I’ve stayed away from Anchorage Mayor Dan Sullivan’s tennis mess, mostly because I haven’t really kept track from the beginning on what’s going on. And I didn’t keep track from the beginning because I had no idea the tennis courts would actually turn into a big story. Who can blame me?
And part of the reason it’s turned into a big story is that the story continues to change. There appears to be a new wrinkle just about every other day or so, and now, those wrinkles have pitted Sullivan against Alaska state Rep. Bill Stoltze, the powerful co-chair of House Finance. And in the meantime, the person who could perhaps help smooth out the wrinkles is staying mum. Rep. Lindsey Holmes, as she tends to do when she’s facing controversy, has gone radio silent.
Here’s what we know: the Legislature appropriated $37 million of grant money to Anchorage for maintenance on facilities that were built in the 1980s. Sullivan wanted to use some of this money to build tennis courts –anywhere from $4 to $10.5 million — in the Turnagain neighborhood, where Sullivan lives and which is represented by Alaska state Rep. Lindsey Holmes.
From there, things get dicey. Questions still floating around include:
- How much flexibility does the municipality have to spend the money?
- How much are the courts going to cost?
- What did the Anchorage Assembly know about this project and its costs?
- What did the Legislature know when it appropriated the money?
All of these, thanks largely to Sullivan, are moving targets and have been answered in various ways, depending on the audience.
The fourth question is one that has recently caused the most tension. Stoltze said that he worked with Holmes on the tennis court money, and that she told him that the courts wouldn’t cost more than $4 million.
She’s not confirmed or denied this. Instead, Sullivan is doing the talking. He says that’s not true. Stoltze then called Sullivan untrustworthy. In turn Sullivan called Stoltze disingenuous, which is a nice way of calling him a liar.
I know Stoltze a little. Like many of us, he contains multitudes. He’s razor sharp, can be vindictive and tempestuous. But I would never call him a liar. And neither should the mayor of Anchorage, who risks putting his city on the losing end in a battle over funds during next year’s legislative session, say nothing of alienating one of the Valley’s most powerful and popular lawmakers.
According to Holmes’ Facebook page, she is someplace sunny taking pictures of cute raccoons.
Her absence feels familiar. She also stayed low when she changed her party affiliation from Democrat to Republican last year. But that was a different sound of silence. Now, it’s bigger and potentially more destructive.
Holmes doesn’t have a lot to gain from getting in the middle of the mess. On one side, she risks alienating Sullivan and the powerful tennis group who want those courts built, many of whom are her constituents. And there’s Stoltze on the other side, who helped get her a position on House Finance when she switched parties, and appears to have been nothing but gracious to and supportive of her.
But just because it’s not good politics to tell the public what she knows, doesn’t mean that she doesn’t have an obligation to do so. After all, isn’t that what we expect our elected officials to do?
Contact Amanda Coyne at amandamcoyne@yahoo.com
Who is going to pay for the heat and the on-going maintenance if the mayor is allowed to build his neighborhood tennis club.?
Will the assembly have the courage to stand up to the mayor.?
This is sneaky. This is wrong. The mayor isn’t fighting to defend his character because that went out the window long ago.
He may be fighting for his political credibility. That’s my guess anyway.
It is a shame that our mayor has so little political credibility that he has to so absurdly fight to maintain it.
Now he’s running for the number two job in state government. Talk about the “Peter Principle”.
