart. walmart wants to upgrade the walmart into a supercenter, by building a new one. not only this, but only eight miles away in pullman, wa. they are trying to build another supercenter.

so i was an associate with this store during the city council meetings. in morning meetings at work, they discussed how people of the community faught hard at the council meetings to make sure walmart did not win the land to build a bigger store. so what did they do? they offered each associate(+1 or 2 guests) to attend a city council meeting as a group, with members of management. they clearly said it was simply to make numbers for walmart look bigger. to make it look like more people wanted it.
to get people to sign up to go, they bought dinner for anyone who went.
and told us, we didn’t have to vote, or talk, just come and sit down.
hmm. bribe?

in any case i came to work yesterday, having taped a wake up walmart flyer inside of my car, and about two hours before my shift was over, i got called up front, where my store manager, an assistant manager, and the personnel associate, took me outside to my car.
they lectured me for almost an hour, though not really giving any substantial evidence as to why the issues on the flyer were so incorrect.

now i feel that if they valued me as an associate (let alone one that worked at a walmart before, and came back) they would have actually tried to sway the way that i thought about the company, rather than giving me the ultimadum of, take the flyer down and keep working, or keep it up and leave. do they teach store managers exactly what to say in these cases? it sounded more scripted than anything.

i actually respeced the people at this store, more than the ones at the store i worked at in tennessee, and they didn’t treat me disrespectfully, because they always beg you not to quit. but, i just think it’s an amazing move to let an associate go for this reason, instead of changing my mind about the issues i feel are questionable.

Nils Peterson’s remarks at the Yes, Moscow event June 16 at the 1912 Center:

My name is Nils Peterson, I reside at 841 Travois Way. Jerry Schutz, if you are out there, start your stopwatch, I plan to use my full 3 minutes.

Please give a hand to our band, Steptoe
And a hand to Red Door for helping to cater this event.

Now, be sure to fill your glasses, I have some more thank yous, that will end in a toast.

I want to start at the beginning, to PARD, for good advice and helpful head start

Thank you

To the UUCP Social Action Committee, for having a core of concerned people that could bootstrap our efforts, Thank you.

To the NoSuperWalMart Core – for endless meetings and boundless energy and the passion to stick this through, Thank you.

To the 570 who signed a petition to roll back the Comp Plan change – we were not successful with our request, but this put the City on notice we were a powerful force, Thank you.

To those who came up to me, or nodded across a store counter, saying they appreciate what we were doing, even if they could not be more outspoken about it, Thank you.

To the hundreds to who came out to long meetings in overcrowded rooms making the political process work, Thank you.

To the 1000+ on our mailing and email lists who have lent their support in diverse ways, Thank you.

To the donors, including anonymous ones, who made magic happen, Thank you.

To Nathan Alford, for finally taking a position, even if your editors couldn’t ever agree, Thank you.

To the Jerry Schutz and P&Z; Nancy Chaney and City Council for making a public process arena where the citizens could be heard, Thank you.

Nancy, your Community Development Director and Legal Counsel have repeatedly revealed their blatant pro-development bias, and I’d urge you to show them the same door we just showed to WalMart.

To WalMart for understanding Yes Moscow means No SuperWalmart

And finally, To MCA, who set the table, helping to elect the current city government, and forming the backdrop. MCA will be here after NSWM is gone. Join them.

–

Let me offer a toast. To the future of a vibrant Moscow, filled with an interested and interesting citizenry – Yes Moscow.

–

We are not done. There is more to do. We are going to be calling on your help getting Council to pass a size cap on large scale retail and a Dark Store ordinance. Look for P&Z hearings in August and the Council decision in Sept/Oct. A size cap will keep a super store out of our town forever, no more of these fights. A dark store will help prevent a future Tidyman’s or other large empty retail site, leading folks to say we need to pave more fields to have space for retail. We need both ordinances.

We are working on a “How big is too big? game” … Come play it at Market, send your friends to find us and think about the issue, what is too much?

Omie, if you are out there, from now on, can you identify me as Nils Peterson, Moscow resident, rather than a member of NSWM, I’m ready to move on to other things.

I was grinning ear to ear while being interviewed. Now maybe I can get back to timber framing.

Wal-Mart rethinks plans for Moscow

Retailer moving forward with Pullman super center on Bishop Boulevard

By Omie Drawhorn, Daily News staff writer
Published: 06-16-2006

Wal-Mart has shelved plans for a highly debated super center — for the time being.

