Here's an interesting debate. On one side we find a smart guy who's made many, many millions of dollars running a successful business, and given lots of it back to the local community. On the other side, we find... well... another guy.
Comments (13)
Sam Adams and credibility are mutually exlusive. He looks like he's lying. He sounds like he's lying. And he's been proven to be a liar.
Sorry, Jack, but this one is from the even-a-stopped-clock-is-right-twice-a-day department. Willamette needs all the help it can get when it comes to keeping industrial nastiness out of it.
BES had a dog and pony show at the St. Johns lab several years ago to review some of the processes they could use to remove this stuff. Costs were all over the place. For years Sam and Vera have been trying to delay with EPA, and point their fingers at business. (GASCO was a political solution). They would rather spend money on the old useless "River Renaissance". Superfund money seems to have evaporated for us. We now pay for it on our water/ sewer bill. The point being this is another poor management example from City of Portland and their attitude for business. Greenbrier is right on.
When will Portlanders wake up? We're circling the drain people! Vote in some NEW candidates!!!
The leopard reminds me of a trip to the Serengeti near Ngornogoro Crater. Probably in the same area as this photo. We were close enough, not unlike this photo to practically touch the leopard in the tree. He had an impala kill wedged in between two branches, and had little interest in us. Thanks for the great shot.
I might believe Furman if he would site specific examples of what the Willamette Plan will do to his business in detail. the Willamette plan is needed to address the sound environmental policy and jobs, they are not mutually exclusive. A clean healthy river, regulation to support business activities and those in support of citizens access to the river is needed.
I think the point is being missed here. We all want a clean river and water but opportunites to get it done long ago were squandered by Vera and Sam. EPA Superfund could have helped pay for it but they did not want EPA help because of oversight. Stupid decision. Now Superfund money is gone and no help from Feds. How many times and how long do businesses have to pay for poor CoP management and judgement?
The answer is: they are leaving fast and for good reason. It's an expensive mess that could have been avoided and finished long ago. Now we will all pay more for mistakes from elected idiots.
In this economic climate, the city should be doing nothing that comes close to costing jobs. They sure as hell don't know how to attract or recruit jobs, so they should leave the ones we have alone. The economy is going to recover much more slowly than people seem to think. Political leaders should leave every existing job untouched. Five years from now, they'll be happy that they did.
The problem with Portland isn't that we love our beautiful local environment. We should. Or that we like bikes. They're nice and healthy. I'll even admit that streetcars look nice on a postcard. The problem with Portland is these things and others we tend to like don't pay the bills, and in fact many of them cost a ton of money.
Portland, and I'm talking individual Portlanders, have to learn to reconcile their politics with private business and understand their needs. Private economic activity pays for every public good we have. Our government and its big plans simply wouldn't exist without private enterprise. So if we want these community benefits, we have to get over our distrust of "corporations" and hear them out. They aren't all Mr. Burns. They're generally trying to help out a community that they love too.
Sam's "I don't by it" remark is not a good remark to make to entice cooperation in allowing industry to prosper and the environment to prosper along the lower Willamette. Notice that Sam cites some study that shows business is prospering along the Willamette. I don't by it. What study? Sam is good at pretending he is smart, knowledgeable about a subject matter-but not really. He employs this operandi at all the townhalls, and other public meetings to squelch public opposition, or even an honest discourse.
The point Furman is making is that it isn't a question of whether industry is prospering, but after having over 14 public agencies to satisfy to turn over even a shovel full of dirt, adding more layers of CoP RiverPlan requirements will send businesses away. And not encourage others to come. If the City wanted to do something, just enforce the regulations in place now.
On one hand you have the industries that caused a huge mess and have contributed vastly to the Portland Harbor being designated a Superfund site -- which has already cost 70 million to date for inventory[1], and will cost hundreds of millions more to get cleaned up. Clearly, it's not just the businesses that get handed an invoice, it's everyone.
On the other hand this is more regulation in the wake of huge job losses that certainly aren't going to help businesses by any means.
I wish I could read the letter he wrote, why would KGW not post it?
Either KGW did a terrible job reporting, or Bill Furman is not making a convincing argument. I'm not exactly sure what Saks Fifth Avenue has a ton to do with the River Plan. The River Plan does have a lot to do with his business on the river's edge -- why not explain how the River Plan will affect his business specially, instead, and use numbers.
That's more of a cogent argument than saying, "There's a ton of vacancies in Portland, so that's why we shouldn't pass the River Plan".
I'm not sure why businesses threaten to move to Vancouver, usually when they do, they are making political statements instead of business statements. By all means, it would probably cost them a boat-load, quite literally, just to move.
