Warning: file_get_contents() [
function.file-get-contents]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents(http://portland.wweek.com/online/exports/Rss.xml?section=55838) [
function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents() [
function.file-get-contents]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents(http://portland.wweek.com/online/exports/Rss.xml?section=55842) [
function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents() [
function.file-get-contents]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents(http://portland.wweek.com/online/exports/Rss.xml?section=55844) [
function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents() [
function.file-get-contents]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents(http://portland.wweek.com/online/exports/Rss.xml?section=58781) [
function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents() [
function.file-get-contents]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents(http://portland.wweek.com/online/exports/Rss.xml?section=55843) [
function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents() [
function.file-get-contents]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents(http://portland.wweek.com/online/exports/Rss.xml?section=55841) [
function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents() [
function.file-get-contents]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents(http://portland.wweek.com/online/exports/Rss.xml?section=55839) [
function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents() [
function.file-get-contents]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
Warning: file_get_contents(http://portland.wweek.com/online/exports/Rss.xml?section=55840) [
function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in
/home/wweekco/public_html/xml/rsscacher.php on line
61
It’s such a classic tactic for someone like Fritz who wants to seek re-election and build a political career to take the easiest path.
That path is to take zero risks, do nothing that is controversial, and take an opposition stance when there is nothing on the line.
That path is lazy, and by not fulfilling her duty to do right for the city, Fritz’s path is not only irresponsible but a disservice to the People of Portland.
It’s probably true Amanda – don’t do anything at all controversial and take a vocal position on the status quo and the popular issues that nobody can argue with like, oh Polar Bears perhaps – and you’ll probably coast your way into another term or two.
Way to join the ranks of a decades of do-nothing bureaucrats.
About here statement – eh, I completely discount the noise she as making as classic political theatre carried out by someone who is calculating every move she makes just to make sure she is squeaky clean when election comes around.
It is a shame that someone with such lofty populist promise has already learned to play the game of politics so well.
Fritz – get off your butt and do something that is good for the city instead of just pandering and positioning for your political future. As a progressive city, we actually don’t want someone whose mission it is to preserve the status quo because – look around you – the status quo isn’t all that great.
Yes we realize that it is harder to stand for something than to stand against everything.
How easy is it to debase other peoples plan that involve risk and reward, when you propose no actual ideas of your own.
No it’s not your fault our unemployment is in double digits and it will be a hard case to make that you are responsible if conditions linger, but by continuing to disguise your self-seving agenda of re-election as something good for Portland is more than heartless in times like these.
Unlike Salzman, you are not approaching this opportunity to crate jobs with a problem-solving attitude. Instead, you are using every attempt to create a public record of your opposition to the deal so that you have something to point to during election season. You don’t care to propose ways to pragmatically solve problems, you will be opposed to this plan no matter how good it looks.
Amanda, you are lazy, self-serving and whether it comes back to you or not, you will be responsible for costing Portlanders hundreds of opportunities for gainful employment.
Next time any of us see an unemployed person who desparately wants a job, we should think of Amanda Fritz – she wants to kill an opportunity for that person to find work by rallying against a plan that would create hundreds of jobs, many of them white collar and well paying.
Amanda Fritz – you should be ashamed of yourself.
You have GOT to be kidding.
Exactly JJ Gildersneaze. He is kidding. It’s a game to him.
You’re right, Wilson. We shouldn’t pay attention to elected officials who might want to be slow and prudent about change and the taxpayer’s money, but rather, we should bow before internet posts such as yours, which contain many details regarding what should be done. Oops, sorry, your post doesn’t contain anything positive. Did I miss something?
That’s just the problem. It would be great if Fritz were being prudent, but she’s not.
Instead she is sticking her fingers in her ears and saying “la la la I won’t listen to any details of this plan la la la I just plan to be opposed to it no matter what so that I can come across as the people’s advocate during the next election la la la”
We want leadership that will actually consider every single tough issue objectively instead of refusing to problem solve because they are rooted in partisan stances.
Even if there was a condition in this plan that required Paulson buy all of us our dream house with no risk or downside, Fritz’s mentality would still derail this because she is dead set opposed to this no matter what, although she has yet to offer her own plan that will get each of us our dream houses.