“We are re-evaluating opportunities for a super center in Moscow,” said Karianne Fallow, spokeswoman for Wal-Mart in Boise. “While we’re fully committed to serving our customers on the Palouse, we can’t continue to delay our relocation plans at this time.”

Wal-Mart’s decision follows the Moscow City Council’s May 15 denial of a rezone application for a 77-acre parcel in east Moscow on South Mountain View Road between the Troy Highway and East Palouse River Drive.

A rezone would have opened the door for the super center and other large-scale retail development.

“We can’t continue to face guessing games with procedure process,” Fallow said of the City Council’s decision. Wal-Mart could have appealed the decision to District Court.

Wal-Mart will continue to operate its store in west Moscow, and plans for the super center on Bishop Boulevard in Pullman are well under way, Fallow said.

She said Wal-Mart continues to view Pullman and Moscow as two distinct markets, and Wal-Mart will keep an eye out for alternative sites in the area.

“There are thousands of supporters in Moscow who want to see a super center,” she said.

When asked if Wal-Mart is viewing the Hawkins Development across the border in Whitman County as an option, Fallow said the company is “still evaluating the opportunities available to us.”

Fallow said she appreciates the strong public involvement at packed City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission public hearings. “Assuming it’s balanced, it’s a very good thing,” she said.

Some people may view Wal-Mart’s decision as a good thing, but they shouldn’t be too quick to celebrate, Fallow said.

“It’s a major loss for the community.”

But Nils Peterson, a member of Moscow No Super Wal-Mart, an advocacy group battling the retail giant, was delighted with the announcement.

“I’m pleased to hear it,” he said. “Continuing sprawl on the east side of Moscow was the wrong way to go.”

The group will celebrate the Moscow City Council’s decision to reject the rezone, and now Wal-Mart’s decision to forego an appeal, tonight at 7 p.m. at the 1912 Center. The public is invited.

Omie Drawhorn can be reached at (208) 882-5561, ext. 234, or by e-mail at odrawhorn@dnews.com.

Maybe from Bentonville its hard to understand the democratic process in action. Even as they go away, they are spinning.

Wal-Mart shelves Moscow super center

By ELAINE WILLIAMS
of the Tribune(published 6/16/06)

Wal-Mart has put plans for a super center in Moscow on the back burner.

Wal-Mart will not pursue a location on the southeast corner of Mountain View Road and Highway 8, east of a former Tidyman’s site and near Eastside Marketplace, said Karianne Fallow, a spokeswoman for Wal-Mart in Boise.

“Wal-Mart has decided to re-evaluate our opportunities for a super center in Moscow,'’ Fallow said in a Thursday announcement.

“While we’re fully committed to continuing to serve our customers on the Palouse, we can’t continue to delay our relocation plans at this time,'’ Fallow said.

Wal-Mart will continue to operate its existing Moscow store, Fallow said.

Wal-Mart will also seek to open a 223,000-square-foot super center on Bishop Boulevard in Pullman, Fallow said.

That project has been appealed by Pullman Alliance for Responsible Development in Whitman County Superior Court.

And Wal-Mart will also look for alternative super center sites in Moscow, Fallow said. “We still continue to view Pullman and Moscow as two very distinct markets.'’

Fallow said Wal-Mart has no plans to build a super center in Lewiston at this time. Rumors about such a store have been circulating in Lewiston for months.

Wal-Mart’s decision is directly related to action taken by the Moscow City Council last month, Fallow said.

The panel rejected a request to rezone 77 acres from agriculture-forestry to motor business, a designation that could have opened the door for a number of big-box retailers on the site.

At the time, the council indicated that a rezone request for a lesser amount of property might be acceptable.

But Wal-Mart isn’t interested in following up, Fallow said. “The city council has continually changed the rules of the game. And creating a guessing game for any kind of development is a very expensive endeavor.'’

First the land needed to be rezoned and then how much needed to be rezoned wasn’t clear, Fallow said.

Then it wasn’t possible for the store plans to be reviewed before the rezone and other parts of the process were settled, Fallow said.

Attempts to reach the city’s elected officials Thursday afternoon by e-mail were not successful. All of them were out of town, most of them attending the Idaho Association of Cities conference in Lewiston.

“We certainly respect the decision Wal-Mart has made,'’ said Bill Belknap, assistant city supervisor. “We wish them the best in their endeavors.'’

