I could care less. I just want to know what happened so it won’t happen again. But one point that I have not seen anywhere concerning the brochure is the disposition of the RETT money meant to pay for all three phases of Burlington in toto. With all the focus on the botched subsidy, we have taken our eye off the ball of the fundamental purpose of the RETT.

Here’s what I mean:

The Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) was put into place to finance affordable housing in Aspen on a pay-as-you-go basis–not as a funding mechanism for a $75 million bond. By “banking” land for $31 million in the reign of the current Council, the city has completed depleted its money to build–and is actually in a “negative balance” as Steve Barwick said on my show. Furthermore, the City has ALREADY had to borrow money from the Wheeler RETT fund–a whopping $16 million–money they say is a mere accounting nuance.

The upshot: there’s no money to finish Burlingame and the city has to go to the bond market. If voters turn down the bond it’s the end of affordable housing as we know it–a good thing, as far as I’m concerned, until they get their act together.

But here’s the key point: if the bond passes, then voters will be paying for Burlingame by using the RETT to pay off the debt service on the $75 million bond. That’s a complete change from the promise in the brochure to use the RETT to pay for Burlingame in toto over two years!

Say goodbye to pay-as-you-go.

My financial friends say the bond is a good mechanism for the city to build affordable housing and I have no reason to doubt them. But i would NEVER vote to put the power in the hands of the current City Council given its record of Ready! Fire! Aim!

Best, Michael!