December 19, 2006 - 2:56pm | Stags_Leap

the voters

Yep -the voters also rejected bond measures to fix up Clark Middle School and Chester Valley Elementary School, which are both falling apart -placing kids and staff at imminent risk of harm.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 19, 2006 - 1:22pm | Ter_H

There should be a thread on the 4th Avenue Theater

Otherwise it just supports those that say the ADN gives the Mayor a free pass.

I believe that overall our Mayor has done a really good job. Doesn't mean that he is perfect either. The man does work hard and his heart is in the right place. That said, I wish he was a lot more conservative with spending our tax dollars.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 19, 2006 - 1:38pm | Alaska_Politics

4th Ave

Thought I'd missed the opportunity to start a thread on this by not jumping on it over the weekend ...
This may be a stupid question, but what's Wells Fargo get out of participating in the deal?
And will the name of the theater change?
-- Kyle

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 17, 2006 - 2:11pm | leslie

4th Ave Theater

The city used a $250K Grant that had been sitting around for 20 years meant for Historic Preservation. The financy is set so that the taxpayers will not be on the hook if anything goes wrong. The Rasmuson Foundation would be the owners if the ACVB defaults on the loan.
We have so few historic beautiful buildings. Using creative means to keep them seems like a decent idea.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 16, 2006 - 2:48pm | Ter_H

Did Gottstein get a good deal?

Sure seems like it could be too good for Gottstein. He gets to walk away from back-taxes and gets to keep the liquor license. I read that Gottstein will "donate" $600,000 in the deal, but the liquor license alone has to be worth more than that.

Anyone know how much in back-taxes are owed?

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 15, 2006 - 9:35pm | QueenBee

DO NOT GO THERE.

Do not try and say anything bad about the mayor. He has done more for Anchorage, than probably the last 10 mayors combined. Stop your whining. I love how people sit and home and complain, if I made a list of all the great things he has done,
it would take the average person a lifetime to read it.

So I will shut you down everytime.

He loves Anchorage. You can feel it.

QB

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 18, 2006 - 9:16am | tommcgrath

4th Avenue Theater

The “MARK” IS QUAFFING IN A TUXEDO

Lower the “Mark” (to be elected to Mayor) to 45%, gets you to the “Mark.”

Lower the “Mark” (to increase a tax for the museum) to 50% and you get to the “Mark” for increasing our taxes.

Unethical behavior by MUNI employees at the museum gets you to the “Mark” to approve $75,000,000 of that $100,000,000 for the museum expansion. By the narrowest of margins we have a better venue for quaffing in our tuxedoes. And free parking downstairs for those in the know.

A vote for a $93,000,000 gets us a convention center that really costs $113,000,000. Another place for us to quaff in our tuxedoes.
What about that 44 million dollars for a “State” parking garage next door. Free parking after hours for quaffing in our tuxedoes.

The voters said “NO” to the “Mark” on the 4th Avenue theater bond but the “Mark” isn’t high enough for places to quaff in our tuxedoes.

100 million, 200 million, 250 million, whats another 4 when needing better places to quaff in our tuxedoes.

But want to build a ballpark, soccer field, Rec Centers or park your call for a Sea Wolves game. No Way. 6 million for park bonds—No Help—No grand schemes and yes, you have pay to park for that game

Help out a buddy whose family has supported the liberals—only four million dollars—That gets you to the “Mark”

A long promised road for child safety in Spenard—NO—The “Mark” is spending that money for drive by planning

The “Mark” in Anchorage is more facilities for quaffing in a tuxedo

Drive by shootings---please, let’s work on that convention center

40% drop out rate---please, roll up your sleeves and fund that museum

Not enough cops---please, an arts district in Mountain View is a must

Roads not getting built---please, buy me a theater where I can quaff in my tuxedo,

But- dash the thought-quaffing in a tuxedo may not be safe in the future.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 18, 2006 - 10:08am | aktraveller

Wow!

How long did it take you to come up with that diatribe? Seems to me the "Mark" of a good mayor is one who was able to utilize some long forgotten money to save a historical landmark in our town without affecting the tax payers. Seems like a win win situation to me. If you honestly think the Mayor wouldn't have pushed for this if Gottstein wasn't involved you need to step back a bit from the precipice. Conspiracy theories aren't always healthy for the soul. This had nothing to do with helping Gottstein.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 19, 2006 - 2:56pm | rebeccalogan

"Long Forgotten Money"

Slight correction - the $250,000 the muni is using was money that Anchorage Historic Properties returned to the muni after a long, drawn out battle over the funds. It wasn't some long-forgotten money that Mayor Begich just happened to discover. In fact, on January 25th of 2006, Anchorage Historic Properties signed a deal with Gottstein to purchase the theater for 3.1 million and put that very same $250,000 in an escrow account towards the purchase of the theater. Ironically, the people who are being credited with "saving" the theater are the people who, after negotiating a deal with Anchorage Historic Properties for the return of grant funds in July of 2005, went ballistic when the assembly scheduled an assembly worksession on the issue and filed a lawsuit so the assembly couldn't be involved. The result? Instead of the city receiving over $600,000 in funds that could have been used for historic preservation, they receieved just over $300,000! The bigger irony is that most of the people involved with Anchorage Historic Properties were friends and supporters of the mayors - he did not treat them well. That is not the "mark" of a good mayor -

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 16, 2006 - 3:22am | Loquitur

Is this your blog QB?

