The board of Portland Parks and Recreation has joined some advocates for affordable housing in opposing the city’s deal with Merritt Paulson to bring minor league baseball to Lents Park.
In a strongly worded letter [PDF], members of the parks bureau board write:
The use of Lents Park for the Beavers baseball complex would represent a sea-change for Portland. If we proceed, we will dismantle a highly active community park in parks-deficient outer southeast Portland. To do this flies in the face of our reputation as a world-class parks city, and puts us on the slippery slope of continuing to use public park lands for private development when other “opportunities” arise.
So far, Commissioner Randy Leonard appears undeterred. At a public meeting in Lents on May 12, Leonard told Lents residents he wouldn’t back down from the deal. “I have yet to be dissuaded from pushing this option because of opposition,” Leonard said. 
- Portland Parks: $13 Million to $29 Million Needed to Replace Portions of Lents Park Commissio
- Update Your Scorecard: Baseball In Lents Requires New $2 Million for Parks Commissio
- Saltzman’s Conditions on the Lents Deal Commissio
- Breaking: Paulson Withdraws Lents Stadium Proposal Merritt P
- More News from Lents The Trib
Tags: Neighborhood News
This is the right decision. The Lents community has been saying “NO” all along. My sister Margie can rest now. This is a family park. Paulson is not family.
Actually Lents residents support the ballpark being built in Lents park by a margin of 2-1. But hey…continue on saying things that aren’t true. I’ll continue trusting on studies that were conducted.
http://ilovelents.com/?p=146
If I recall correctly, a huge majority of the respondents in that poll also cited themselves as Beavers fans. I doubt a majority of Lents residents are Beavers fans.
What about Foster Powell? Mt. Scott Arleta? Powellhurst Gilbert? We live adjacent to Lents and within the URA, which will have its funding completely raided in the near term.
The impacts of this disaster in the making are definitely NOT constrained to Lents.
We need basic incentives for sensible development, small businesses and things that quantifiable make our community better. Like crosswalks. You can watch the Beavers elsewhere. Enjoy.
YES! Finally, we can chalk one up for a group that gets it right on what a People’s Park is all about!
Among other duties, isn’t Fish our Park’s Commissioner?
Time for lunch….let’s see….which one of Portland’s beautiful parks shall I go sit in the grass and eat my little nosh and listen to the birds tweet in the big old trees…while I whistle a happy tune and smell blossoms in the air…
Good Lord, it is amazing to me to see how difficult it is to do anything in this town. For God’s sake can we just get this deal done!! This Stadium will attract Portlanders to a neighborhood that snobby Parks Advocates probably never visit.
Don’t you mean snobby trolls will never visit? SNOBBY TROLLS WILL NEVER VISIT A PARK. Trolls who live in deep pockets never go to the park. Right Bradley?
If you want this to be a done deal, then find an owner who isn’t looking for a huge handout. The problem with this deal is the trust fund baby named Merritt Paulson.
Go FISH!
Fish is a fool. He is bringing Portland down.
Fantastic news! In this economy we should be focusing on basic services, and preserving what’s already great about Portland. Not selling our assets off to the highest bidding developer slash sports impresario.
As a southeast resident, I’m always grateful to have my betters who live on the West Side tell me how foolish it is to want something that would bring people, jobs, attention and energy to this side of town.
Yet one more obvious troll alert.
Just want to point out, everyone here knows that there already is a stadium that is condemed (the stands at least) in Lents park right now, right? And that any park land taken up would 1) be usable for other purposes and 2) would be replaced with other parkland, and the sites being discussed are nearby 3) The majority of the land being taken up is a soccer field teams are protesting playing on. Everyone knows this right?
Its one thing to say bulldoze a park and replace it with a Walmart than to build a community ballpark on an existing footprint and replace the land (which constitutes a small percentage of the current park) with other parks.
I want to know what Lents says, a poll is leaning 2-1 in favor and they should be able to move forward with this project if that is what the community there wants. Those of you bemoaning the loss of the park, how often do you go there now? Esp you non-Lents residents?
zig zag, since you post infrequently but do show up on stories about MLS (East side or West side) or anything relating to Paulson, you do leave Porltanders, to wonder who you work for ….Paulson or Cordish?
I’m not a paid employee of anyone and actually really think the Cordish thing is stupid for Portland, but probably decent at bringing in crowds (occassionally) from LO, Beaverton and Vancouver.
I’ll admit I am supporter (which means I spend ALOT of my FREE time working in favor of this)of the MLS bid, but I also would like to think that if Lents wants this stadium, which would provide a useful asset to the community, they have the right to at least vote/discuss it, rather than have some park board members who never go to Lents because they think its felony flats and object to any parkland being used (although leaving out the fact that any parkland would be replaced and the fact there already is a condemed stadium in its place), tell them it shouldn’t be allowed, nor discussed.