Mark Solomon, a coordinator of No Super Wal-Mart, said Moscow already has the services a Wal-Mart would have provided at its own store and in retailers owned by Palouse residents.

“It’s great news that the most predatory retailer on the planet won’t be gaining any larger presence in Moscow,'’ Solomon said.

Solomon’s group already had a party planned for 7 p.m. tonight at the 1912 Center in Moscow to mark the previous zoning decision of the city council. “There will be additional cause to celebrate Moscow’s vitality,'’ Solomon said.

But Fallow said it’s wrong for Moscow residents to view her employer’s decision as a victory. “With a super center comes additional jobs, additional tax revenue. You name it, there are a lot of benefits to having a super center in the city.'’

Solomon disagreed. Wal-Mart jobs replace better paying ones in existing local businesses, Solomon said.

Do the math, don’t let the Chamber spin their data…

East is the wrong direction

Letter to the editor
appearing June 3, 2006

Something was bothering me when I read the April 8 & 9 Daily News article “Survey: Businesses favor controlled growth.” The article stated that “the largest number of respondents (25 percent) said they favor expansion to the east of town.” Well, if you assign 25 percent to each of the other compass directions then, well, you can do the math. So I looked at the Moscow Chamber of Commerce survey. Sure enough, in Question 6, East has 25 percent but there’s seven answers. One answer, “No further development” has 0 percent. But, the answer “Develop ag-industrial areas between downtown and university” has 8 percent and the answer “Concentrate more development in existing retail centers” has 14 percent. When added to the answer west, these answers favor mostly west, for a whopping total of 40 percent. Add the answers north and south to west and 75 percent of the businesses surveyed didn’t choose east. This is from the horse’s mouth.

Now, the Moscow Chamber of Commerce should follow its members wishes and agree with No Super Wal-Mart that east was the wrong direction to “support more development or expand existing retail centers in and around Moscow.”

Steve Streets, Moscow

While urging we not polarize on a few issues when we can cooperate on many, Nathan notes that WalMart won’t be good for his business, because it won’t be good for the local businesses that support him.

COMMENTARY: Let’s maintain our comunity perspective on Wal-Mart debate

By Nathan Alford
Published: 06-03-2006

[View Photo]
Alford
Wal-Mart issues continue to brew in our communities. You haven’t seen an editorial on our opinion page taking a strong stance one way or the other. There’s a reason for that.

Our four-person editorial board doesn’t agree. Like many in our communities, we are evenly divided; some favoring Wal-Mart and others favoring restrictions to varying degrees.

Without consensus or middle ground, a Daily News editorial stance is unlikely. Every editorial published on the opinion page is the by-product of the collaborative editorial board process. If we don’t agree, we don’t write it.

I admit, I’m holding up the editorial process on the Wal-Mart issue. It’s not the first time.

We also differ on issues relating to gay rights, abortion and capital punishment. That’s to be expected on hot-button issues. Wal-Mart is no exception.

I sit precariously perched on the figurative fence with my back toward the pro-Super Wal-Mart camp, my two feet kicking about, poised and ready to leap into the camp favoring across the board big box restrictions.

I’m open about my personal and professional conflicts with the board and now you.

Two Super Wal-Marts in Pullman and Moscow would have a negative net effect on our community newspaper. That’s proven to be the case in smaller communities across the country.

Why?

Two mega Wal-Marts will challenge a large number of smaller businesses in our communities. In turn, the advertising dollars for small business owners, truly providing some of the First Amendment fuel for community newspapers, will shrink.

The result?

Economic hardship for small business and indirectly the community newspaper. Newspapers in Wal-Mart-dominated markets take a hit when it comes to town. Declining advertising dollars means newsrooms often have to cut staff. It’s the number of people working in a newsroom that defines the depth and character of a newspaper.

What does that mean to you, the reader? Potentially, less local reporting and fewer eyes and ears on the streets.

This effect on small market newspapers is an often overlooked secondary effect of the retail giant’s market domination.

That’s the professional conflict of interest.

My personal conflict is based on Wal-Mart’s arguable unfair labor practices, minimal benefits, the potential damage to the intimacy and character of the local business community, and Wal-Mart’s unprecedented and dominant control over suppliers.

Those issues have been well-debated on our opinion page and in coffee shops across the region.

