Spokane/ CDA development discussions

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by Boiseguy

beautiful pictures of a beautiful city.. my sister use to live in spokane a few years ago.. such great architecture and promise... the spokane river and the falls are absolutely stunning...

As for promise, every time I go back home to visit, I always seem to learn about new things in the city or assets that are becoming more popular there. The city has really changed alot for the better over the past 5 years. I have a feeling there is going to be quite the buy local and small business growth there in the coming years.

[Boiseguy]

Originally Posted by urbanlife

As for promise, every time I go back home to visit, I always seem to learn about new things in the city or assets that are becoming more popular there. The city has really changed alot for the better over the past 5 years. I have a feeling there is going to be quite the buy local and small business growth there in the coming years.

I could see that happening as well....they just need to really get more people living downtown

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by Boiseguy

I could see that happening as well....they just need to really get more people living downtown

That will be the tricky part because that will have to happen mostly through new developments which is a costly risk to take and would only make more expensive units available to people that live there....and if you can afford to live in Browne's Addition for $400 or so, chances are one isnt going to pay $1200 in rent.

But the more renovations that happen the better, all along the railroad tracks through downtown, many of those old buildings have been converted into apartments and condos, which is a good move.

The downtown does need a bold and massive move to happen along the parking lots on Main, I have always felt that is what hurts the city the most and could easily change the dynamics of the city having that area built up and flowing with activity.

[Contrarian]

Originally Posted by urbanlife

Well to focus more on you thinking the democrat party is more of a socialist program, which it is not...you dont mind me referring to the republican party as a fascist party?

It would be inaccurate to describe Democrats without qualification as "socialists." Some of them are, many are not. It would also be inaccurate to describe Republicans as "fascists" for the same reason (although I wouldn't much care what you said about either one). But I said nothing about Democrats. I mentioned "leftists," meaning persons who subscribe to and champion political positions characteristic or definitive of "the Left."

Originally Posted by urbanlife

So let me get this straight, you do not support taxes? Because isnt that what taxes are, we give the government money to help pay for programs and needs of the country?

I certainly think that persons who benefit from public programs have an obligation to help pay for them, to the precise extent to which they benefit. E.g., motorists who use public highways cannot legitimately complain about paying fuel taxes; a person who is not burgled because many of the burglars are in prison cannot complain about paying taxes for police, courts, and prisons. But no one has any duty to pay for government programs which they have not requested, do not desire, and from which they receive no benefit.

Countries, BTW, and other defined group entities (societies, communities, cities, species, etc.) do not have "needs," except metaphorically. Any needs (and goals, interests, preferences, tastes) to be found in them will be the needs, interests, etc., of some actual individuals within them, and will differ --- often greatly --- from individual to individual. It is a common fallacy among the Left to refer to such defined, abstract statistical entities as though they are concrete moral agents --- persons --- and impute properties to them which only apply to persons. Often the properties imputed actually apply to very few --- if any --- of the actual persons making up the defined group.

Originally Posted by urbanlife

Also Fortune 500s aside, do you honestly believe Spokane would have the number of businesses that it has without SBA?

It would likely have more --- or, at least, those it had would be more dynamic and profitable, since they were not being dunned to support that particular government boondoggle.

Originally Posted by urbanlife

Or do you prefer the only businesses that should be allowed to do anything are the ones that have money already? Thus meaning the rich get richer while the poorer never gets ahead.

Urban, almost everyone who started any business, including the founders of most of the Fortune 500 companies, were "poor" at the outset. If you lack sufficient capital of your own to launch a business --- as most entrepreneurs do --- you have to obtain it from someone else. At that point you have two options --- you must either convince other private citizens that your business proposal and plan has merit, and induce them to willingly invest their own money in it, or you have to convince a bureaucrat that it does, who will invest, not his own money, but money seized from third parties by force. Which method do you suppose will be more likely to spawn successful businesses?

Originally Posted by urbanlife

So let me get this straight, one can survive and make great pay off of just a high school education because 100 years ago immigrants made it with less...with that analogy, the Mexicans coming to this country must be profiteering hand over fist.

Yes, they are, by comparison to the opportunities open to them at home. That's why they're here. And those who remain and settle, rather than work here a few years and return home, will, in another generation, attain income parity, just like their European predecessors.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by Contrarian

I certainly think that persons who benefit from public programs have an obligation to help pay for them, to the precise extent to which they benefit. E.g., motorists who use public highways cannot legitimately complain about paying fuel taxes; a person who is not burgled because many of the burglars are in prison cannot complain about paying taxes for police, courts, and prisons. But no one has any duty to pay for government programs which they have not requested, do not desire, and from which they receive no benefit.