The only reason I try and drop by is to make sure BOTH sides of the argument are at least seen by people who read this site, rather then swept under the carpet. Informed voters/commenters/citizens make for alot better city in the end.
I’d also add Annie, I’ve actually MET Dewey, who is a guy that greatfully cares for his neighbors and the community he lived in, same with Cora Potter. However, throwing out baseless comments about who they are or what they are trying to do for thier community, while at the same time alledging some mass conspiricy, just makes you look childish. If there were paid commenters for Paulson, Cordish (who would be the Blazers), Sam Adams, whoever, why wouldn’t there be 900 comments in favor of it?
The comment about Dewey is based on the content of his letter on the Love Lents site. My opinion is that he sounded condescending to the residents of Lents. Interesting, you can even google Dewey. Care to share the circumstances you met Dewey as “just a supporter” for the MLS, and where you gathered your own opinion of him?
What do you think are the problems with the optional locations the Portland Parks Board recommended in the letter to Commissioner Fish?
It’s doubtful. You’re far more likely to find drug paraphernalia laying around the park than a nice patch of grass to lay down on. It’s why I don’t go to that park.
Off the subject of the paid posters who in a similar way to Adams and his gay vs. anti gay attempt at taking the point off message; the Paulson/Cordish buddies are now trying to reduce this to a East/ West side rivalry…shoing that whomever is setting these groups up with their messaging, doesn’t give a big fat flying fig about this town, only getting their way, at the cost of community relationships.
Anyway, who is this Dewey Akers cat? His letter to his neighbors on the LoveLents site, reads like someone with promised life time box seats in exchange for setting Lent’s straight. Telling his neighbors one too many times…..whatever they do not to take it out on the Beavers…it’s not the Beaver’s fault and wha wha wha wha wha….
Does ol’ Dewey always condescend to the people of Lents, like they can’t think for themselves…..ick….
Just to clarify, you should know Cordish has NOTHING to do with the stadium in Lents, nor the proposal involving PGE. They are the development company the Blazers hired to create the Live district in the RQ, so why would they care where a baseball stadium would go (assuming its not in the RQ)?
Cordish works for Paul Allen and they benefit more for the future Beavers stadium not being located at the Memorial Coliseum site. You’re really making a good point by showing how little you really know about what’s going on.
First off Zaggy and blackedout, curious as to why you don’t post under the names you use when you’re supporting your cause off the sites?
I get that the original deal that was wrapped up with the MLS franchise approval in PDX, included moving the Beavers to a new stadium in the RA, where the Blazers proposed to also develop the retail/bar/restaurant idea, proposed on a development approval by Cordish. It’s a legitimate assumption to make that Cordish may still figure in, in some way, considering the way the original deal was presented linking the move to a new stadium, and it may or may not change significant players.
This is very, very welcome news. Big thanks to the Portland Parks Board for taking this position.
So you let me get this straight. You want to keep a Stadium that is in terrible condition and a soccer field that isn’t safe to even play on? This is better than having a beautiful new ballpark for the Beavers with Paulson paying for replacement parkland that will most certainly be more useful than the aforementioned park facilities? Wow
Since your head is obviously unacquainted with the presence of sunshine, let me spell out for you precisely and exactly what it is I am saying: “This is very, very welcome news. Big thanks to the Portland Parks Board for taking this position.”
You should dress up your straw man to resemble Paulson so you have a nice body pillow to curl up with and cry on when your stupid stadium idea dies the ignominious death it so richly deserves.
Three cheers for tw!
Hip Hip Hooray! Hip Hip Hooray! Hip Hip Hooray!
Bradley sez: “…with Paulson paying for replacement parkland…”
Yet in WW’s article last week we read:
“Commissioner Randy Leonard and Merritt Paulson went before the Lents community Tuesday night and told the neighborhood they would need $2 million from the Lents Town Center Urban Renewal Area to pay for new park space taken from Lents by the new proposed Triple-A baseball stadium.”
So who’s paying for that replacement parkland again Bradley?
Not to mention that Parks and Rec came up with “vastly different numbers” for the cost to mitigate the proposed changes. They estimate the cost to be anywhere between 12.9 and 28.9 million, not 2 M as Paulson and his buddies would have you believe.
