DoyleG Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 quote:Originally posted by spiral And if he's the son of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson like everyone says he apparently is and his Dad is handing out $ 300 Billion to the big banks to survive, how do you figure he won't have enough money for his son's soccer venture? http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_030109_sports_soccer_portland.166533d3.html His dad has **** all to do with the federal bailout. His term as Treasury Secretary ended on January 20. The blog you posted doesn't mean anything since its by a baseball fanatic who wants to keep PGE Park for baseball. Although we know that stadium is suitable for anything but baseball. And its clear tyhose that are commenting are kicking his sorry ass back into line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgary Boomer Posted March 2, 2009 Author Share Posted March 2, 2009 quote:Originally posted by spiral What the F are you talking Paulson has no money? Read the article below! He's gonna pay the $ 40 million expansion fee. And if he's the son of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson like everyone says he apparently is and his Dad is handing out $ 300 Billion to the big banks to survive, how do you figure he won't have enough money for his son's soccer venture? http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_030109_sports_soccer_portland.166533d3.html Blogs and columns by nobody's should go under the Spiral and Luis MLS expansion rhetoric forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandstander Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 quote:Originally posted by spiral What the F are you talking Paulson has no money? Read the article below! He's gonna pay the $ 40 million expansion fee. And if he's the son of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson like everyone says he apparently is and his Dad is handing out $ 300 Billion to the big banks to survive, how do you figure he won't have enough money for his son's soccer venture? http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_030109_sports_soccer_portland.166533d3.html If he had the money, or an ownership group that had the money they would not need tax payer dollars. HE DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 ^ On the other hand he may be taking a position not all that different from Saputo in Montreal, limiting his exposure and in Paulson's case, transferring some of the risk to the Portland taxpayer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 and that's exactly what Portland City Council doesn't want: Courtesy of the Portland Outlook: Two controversial Portland-area projects face key votes this week: The plan to bring a Major League Soccer team to town and the proposed Columbia River Crossing bridge between Portland and Vancouver, Wash. Although the votes will be held by advisory committees, their outcomes could help determine whether the projects go forward. Portland Mayor Sam Adams says negative votes will not necessarily doom the projects, but could greatly complicate them. “These are important votes, no doubt,” said Adams. The question of spending public funds to bring professional soccer to Portland will be taken up by the Major League Soccer/Triple A Baseball Task Force on Tuesday afternoon. The task force was formed by Adams and Commissioner Randy Leonard to review the financing plan being developed to bring an MLS team to Portland. The City Council is being asked to commit an estimated $85 million to renovate PGE Park for the team and build a new baseball stadium for the Portland Beavers. “Commissioner Leonard and I appointed the task force to give us good, objective advice on whether the financing plan pencils out,” said Adams. The task force is reviewing a plan being developed by Beavers owner Merritt Paulson and city finance officials. It involves Paulson paying $40 million of his own money to secure an MLS expansion team, and the city issuing revenue bonds backed by a ticket tax, urban renewal funds and others sources for the remodeling and construction work. The council must approve the plan by mid-March for Paulson to apply for one of two expansion team franchises that will be awarded this summer. Adams said that at the least, the council must approve a framework agreement with Paulson that shows how the move can be accomplished. Avoiding a repeat of PGE Park debacle Many local soccer fans support bringing a professional team to Portland. Dozens of them packed the last task force meeting and rallied at City Hall on Sunday to urge the council to back Paulson’s application. The plan is questioned by a number of financially conservative local bloggers, including Lewis & Clark law professor Jack Bogdanski, who operates the well-read bojack.org Web site. He and others argue the city cannot afford construction and renovations costs, especially with the economy in such bad shape. The task force will meet Tuesday afternoon to consider a draft resolution that calls for the council to move forward with the agreement, provided that no city agency budgets be cut and Portland taxpayers be protected in case the city defaults on the bonds. The draft resolution also notes that an additional $20 million to $40 million must be raised to pay for all the work, depending in part of the final cost of the new baseball stadium. The task force plans to finalize the recommendation Tuesday and present it to the City Council on March 11. Adams said that if the task force votes against the resolution on Tuesday, the council will take that very seriously. “One goal of appointing the task force was to prevent a repeat of the PGE Park debacle,” said Adams, referring to financial problems that arose with earlier owners of the Beavers after the former City Stadium was last remodeled. “We would have to look at their rationale very closely.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 well it looks like the Task Force will recommend to City Council that Paulson gets his upgrades... gulp... I think we're in trouble http://blog.oregonlive.com/tailgate_impact/2009/03/Report.doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandstander Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Richard ^ On the other hand he may be taking a position not all that different from Saputo in Montreal, limiting his exposure and in Paulson's case, transferring some of the risk to the Portland taxpayer. Unfortunately his risk limiting was based on Gillet's involvemnet. He's out, and so is Montreal. It's one thing for state or even federal funding, local city funding for the 85 million draws from a smaller pool of people. Obviously I have a bias towards Vancouver's bid, but I would not be happy if my municipality wnated to fork that much money specifically to help a private enterprise. I hope those teams (Beavers & Timbers) don't relocate or fold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 ^ Hmmmm... what about all the money the BC government is spending on BC Place, not just for the Whitecaps who