I Am So Popular: Open Letter To Jody Denberg
The Last Waltz Done Live At Club Deville
Review: The Cherry Orchard at The Blue Theater
EAST Interview: Beth Hempton of The WonderCraft
EAST Interview: Nick Henning at Pump Project
In the latest twist to the Las Manitas debacle, Lidia and Cynthia Perez have rejected the proposed $750,000 forgivable loan from the city. The financial reasons they provided seem pretextual - even with the strings added by the city after the proposal was passed by city council, the loan was still a bargain from a financial perspective. The first reason sounds more legitimate: "This loan has become way too complicated and caught up in controversy, politics and misunderstandings."
This portion of the program appears to be over, but plenty of action remains. Will Las Manitas relocate on Congress Avenue? Will the Perez Sisters consent to Marriott's encroachment on the alley? Will the proposed Marriott monstrosity be built? Stay tuned for the next episode of Las Manitas' Guerree Con el Monstruo!
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
you could have read it here first: http://www.austinpoliticalreport.com
they have the union chief's resignation letter now too...
Props to the Perez sisters for reading the tea leaves & folding their tents. This was a classic lose-lose situation, from a PR perspective.
Just another case of Toby Futrell rewarding her pals with sweetheart deals (& thank goodness that Napoleon Bonaparte-in-heels is also leaving).
We shall never know (unless Dick Chaney takes an interest and water boards them after injecting them with sodium pentothal) what the sister’s motivation was, but I give them credit for eventually doing the right thing, especially after the memo from the City’s Small Business Loan Program came to light via the AAS.
FYI Kenneth1
I worked at City Hall for 2 years and I had several conversations with Toby Futrell at the elevators to the parking garage. I was a "temp" and she had approved my hiring during the last hiring freeze in 2003. While you can fault her for the decisions she has made, she is one of few top bosses at any place (dozens over 35 years) who would stop in her tracks to talk to an employee, much less the lowest man on the corporate totem pole.
Plus, she is 5'7" in flats. Hardly Napoleonic.
The news here is how MCCRACKEN voted FOR this loan and now badmouths it. He is the Spineless Wonder!!
Conan,
Thanks for the inside perspective on Toby. I worked with her on getting Austin's first public skatepark built in Mabel Davis and found her to be effective and accessible. Austin's skateboarders, who had been waiting for a very long time for a free, public skatepark, owe many thanks to Toby Futrell.
Seth
McCracken was bad-mouthing the loan within days of the final vote (i.e., blaming the sisters for holding the city hostage). That's not news.
My guess is that the sisters finally realized that they were buying a whole lot more than $750k worth of ill will in taking the loan.
Why do I have the feeling the sisters are going to try and get even more? I do not trust them at all...I live downtown and stopped going there to eat when this whole controversy started. Even if they aren't trying to pull a fast one, I will never eat there again, and I know several other downtown residents that used to be regulars that say the exact same thing.
Is pretextual a word?
"Why do I have the feeling the sisters are going to try and get even more?"
Because you have trust issues left over from childhood? Mommy really should have stayed at home instead of dropping you off at daycare.
"I do not trust them at all..."
...And I rest my case.
"I live downtown and stopped going there to eat when this whole controversy started."
And what a giant dent in business you've made, California coondo dweller! If you did decide to go to Las Mans, you'd see that there's just as many people there as before the controversy.
"Even if they aren't trying to pull a fast one, I will never eat there again, and I know several other downtown residents that used to be regulars that say the exact same thing."
As a Ghettos of North Austin resident I will continue to eat at Las Manitas when I go to work downtown because the food is GOOD and it is INEXPENSIVE and it is FAST.
I just hope they stall out the Marriot. Though I did notice in the Austonian brochure (I think it was the Austonian) that they show their condos looking down on Las Manitas so having a giant hotel there would be fun in a sick way since that's not the view I think the Austonians are going for.
"Will Las Manitas will relocate on Congress Avenue? Will the Perez Sisters will consent to Marriott's encroachment on the alley? Will the proposed Marriott monstrosity will be built?"
Is it just will me, or is there will something funny about these will sentences?
This is well-played brinksmanship on the part of the Perez Sisters. Marriott needs the alley the sisters own in order to build. Las Manitas is destined to close, very soon. It's mutually assured destruction for both parties.
It'll be sad to see L.M. go, but at least the damn hotel won't be built.
Which reminds me: I need to get down there for one last round of their Enchiladas Jalapeños. If you haven't had them, you haven't lived. Get the chicken.
... downtown residents that used to be regulars ...
Say what? Downtown residents are all newcomers. How could they have been regulars?
Guest 11 - thanks for the proofreading. I re-wrote the second paragraph this morning to make it sound like the end of an old Batman episode or a telenovela, but didn't do a thorough job. Fixed now.
Guest 8 - pretextual is a word, although I guess it isn't in many dictionaries. It is the adjective form of "pretext."