Countries, BTW, and other defined group entities (societies, communities, cities, species, etc.) do not have "needs," except metaphorically. Any needs (and goals, interests, preferences, tastes) to be found in them will be the needs, interests, etc., of some actual individuals within them, and will differ --- often greatly --- from individual to individual. It is a common fallacy among the Left to refer to such defined, abstract statistical entities as though they are concrete moral agents --- persons --- and impute properties to them which only apply to persons. Often the properties imputed actually apply to very few --- if any --- of the actual persons making up the defined group.

First off, do not assume that it is only the "Left" that are pushing through programs in Capitol Hill that benefit very few people...that is something that knows no political boundary and effects both sides. I do not disagree with you on that, I think there are many things that get pushed through that shouldnt of been allowed in the first place, but often times those things happen to buy people's support....which is a sad fact in politics.

Though I dont wish to break down every program with you that has been passed, I just wish to point out that this is not a "Left" issue like you are claiming....neither party is perfect.

Originally Posted by Contrarian

It would likely have more --- or, at least, those it had would be more dynamic and profitable, since they were not being dunned to support that particular government boondoggle.

Do you have proof of this? An example maybe where a city the same size of Spokane that does not have an SBA? Also, the SBA doesnt just loan money, it also guarantees loans, thus making it easier for someone without a wealthy background to obtain a loan to help start their business. Also, the SBA provides information and classes on how to successfully start a business...I fail to see how that could hurt Spokane...does it bother you that I and millions of others owe the country money for our college loans? Because much like the SBA, FAFSA was designed to help those go to college who do not have the financial backing from their parents....it is the same thing that applies to different fields.

Originally Posted by Contrarian

Urban, almost everyone who started any business, including the founders of most of the Fortune 500 companies, were "poor" at the outset. If you lack sufficient capital of your own to launch a business --- as most entrepreneurs do --- you have to obtain it from someone else. At that point you have two options --- you must either convince other private citizens that your business proposal and plan has merit, and induce them to willingly invest their own money in it, or you have to convince a bureaucrat that it does, who will invest, not his own money, but money seized from third parties by force. Which method do you suppose will be more likely to spawn successful businesses?

I singled this section out to talk about this idea of "force." You make it sound like you are forced to give away your money to help others...I do not recall the government banging on my door to raid my piggy bank. I am well aware that I pay state and federal income taxes that then gets divided up to different programs that use that money to pay for its function...which again, I do not wish to get into that spectrum of programs because for almost all of them, there are reasons why we have them.

But I wished to point out that it is unnecessary to talk about our government as if it were some form of mob, this isnt Iran.

Originally Posted by Contrarian

Yes, they are, by comparison to the opportunities open to them at home. That's why they're here. And those who remain and settle, rather than work here a few years and return home, will, in another generation, attain income parity, just like their European predecessors.

But you fail to point out that we as Americans are in the same situation as we were in the 19th Century...one cannot compare our current time to that time and say it is the same...if it were I should be able to by a loaf of bread for a nickel....and again, early settlers did not need a college education to get ahead then...nowadays a high school diploma is almost completely worthless....which again comes back to the rising costs of tuition.


There are many holes in the claims you are making, but the foundation in which you believe in is fine...I have no issue with someone disagreeing in what I believe in, but I will always be a supporter of helping out our fellow Americans, if that means helping someone be able to start a business, go to college, feed their family...those things are things we as Americans should be willing to help with, so that if there comes a time when I need help, I will know there are others their for me....I look at my college degree I just finished, I could not of done it without the help of FAFSA, and based off of your ideology, that program would not of been there for me if this country was shaped in the way you wish it to be.

[mSeattle]

We might end up with a string of cities in similar size on that side of the state, though Spokane has advantages of a bigger city center and the big river/falls going through it.

[Contrarian]

Rich Hadley, president of Greater Spokane, Inc., the Spokane area's regional chamber of commerce, says that Spokane will have a "full 4-year medical school . . . within five years."

Growing up on a farm in Iowa, I never thought much about rural health care. Dr. Murphy was in the big city of Fredericksburg with a population of 600. When we moved off the farm into town, I dated Dr. Murphy's daughter, Diane. That is as close as I ever got to pursuing a health care career!