I’m sympathetic to concerns about personal property rights. I also appreciate and respect the laissez faire notion of capitalism and local tax benefits, especially in Pullman.

Our local policy makers are charged with the task of balancing these competing interests, and whether or not a Wal-Mart Supercenter or other comparable big box stores are the right fit for our community. Dark store provisions, square footage caps and zoning restrictions, among others, are the tools at their disposal.

Regardless of the outcome, our communities and newspaper will adapt and thrive. I don’t fall in the doom and gloom camp. I’m confident most of our local businesses - the Daily News included - will get by. We’ll simply have to adapt. Change is an inevitable part of business and growing communities. I accept that.

That doesn’t mean I won’t be disappointed if both of the proposed Super Wal-Marts become reality. And I won’t be surprised if we realize what I predict will be an economic pinch and a homogenization of our retail landscape.

Again, I’ll be disappointed. But there’s a difference between being disappointed and letting animosity blur the line between passion and aggression.

That’s the key.

Divisiveness, passion and emotion sometimes get the best of our communities. Make no mistake, that’s much preferred over indifference. We’ve got the necessary spark and vigor to be great. The potential downside to our emotional investment and vocal participation is the potential for a wall to grow between the different camps.

Regardless of the decision, let’s not let disappointment - on either side of the figurative big box fence - turn into destructive frustration.

Sure, I’m philosophically opposed to consciously sending my dollars to corporations outside our communities. And, I’m proud to say that I’ve never been inside a Wal-Mart.

But I’ll still support the decisions of local officials and appreciate their effort in navigating us through the choppy big box waters.

In the meantime, each of us has the right to have our voices heard. We all have the opportunity to shape the business landscape and character of our communities.

Let’s let the public process work. Let’s offer our input along the way. Let’s respect the efforts of the Pullman Alliance for Responsible Development and Businesses and Residents for Economic Opportunity. Let’s respect the efforts of the Moscow Civic Association and the newest grassroots organization - the Moscow Greater Alliance. That’s part of the process.

Let’s have the debate and accept the results.

But, let’s not be so upset that we create factions and impede the necessary cooperation on the positive efforts, which outnumber the divisive issues 10-to-one.

Shaping the direction of our communities is complex. The discussion I had with fellow editorial board members prior to this column hitting the press further illustrates the point. We debated whether this column indirectly puts the newspaper on one side of the issue or the other. So let’s be clear: the newspaper hasn’t taken a position on the Wal-Mart issue. Nathan Alford has.

All sectors have different opinions for different reasons about Wal-Mart.

I remember outgoing Idaho Speaker of the House Bruce Newcomb, a well-known conservative, outlining to me in a visit at the statehouse how his home town of Burley, Idaho was devastated by a Wal-Mart. He also was concerned about Wal-Mart encouraging employees to apply for state medical benefits. It’s not a politically partisan issue.

Let’s engage each other in a civil manner on Wal-Mart and other contentious issues. And, much like the Daily News editorial board, let’s have a cup of coffee afterward and continue working together based on our strengths, rather than dwelling on our less common differences.

Nathan Alford is editor and publisher of the Daily News. He can be reached at (208) 882-5561, ext. 247, or by e-mail to alford@dnews.com

New plan submitted, no details in this article.

Company submits a new plan for proposed shopping center in corridor

By Ryan Bentley, Daily News staff writer
Published: 05-27-2006

Hawkins Companies submitted a new plan and environmental checklist for its proposed shopping center just west of the Idaho state line.

Whitman County Planner Mark Bordsen received a new State Environmental Policy Act checklist Thursday that included consultant studies on the impact of the development on wetlands and traffic in the proposed construction site.

Hawkins Companies originally submitted an application to Whitman County in January to build a shopping complex along the Pullman-Moscow Highway just west of the state line. The proposed development, at 600,000-square-feet, is seven times as large as the Wheatland Mall in Pullman and about twice the size of the Palouse Mall in Moscow.

Bordsen said he will review Hawkins’ findings next week and decide what precautions Hawkins will have to take to build the shopping center.

“I have to go through the checklist now and look at everything with a fresh mind,” Bordsen said. “The slate is clean.”

Bordsen approved Hawkins Companies’ initial SEPA checklist with some conditions involving a traffic study and protection of wetlands.

The city of Moscow appealed Bordsen’s decision, claiming the Hawkins development would have an adverse effect on the environment, and the city’s police and fire departments would end up responding to emergencies at the center without reaping any of the tax revenue.

