

We accept advertising through Blogads. If you're interested, click the "Advertise here" link above, or go here to place your ad through Blogads. For assistance, e-mail me here; I'd be glad to help. Reach lots of viewers -- we're up to about 3,800 unique visits a day, and more than 61,000 page views a week (as of November 4). Our rates are dirt cheap for the exposure you'll get! If you'd like to advertise without going through the Blogads system, that's do-able, too. Just e-mail us here for more information.
As a lawyer/blogger, I get
to be a member of:
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
Cameron, Chardonnay
B.R. Cohn, Cabernet, Silver Label 2006
Graffigna, Cabernet 2005
Palo Alto, Reserve Red 2008
Menguante, Garnacha 2008
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Felsina Berardenga, Vin Santo 1997
Anne Amie, Pinot Gris 2009
McKinley Springs, Bombing Ramge Red 2007
Vieux Papes Red
Dionysius Chardonnay 2009
Haden Fig, Pinot Noir 2009
Vega Montan, Mencia 2008
Chateau la Vernede, Coteaux du Languedoc 2007
Mount Defiance, Hellfire (White) 2008
Root: 1, Cabernet 2008
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Pinot Grigio 2009
Columbia Crest, Two Vines, Vineyard 10 White, 2008
Columbia Crest, Two Vines, Vineyard 10 Rose, 2007
Abacela, Grenache Rose 2009
Avia Cabernet 2004
Lemelson Pinot Noir, Thea's Selection 2007
Chateau de la Roulerie, Rose d'Anjou 2009
Casal Garcia, Vinho Verde Rose
La Ferme Julien, Rose 2008
Cana's Feast, Bricco Red, 2006
Hogue, Genesis Merlot, 2008
Owen Roe, Sharecropper's Cabernet, 2008
Kim Crawford, Unoaked Chardonnay 2008
J. Scott, Pinot Noir 2008
Edmunds St. John, White, Heart of Gold 2008
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2006
Stevenot, Cabernet, Sierra Foothills, "Stanford" 2000
Portuga, Vinho Rose 2009
Taylor Fladgate, First Estate Reserve Porto
Franciscan, Cabernet, Napa 2006
Chaparral de Vega Sindoa, Garnacha 2008
Quinta da Aveleda, Vinho Verde 2008
St. Francis, Chardonnay Sonoma 2008
E. Guigal, Cotes du Rhone Blanc, 2007
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly, Gamay Noir 2008
St. Innocent, Pinot Noir 2006
Jigsaw, Pinot Noir 2007
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Merlot, Indian Wells 2007
Charles Shaw, Chardonnay 2008
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly, Gamay Rosé 2009
Cameron, Willamette Valley Chardonnay
Il Valore, Sangiovese, Giovane, Puglia 2008
Duck Pond, Chardonnay, Wahluke Slope 2007
Kim Crawford, Marlborough Pinot Noir 2008
Domaine du Pesquier, Cotes du Rhone 2005
Cantina Zaccagnini, Montepulciano d'Abruzzo 2006
Domaine Matrot, Chardonnay, Bourgogne 2007
David Hill, Oregon Sparkling Wine, Brut
Chandler Reach, Monte Regalo 2006
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2008
Kirkland, Columbia Valley Merlot 2008
D'Aragon, Old Vine Garnacha 2008
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2005
Pavin & Riley, Merlot 2006
David Hill, Estate Pinot Noir, Barrel Select 2006
Castle Rock, Paso Robles Cabernet 2006
Magnificent, Cabernet, Steak House 2008
Conundrum 2008
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1998
Saint Cosme, Cotes-du-Rhone 2007
La Granja, Tempranillo 360, 2008
Santa Rita, Mendalla Real Cabernet 2006
Columbia Crest, Grand Estates Merlot 2006
Andezon, Cotes-du-Rhone 2007
Collegiata, Montepulciano d'Abruzzo
Troon, Druid's Fluid 2008
La Granja, Tempranillo 2008
Monte Antico, Toscana 2006
Vieux Papes, Blanc de Blancs
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt
Miles run year to date: 54
At this date last year: 50
Total run in 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269
Comments (21)
The A-Engrossed version of House Bill 2531 establishes a $15 million cap for incremental tax revenues destined for the Major League Stadium Fund for a 30-year period. However, there have been two recent House Revenue Committee work sessions, including one scheduled for yesterday. Can't wait to see the B-Engrossed bill.