FWIW,
I don’t have deep pockets and don’t live in Lents. I live in Woodstock and am excited by the plans to have a new ballpark at Lents. I hope the residents of that neighborhood realize that this is a plan that will bring positive attention to their neighborhood and as a resident of Woodstock I will certainly go to more Beaver games than I do now. I don’t work for Paulson but I am a Timbers/Beavers/Sports fan who is frustrated by a city that often seems impotent when it comes to getting things done. I hope this happens.
“Impotent” shrimpotent. Did you by any chance check out how fast that elegant neon rose got approved and made?
This is an extremely well written and sensible letter. What has taken Sam and Randy so long to consult the Portland Parks Board? Do they even care to solicit such wisdom, or are they so set on spending city funds that such input is completely neglected? How can these city commissioners have more concern for Paulson rather the city residents? Paulson and MLS need to seek support from a larger population support base rather than just Portland residents.
The original deal was to be in the Rose Quarter but a small group of architects and foolish journalists such as Matt Davis helped to scuttle that deal. Laughably their misguided efforts have now opened the door for the Blazers and Cornish to place a garish corporate mess down there. So to answer part of your question, Lents was seen as off the table for quite a while. Lents is the remaining option that was approved by the Citizen Task Force (that included at least two park advocates). I suspect that the Parks Board wasn’t approached earlier because a deal was only recently reached and why consult them without a finalized deal?
Have you no basis in reality? The door has always been open “for the Blazers and Cornish to place a garish corporate mess down there” at the Rose Quarter. They only jumped on the bandwagon to fast track it now BECAUSE they were afraid Paulson’s folly would suck up all the public money available for development there.
But you just keep on rewriting history, man.
You say: “Lents is the remaining option that was approved by the Citizen Task Force (that included at least two park advocates)…” yet fail to mention the letter that Mike Houck (presumably one of the two park advocates you refer to) wrote to Adams. Houck writes about this “house of cards” deal:
===
As I noted in my earlier testimony, my affirmative vote was predicated on the city adopting all of the conditions set by the
committee, including:
1). Taking Public Park Land: From the beginning myself and other park advocates have been adamantly opposed to taking precious public park land for other uses. I have consistently opposed the use of Lents Park not because the current stadium would be replaced with a new facility with a similar footprint, but because 500 parking spaces and ancillary buildings would take several acres of precious public park land in an already park deficient area of the city.
The taskforce discussed this issue at length. The following language was voted on and approved by a majority of the taskforce: “No open space land in a public park will be taken for use in the project. If no alternative exists to using open space land in a public park, the project costs will include funds to purchase or develop and to maintain equivalent open space land for public use in the same area of the City.”
===
I suspect that the Parks Board wasn’t approached earlier because Scam and Co. already knew what they would say. I mean it was plainly worded in the MLS recommendation already as quoted above by Houck.
I know. Details, details, right bradley?
Finally, what “deal was only recently reached?” No deal’s been reached yet, bub. Isn’t that the point of all these stories? You really haven’t been paying attention or are just pathologically adverse to reality. And “why consult them [Parks] without a finalized deal?” Because they need to be a part of finalizing any deal that involves parks. Duh.
But Sam, Randy, Merritt and the Timbers Army would prefer if everyone just stood mutely by in deference to their infinite wisdom and let them tell us all how it will be after they decide. Who needs public process and reality-based analysis?
I live in North Portland. We have vast expanses of public wasteland up here. For God’s sake, can’t they build a ballpark where there isn’t already a good thing going?
(Or can’t they just PLEASE let baseball go? It’s such a braindead activity. At least with soccer you burn some calories getting excited.)
GO, PARKS BOARD! Way to stand up for our public assets! Commissioners, if you are smart, you will take notice.
Funny – Mike Houck who has led the charge to “preserve pristine Lents” live on NW 25th ave in richy rich land. I doubt the guy has even been there in the past 3 years.
The truth is that there is a existing baseball stadium that is in such bad condition you can’t use the bleachers for safety reasons. This baseball stadium would take that existing structure and an absolutely abysmal and dangerous soccer field and replace it with something the community would use.
But you guys just wanna rant about Paulson and pot holes, sidewalks blah blah blah blah that has nothing to do with the proposal at hand.
AND Beth you should do your research – the Parks board took a preliminary vote back in January opposing this – this is nothing new.
It would replace the current baseball stadium that is available for community use with a privately-operated stadium that will not be available for community use. Please play fair with the facts.
Another thing to consider is that $42 million of Lents URA money that could be used for affordable housing and business development will instead be used to fund a private business that will pocket all the profits and likely will not generate any business outside the stadium. Why would Paulson want people to come to Lents to buy food or drinks at other establishments, when his entire business model relies on those people coming exclusively to his stadium to buy hot dogs and beer?