If the economics of it were that great, they would probably have done so already.
But, I and many others want them in Portland instead, I just don't like the attitudes on both sides of the issue.
And of course, there's Scam Adams, with smug, smarmy, condescending persona trying to tell us simpletons that of course we don't understand, it's so complex and governmenty and so forth. I'm sure he has a team of $100K consultants whipping up a report to suit his end goal which will amount to collecting more money from taxpayers and distributing it among the usual cadre of bandits.
Actually, I think Sam Adams is not so interested in Gunderson/Greenbrier and its hundreds of blue collar metalworking and welding jobs, but rather the 4,100 linear feet of land between Front Avenue and the Willamette River, that's between 600-700 feet wide, to use as prime redevelopment.
So what if it's next to a major railroad yard that is owned by not one, but TWO major railroads (both BNSF and UP, through the joint-owned Portland Terminal Railroad Company), that Adams would have no control or influence over? But if you get rid of all the industry in Portland, then that yard would become surplus and for sale (at grossly inflated prices, that no one in their right mind would pay for it. Except, of course, the City of Portland which would gladly pay - no questions asked - and would probably even pitch in a couple million extra!)
Erik H, your point about the two major railroads serving our city brings up a major point. Our city is fortunate to be located at several major transportation hubs of railroads, seaport/riverport, federal highways, and airport services; and all on the Pacific Rim. But with Sam who claims he sees the "big picture" he has little understanding how existing endless regulations and calls for new regulations affects even the continuation of what we have or their expansion.
You might be right, Sam may want to get rid of a pivotal transportation hub-railroads and ships, to build green condos along the river. How nice, how so forward thinking to substitute a Starbucks job for a Gunderson $70,000 job that lasts for a lifetime.
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
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
The Occasional Book
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
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
Road Work
Miles run year to date: 21
At this date last year: 52
Total run in 2012: 129
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 (13)
Sam Adams and credibility are mutually exlusive. He looks like he's lying. He sounds like he's lying. And he's been proven to be a liar.
Posted by expop | April 17, 2010 11:07 AM
Sorry, Jack, but this one is from the even-a-stopped-clock-is-right-twice-a-day department. Willamette needs all the help it can get when it comes to keeping industrial nastiness out of it.
Posted by Shirley U. Jest | April 17, 2010 11:13 AM
BES had a dog and pony show at the St. Johns lab several years ago to review some of the processes they could use to remove this stuff. Costs were all over the place. For years Sam and Vera have been trying to delay with EPA, and point their fingers at business. (GASCO was a political solution). They would rather spend money on the old useless "River Renaissance". Superfund money seems to have evaporated for us. We now pay for it on our water/ sewer bill. The point being this is another poor management example from City of Portland and their attitude for business. Greenbrier is right on.
When will Portlanders wake up? We're circling the drain people! Vote in some NEW candidates!!!
The leopard reminds me of a trip to the Serengeti near Ngornogoro Crater. Probably in the same area as this photo. We were close enough, not unlike this photo to practically touch the leopard in the tree. He had an impala kill wedged in between two branches, and had little interest in us. Thanks for the great shot.
Posted by Herb S. | April 17, 2010 11:13 AM
I might believe Furman if he would site specific examples of what the Willamette Plan will do to his business in detail. the Willamette plan is needed to address the sound environmental policy and jobs, they are not mutually exclusive. A clean healthy river, regulation to support business activities and those in support of citizens access to the river is needed.
Posted by michael | April 17, 2010 11:22 AM
I think the point is being missed here. We all want a clean river and water but opportunites to get it done long ago were squandered by Vera and Sam. EPA Superfund could have helped pay for it but they did not want EPA help because of oversight. Stupid decision. Now Superfund money is gone and no help from Feds. How many times and how long do businesses have to pay for poor CoP management and judgement?
The answer is: they are leaving fast and for good reason. It's an expensive mess that could have been avoided and finished long ago. Now we will all pay more for mistakes from elected idiots.
Posted by Frank Delay | April 17, 2010 11:50 AM
it's sad when advocates for a clean river have this guy as an rep. on TV--real bad PR.
Posted by jimbo | April 17, 2010 12:13 PM
In this economic climate, the city should be doing nothing that comes close to costing jobs. They sure as hell don't know how to attract or recruit jobs, so they should leave the ones we have alone. The economy is going to recover much more slowly than people seem to think. Political leaders should leave every existing job untouched. Five years from now, they'll be happy that they did.
The problem with Portland isn't that we love our beautiful local environment. We should. Or that we like bikes. They're nice and healthy. I'll even admit that streetcars look nice on a postcard. The problem with Portland is these things and others we tend to like don't pay the bills, and in fact many of them cost a ton of money.