Posted by A Hopeful | June 4, 2009 10:07 AM
Good observations. I myself was wondering how pre-paying rent constitutes investment.
Posted by Chubby | June 4, 2009 10:14 AM
That's par for the course in portland politics. Lets not let facts get in the way of our decisions. Has any major "improvement" ever penned out dollar-wise before they went forward? Max, Streetcar, etc., etc.
Posted by mj | June 4, 2009 10:22 AM
Jack, maybe you know more on how the remaining costs of $28M, and it's debt costs for PGE Park is being handled. This should be figured in the true costs of this proposed "deal".
Posted by Lee | June 4, 2009 10:47 AM
Capturing state income tax is not free money. I have no idea where this idea comes from. The taxes people working for teams would pay to the state comes primarily from the spending by fans, who in turn would have spent the same money elsewhere had the stadium not been built. It is money out of the state tax system. Not new dollars.
Taken to the extreme, what if all of us got such a break. My company could get our income taxes recaptured and used to pay for our rent. Fred Meyer could use the many millions its workers pay to Oregon and have it plowed back into store infrastructure. What would the state have left to pay foster parents, run its schools, etc??
Posted by BW | June 4, 2009 10:51 AM
Imagine all that capital going to improve schools and parks that are being neglected.
Posted by swimmer | June 4, 2009 10:55 AM
maybe you know more on how the remaining costs of $28M, and it's debt costs for PGE Park is being handled. This should be figured in the true costs of this proposed "deal".
The Paulsons' attitude toward that is that the prior remodeling wasn't their deal, and so paying off those bonds is strictly the city's problem.
Posted by Jack Bog | June 4, 2009 11:40 AM
"Paulsons' attitude" is one thing, but simple accounting practices is another. What is the arrangement with Paulsons if they are the major tenants of PGE Park, that reconfiguration will drastically limit the uses just for their enterprise?
One would think that Sam and Randy could tell us how the $28 Million old debt will be paid off with Paulsons' proposal. It isn't "chump change". I would even include other costs of PGE Park, like taxpayers paying an extra $3 dollars an hour to make "living wages" for Paulsons employees.
These things add up and could fill a pothole or two and keep 50 police patrolling the streets.
Posted by Lee | June 4, 2009 12:14 PM
"Larabee neglects to take into account in any way the 18-year rent and tax holiday"
To be fair on the property tax, CoP would own the properties and not pay property tax.
However, they are relying on Paulson to pay rent so CoP can pay back the bonds.
This is the problem I have. Every time Randy gets backed into a corner by saying something less-than-intelligent, he spouts the "Paulson will pay for it" line.
Like maybe Paulson can cure cancer.
Posted by Steve | June 4, 2009 1:16 PM
No, the tax holiday is on the ticket tax that's supposed to pay off the bonds. I never expected anyone to pay any property tax -- heaven forbid.
Posted by Jack Bog | June 4, 2009 2:00 PM
"I never expected anyone to pay any property tax"
You're right, thats for the fools that fund these kind of things, like taxpayers.
Posted by Steve | June 4, 2009 3:44 PM
Jack,in the cost figures, don't forget to include what it would cost for the mandatory replacement of parkland that these goons would be paving over.
Posted by RANZ | June 4, 2009 8:33 PM
The trees alone are worth upwards of a million.
But the park land isn't going to be replaced, is it? How is that "mandatory"?