"Do not try and say anything bad about the mayor"

"Stop your whining"

"So I will shut you down everytime"

Do you have a blog for those that agree with you can visit? Please post a link!

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 18, 2006 - 10:32am | Stags_Leap

bone headed comments

we have a bunch of facists running rampant on this board posting false statements and inaccurate information about the Mayor and deals he may be working on.
I think it just gets your underwear all bunched up thinking that so many people voted to re-elect him this year.

I do think the Mayor is NOT immune to criticism. But please, for the love of God (or Donuts) please try and make true statements. Dragging Mark through the mud of false and inaccurate statements is poor blogsmanship.

Also, if your're tired of gang violence and domestic violence in our community -there are a number of organizations that need your volunteer time. But I'm sure most of you don't have the time to volunteer. But you do seem to have the time to complain and bash.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 18, 2006 - 10:06pm | akallegro

Here is what we do and do not know.

The city all ready spent 1.1 million on this building to install a stage and to supposedly guarantee historical preservation back in the 80's.
Just last April we voted against involvement by a margin of close to 60%
The property was 2 years behind in tax payment with no action taken by the city.
According to the Mayors spokesperson we can all do that and they will not take our property. Any one else want to try it?
The fact that the property was in arrears in tax payments was kept from the public.
The property was and still is not available to look at on the muni website.
Someone was told to remove the listing. Its still private property, who made that decision and why.
We cant see what the city assessed it at.
The fact that the Mayor was using city resources and employees to pursue this was not disclosed.
Robert Gottstein paid 600000 for the property when it was in foreclosure in 1991.
We have no idea if he refinanced and pulled some equity out of it and kept that cash or spent it on something else.
We dont know what he currently owes.

Here is the Math the Mayor has set up for us to accept
.6 million is Gottsteins known purchase price in 1991
3.4 million is the Cities purchase price
2.8 million is Gottsteins profit
.6 million donation Gottstein makes to the City for a write off. Where does he get the .6 if he cant pay his taxes?
There is some mention of .25 million in fees but no mention of who gets that.

If the property was worth .6 million in 1991 at foreclosure, are we to believe that if we waited till it was in foreclosure again that it would go for 3.6 million? Even with asbetos abatement costs of at least 2 million if someone wanted to tear it down?
How much did Joe Fang offer last year?

To make matters worse the city has to increase all of our property taxes to make up for this property being taken off the roles. This even though almost none of us who will pay more in taxes to cover this loss of revenue will ever utilize the theater. It will be used by those rich enough to throw weddings and parties in that type of venue.
Please dont tell me I dont know about the treasure that may have been lost. The joint was not in jeopardy of being torn down, and yeah I have been here since 1959. My parents couldn't afford the 40 cent ticket that the Gottsteins could then and I can't afford to pay for his poor judgements now.
Kyle, where are you on this? Have you been told you cant start a seperate thread by your bosses? The coverage so far by ADN has only been a regurgitation of the press release. For gods sake his name is Begich not Putin.

We said no, the assembly needs to say no.
The Mayor is a Frank.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 16, 2006 - 10:26pm | undeclared

Enough of QB

I agree - I've had enough of Queen Bee.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 16, 2006 - 11:21pm | bobbyc

I CONCUR!!!

I CONCUR!!!

KMA QB

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 15, 2006 - 11:50pm | Gypsyprincess

I like Begich

but I certainly don't think that because he has been a good mayor that he is immune from criticism.
ALL political decisions are subject to criticism. If a politician makes 99 great decisions, and 1 bad decision, do you think that he should not be criticised for the bad decision? Criticism does not, however, have to be mean and nasty.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 15, 2006 - 6:47pm | ducbglk

Longevity Bonus

I do not oppose the Longevity Bonus as long as it is applied fairly-----but choosing to reinstate it to just those who got it before is NOT FAIR. The best program, if we need a Longevity Bonus at all, is to set up a "needs" based program-------I could support that. I have lived in Alaska 52 years and I am well over 65, but I do not 'qualify' for the Longevity Bonus. This is not 'sour grapes' because frankly, I don't need the "States Dole Program" and would not apply for it. Any lawyer out there who would like to do a class action suit?? Where is Ron Zobel when you need him??

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 15, 2006 - 2:35pm | Alaska_Politics

only those

who got it before would get it again...

-- Kyle

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 15, 2006 - 2:51pm | Ter_H

Many thanks.

I'm sure that is the easiest way to do it.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 15, 2006 - 3:09pm | franan

not sure about that

I'm not sure cutting health and social services really has that much impact on the poor. My experience has been that a fair amount of that budget is simply making jobs that tend to benefit those who get the jobs far more than the public they supposedly serve. Regardless - it would be good to cut money for capital projects - we don't seem to be able to keep up on maintenance for what we have now. The worst thing we can do to 'the little people' is to subsidize a false sense of ability to exist in a state that is very difficult to 'subsist' in to begin with.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  December 15, 2006 - 8:17pm | bmcdaniel9

Why not?

Why not subsidize the "little people's" false sense of ability to exist in Alaska since we subsidize corporations' false sense of ability, and at a much higher price, as well?

login or register to post comments | flag this »