Update: Austin Getting Out Of Retail Business

Speaking of the homeless, soon-to-be-single councilman Brewster McCracken is telling folks he has the support to close the controversial Austin City Store, which has lost more than $100,000 during its first year of operations and needs that much more to stay in business, according to the proposed new budget.

McCracken says the store will close by the end of this month, throwing at least two temporary employees who apparently have no family ties to City Manager Toby Futrell out of work. Good thing panhandling is still allowed…

That’s an extra $100,000 McCracken and his colleagues can now give to Tiffany’s to ensure its retail success at the high-end strip center known as the Domain.

Posted on September 7, 2007 – 8:55 am by APR

  1. 7 Responses to “Update: Austin Getting Out Of Retail Business”

  2. Shhhh. Don’t let Lee Leffingwell know there’s extra money available. He might give it to Las Manitas. And then take it away.

    By Willis on Sep 7, 2007

  3. What in the world are you people talking about? Leffingwell never said he would give Las Manitas the loan under those terms. You must be confusing him with McCracken and Kim, who were for it before they were against it (after the fact). Oh but wait, McCracken HAD to be for it or the blessed Marriott wouldn’t get to go there. I forgot that part.

    By BeatrixKiddo on Sep 7, 2007

  4. Dear APR: I think your blog has zing, but I gotta ask - who are you? Please dissuade me of the notion that you are a paid politico, or a candidate, or someone else with equally self-interested motives, so I can enjoy your nastiness without suspecting that you have a hidden agenda… thanks!

    By THT on Sep 7, 2007

  5. Glad you enjoy the blog THT. We’ll keep it zing-ey for ya! Have a great weekend!

    By APR on Sep 7, 2007

  6. Isn’t Leffingwell, not McCracken, the one who now wants to give it to the Domain?

    I’m so confused….

    By Out of the Office on Sep 8, 2007

  7. Out of the Office,
    You must be reading this blog too much. Neither Leffingwell nor McCracken were in office when the Domain deal was inked. But Leffingwell, as a private citizen, spoke in opposition to the subsidy. However it was approved on a 6-1 vote with Daryl Slusher in opposition. But now that the Domain is built it is time to make payments under the agreement signed in 2003. So the question isn’t subsidize or not, but pay up under the existing agreement or not. I have heard of no councilmember willing to break the agreement.

    Confusing enough for ya?

    By BeatrixKiddo on Sep 10, 2007

  8. Leffingwell and the rest of them should rescind this deal. Whether they supported it originally or not is not the issue. The issue is that it is unfair to small businesses that have been here forever and it is especially galling now that the economy is going south.

    By Willis on Sep 10, 2007

Post a Comment