That’s a hypothetical exaggeration of course, but the point is that Fritz is NOT being pragmatic, she is not problem solving, but she is rooted in politics, pandering and positioning for her future career.
Salzman is the model she needs to follow. He has plenty of rational reservations, but he is saying “look, I don’t like this plan as is, but if problems x, y, and z were overcome, it would start to look more attractive for Portlanders and I would consider it.”
Why can’t Fritz approach this like Salzman? Because she is new and feels like she has to play safe to set her self up for re-election.
WILSON—By any chance, do you work for The Gallatin Public Affairs?
Wow, what a despicable tactic.
Instead of discussing the points, you try to undermine my credibility by suggesting I am a shill.
Classic desparate move taken straight out of the Bush Administration’s playbook.
When you resort to that kind of switchblade approach both you AND LOGIC have already lost.
But to answer your question – no, I am just a person. Gainfully employed in the technology field who has as much stake in this as any average Portlander, and that is wanting to see some positive improvements for our fair city.
Why do you hate Portland by the way?
If Wilson is not working for Paulson or his PR (he should be), maybe he and “attendancestats” can get a little gig going for the County Fair circuit this summer. They wouldn’t need to invest in a laugh track.
RIGHT ON!
An excellent letter! Well said, Amanda.
It’s long past time to pull the plug on the absurd and insulting Lents plan once and for all.
Wilson and Annie for whatever they want to run for!!!
OK..not a Progressive posting I’m, somewhere to the right of “Attila the Hun I guess, not a BUSH koolaid drinker, maybe leaning a bit to the independent center.
Having said that,and knowing that Wilson is PROGRESSVIE..and Annie is, I would guess.
The emerging pattern here is real commonsense Progressives,(SAM,and RANDY who are so far left…the charts quit marking the trip they are on), are getting more pissed by the minute, and the glow of these two, is just about gone.
My suggestion here, if you read the back bumper stickers on SUBARU’S,they suggest “Can’t we all just get along!” long enough to get behind the recall of Sam Adams…and put commonsense leadership back in city hall.
If we all just get along starting July 1, 2009,and make history here in the recall of this guy, maybe(I don’t really think so) maybe the off the chart arrogance of one Randy Leonard, might settle down, and he starts listening to us instead of Homer Williams, and Merritt Paulson,if not…we “do him to!”
Wilson says a whole bunch of nothing! Wow, 483 “words of wisdom.” Next time any of us see an unemployed person who desperately wants a job, we should think of Wilson. “Yes we realize that it is harder to stand for something than to stand against everything.” Thanks so much Wilson, for standing up for something so outrageously stupid.
Good for Fritz. She’s doing EXACTLY what I and many elected her to do: Carefully analyzing risky projects using significant amounts of public dollars, questioning the costs and benefits, reading and assessing the data and issues and taking a stance based on these findings.
Sometimes saying NO is taking the biggest action of all. In this case, hats off to Fritz for having the kahunas to call BS where she, and most of the rest of us, see it. How easy it would be for a newbie Council person to just go with the flow and not make waves. Trust me, Fritz is nothing lazy. She’s the one who is up past midnight reading emails from her constituents and responding to them. I know, I’ve sent her several and she’s always read them quickly and responded thoughtfully. This shows me she is working hard and paying attention. Kudos to Fritz.
The Lents project continues to show very little economic benefit for Lents or the City as a whole, and comes with huge risks, takes away existing funding for economic development budgets in a much needy community, and decreases livability of a mostly residential neighborhood. This project continues to show in fact based reports, commissioned by the City mind you, that the proposal costs outweigh the few, if any, benefits. In summary, this project is idiotic.
Let’s continue to let the facts lead and let’s continue to support elected officials like Fritz who have their heads on straight.
And Wilson, keep the personal attacks to yourself please and try focusing on the issues. For someone who calls someone else names for doing nothing, what exactly do you propose to create living wage jobs and address Portland’s unemployment and current huge budget shortage? Hmmm? If you say, “Lents Baseball”, then explain to me exactly the revenue stream, costs, public financing trade offs for using TIF and how this will effect the city’s ability for other projects, the financial projections and your methodology for your numbers and how they negate the study recently released by HVS. ‘Cause seriously, I’d love to be able to support your stance, but an anti stance against a politician is no stance around the issues of a publicly funded project. Thanks!