Posted by Jack Bog | June 4, 2009 8:50 PM
This link is sort of off-topic but really not, as it's yet another case (as in the present one) of the media doing their level best to shout down "the critics" -- the nattering nabobs of negativism -- and then, years later, admitting that the "gadflies" were right all along, and that what looked like a scam, walked like a scam, and quacked like a scam was -- quelle surprise! -- a scam!
Funny how the punditocracy, particularly at the Big O, steadfastly refuses to review history of projects and predictions when discussing things like the Lents boondoggle. Opposing the punditocracy is like being right about Iraq all along -- someone, the ante for being taken seriously is that you had to have been wrong at the start. If you knew the was was a crock of crap from day 1, you just aren't serious. If you can smell tax scams and sports scams a mile away, you just aren't a serious person -- you're a bitter local blogger or something like that.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/business/05norris.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Posted by George Anonymuncule Seldes | June 4, 2009 10:17 PM
typo alert -- "someone, the ante" should be "somehow, the ante"
Posted by George Anonymuncule Seldes | June 4, 2009 10:18 PM
How about you land use gurus pitching in on this conversation, and related ones in this blog on the subject of these goofy Paulson stadium schemes? Especially the proposed take-over of historic Lents Park.
ORS 197.013 Implementation and enforcement are of statewide concern. -- Implementation and enforcement of acknowledged comprehensive plans and land use regulations are matters of statewide concern.
Posted by Mojo | June 4, 2009 10:49 PM
P.S. -- Lents Park is certainly eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places in the U.S. Can you say "federal case" boys & girls?
And add a few more years and other uncertainties to the process.
Hands off Lents Park, Paulson!
Posted by Mojo | June 4, 2009 10:56 PM
Historic designation takes a long time. Fireman Randy will be cutting down trees in September.
Posted by Jack Bog | June 4, 2009 10:59 PM
Oregon's Land Use Goals
http://www.lcd.state.or.us/LCD/goals.shtml
See, among others, Goal 5.
Paulson & Co. shouldn't be able to get any state permits to facilitate the obliteration of Lents Park.
Get lost, Randy.
Posted by Mojo | June 4, 2009 11:04 PM
Jack, You raised another thoughtful point, but I didn't necessarily mean historic designation by the City's internal processes, but rather, by the federal/state agencies from whom CoP/Paulson/Peregrine/Turkey LLC, must obtain permits (e.g., DEP, DOT). Eligibility determination is a threshold process. National Historic Preservation Act, Sec.106 and/or federal transportation act Sec.4f. But certainly, as a federally-approved national historic preservation program delegee, the City has the duty to make the eligibility determination up-front. And that decision can be appealed administratively through the state, and ultimately to the Secretary of the Interior of the U.S. Add at least two more years to the process just for that.
Furthermore, chainsawing those (actual, if not yet designated) heritage trees in Lents Park beforehand -- or any other such alterations of the historic landscape and "traditional cultural property" that Lents Park is -- would be an illegal "anticipatory demolition" under the National Historic Preservation Act, Sec.110. "Anticipatory demolition" violations of the NHPA subject the violator -- in this case the City of Portland -- to severe sanctions, particularly including losing federal grant funds and being barred from obtaining future grants. The City's authority to regulate its own federally-approved historic preservation program would likewise be forfeited.
Such destruction of those trees or any other feature of historic Lents Park would actually have the real potential to cost the City of Portland hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars.
Hey, Randy & Merritt: instead of trying to build a commercial stadium and parking lot on Lents Park, why don't you go there and fly a kite?
Posted by Mojo | June 4, 2009 11:40 PM
Jack: You are ASSuming that Mark Larabee is a reporter who deals with actual facts. In reality, he's one of the growing number of "journalists" who prefer to deal with opinions of their own and those who employ them. And the newspaper people wonder why their circulation numbers are dropping by the thousands.
Posted by Dave A. | June 5, 2009 6:38 AM