Comments

to longtimevalley wrote on Jul 1, 2009 11:34 AM:

" How do you figure this silly bridge would benefit the valley and not Anchorage? It would benefit Anchorage more than anyplace or anybody else! The population of Anchorage would have more room to spill into. To log, build, pave and generally destroy in the image of that filthy dump they love so much. Knik would become an extension of that over-sized outhouse. "




longtimevalleyRES wrote on Jul 1, 2009 10:07 AM:

" Of course anchorage assembly shut down the bridge, If it helps any area other than Anchorage they will lose out.. on being the big city..The Valley will be the main spot soon enough..Anchorage days are comming to be second fiddle..
Hang for the wild ride....

Anchorage Assembly Sheila Selkgreg is a Doctor and knows what is best for all of us.. "




Mary Lou wrote on Jun 28, 2009 11:24 PM:

" Light rail is far from light years away! That claim is an utter falsehood!

The bridge was an overly expensive, impractical, and extreme solution that brought many problems with it. It was a poor excuse for the growing commuting problems between Anchorage and the Valley.

We already have a rail, and some details have yet to be worked out for the commuter rail, but they are on the way. In the meantime we have the rails and roads for deliveries, and we have a van share program and cars for commuters. "




Bridge to Nowhere wrote on Jun 28, 2009 2:47 PM:

" I disagree with the special interest land owner comments that a bridge will A.) cut down on commute and B.) that somehow it was a political decision to kill the bridge. A.) It won't cut down on anyone's commute who lives in the Wasilla/Palmer area. B.) the very concept of pushing this thing through has been politically motivated since day one. "




Because wrote on Jun 28, 2009 1:31 PM:

" No name because it is an editorial written by the editor of this paper. I think it is Mr Mitchell. Editorial means just that a piece written by an editor and usually approved for publication by a editorial board or publisher. That is why there is no name. "




BY No Name wrote on Jun 28, 2009 1:20 PM:

" No the first time a name has not appeared in this section... "




MineThatBridge wrote on Jun 28, 2009 12:49 PM:

" Spot on article! The outcome was rigged from the get-go, with the majority of key votes on both the Assembly and AMATS being SelKregg, Claman, and Flynn. Talk about a conflict of interest - hopefully the courts will see through this sham. Bottomline: Flynn had to kill the bridge as he represents Gov't Hill. Claman is a dolt who does the handiwork forgetable Begich. Lastly is "obermeyeresk" Skelkregg, the mastermind, the "Doctor" of urban planning - she sought to protect her appraised large Tudor parcel. She won! "




Power Wagon wrote on Jun 28, 2009 11:46 AM:

" NO BRIDGE!! Keep Anchorage contained! That's all we need is Anchorage spilling onto the Knik! Clear-cutting, increased traffic, increased crime...everything that sucks about Anchorage expanding out! You don't like the commute? Then don't live so far away! Move closer to that cess-poole! "




Anchorman wrote on Jun 28, 2009 10:46 AM:

" I'd like to know who wrote this article. Why is there no name on it? "




cottonwood49 wrote on Jun 28, 2009 10:42 AM:

" That bridge would have contributed more than easing the commute for Valley folks, it would be a shorter route for freight bound for Fairbanks, easing congestion for the trucks in Anch. Now the state needs to widen the Eagle River bridge, and straighten the approach, three lanes past Eagle River. Where is a ferry going to land in Anch? Light rail is light years away. "




John Harkey wrote on Jun 28, 2009 9:21 AM:

" NO stupid stinking bridge, we cannot maintain the highways, another half baked idea that will cost everyone! The boondoggle ferry is another example, eggs before the chicken anyone? All boosters special landowner interest! "




Cheryl Kerkove wrote on Jun 27, 2009 11:19 PM:

" I am for the bridge. It's a shame it was "post-pone", ten years, It'll cost double what it would now. The pluses on building the bridge NOW, would be putting a bunch of people to work, less expensive than ten years from now, and a safer way to get to Anchorage and back. Goes to show you, politics out shines the necessity of the people the bridge would benefit. The departing acting mayor isn't working for the best of the people of Alaska, but only for himself "