Portland, and I'm talking individual Portlanders, have to learn to reconcile their politics with private business and understand their needs. Private economic activity pays for every public good we have. Our government and its big plans simply wouldn't exist without private enterprise. So if we want these community benefits, we have to get over our distrust of "corporations" and hear them out. They aren't all Mr. Burns. They're generally trying to help out a community that they love too.
Posted by Snards | April 17, 2010 2:05 PM
Sam's "I don't by it" remark is not a good remark to make to entice cooperation in allowing industry to prosper and the environment to prosper along the lower Willamette. Notice that Sam cites some study that shows business is prospering along the Willamette. I don't by it. What study? Sam is good at pretending he is smart, knowledgeable about a subject matter-but not really. He employs this operandi at all the townhalls, and other public meetings to squelch public opposition, or even an honest discourse.
The point Furman is making is that it isn't a question of whether industry is prospering, but after having over 14 public agencies to satisfy to turn over even a shovel full of dirt, adding more layers of CoP RiverPlan requirements will send businesses away. And not encourage others to come. If the City wanted to do something, just enforce the regulations in place now.
Posted by Jerry | April 17, 2010 4:06 PM
On one hand you have the industries that caused a huge mess and have contributed vastly to the Portland Harbor being designated a Superfund site -- which has already cost 70 million to date for inventory[1], and will cost hundreds of millions more to get cleaned up. Clearly, it's not just the businesses that get handed an invoice, it's everyone.
On the other hand this is more regulation in the wake of huge job losses that certainly aren't going to help businesses by any means.
[1] http://www.millernash.com/showarticle.aspx?Show=2768
I wish I could read the letter he wrote, why would KGW not post it?
Either KGW did a terrible job reporting, or Bill Furman is not making a convincing argument. I'm not exactly sure what Saks Fifth Avenue has a ton to do with the River Plan. The River Plan does have a lot to do with his business on the river's edge -- why not explain how the River Plan will affect his business specially, instead, and use numbers.
That's more of a cogent argument than saying, "There's a ton of vacancies in Portland, so that's why we shouldn't pass the River Plan".
I'm not sure why businesses threaten to move to Vancouver, usually when they do, they are making political statements instead of business statements. By all means, it would probably cost them a boat-load, quite literally, just to move.
If the economics of it were that great, they would probably have done so already.
But, I and many others want them in Portland instead, I just don't like the attitudes on both sides of the issue.
Ultimately some concessions need to be made.
Posted by ws | April 17, 2010 5:21 PM
"Willamette needs all the help it can get"
That'd be nice if they actually spent any extra funds on cleaning the Willamette.
How long were we dumping sewage into the same river before evil Bush and the environmentalists had to sue CoP to get them to stop.
They don't care one bit about the river, just procuring more funds to siphon off for pet projects.
Posted by Steve | April 17, 2010 5:37 PM
And of course, there's Scam Adams, with smug, smarmy, condescending persona trying to tell us simpletons that of course we don't understand, it's so complex and governmenty and so forth. I'm sure he has a team of $100K consultants whipping up a report to suit his end goal which will amount to collecting more money from taxpayers and distributing it among the usual cadre of bandits.
Posted by notjustforlooks | April 18, 2010 7:43 AM
Actually, I think Sam Adams is not so interested in Gunderson/Greenbrier and its hundreds of blue collar metalworking and welding jobs, but rather the 4,100 linear feet of land between Front Avenue and the Willamette River, that's between 600-700 feet wide, to use as prime redevelopment.
So what if it's next to a major railroad yard that is owned by not one, but TWO major railroads (both BNSF and UP, through the joint-owned Portland Terminal Railroad Company), that Adams would have no control or influence over? But if you get rid of all the industry in Portland, then that yard would become surplus and for sale (at grossly inflated prices, that no one in their right mind would pay for it. Except, of course, the City of Portland which would gladly pay - no questions asked - and would probably even pitch in a couple million extra!)
Posted by Erik H. | April 18, 2010 9:30 AM
Erik H, your point about the two major railroads serving our city brings up a major point. Our city is fortunate to be located at several major transportation hubs of railroads, seaport/riverport, federal highways, and airport services; and all on the Pacific Rim. But with Sam who claims he sees the "big picture" he has little understanding how existing endless regulations and calls for new regulations affects even the continuation of what we have or their expansion.
You might be right, Sam may want to get rid of a pivotal transportation hub-railroads and ships, to build green condos along the river. How nice, how so forward thinking to substitute a Starbucks job for a Gunderson $70,000 job that lasts for a lifetime.
Posted by Lee | April 18, 2010 1:42 PM