[Vision2020] URA Shananigans

[Tom Hansen]

With this decision, the Moscow URA has self-servingly proclaimed that if locals cannot afford health care, they don't deserve it.

It will be interesting . . . observing, commenting, photographing, and videotaping on this development . . . over the next five or six years . . . or so.

Stay tuned, Moscow, because . . .

"Moscow Cares"
http://www.MoscowCares.com
  
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
  

> On Feb 28, 2015, at 4:47 PM, Rosemary Huskey <donaldrose at cpcinternet.com> wrote:
> 
> I sent the following letter to the Daily News, the Arg, and the LMT.  They may or may not print it but it is my very strong feeling that it is long past time to identify the egregious, self-absorbed jackassery in this community.  From self-educated midwives, to pretentious, self-absorbed committee members the positions they enjoy spill havoc over Moscow and the surrounding area.  I have just plain had it and I hope that at least some of you share my feelings.  There must be more to this story than meets the eye and it is to be hoped that someone far more clever than I with a perceptive understanding of governmental entities can help me (and others) to understand how these kinds of decisions are made and why community and area residents were not part of the process when our money is paying for it.
> Rose Huskey
>  
>  
> Elitist URA
>  
> After attending the very disappointing Moscow Urban Renewal meeting last Thursday, it became clear to me that beneath the fluff of the winning Sangria Restaurant project  lurks an ugly truth about Moscow.  Board members Drown, McGeehan, Bettge and Sullivan are oblivious to the diverse demographics of the communities they pretend to represent. They are the appointed face of elitism and privilege who turn a blind eye to poverty, publicly apparent mental health issues, and culturally marginalized folks.  “Their” Moscow mirrors their own comfy lifestyle, not the struggles which frame the daily lives of so many residents.  Their vote recognizes Moscow citizens who look like the people illustrated in the Sangria proposal; white, privileged, and enjoying the good life.  Board Members Weber and McGraw represented the fiscally responsible and compassionate citizens. They were outvoted.
>  
> Gritman’s community focused proposal included full disclosure. Gritman intended to pay full market price for the land and construction.  They did not ask for a penny from the taxpayers.  Property tax revenue from the Gritman proposal would be $70,000 a year with a completed building in 18 months.  The employees would receive an average salary of $25/hr.  Gritman’s proposal would strengthen the community by promoting equality and access to low cost or free dental, medical, pharmaceutical, and mental health care. 
>  
> In contrast, the Sangria proposal was based on the fulfillment of the owner’s dreams courtesy of the taxpayers.  They provided no documents addressing construction cost or wages. Construction will take at least five years. However, the owners did stress the attractive design features and claimed their establishment would be a magnet for entertainment and downtown living (at taxpayer subsidy).  There will be no parking for restaurant patrons.
>  
> I can’t think of a worse or more insulting way to spend taxpayer’s money.
>  
> Rosemary Huskey
>  
>  
>  
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20150228/6ee081fc/attachment-0001.html>