I am starting to feel like a sucker for even buying tickets to Timbers games and supporting Paulson in the process. These stadiums deals just seem worse the more we learn about them. I can’t ethically support the stadium at Lents, and I hope other Timbers fans feel the same. We should ask Paulson to privately fund the stadium somewhere else that won’t adversely impact our fellow citizens, or just leave the Beavers at PGE Park. I am fine with the way things are right now.
WHO exactly is ranting, blah, blah, blah?
If you guys aren’t busy twisting the truth and rewriting even very recent history, you’re making ad hominem attacks and completely inane and irrelevant snide remarks about those who have the audacity to oppose you.
So what if Mike Houck lives “on NW 25th ave in richy rich land,” or hasn’t been to Lents Park in the past 3 years? (Like you’d even know anyway.) Are you only allowed to voice an opinion – or do your job – on this matter if you are low-income and live in Lents? OK. Every Timbers Army member who doesn’t live in Lents and makes over 20k a year has to shut up now, too. Fat chance.
And, the truth is, in the words of the Parks Board, “Community access (i.e., adult baseball groups and the public) to the new stadium is unclear.” So, contrary to what you assert as absolute fact, it’s uncertain that this baseball stadium would replace existing facilities with something the community could use.
AND Jeremy, you should do your reading – Beth never claimed anything was “new” here, other than the letter the Parks Board just sent to Fish. It was dated May 13, 2009. You’re just mad because she publicized yet another sensible voice that opposes this fiasco and might derail your little pet project.
Blah, blah, blah indeed.
Can you guys stop being such self-absorbed, boorish, con men? But I guess not. I think it’s incredibly shallow and selfish of you all to expect the majority to pay to subsidize your minority’s preferred form of entertainment. Especially in this economy. Asking you to be truthful, respectful and considerate of the public good is apparently beyond you.
If baseball is such a great idea for Lents then Merritt Paulson should buy his own land, with his own money, and build his stadium. Don’t delete a park that is nearly 100 years old just for his profit.
Is isn’t too surprising that all of the people in favor of this are Timbers Army fans, who state on their own board (http://www.soccercityusa.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=mlsinpdx) that they really don’t care where baseball goes as long as it isn’t at PGE Park. To soccer fans Lents is a great idea, or anywhere else, as long as NIMBY.
PLEASE help me comprehend how this MLS-Stadium deal in any way pencils out for anyone but Merritt Paulson. So far, it is my
understanding that:
>
> ¨ Taxpayers struggling to meet everyday obligations will be expected to bear the burden (potential or real) of millions of dollars in additional debt to re-develop a stadium for an MLS team when
>
> ¨ MLS has a documented history of adding little if any appreciable economic benefit to any community and
>
> ¨ The proposed average ticket price of $31 (not including parking or transportation, food, beverage, and souvenirs) is hardly “family friendly” and
>
> ¨ The sustainable jobs created will be well below “family wage” and likely require continued supplements from additional taxpayer
> dollars and
>
> ¨ The additional “requirement” that the re-developed park be for soccer-only mandates building of a new stadium for a minor league
> baseball team that has been fun to watch but marginally profitable at best and
>
> ¨ Taxpayers (still) struggling to meet everyday obligations will be expected to bear the burden of even more millions of dollars in
additional debt to develop a stadium for said minor league baseball team and
>
> ¨ The development of said stadium would require one or more major change(s) to existing URA(s) resulting in other current and/or pending projects being put on hold if not eliminated altogether for the sake
of a further taxpayer subsidized, privately owned property that provide little if any economic benefit, no affordable housing, and
even more below family-wage jobs and
>
> ¨ The subsequent average ticket prices (also not including parking or transportation, food, beverage, and souvenirs) to enter the new
stadium to see a minor league team would likely be even more prohibitive that the “major league” soccer team and
>
> ¨ The siting of said stadium will require thousands if not millions in additional study (taxpayer?) dollars and
>
> ¨ The location of said stadium will require additional millions in modification and/or (re)development of infrastructure including parking, transportation, utilities, and relocation and
>
> ¨ There has been no meaningful public engagement around this issue much less the thoughtful presentation and careful consideration of a comprehensive and sustainable plan to finance, develop, market, and maintain these two new behemoths.
>
> As a business person, community organizer, and engaged citizen; I just don’t see it. I plead with you to provide me with some semblance of rationale that might convince me that this deal is anything but a bad one for Portland.
[...] Leonard declined to address the charges made by the Portland Parks and Recreation board last week that converting Walker Stadium in Lents Park into a boutique stadium for a private [...]
I was wondering if there were actually sites online where i could get free ringtones? because everyone i have seen you have to pay for?
thanks alot
Landon