Post Office condo scam will include hazmat cleanup
Portland's insane obsession with pushing the regional postal distribution center out of downtown -- and with it, lots of family-wage jobs -- continues apace. So hot are the City Council members to hand that land over to developers for some more of their distinctive, East Berlin-style human warehouses, that they're getting ready to way overpay for the property, all with money borrowed by the taxpayers under the "urban renewal" banner.
If it has its way, the city will probably pay $80 million for the parcel, which is actually worth about half that, and then sell it to a Homer Williams-Mark Edlen type for -- when you cut through all the smoke and mirrors that Steve Janik can cook up -- about a dollar. Next thing you know, we'll have another jungle of multi-story, eco-roofed apartment buildings and blocks and blocks more of vacant "mixed use" storefronts, with the occasional Clearwire store and a Starbucks or two thrown in. In other words, planner Nirvana (no offense to Nirvana). Meanwhile, the Post Office will wisely pull up stakes for some place like Troutdale.
Anyway, the latest episode in the crazy story is the release by the state yesterday of a new environmental cleanup plan that will be needed only if the post office moves out and ground is broken on something different. The post office says it isn't presently planning to move, but it's collecting millions from the city to keep talking about a deal that would send it elsewhere.
No doubt the mayor has already made the routine backroom commitment to his condo weasel overlords. And the state doesn't write cleanup plans for nothing. One can only conclude that along with minor league baseball, Portland can soon bid a wistful goodbye to a bunch of Post Office jobs. Go by streetcar!
Comments (16)
I don't understand the rush to have this space (unless you are a developer). PDX is in sad shape with the people in office....
(scratches head)
Stan, the idea is probably to build as much as they can, while the money is still available, before everything implodes. I'm willing to bet that some weasel has a really good line of credit that he promises to use to pay for all of this, but only if the city fronts the building costs. Then, when it's actually built, the weasels disappear with as much money as they can steal, and the pit is now the city's responsibility.
moving it now may not make sense, and this deal probably has all kinds of insider scams, but just on the merits if you were starting from scratch wouldn't putting the dist center at the airport make sense?
"Next thing you know, we'll have another jungle of multi-story, eco-roofed apartment buildings..."
Actually, I think that's highly unlikely, for at least 10 years, probably more, so I don't understand what they're doing.
The obsession with development for development sake is pretty strange. It's tough to come up with any other explanation then that it is all just about money (for property owners, developers, and campaign cash for politicians).
The citizens need to ask themselves: what if we don't spend a zillion dollars to "renew" that district? What if it just stays as it is? Is that the end of the world? Is it worth a zillion dollars to change the status quo? If so, why?
We really need to force the PDC to explicitly justify all these renewal projects. You know, every city has some areas that are less nice then others. Maybe that's just how cities are, and it isn't some problem that we must fix at great expense.
Why would anyone in there right mind be building, financing, subsidizing condos in PDX right now when there are a glut of unsold places. This scam should be killed instantly.....
Actually, I think that's highly unlikely, for at least 10 years, probably more, so I don't understand what they're doing.
Why do you think that? These idiots create money out of thin air, or just steal it outright from other public sources. If they want it, they will build it.
Yesterday I commented: Shame on our City Council for just about everything they do now week after week. This last week's decision on West Hayden Island shows that they cannot be believed when they talk sustainable. Those who still believe Adams sustainable agenda, why??
Sure enough, first thing this week, again more on the post office deal.
Jon, I'm saying that the private-side developers don't want it. They have a glut of residential space and office space, and can't get financing for either of them right now.
I wonder if there's any coincidence that the same week that Merritt Paulson goes public with his threat to move the Beavers, the City starts talking about developing this site. They've wanted to build a stadium down there forever, and now they can play the "but we'll lose the Beavers!11!!!" card to get a few extra votes.
@johnnyj - have you ever noticed the striking similarity between Denvers urban renewal area with Portlands? its eerie. i'd bet its the same group of developers.
"Keep voting for those incumbents..they always know what's best."
Or you can be like Vancouver voters who tossed out the long-time incumbent mayor for the challenger, only to find that the new mayor now supports even more of what he opposed as a candidate . . .
The constant drumbeat against all incumbents reminds me of the GOP-led passion for term limits in the early 90s . . . a passion that evaporated as soon as they were in the majority. I am getting a strong sense that the people who constantly urge defeat of all incumbents are just hoping to run another trick play of the "all incumbents evil . . . until they're OUR guys."