How about you explain how doing nothing is going to create jobs and change the status quo for the better.
The Lents Park baseball stadium won’t create any jobs. It will just transfer the jobs from PGE Park to Lents. Those jobs are already so low-paying that the city government subsidizes the wages of PGE Park workers. So even if the stadium created jobs, and it won’t, are those the kinds of jobs we want? The jobs argument for the stadium is a bunch of B.S.
Lents needs street improvement. Many streets lack sidewalks, many busy intersections lack traffic lights, and traffic in general is very bad. The Lents URA money can go toward that. That will create jobs and bring real tangible improvements to the neighborhood. It will also create a more inviting environment for new businesses. The stadium will not correct any of the current visual ills of the neighborhood, and will in fact prevent these improvements by stealing money earmarked for these improvements.
The Lents URA money also provides loans to existing homeowners to stay in their homes and improve the homes. This also contributes overall improvement in the neighborhood. Right now, Lents has too many absentee landlords and renters. Bringing a stadium into a neighborhood park will only make the problem worse. Who wants to own a home near a loud stadium with floodlights on all evening? Contrast that with owning a home near a very nice park where your children can play.
I’ll say it again because you didn’t.
How about you explain how doing nothing is going to create jobs and change the status quo for the better.
You guys are simply hysterical when not sickeningly obvious.
Many of the items mentioned in her letter are laudable goals for renewal funds, but again, why have so few viable projects been forthcoming for Lents in all the years of the district’s existence? Simply put, private investors to date have been reluctant to invest in Lents; Paulson/Adams/Leanord, are at least proposing a project that will involve private investment there.
Also, regardless of what you think about Leonard and his position on the stadiums, at least he has been talking about outer eastside from day one (i.e. when he ran for the counsel). Glad that Amanda is now thinking about Lents, although she seems to be coming to this rather late.
Where did you say you are from again, because it sure isn’t Portland Gingerdad (afriend of Blackedout’s gang perhaps?) “Glad to see that Amanda is NOW thinking about Lents, although she seems to be coming at this rather late” (your words not mine). You might want to consider a summer fair run with Wilson and attendancestats. You sound perfectly matched.
Probably difficult to stay on top of how late or not, Amanda might be coming to this issue, when you might live in Timbuktu, right? Quick! Do you even know who Amanda Fritz is, or how long she has been in office, since you’re quick to judge her on speed. Just not fast enough for you and the Peden/ Paulson bunch? Why do you all sound alike? Intern project?
I love that I’m inside your head.
Yeah, I figured that you would be the type who would love being somewhere in someone’s head…..you poor little lost and alone thing. At least it’s better than nothing.
Amanda’s going to be great. Our new Mildred Schwab, without the smoking and the drinking.
Voting no is not “doing nothing”. Fritz is taking strong action and PREVENTING THE LOSS of already dedicated funding for job growth through urban renewal funding through economic development funding and housing development in Lents from being diverted to a project that will end up costing the city more than it will recap. The money and bond issuance saved from this black hole of a proposed project can thus be used for more strategic and solid investment in development projects such as construction jobs for road improvements and housing development, recruiting for companies that pay living wage jobs, small business loans and grants to help boost individual wealth creation, and to leverage private sector investment in much needed development projects.
But Fritz first has to first prevent this money from being diverted and used for the big black hole of this proposed project in which, as based on findings, will never be recapped by the city.
It’s a no brainer. The proposed Lents/PGE project is bad for the city. I changing the status quo means losing massive public money, then let’s not change it. Let’s instead move on so that Council can focus on real economic development and job growth. Just say NO to LENTS.
Funds have been tied up for years in the Lents URD with very few successes to speak of. If there are truly “more strategic and solid investment in development projects” why have they not been put in place after so many years?
Fritz has stated that she is opposed to any public funding for sports stadiums; any of her critiques of a particular proposal should be seen through that lens. It is unclear whether that has been her long-term view, or she is merely exploiting in this case Portland’s long-term suspicion of large-scale capital projects; but it takes very little political courage in this town to attack a proposed project of this nature – frankly, it is the easy out for politicians.