Amanda – in response to your article, you should be aware that Rep. Stolze and I never had a conversation regarding how much of the undesignated grant funds would go to the tennis facility, hence my concern with his remarks that I was somehow deceptive. The Alaska Tennis Association, after gaining the support of the appropriate community councils, made a formal request to the legislature for $7.2 million for Alaska’s first public tennis facility. Of the 38 million grant, only two projects had specific amounts – the museum for $5million and the McDonald Center for $4 million, which was added by Rep. Stolze in the waning hours of the session. The remainder of the grant was to be allocated at the discretion of the municipality. This flexibility was necessary because the exact project amounts had not yet been finalized. For example, in the municipality’s legislative program, we requested $10 million for the Sullivan Arena upgrades but it turns out we will only need $8 million – does that mean we were deceptive as Rep. Stolze stated? Of course not, it just means we now have better numbers – same for all the projects. Again, since Rep. Stolze and I never discussed the cost of the new rec. center, i fail to see how I was ‘deceptive’ and now ‘untrustworthy’. He could have placed a specific amount on that project like he did with the McDonald Center and he did not do so. I will not tolerate anyone, including “one of the Valley’s most popular and influential lawmakers” casting unfounded aspersions on my character. As far as the Assembly’s involvement, numerous non-profits go to Juneau and get funding for municipal facilities without the Assembly – the Nordic Ski Club, the Boys and Girls Club, the Anchorage Parks Foundation, the American Legion Alliance have received millions of dollars in state grants over the last few years for improvement to municipal facilities – none of their projects were in the city’s legislative package that is approved by the Assembly. The Alaska Tennis Association’s project is no different. People are trying to make a distinction solely for political reasons. As for the facility’s proposed location, I don’t care where it is located – our first choice was the South Anchorage Sports Park off of Klatt but the soils were too poor. I will continue to play at the Alaska Club because I play frequently enough and because I want the other amenities for it to be worth the cost. I am fortunate to be able to afford the private club – the public facility is for all the other people in our community, including the vast majority of our high school players, that cannot afford a private club but would like to learn and enjoy the lifetime sport of tennis. Call me if you have any questions. Mayor Dan
With all do respect to Lynn Willis’ thoughtful commentary, I beg to differ with the arguments she espouses and with particular emphasis to her supportive collaboration and invoking Mr. Cole’s article. It appears that both Willis and Cole have at best a limited understanding of the appropriation process, or a selective and somewhat bias perspective. First, Stoltze does NOT write the budget himself. He has to include the wishes and wants of his caucus and other members of the legislature. By selective mention I refer to the complaint of increasing Project 80s funding with limited public process while ignoring other appropriations that are an exponential figure of the increase you complained earlier about with far less public process such as the 12th hour floor amendment adding $30 or $40 million for the Alaska Railroad. In other words, I see your arguments as simplistic, selective and more attuned to character assacination than relevant to the real issues of budgeting and state appropriations. Nonetheless, I respect you for sharing a more informed perspective than many Alaskans take the time to be.
Regardless of the project, I submit that we Alaskans need not accept nor should we tolerate a state budgetary process that allows construction of any new buildings or other significant deviation from the stated intent of a budget line such as “critical and deferred maintenance”. The immediate question should be where else in the state budget did Representative Stolze or other legislator pull this stunt. Remember we have a state budget based on an oil price of $118/ bbl – a price that hasn’t been seen for some time. This means that we are currently in deficit spending because revenues are not going to match budgeted expenditures.
Please read the excellent October 10th Alaska Dispatch Article written by Dermot Cole regarding this situtation. (http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20131010/anchorage-tennis-flap-shows-need-transparent-state-budget)
In his Article Mr. Cole states that: “In any event Stoltze increased the project 80’s number for “critical and deferred maintenance” from $28.3 million to $37 million. Since this took place shortly before adjournment, there was no serious review. Within the text of the backup document, which was not available to the public, was a note that said the tennis courts would be an expansion of the Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena.” Mr. Cole also points out that : ” First many legisaltors who voted for the budget had no inkling that they were funding tennis courts. Second, the public was not provided anything but the line in the bill about maintenance.”
Regardless of the construction project, or the exact number of millions added,, I submit that we Alaskans need not accept nor should we tolerate a state budgetary process that allows construction of any new buildings or other significant deviation from a stated intent such as “critical and deferred maintenance”. The immediate question should be where else in the state budget did Representative Stolze or other legislator pull this stunt. Remember we have a state budget based on an oil price of $118/ bbl – a price that hasn’t been seen for some time. This means that we are currently in deficit spending because revenues are not going to match budgeted expenditures.
Please read the excellent October 10th Alaska Dispatch Article written by Dermot Cole regarding this situation. (http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20131010/anchorage-tennis-flap-shows-need-transparent-state-budget)
In his Article Mr. Cole states that: “In any event Stoltze increased the project 80’s number for “critical and deferred maintenance” from $28.3 million to $37 million. Since this took place shortly before adjournment, there was no serious review. Within the text of the backup document, which was not available to the public, was a note that said the tennis courts would be an expansion of the Dempsey Anderson Ice Arena.” Mr. Cole further states that: ” First many legisaltors who voted for the budget had no inkling that they were funding tennis courts. Second the public was not provided anything but the line in the bill about maintenance.”
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Rep. Stolze and his ilk bear careful watching this next session.
Great column. The Mayor is behaving as a petulant child. I wonder how committed and how much of a fight he would put up if the proposed tennis courts were to be placed in Muldoon instead of close to his home ? I am angry and disappointed in the Mayor’s behavior. I just can’t imagine that Governor Parnel would want him as a running mate.