Here's a MoJo story I just found that I think captures what's going on with the "anti-incumbent" fever -- a guy with a 93% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union isn't conservative enough anymore:
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 (16)
I don't understand the rush to have this space (unless you are a developer). PDX is in sad shape with the people in office....
(scratches head)
Posted by Stan | August 3, 2010 10:00 AM
Stan, the idea is probably to build as much as they can, while the money is still available, before everything implodes. I'm willing to bet that some weasel has a really good line of credit that he promises to use to pay for all of this, but only if the city fronts the building costs. Then, when it's actually built, the weasels disappear with as much money as they can steal, and the pit is now the city's responsibility.
Posted by Texas Triffid Ranch | August 3, 2010 11:00 AM
Keep voting for those incumbents..they always know what's best.
Posted by Dan Derner | August 3, 2010 11:10 AM
moving it now may not make sense, and this deal probably has all kinds of insider scams, but just on the merits if you were starting from scratch wouldn't putting the dist center at the airport make sense?
Posted by eric k | August 3, 2010 11:27 AM
"Next thing you know, we'll have another jungle of multi-story, eco-roofed apartment buildings..."
Actually, I think that's highly unlikely, for at least 10 years, probably more, so I don't understand what they're doing.
The obsession with development for development sake is pretty strange. It's tough to come up with any other explanation then that it is all just about money (for property owners, developers, and campaign cash for politicians).
The citizens need to ask themselves: what if we don't spend a zillion dollars to "renew" that district? What if it just stays as it is? Is that the end of the world? Is it worth a zillion dollars to change the status quo? If so, why?
We really need to force the PDC to explicitly justify all these renewal projects. You know, every city has some areas that are less nice then others. Maybe that's just how cities are, and it isn't some problem that we must fix at great expense.
Posted by Snards | August 3, 2010 11:31 AM
Why would anyone in there right mind be building, financing, subsidizing condos in PDX right now when there are a glut of unsold places. This scam should be killed instantly.....
Posted by LucsAdvo | August 3, 2010 12:22 PM
Actually, I think that's highly unlikely, for at least 10 years, probably more, so I don't understand what they're doing.
Why do you think that? These idiots create money out of thin air, or just steal it outright from other public sources. If they want it, they will build it.
Posted by Jon | August 3, 2010 12:29 PM
Yesterday I commented: Shame on our City Council for just about everything they do now week after week. This last week's decision on West Hayden Island shows that they cannot be believed when they talk sustainable. Those who still believe Adams sustainable agenda, why??
Sure enough, first thing this week, again more on the post office deal.
The week isn’t over.
Posted by clinamen | August 3, 2010 1:25 PM
"If they want it, they will build it."
Jon, I'm saying that the private-side developers don't want it. They have a glut of residential space and office space, and can't get financing for either of them right now.
Posted by Snards | August 3, 2010 1:36 PM
I wonder if there's any coincidence that the same week that Merritt Paulson goes public with his threat to move the Beavers, the City starts talking about developing this site. They've wanted to build a stadium down there forever, and now they can play the "but we'll lose the Beavers!11!!!" card to get a few extra votes.
Posted by Dave J. | August 3, 2010 2:16 PM
clinamen commented "The week isn't over"
For KRICE sake, did you need to remind us and scare us?
Posted by LucsAdvo | August 3, 2010 9:03 PM
anyone see this article from Denver? What are Portland's affiliations?
http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_15673894
Posted by johnnyj | August 4, 2010 9:36 AM
Last time I heard talk of that area they were wanting to put a baseball stadium there...
Posted by jon | August 4, 2010 9:41 AM
@johnnyj - have you ever noticed the striking similarity between Denvers urban renewal area with Portlands? its eerie. i'd bet its the same group of developers.
Posted by jon | August 4, 2010 9:43 AM
"Keep voting for those incumbents..they always know what's best."
Or you can be like Vancouver voters who tossed out the long-time incumbent mayor for the challenger, only to find that the new mayor now supports even more of what he opposed as a candidate . . .
The constant drumbeat against all incumbents reminds me of the GOP-led passion for term limits in the early 90s . . . a passion that evaporated as soon as they were in the majority. I am getting a strong sense that the people who constantly urge defeat of all incumbents are just hoping to run another trick play of the "all incumbents evil . . . until they're OUR guys."
Posted by George Anonymuncule Seldes | August 4, 2010 10:25 AM
Here's a MoJo story I just found that I think captures what's going on with the "anti-incumbent" fever -- a guy with a 93% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union isn't conservative enough anymore:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/08/bob-inglis-tea-party-casualty
Posted by George Anonymuncule Seldes | August 4, 2010 10:34 AM