OBVIOUSLY that person was talking baout Luci Baines Johnson, Dan Rather, Bettie Naylor and Rick Perry.
Do any of you actually know why they are not taking the loan? And secondly, for all those people who said it was a sweetheart deal, blah, blah, blah; you do realize that any business in the area can get that too right. It's the provisions of the loan that the Perez Sisters couldn't agree to. Any other business downtown can get that loan too, they just need to sign those papers saying they will not close or sell for the next 20 years or they are responsible for the whole loan, just like the Perez sisters would've had to.
How do you figure Las Manitas is destined to close?
How do you figure that no one who lives downtown could have been a regular at Las Manitas?
Last time I checked, the Railyard was apartments (and now condos) for 20 or so years. The Brazos, Avenue, and Brown lofts all opened long enough ago to have "regulars". And how long have those towers on the lake been around? Or the tree house looking place at the end of Red River (by the lake as well)? Or the Penthouse Condos?
All those places are well within walking distance and have been populated with people for 5, 10, or 20 years at this point. And, I doubt the vast majority of those people are Californians. Myself included.
You probably don't work in a condo office, buddy.
Even if the alley isn't vacated, the hotel can be built. Don't count on that being an insurmountable obstacle.
Those sisters wanted to take our money and run. They aren't "doing the right thing." The pressure and attention got to be too much so they bailed. Not to mention the stipulations that were being put in place. A lot of people do a lot of good things, doesn't mean that our tax dollars should go to bail them out for bad business decisions or tough breaks.
"You probably don't work in a condo office, buddy" ?
What does that mean?
Scooby, I would actually like the Marriott project a lot more if it were built with the alley in place. I still expect it would be a cheap, boring, poorly-designed and poorly-constructed building that would add little to the downtown community, but if the alley were left in place at least it would be less destructive to the urban fabric and walkability of those blocks. It would probably also do a lot to improve the design. The one building trying to look like multiple buildings approach is generally an aesthetic tragedy.
I really don't understand the hostility towards the Perez sisters. Sprawl developers are given millions of dollars in incentive packages all the time, and most people (myself excluded) don't get excited, but when the city tries to give two minority women the money they need to keep their small business downtown, people go nuts. I think the Perez sisters are good people that discovered that they don't have the callous self-righteousness it takes for well-off people to take government money (unlike, for example, highway construction companies, sprawl developers, student loan companies, etc.).
Guest 17 - Las Manitas may or may not close, but they are getting booted from their current location and it is going to cost them a lot of money to retro-fit their other building to move Las Manitas there. If they are looking at this from a purely financial perspective, which they obviously are not, the right move would be to shut it down now that they are not taking the city's money.
shilli, many of us are consistent in disliking sprawl subsidies MORE than the few cases of urban subsidies - but in this case, it was a particularly stupid urban subsidy to boot (dumber even than the Domain subsidies, for instance). No public good is served by donating money to a private business owned by people who already have enough money to hold on to a downtown building, for christ's sake. Self-identified libertarians throw around the term "rent-seeking" way too much, but in this case it actually fits - they assert some sort of right to be there based on, what, exactly? The fact that councilmembers like to eat there, because when downtown was dead, it was one of the few options?
This is pretty simple, really.
White needs the alley. They will end up paying the $750,000 for it, but it won't be a loan with a lot of restrictions. It will be by purchase.
And there's not a damn thing wrong with that.
MDahmus, I agree that this is an example of rent-seeking, it just bugs me much less than most other rent-seeking because I like the restaurant, would like to see it stay downtown, and believe that it may not stay downtown without this money. I don't think this loan was particularly good policy (I would rather the city cut real estate taxes on all ground-floor retail property downtown), it just doesn't bother me as much as the government giving money to people to do things that I actively disagree with (like sprawl developers). I don't think they have a right to be there, but I do want them to be there and think it is beneficial to the city to have them and other businesses like them downtown. Given that, I like to see the city implementing policies to encourage downtown retail business. This was a ham-fisted attempt, but I think CC's heart was in the right place.
I've lived downtown within walking distance of Las Manitas for 10 years, and I'm from Austin, so I don't get the California condo dweller comment. Most people I know that live downtown now moved there from other parts of Austin.
As for Las Manitas, the food isn't even very good.
I have noticed business seems to be down over the last few months during the weekend when I go by. There used to be long waits for a table and now there tends to be no wait.
Shilli, it's just indefensible to pick one restaurant over another. I wouldn't pick my favorite one and give them a loan over Las Mas. That, alone, makes me oppose this deal. The fact that Las Mas' owners have been so disagreeable just cements the deal.
And this IS worse than most of our suburban subsidies - because there would have just been another restaurant moving into this space, or an alley-less Marriott, either one of which is preferable.
