Local Comment

Edmund O. Schweitzer, III

I’ve read the articles in the papers about the economic activity study performed at the University of Idaho and paid for by the Port of Whitman County Commissioners, and would like to share my perspectives on the role the Port has played in our history.

SEL shipped its first products in 1984, from the basement of my home in Pullman. We then bought a small commercial lot in Pullman, and built an 1800 square-foot facility. We soon expanded that facility to a total of 4600 square feet, and, at that point had fully used that lot. It seemed at the time that commercial and industrial real-estate options were pretty limited.

Professor Peterson was quoted this week in the papers as saying: “Up until about 2000, the entire county had a very anti-growth philosophy towards commercial and retail development.”

Zoning restrictions of our county, and to some degree, in the City of Pullman put into place two or three decades before 2000, may have arrested development.

I sometimes liken those zoning restrictions to our local governments having their feet on the brakes.

Washington State University tried to put a foot on the gas by building its Research and Technical Park. Manufacturing within their park was proscribed, however... probably stunting its growth or success. Early on, I asked a representative of WSU’s RTP if I could purchase some land and build a building on it. I was asked how big it would be, and I stated something like 2000 square feet. The representative’s response was no, we want to make a “major statement.”

Another government entity, The Port of Whitman County, then tried. It purchased farm land, and, by working with the City of Pullman, created an Industrial Park. The taxpayers in effect became venture capitalists, taking a risk, establishing an industrial zone in an environment, which according to Professor Peterson was “anti-growth.” Unlike venture capitalists, however, they used tax dollars, not investors’ or their own.

This is another step taken by government to step on the gas, while it still seems to have other feet on the brakes.

It seems to me that it would have been much more efficient if Whitman County and the City of Pullman had liberalized their zoning laws, so that the risks might have been borne by private investors, instead of taxpayers’ resources going to the Port. I truly believe that the private sector is much more efficient in allocating resources, than government. And, property development seems much more a private activity than an issue of state.

Over the years, SEL has purchased about 40 acres from the Port. We also own another 92 acres of property outside but adjacent to the Port. I want to stress that we PURCHASED the property under all of our buildings, except for the land under our two hangars at Pullman-Moscow Regional Airport, where that was unfortunately forbidden.

Thus, none of our facilities sit on Port land, and we believe we paid “fair market value” ..or above...for the Port property. Perhaps the only value apparently added by government was to get farmland rezoned for industrial activity much more easily and quickly than you or I could. If we step back, though, that apparent value is erased once we realize that government was making it difficult in the first place. One foot on the gas, one on the brakes.

In the mid-90’s, we wanted to buy some more Port lots, but the Port told us they would no longer sell us property, only lease it.

A representative of the Port told me, “Ed, you are a victim of your own success.” I was pretty shocked, and started looking for property around here and in surrounding areas.

Meanwhile, I let the Port know that I would still like them to consider selling us property, and was willing to pay them a certain amount per square foot.

The Port did finally change their mind and agreed they could sell property, but it would be at a price about double my offer.

I explained that was way above what we could purchase property for in surrounding areas.

(I do not believe I mentioned to them that there are places that would have GIVEN us property, because I would not accept that kind of “incentive” or government largesse, and did not think it would be right to bargain with something I would never do.) The Port then told us they would have their property appraised.

Some months later, they got their appraisal back and sheepishly told me that their appraisal was lower than my offer, and asked if I’d honor my offer, and I said “yes.”

Professor Peterson’s quote above should remind us that we probably still have work to do, resetting the damage done by decades of “anti-growth” zoning.

I believe, and have stated many times, that we would be wise to liberalize our zoning regulations to a moderate and centrist position. Professor Peterson was also quoted as saying, “Left to its own devices, the regional economy would have developed a retail sector that could have captured that “leakage.”

We need to step back and think a bit before drawing the conclusion that some industrial activity on property rezoned by the Port and sold to private entities might justify government expenditures on infrastructure for a private commercial project or for more Port projects.

Before spending money we don’t have, or increasing taxes for more government projects, I urge our Port and County Commissioners, and our city, to take a good hard look at what it takes for private parties to develop projects, be they retail, industrial, or residential. Maybe all we need to do is get our feet off the gas and the brakes.

(Schweitzer’s comments were included in a letter sent to Whitman County Commissioners and Port of Whitman Commissioners.)