expect to be only temporary tenants but for the BC Lions for whom it is a permanent home plus a few trade shows... they're all private enterprise. The bulk of the spending is for the Olympics, the world's biggest ever money-wasting elitist boondoggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SthMelbRed Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 ^Neither the Whitecaps nor the Lions solicited the provincial government to spend the money refurbishing BC Place. The roof needs to be replaced because it's reached it's shelf life. The city needs a venue which can host trade shows because they bring outside money into the city, creating jobs. The Olympics are coming to Vancouver because the majority of the people wanted the city, province, and COA to pursue it. Don't let the vocal minority fool you, into thinking otherwise. The situations in Vancouver and Portland could not possibly be any more different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Not sure the majority of those trade shows couldn't be mounted at the brand new billion dollar convention centre nextdoor to Canada Place. Whilst BC Place getting a facelift was primarily for the 2010 Olympics, you're kidding yourself if you think the Whitecaps and BC Lions weren't actively involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 The Lions and Caps were consulted as to what they wanted. The new Trade and Convention Center should be looked at as an addition to Vancouver's trade and convention infrastructure rather than as a replacement to BC Place. Imagine holding the Monster Truck show at the new Convention center! That would be wild! Monster Truck shows and the Playdome next week can only be held at beautiful BC Place. We should recognize Bob Ackles efforts. Even though he is not with us anymore, he was instrumental in fighting for BC Place's survival. Losing Ackles is a huge loss but his efforts are a big reason why BC Place is still here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandstander Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Richard ^ Hmmmm... what about all the money the BC government is spending on BC Place, not just for the Whitecaps who expect to be only temporary tenants but for the BC Lions for whom it is a permanent home plus a few trade shows... they're all private enterprise. The bulk of the spending is for the Olympics, the world's biggest ever money-wasting elitist boondoggle. BC Place owned by PavCO, which is a provincially owned company. Renovations are being fronted by the governement to be recouped by increased dates at th venue, but especially by the sale of development rights owned by the stadium on surrounding property. The renovations will benefit the Olympics, and without the Olympics the renos would not have taken place to help the Lions. To help their own cause, the BC government approached the Whitecaps with the idea of becoming a tenant. So, the government is refurbishing it's own asset. In Portland Paulson is looking for construction on an SSS and baseball park that specifically benefit his teams. The difference may be blurry to you, but it's there. The BC government is taking on the construction here, as well as plans for generating the revenue to recoup it's costs. No bonds, no lengthy repayment etc. I am speaking about a government so what they say and what they do...it's anyone's guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandstander Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Richard Not sure the majority of those trade shows couldn't be mounted at the brand new billion dollar convention centre nextdoor to Canada Place. Whilst BC Place getting a facelift was primarily for the 2010 Olympics, you're kidding yourself if you think the Whitecaps and BC Lions weren't actively involved. Uh yeah..let's get all those RV and Boat shows into the new convention centre. Not to mention 59,000 for premium concerts and what about the fair held in the stdaium. No, two different venues serving differnet markets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 You're still kidding yourself if you think the WHitecaps and BC Lions have been passive bystanders in all of this and yes, many of the trade shows at BC Place could just as easily be held at the convention centre... I never did say they ALL could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandstander Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 I can not confirm or deny that any lobbying behind closed doors did not go on. You are sure of it. However, nothing public on the Whitecaps front has ever comeout. The Lions have been wanting this for years as the stadium started to show it's age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 As I say, thank Bob Ackles for his work; he's a big reason why that Stadium is being resurrected in a big way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Not a done deal yet. They still need a third Yes vote and that's not certain. Also not certain is how Portland's approval / rejection would affect Vancouver / Ottawa. I wonder if Mayor Adams (remember that he's trying to avoid a Recall vote in June) and Leonard presented this package to make them look good but knowing it will ultimately fail: http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2009/03/adams_leonard_defend_soccer_de.html http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/story.php?story_id=123670400456450000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loud Mouth Soup Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 EXPANSION F**KING THREAD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Last minute plea from Portland's Mayor. Funny how Gregor Robertson doesn't make a peep about soccer but he allows homeowners to have chickens in their backyard: http://www.portlandonline.com/mayor/?c=49519&a=234419 I want you to watch Sam Adams' presentation here and judge how it compares to Robertson announcing that homeowners here will be allowed to have chickens in their backyards: http://www.kptv.com/video/18898724/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 ^ Hey, knock off the criticism, we had chickens in our backyard when I was growing up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 ^ Hey, knock off the criticism, we had chickens in our backyard when I was growing up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeta Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Richard ^ Hey, knock off the criticism, we had chickens in our backyard when I was growing up Ha! It still amazes me that my Grandparents (on my Dad's side) had chickens in the yard, rifles hanging on the wall in the unlocked porch and only had electricity for lighting. They didn't get indoor plumbing until after the "city kids" began refusing to visit them. I don't think I'll ever get over that. That someone (anyone!) lived like that in Canada</u> well into the '70s. Incredible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 ^ WOuld that people were as responsible about firearms use now as they were back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.