2 guesses who cuts your check, Gingerdad…Love the “dad” part btw, nice touch, albeit a bit……..sick, maybe. You guys will stoop to anything to sell your sorry story, to gut Lents.
My dog’s name is ginger, thus the name gingerdad. My check’s are cut by an education company, for what that’s worth.
Once again you are taking nasty swings and missing badly.
No wonder education is going down the tubes. Which “education company” do we have the benefit of your being an employee? Especially as you apparently don’t have the ability to differentiate who exactly it is that is taking the “nasty swings”.
At least you stay in the same “all american” theme with pitching for Paulson’s team. You call in dads, dogs, and education, “gingerdad.”. What next “apple pie”?
Wait, let us take a guess. When you say you work for an “education company”….would that be code for “public relations”? As in how public relations companies sell the public on how sexy smoking is, vs. being a risk factor in lung cancer and emphysema? So you would be educating Portland how good it is for our health, to raze a pretty and used community park to build a corporate stadium?
“When you say you work for an ‘education company’….would that be code for ‘public relations’?”
Nope, just plain old fashioned early education company (primarily early childhood education).
Another swing and a miss Anne; keep trying, this is getting entertaining. Their are plenty of incorrect conspiracy theories in the internet world; you are reaching new levels of bad guesses and suppositions.
Does that little “conspiracy” theory you use, ever get in your way, working in the field of early childhood ed? Hopefully you have good health care bennies, which include mental and emotional counseling. With summer break, you could take advantage of addressing your “black helicopter” way of rationalizing anyone with a different opinion. That, and the odd (for a man your age), anglophile thing you bleed into everything imaginable.
Just say NO to LENTS.
Dear EX city worker:
Just say no to Lents, and SAM, and RANDY,you can do that, JULY 1 2009.
Yes, I know Randy isn’t…YET!
The emerging pattern here is real commonsense Progressives,(SAM,and RANDY who are so far left…the charts quit marking the trip they are on), are getting more pissed by the minute, and the glow of these two, is just about gone.
My suggestion here, if you read the back bumper stickers on SUBARU’S,they suggest “Can’t we all just get along!” long enough to get behind the recall of Sam Adams…and put commonsense leadership back in city hall.
If we all just get along starting July 1, 2009,and make history here in the recall of this guy, maybe(I don’t really think so) maybe the off the chart arrogance of one Randy Leonard, might settle down, and he starts listening to us instead of Homer Williams, and Merritt Paulson,if not…we “do him to!”
i’ve asked this question several times before, and once had Leonard’s chief of staff dance around it a bit, but it’s still unanswered in my opinion:
for the life of the Lents URA how many businesses or developers have been offered the same or similar terms that Paulson is receiving?
having an answer to this would go a long ways to addressing some of the questions posed here by wilson and gingerdad.
my gut tells me that Paulson is getting a particularly sweet deal, and one that doesn’t have any real long-term economic benefits.
i am open to being proven wrong.
I think that is fair question, although one of the difficulties with sports financing is that there may not be apples to apples comparisons with other development opportunities (in terms of footprint, scale, communal aspect, etc). It would be interesting for example if there was a competing amphitheater proposal for the site with serious private investor funding it.
However, from my vantage point, the failure to deploy much of Lents URA dollars over the years is indication that the city does not have as many private suitors, willing to invest in that part of town, as one would hope.
i hear you, but also disagree for the most part. i think the ROI of the URA’s investment is going to be very, very slight. sure it will create some short-term jobs, but the majority of those will go to people outside of Lents, and even outside of Portland. the knock-on economic effects will be minimal due to quite a few factors that have been discussed here and elsewhere ad nauseum.
what i would love to hear is a City official that works on these deals to tell us that they’ve pursued someone like Columbia Sportswear, or one of several low-income housing developers, with the same $$$ commitment and fervor that they have for Paulson. beyond that, Leonard and Adams are trying to change the rules as they go along to suit their desires. not cool.
i’m 100% behind the MLS deal at civic stadium because i honestly believe that it will be financially successful on many levels. i’m far from convinced this deal will come close to breaking even over the next decade or so. take into account the removal of funding for Lents for the next five or so years, and it’s a really bad deal all around.
