Comments on: Burlingame Math http://www.aspenpost.net/2008/07/14/andrews-math-revised/ Think Global : Post Local Thu, 8 Jan 2009 00:29:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: Mitch Mulhall http://www.aspenpost.net/2008/07/14/andrews-math-revised/#comment-54512 Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:40:49 +0000 http://www.aspenpost.net/2008/07/14/andrews-math-revised/#comment-54512 Hmmm... Michael, responsible for an ad? If you'd like to see said ad, <a href="http://www.aspenpost.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/TimesAdHalfBillion.pdf" rel="nofollow">click here</a>. And a column too? See: <a href="http://www.aspenpost.net/2008/03/21/aspen%e2%80%99s-half-a-billion-dollar-housing-scam/" rel="nofollow">Aspen's Half-A-Billion Dollar Housing Scam</a> Cheers, Hmmm...

Michael, responsible for an ad?

If you'd like to see said ad, click here.

And a column too? See:

Aspen's Half-A-Billion Dollar Housing Scam

Cheers,

]]> by: Michael Conniff http://www.aspenpost.net/2008/07/14/andrews-math-revised/#comment-54476 Mon, 14 Jul 2008 21:23:30 +0000 http://www.aspenpost.net/2008/07/14/andrews-math-revised/#comment-54476 Happy to do and will do so at length in the near-future. In brief, the half-billion I mentioned was NOT for Burlingame but for all affordable housing in Aspen. So the City is misquoting me at taxpayer's expense--is that legal? Second, $200 million for affordable housing is a DIRECT QUOTE from the City's long-range plan in 2007. The $200 million is on paper from the City as the amount projected to be spent on affordable housing through 2012--that's $200 million over the next five years. Throw in the bond and realize the city would have to pay debt service on that bond over a period of 30 years at a cost of millions more. Then project beyond five years and the half a billion figure actually seems low, doesn't it? Best, Michael! PS Marilyn: Maybe you should pay attention to what I write a little more closely. I wrote a "Affordable Housing Going Broke" blog long before the Burlingame fireworks. Happy to do and will do so at length in the near-future.

In brief, the half-billion I mentioned was NOT for Burlingame but for all affordable housing in Aspen. So the City is misquoting me at taxpayer's expense--is that legal?

Second, $200 million for affordable housing is a DIRECT QUOTE from the City's long-range plan in 2007. The $200 million is on paper from the City as the amount projected to be spent on affordable housing through 2012--that's $200 million over the next five years.

Throw in the bond and realize the city would have to pay debt service on that bond over a period of 30 years at a cost of millions more.

Then project beyond five years and the half a billion figure actually seems low, doesn't it?

Best, Michael!

PS Marilyn: Maybe you should pay attention to what I write a little more closely. I wrote a "Affordable Housing Going Broke" blog long before the Burlingame fireworks.

]]> by: Marilyn Marks http://www.aspenpost.net/2008/07/14/andrews-math-revised/#comment-54475 Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:54:20 +0000 http://www.aspenpost.net/2008/07/14/andrews-math-revised/#comment-54475 Con Man, We have since learned that YOU were the cause of this bizarre ad! You were the only one on the planet who got it! That's pretty good, to write a column 4 months ago, (which everyone forgot about --sorry, Michael), and the City now considers their NUMBER ONE question! But I think that you should explain this confusion and math anxiety you have caused the citizens of Aspen! Marilyn Con Man,
We have since learned that YOU were the cause of this bizarre ad! You were the only one on the planet who got it!

That's pretty good, to write a column 4 months ago, (which everyone forgot about --sorry, Michael), and the City now considers their NUMBER ONE question!

But I think that you should explain this confusion and math anxiety you have caused the citizens of Aspen!

Marilyn

]]>