Based on the appeal, representatives for Hawkins asked Bordsen to withdraw its request for a conditional use permit in early May.

“I hope Moscow’s concerns are addressed in this new report by the Hawkins group,” said Denis Tracy, Whitman County prosecutor. “They have included quite a bit more info than before, and I believe Moscow’s concerns will be properly addressed.”

Tracy said Whitman County takes its responsibilities as a neighbor to Latah County seriously. He said once Moscow sees the conditions Whitman County plans to present to Hawkins, the city will not need to file another appeal.

Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney hasn’t seen the developer’s new SEPA checklist, but she hopes Whitman County will seriously study the effects of the shopping center.

“Our issue is not about political jurisdiction,” she said. “All are concerned, and the details reach beyond the borders.”

After Bordsen decides what Hawkins needs to do to begin construction, people will have 14 days to file an appeal with Whitman County.

Ryan Bentley can be reached at (208) 882-5561, ext. 237, or by e-mail at rbentley@dnews.com.

Retail ‘leakage’ has Pullman’s attention

By Michelle Dupler, Daily News staff writer
Published: 05-27-2006

Linda Landers was 19 when she moved to Pullman. Discussions about the Palouse Mall had just begun.

Landers thought the mall was a good idea. That idea quickly fizzled when city leaders caved to pressure from a few vocal opponents, and the mall went to Moscow.

Three decades later, residents of Pullman are hungry for more retail.

“They shot themselves in the foot with the Palouse Mall,” Landers said.

Recent studies show Pullman residents spend between $92 million and $100 million in Moscow each year. A report commissioned by Moscow’s No Super Wal-Mart group found Pullman had retail “leakage” in every category but dining out, while Moscow had retail surpluses in all categories.

Some of that leakage will be recaptured if a proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter is built in Pullman, and a 600,000-square-foot shopping center is built along the Pullman-Moscow Highway.

Some Moscow and Latah County residents are worried growth on the Washington side of the state line will come at their expense. There are tax dollars and jobs at stake.

“If anything goes in on the Washington side, it will be detrimental to the Idaho side,” said Steve Fischer, a Deary resident who works in Moscow.

Fischer thinks there are enough stores in the region to support the population’s needs, and further retail growth should be in the nature of small, locally owned stores. He’s worried large stores will be a drain on infrastructure.

“I’m not anti-growth, but I think we should grow within the parameters of our existing services,” Fischer said.

Moscow has been a retail center for the Palouse for years, going back more than 25 years to when the Palouse Mall first was proposed.

Without the mall, Pullman was left a virtual retail desert. The handful of small, niche shops couldn’t meet all of residents’ needs, said April Coggins, co-owner of Pullman Honda.

“Before ShopKo came, you couldn’t buy a pair of women’s socks in this town,” Coggins said.

Even after ShopKo opened in the mid-1990s, many Pullman residents found themselves driving to Moscow to find items they wanted. Those residents now are welcoming the prospect of having more places to shop within Pullman and Whitman County.

“I think we need the competition. We need to be competitive with Moscow,” Landers said.

It isn’t only Moscow that Pullman and Whitman County need to compete with, said Dave Waterstraat, a Whitman County resident and owner of Blue Water Taxi. He drives to Lewiston whenever he needs home repair or building supplies. Having a Lowe’s open in the proposed corridor shopping center, as has been announced by the developer, would save him a lot of miles.

“It would be of great benefit to both communities to have a store closer than Lewiston,” Waterstraat said. “I think the positives of having a store that close outweigh the negatives.”

Among the negatives cited by some Moscow residents include a drain on the region’s diminishing aquifer and on police and fire services from Moscow. Those issues were raised by the city government in an appeal of Whitman County’s decision to approve the shopping center. The appeal was rendered moot when the Boise-based Hawkins Companies withdrew its initial application until it could compile more information about possible environmental impacts.

The developer submitted new plans Thursday.

Raymond Thomson and Mikela French, a pair of law students living in Moscow, are concerned not only about the development’s effect on infrastructure, but that it will draw shoppers away from downtown Moscow. They’re worried businesses will go dark, leaving some residents jobless or with no choice but to work in a large retail store for low wages and no benefits.

“If downtown merchants do well, they’ll be more likely to give good jobs with benefits,” French said. “The larger employers have a bad reputation, a bad history.”