I think it was Brewster McCracken that said on the radio not too long ago this loan program was going to be shelved and not used again, it just caused too many headaches for the council. If it wasn't Brewster it was Jennifer Kim, I've heard both speak on this subject recently and I'm sure one of them said it. So, I doubt we see any other loans from the city of this type in the future for other businesses in the area.
That makes no sense, 27. You claimed that the food wasn't good (in your opinion), but apparently you went there a lot since you're acting like the loss of your buisness is goign to hurt Las Manitas. So what is it? Did you eat there a lot and now you don't or did you never even eat there in the first place so the loss of your business isn't a big deal at all?
I eat there at least once a week and I have not noticed a decline in Las Manitas' customer base at all. In fact, it seems more crowded lately as it ever was exempting SXSW week when all hell breaks loose.
You want to have an opinion that matters, but if you did not like the food in the first place then your opinion regarding whether you go back or not is worth jack shit.
Oh yeah, and I was just over there maybe 15 minutes ago with 3 or 4 greoups waiting for a table. But it's nice to know you're staking Las Manitas out for us. Just keep your binoculars out of my windows.
In response to #30, I am not saying I went there a lot or that my not going there is going to hurt the business. I'm saying the food isn't very good (my opinion) and my observation is that business seems to be down there. But that's based on my going by on my weekend runs during weekend mornings, maybe during the week it's different. I don't stalk Las Manitas as you say, that makes no sense. You sure seem hostile. Are you one of the Perez sisters or something?
Well 32, I thought you were 7, since you took offense to the California condo comment.
ConanTheLibrarian:
Congrats on having a private tete-a-tete with our City Dictator Manager. It impresses me that Futrell would deign to speak to a lowly temp.
I'm basing my opinion, however, on a variety of sources, oral & writtin, in Austin media, not just one or two anecdotes. I'm convinced Futrell's legacy will be sweetheart deals for her friends, a corruption fiasco at the convention center, several questionable police shootings, an ongoing federal investigation into civil rights violations at APD, along with reports from city minions about her abrasive, controlling, dictatorial leadership.
Furthermore, City Hall reporters from the Chron & Statesman say she basically treats council members like Edgar Bergen treated Charlie McCarthy, and has little to no regard for city commissions like P&Z and neighborhood planning. I'm sure Futrell is gratified that some former underlings such as yourself hold her in high esteem, but the fact remains most council watchers & commissioners will be thrilled to see the curtain drop on the reign of Empress Toby I.
mdahmus,
you do realize that they didn't pick one rest. over another right? As stated by councilman Martinez last night, this program is available to any business on Congress who wants it. As long as they agree to the same terms the Perez Sisters were given, get the loan and only pay for 5 years, but if you close or sell in the 20 years after that, you are then responsible for paying back the entire loan. A lot of people jumped to conclusions with this, just like most other things they don't investigate or understand. Its funny to think that people would get upset about tax dollars of 750K would get people upset, but there has been no uprising ove rthe millions that Marriot will get and they already have billions.
"As stated by councilman Martinez last night, this program is available to any business on Congress who wants it."
Which means it's basically available to Las Manitas and effectively nobody else, when you add in all the other conditions.
brewster mccracken was on the jeff ward show today at 3:45 and said the council would not be offering these type loans to any other businesses. he said it was well-intentioned on their part to resolve an impasse between the restaurant and the developer, but it was not in hindsight a good thing to get involved in on the city's part. so maybe that's the end of it, at least from the city's part. he did say he still hoped the hotel would be built, but the city would not be involved.
No mdahmus, its saying its avialble to any other business on COngress. Subway, Chipotle etc...they could all do it if they wanted to as well. It was in no way a hand out or personal favor to LM. With that said, I believe city coucil found that their provisions were a bit too much for anyone and will revamp their deal. that is, after they are done giving millions to Marriot for building downtown, which apparently none of you have an issue with, but $750K for an Austin institution is out of the question.
"done giving millions to Marriot for building downtown,"
They aren't giving Marriott one red cent for building downtown.
Re #38.
"Private tete-a-tete", "denign", my what fancy words construed by a mind that should be working for Murdoch. By the way, the spellings are tête-à-tête and deign.
As for "high opinion", there is a 2006 US Silver dollar ready to be shipped to you if you can highlight in bold underline font where I said that, or even implied it . Simply post your snail mail address online if proof is provided
As for Edgar Bergan/Charlie McCarthy comparison, that is an insult to the intelligence of Charlie McCarthy. Based on recent digital and Internet dealings with the Council Members, they are so used to genuflecting rectum licking sycophants that they react to criticism based on hard science from UT of their plans for Windsor Park as slander and defamation of character.
Parting words of Drew Gilpin Faust to me at the American Civilization Department offices at Penn were “Do let us know when you win the Pulitzer.” Do let me know when you get dissed by one of Time’s 100 most influential people in the world.
Picking on people for their spelling when you got the gist of what they were saying is like looking down your nose at someone because they wore black shoes with a brown belt.