There are dozens of small rural towns in Eastern Washington that would love to have a Dr. Murphy, but just can't recruit them to this part of the world. I expect that to change when Spokane has a full four-year medical school that graduates 100 physicians each year - many in family and primary care. There may be a fund developed to support medical students with high education costs in turn for serving in those rural towns in this region.

Yes, we are on that path through a project that involves UW, WSU, and GSI. In September we’ll visit the medical school at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC and their branch campus in Victoria. They are one of the models we are considering. By the end of the 2009 we will have calculated what it will cost to have "our" medical school within five years. Wow!

http://launchpadinw.ning.com/group/h...medical-school

As I mentioned in an earlier post, Spokane already has 3/4 of a medical school.

[grayproduct]

This is precisely the sort of thing that Spokane needs. A mini UW Medical Center type system would do wonders for the already dominant health care sector.

[Smentek]

What is going on down across the street from the Convention Center. It looks like there is some sort of construction about to take place or something.

[Contrarian]

A larger surface parking lot. *Sigh*

[Hub for an Empire]

They bought the block across the street from the Opera House (INB Performing Arts Center) for expansion of the Convention Center.
Sadly, the buildings they tore down were the last remnants of Spokane's Chinatown from the late 1800's/early 1900's!
Let's hope they use the block to it's fulliest advantage, when they do get around using it!

[Smentek]

Mobius lease approved.

Link: Any thoughts?

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/200...deal-approved/

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by Smentek

Mobius lease approved.

Link: Any thoughts?

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/200...deal-approved/

sounds like a good idea, no harm in letting them see if they can do this...besides, this is Spokane, is there anything else the city could or would do with that land any time soon?? My guess is it would sit vacant anyway, so might as well make a buck off of it.

[Contrarian]

I've always seen that site as an optimum spot (former Park Maintenance bldgs) for a permanent flea market/farmer's market.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by Contrarian

I've always seen that site as an optimum spot (former Park Maintenance bldgs) for a permanent flea market/farmer's market.

personally I have always thought the warehouse next to the tracks on E Riverside would make a perfect market building because of its length, which would make it easier to have a line of vendors, plus it is an existing building which would mean it would be much easier to do because no construction of a new building would be needed....plus it could easily tie into the university district plan the city has been wanting to do.

[Contrarian]

That would have been a good site too, Urban. In fact, it was used for that purpose for a couple of years (I happened to be involved with that project). Those bldgs are now scheduled for demolition, however, to make way for the extension of Riverside Ave, which will replace Trent as the major arterial and truck route through the U-district area. Trent will become a campus blvd.

[Dazzeetrader]

Did the Parks Dept really have to lease the rights for 50 years.....I mean 50 years!!!???!!! C'mon. Things do change plenty in 50 years.... and I doubt that the site would have just sat for that long. I've seen a different plan for that 5.7 acres. Somebody DID have something on the boards. Parks Dept made a quick deal when nobody knew enough to offer an alternative idea.

Because the Parks Dept answers to nobody, they were free to quietly proceed with who? Who's going to pay for the lease? Who leased the site and for how much? Who stands behind Mobius...and did they really need all the acreage for...? Has anyone seen a site plan ever? I don't know the answers but Parks needs to be reined in. Change the charter if necessary but somebody needs to bring this group under control and get some accountability. How about the Council? Swim fees anyone?

Did anyone know the proposed sale price last year was $19.5 million? So what would the lease rate be? I don't know but the new lessors snagged a prime piece of land on the edge of that beautiful park. Guess who???

[Dazzeetrader]

"Quick details of the lease include rent of $1 a year in exchange for Mobius building the $29.5 million complex. If Mobius develops commercial structures on the property, the city gets 15 percent. Mobius also has to pay $12,500 a year for parking."

From the "FriendsofFuhrman" blog <---I didn't know there was such a blog.

Seems like Barry Russell wouldn't give up the terms and told the Blog owner to file a FOI but one of the City's lawyers turned it over. I thought the Mobius thing couldn't be supported last time. I wonder what's changed.

It's a lot of money to fund a Children's center. It seems they might have thought of other options for the site.

[FireFighter74]

http://www.mainmarket.coop/6,staytuned

[FireFighter74]

http://www.spokanecity.org/services/...ArticleID=1982