Dave Bronson - Midtown

Name: Dave Bronson             

Occupation: Commercial pilot

Website: bronsonforassembly.us

Registered Political Party: Republican

Last book you read: Colonel Roosevelt, by E. Morris

Favorite movie: The Great Escape

Why are you running for the Anchorage Assembly?:

I believe the Municipality Anchorage has increased its spending to levels which are unsustainable.  I intend on working with the mayor and other like-minded members of  the Assembly to reverse that trend. We have a great quality of life here in Anchorage, and my goal is to maintain it at an affordable level so our seniors and future generations can afford to call this city home.

What one sentence best describes your philosophy of how city government should be run?:

That government which governs least, governs best.

What letter grade would you give the current assembly, and why?:

D. Certainly Anchorage remains a great place to live and work. However, as I look to the future I see significant challenges which were created by the 'tax and spend-to-the cap' mentality that controls the thinking of a majority of our current Assembly members. Since a majority on the Assembly has decided to rubber stamp the former mayor's ruinous fiscal plan, while also approving ill-conceived union contracts in 2008, we are all now paying more in taxes for fewer services.

What letter grade would you give Mayor Sullivan’s administration, and why?: 

A. He has been successful in dramatically reducing costs of operating the office of the mayor. Furthermore, he has resisted the call by the liberal majority of the Assembly to increase both taxes and spending. His persistence in finding efficiencies in government (updating the city with electronic timecards, for example) is an endeavor I support.

What are your thoughts on the 2008 union contracts approved by the Assembly? Is there a link to those contracts and the city's current fiscal situation?:

There is a link between all costs borne by city government and the fiscal problems we now face, the 2008 contracts are just the most recent, and probably egregious, of them. Unfortunately, a majority of the Assembly chose not to consider the overwhelming evidence that our city, our state and our country were all facing a financial crisis but instead elected to support contract terms we now universally recognize as unsustainable. If you compare the political contributions made to the Assembly members who voted for the contracts versus those who didn't, there’s an obvious correlation: more than $100,000 of contributions from city unions went to the contract supporters, when only $8,000 went to non-supporters. I think that’s wrong and a glaring conflict of interest.

What are your thoughts on the budget reductions proposed by Mayor Sullivan over the past two years? Are they too much? Not deep enough? A right amount?:

All cuts are painful, but the flat revenues of the city combined with the increasing personnel costs make them necessary. When considering the revenue projections over the next several years it appears these cuts are adequate. They do not, however, provide any pad for unforeseen problems.

What city services would you like to see reinstated, and how would you suggest they are paid for?:

None. I believe the Assembly has a responsibility to further reduce the cost of city government. We simply must reconsider our spending priorities and then seek ways to reduce or eliminate those costs associated with our lowest priorities. Again, what we are now doing, and how we are doing it, is unsustainable.