Waterstraat said some people in Whitman County would be happy to have a job at all. He recently hired a new tax driver for his business. The young man had applied at fast food and retail businesses in Pullman but was told there were no jobs.

More retail will bring more jobs, Waterstraat said.

“It may use more resources, but that’s the nature of the beast,” he said.

Robert Greene lives in Pullman and owns BookPeople in Moscow. He suggested communities in Whitman County could be better served by an overhaul of Washington’s laws than bringing in large-scale retail.

“The Washington tax system needs to be examined. The business and occupation tax works against small businesses,” Greene said. “They have a good minimum wage, but that can work against small businesses too.”

He said Pullman should focus its economic development efforts on projects that make Pullman more attractive to visitors, like the downtown Riverwalk, and on improvements at the Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport. He also believes more cooperation is needed between Pullman and Moscow to develop as a region, rather than as competitors.

Pullman is thinking about the region when it works toward commercial expansion, said City Supervisor John Sherman. A wider distribution of retail improves the quality of life in communities throughout the Palouse. It also helps reduce some impacts on infrastructure in cities like Moscow and Pullman if people in outlying towns can shop locally.

“Imagine if everyone in the county had to come into Pullman to buy groceries - the impacts on streets,” Sherman said. “We don’t selfishly want all the retail in Pullman. That wouldn’t be very healthy.”

Michelle Dupler can be reached at (509) 334-6397, ext. 307, or by e-mail at mdupler@dnews.com.

Moving in: Wal-Mart effort puts process in the spotlight

By Omie Drawhorn, Daily News staff writer
Published: 05-27-2006

It could take a year for a large-scale retail development such as a Wal-Mart Supercenter to be approved in Moscow.

And that’s the minimum.

The process developers go through has come into the spotlight over the past year after a series of public meetings and appeals related to Wal-Mart’s application to build a super center on the Thompson property in east Moscow.

The community has at least five opportunities to give input at public hearings throughout the different phases, from the annexation into the city to the conditional use permit process, said Moscow Community Development Director Joel Plaskon.

As different processes are appealed, there are additional opportunities for the public to comment.

Nils Peterson, a Moscow resident active in the Wal-Mart Supercenter debate, said the public process could use some tweaking.

Currently, the initial meetings for a project take place between the developer and city staff. By meeting with community members early in the process, developers could avoid a confrontational setting later on, he said.

“Public process starts behind closed doors; that’s a way to have a combative setting,” Peterson said.

“There is no incentive (for developers) to come and talk with the community in the early stages. We need more conversation and strategizing upfront and a review of the costs and benefits.”

He said a group was hired by the city last fall to help define what residents want and to promote economic and social vitality. NewCities collected public input during three trips to Moscow and was trying to find a way to change the process, but it seems to have disappeared.

Councilwoman Linda Pall said meetings early in the process - either during a Planning and Zoning Commission meeting or in the form of a neighborhood meeting - would be helpful.

“It would be good for everyone in the process to figure out what’s being planned,” she said. “I really hate total surprises.”

The process surrounding the development of the Thompson property began with an uneventful annexation into the city, before anybody knew what might be built on the land.

The annexation was followed by a comprehensive plan map amendment to change the zoning designation to extensive commercial.

The city’s process for development is straightforward. After an annexation and amendment to the comprehensive plan map, the property can be rezoned.

The developer then goes through subdivision preliminary plat and conditional use permit hearings before a building permit can be acquired and construction can begin.

Plaskon said these processes used to be combined, but Mayor Nancy Chaney separated the processes after she took office in January.

“The benefit to combining the processes is that it takes a shorter amount of time,” he said. “It also brings predictability to the process, which is more conducive to development occurring and helps bodies and public talk about developing property.”

Development in Moscow: start to finish

– Annexation and comprehensive plan map change is presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a public hearing and a recommendation.

– Annexation and comprehensive plan map change is considered by the City Council after a public hearing.

– A request to rezone the property is presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission for a public hearing and a recommendation.

– A request to rezone the property is considered by the City Council after a public hearing.

– The City Council reviews and approves subdivision preliminary plats.

– A conditional use permit hearing is conducted by the Board of Adjustment.

– Developer applies for a building permit;city checks plans for compliance.

– The City Council’s decision can be appealed to district court.

Omie Drawhorn can be reached at (208) 882-5561, ext. 234, or by e-mail at odrawhorn@dnews.com.