Alex quoted a long-time realtor: "If these in fact start hauling 200 some loads, it will have in my opinion a negative impact on property values...As much as half of their value could be lost."
Such losses are just a fraction of the environmental and job-providing tourist industry losses that are anticipated (by everybody except the oil companies and their employees/shareholders). Sweetleaf says: "These shipments affect a wider area than the communities they move through: all Montanans would be impacted by the costs of repairing the inevitable damage to roads and bridges." I add: not only all Montanans, but all Idahoans (I live in Boise) as well. There is no evidence to date that road damage and or local damage due to an accident will be covered at all by the oil companies. In addition, the two states are not charging nearly enough to the oil companies for their use of this route: clearly a backroom sweetheart deal. Worse, holding up use of the road to the extent needed to move these megaloads will adversely impact both resident and all other road users. We must stand up against tunring our states into sacrifice zones for the advantage of billion-dollar oil companies. Those creeps could easdily have afforded to lose a bit of profit and have the megaloads built in Canada. Conoco P. was already moving equipment to Billings via east to west routes in the US!!
This insanity has got to stop. Start yelling at your governors, people! They can reverse these decisions. Bring lawsuits against this egregious misuse of our transportation corridors.
Missoula News/Independent Publishing |
Powered by Foundation