September 09, 2007
Sunday PM

Re Ms. McCreary's letter (Tourist Destination & Planning not just Ketchikan):

First, the idea that those with sufficient financial resources could support new entrepreneurs and encourage new business owners is a good one so long as everyone understands and agrees that those with sufficient financial resources are not obligated to do so, and should they do so, it would be out of the kindness of their hearts rather than as some type of quid pro quo for being allowed to rent, sell or lease their real property as they see fit.

Second, I don't find it particularly interesting or even mildly surprising that Juneau is working to limit certain types of businesses within Downtown Juneau. Using data from the 2000 census, the U. S. Census Bureau compiled a list of the 100 counties with the highest per capita income. Juneau was 96th. Ketchikan was not on the list. In addition, we do not know whether the good people of Juneau will accept this restriction on business, and even if they do, frankly, I don't care what they do in Juneau.

Finally, restricting my rights as a property owner in this manner is just plain wrong, dead wrong. The win-win situation Ms. McCreary hopes for is really heads she wins, tails I lose, which is win-win for the initiative sponsors.

Chris Elliott
Ketchikan, AK

Received September 07, 2007 - Published September 09, 2007

About: "Resident since before Statehood; Newtown area property owner"

Related Viewpoint:

Tourist Destination & Planning--not just Ketchikan By Bobbie McCreary Ketchikan, AK

Viewpoints - Opinion Letters:

Webmail Your Opinion Letter to the Editor

SitNews ©2007
Stories In The News
Ketchikan, Alaska