Columbia HQ relocation was one of the city’s real failings; however, I might draw a different conclusion from that experience: when opportunities come along, sometimes you have to jump at them. City apparently could have done alot more to keep Columbia, but they failed to act. I hope we don’t repeat ourselves here (although, at the end of the day, if we get MLS soccer and lose baseball, I’ll take that trade for the status quo).
As for affordable housing developer, I think affordable housing is an important consideration in public policy, although I’m not convinced the economic justification is the why behind it.
My suspicion is that Lents would face a hard time attracting a large corporate HQ; in its history, the URA’s one success is a single regional insurance company. It seems businesses that want to be in Portland want to be downtown (and maybe Lloyd district).
I happen to really like the Memorial Coliseum idea as well (love the idea of the stadiums being close to the city core). I am less sure of Lents Park overall, but based on my experience in Portland think:
Portland naturally resists these kind of projects and that isn’t always a good thing; that tendency is easy for politicians to exploit; and
this project would overall be a net positive to Lents Park.
I’m sorry “gingerdad” so close to Father’s day and all, but zzzzzzz.
Continue to question Ginger”dads” motives, Eric Cantona…
All of a sudden you’re re-appearing on the scene to elevate your pitch GingerPop? A few stories back you were simply crying the blues about the soccer field at Lents Park being sub par for the adult leagues in town, like you were all into that being your motive.
You seemed suspicious then, but you really seem suspicious now, that you’ve all of a sudden jumped into being in the know about “difficulties with financing sports facilities”.
Anne, you have previously propped up those fields as some great loss (and in some cases, greatly exagerated the impact the baseball field will have on the park); my point, I’ve used the field that will be lost to this project and it is a disaster. In my experience, that is a sentiment generally shared in the soccer community (a community that I am quite close and have been actively involved with for awhile). I think Saltzman’s idea is a good one: replace the 3 lousy fields with 2 turf ones.
I didn’t read Cantana to be questioning my motives, just arguing the facts. Folks my take your posts more seriously if you spent more time on substance.
Do you have a single viable alternative for Lents URD funds? If so, what have you done in recent years to push those projects forward?
It is quite easy to attack every proposal that is put out there and attack the motivations of those who propose or support them; it is much more difficult to push forward a positive agenda.
Having said all of that, cheers for being politically engaged.
Ah gee thanks GingerPop…just hanging out for your ‘approval’ here. Wake me up, when you have something else, ANYTHING… of importance you’re bringing to the party, on how gutting Lents Park, empowers the community/city/region to the tune of the Lents sacrifice of fronting Paulson $42 million (before interest) for the rights deface Lents Park and put a BIG lock on it.
Time for another TA Brit infused cheer perhaps? BTW, why all the Brit slang yells….you all momentarily forget the country the Timbers Team is located?
WELL DONE, AMANDA. Way to stand up and ask some tough questions. You have my support, and have shown backbone and courage, unlike the wimpy Dan Saltzman. Keep it up!!!!!!!
Gustavo, for the record I’m not convinced that Lents Park is the right place for the stadium either. My main points above where that the field lost in this project is no loss at all; that this town can be a very difficult one to push forward projects in; and that their are politicians who exploit that tendency. A couple other thoughts/responses:
“We want public funds to help the community – not private enterprise.”
The most succesful URDs seem to have a component where private enterprise gets a good return. Without that expectation, private funds simply won’t be available. It is a real balancing act: attract private enterprise with an opportunity for a good return, without giving away the farm.
“There are other possible venues for the stadium which would work much better”
That may be right, but each seems to face its own NIMBY dynamic.
“but only in Lents can Poulson and Leonard get the bill covered by public funds.”
You are right, it is URD funds which make this attractive, although Leonard has been pushing from day one to get the resources of city hall working for outer eastside and I think he geniunely believes this is a good project for Lents.
Your point that you think Leonard “genuinely believes this is a good project for Lents”, is enough on its own, to throw the majority.
Haven’t you noticed, Leonard is all about Leonard, and the people are seeing through to that bi-polar thing he has going on with his weird jokes and those recipes on his blog site/over sensitive-anger blow out and insult a Commissioner thing, he keeps hitting us with.
Haven’t you noticed, “gingerdad”, that anything Randy is supporting is enough to indicate to the citizens of our town (not yours), that it can’t be good for the area. Good for paulson’s hobbies, but not for Portland.
“is enough to indicate to the citizens of our town (not yours)”
I have no idea what you are trying to say, but plent of folks who support these efforts are long time Portlanders. I’ve been here for almost 10 years and in Oregon over 15 years; is that enough to meet your threshhold of a Portlander? Or is it that anyone who disagrees with your perspective doesn’t qualify?
It’s apparent you don’t know what any of us who don’t “support the corporate stadium for a few” mean. It is a said statement, being you supposedly work for an “education company” and all, yet are capable of following the basics.
It is a source of amusement however, that a few of you on the Paulson/PR/TA team keep bringing up; with regards to how long you’ve lived here in years. That and which area you live in…dead give away…..” newbie outsider, with an agenda, having the potential of costing the city HUGE, in more ways than one.”
“‘That and which area you live in…dead give away…..’ newbie outsider, with an agenda,”
Divisive and unnecessary. You continue to make factual misstatements, when called on it, you resort to attacking ones motivations, and when that fails, you resort to classic us versus them tactics.
Out of curiosity, who appointed you Lord of defining for WW readers what is “unnecessary”? If it weren’t for the fact that you revealed you work in early childhood ed (which is frightening), you would be such a crack up. Your way of seeing everything as someone’s conspiracy theory is wank (trying to use a word you might relate to with your fetish for all things Anglo).
You sound lost in blog land…perhaps you are looking for a “Sissies looking for Someone to Agree With Me” site, where you’re not so threatened.
Gingerdad: “Teacher, annie said something I think is unnecessary, can’t you make her go away!”.
hold your ground annie!
(you’re right… it’s hard to have something to say by the time I get to the second line.)
Gingerdad & others:
Lents park is not an appropriate site for the stadium, and the current plan uses up the majority of the public urban renewal funds available for the area. It will set all existing programs back by years, and bring negligible economic benefits to Lents. As a resident here, I’d prefer to use that funding to build sidewalks, clean up streets, and create more affordable housing – which in turn will attract more businesses.
I and the many of my neighbors that don’t want the stadium in Lents park are not anti-development. We have looked at the studies and plan carefully, and decided it would be irresponsible to spend $42+ mil of public funding on what is in effect a private facility (even if the plan names it as a public facility). Especially at the cost of Lents park.
We want public funds to help the community – not private enterprise. There are other possible venues for the stadium which would work much better – but only in Lents can Poulson and Leonard get the bill covered by public funds.
Take a look at http://lentspark.blogspot.com/ for a lot of supporting information.
anon says:
June 12, 2009 at 4:27 pm
WELL DONE, AMANDA. Way to stand up and ask some tough questions. You have my support, and have shown backbone and courage, unlike the wimpy Dan Saltzman. Keep it up!!!!!!!
Dear Anon: She will fold when it is all said and done, trust me, she has a track record with me.
“How about you explain how doing nothing is going to create jobs and change the status quo for the better.”
SImple instead of taking the $45M and blowing it on a baseball statdium that will create zero living-wage jobs. Take teh same money and build Nike/Intel a plant, give ti to them and they can hire 1000 people.
[...] for the Paulson minor league baseball stadium. Her latest, well reasoned position paper, of which WW obtained a copy yesterday afternoon, is [...]
In this instance for many of you you agree with Amanda’s position on the stadium proposal.
At some point you’re going to be on the other side of Amanda’s position where she sticks her fingers in her ears and goes blah blah blah nya nya…
Then maybe you’ll realize why having an ideologue like Fritz sitting in an elected office isn’t necessarily a good idea.
blackedout, why do you even bother, when you are down to blathering? It’s not becoming.
Fritz is a total disappointment. She has shown herself to be nothing but a shrill, destructive commissioner. At the end of the day, she is hurting Portland. What she supports is the opposite of what made Portland the wonderful city it is today. Too many Portlanders fail to see that.