Fixers don't come cheap
Cha ching! Steve Janik, the high-end real estate lawyer who's putting together the Paulson stadium deal, just got his fee from the City of Portland raised. Janik's meter is now up to $415,000, and counting.
It's pretty funny -- between the time they drafted the contract amendment raising his fee and the time they got it onto the City Council agenda, his price went up by $15,000!
But worth every penny, no doubt. Janik would kill the deal if it was in the best interests of taxpayers to do so. Wouldn't he?
| Posted at 6:50 AM | Permalink |
|
Comments (9)
When we have to start relying on the City's fee-based attorneys for advice on what to do (versus how to do it, legally), we know we are in big trouble.
To use a soccer analogy, Samadumbs shouldn't be kicking the ball to Janik to avoid making a responsible decision himself.
Posted by Mike (the other one) | January 23, 2010 9:12 AM
I thought Ball Janik was representing Peregrine LLC in this deal?
Posted by Mister Tee | January 23, 2010 9:28 AM
Yes, and probably another $415k to handle the new Beavers Stadium deal, when the other shoe finally drops.
Remind me again, how many attorneys does the city already have on it's payroll? None of them had the time? or Sam and Randy didn't want to risk a whistle blower scenario from inside city hall...
Posted by RANZ | January 23, 2010 10:18 AM
I think its funny, but I don't live within the City boundaries. If I did, I'd be furious. What a waste. And as we know, it's just a small part of the waste and abuse that the City Council perpetrates every day.
Posted by Pat | January 23, 2010 10:30 AM
"Janik"..."best interests of taxpayers"?
In the same sentence?
ROTFLMAO
Posted by godfry | January 23, 2010 12:20 PM
So what was Janik's excuse for handling both sides of the deal?
BTW - I heard Adams' advice to Pres Obama on the radio. Is there a written statement I could read for laughs somewhere?
Posted by Steve | January 23, 2010 5:46 PM
If Janik really is handling both sides of the deal, wouldn't that be grounds for a bar complaint on conflict of interest?
Posted by LucsAdvo | January 24, 2010 8:16 AM
"If Janik really is handling both sides of the deal, wouldn't that be grounds for a bar complaint on conflict of interest?"
Who's going to complain - He's represnting both sides.
Posted by Steve | January 24, 2010 4:12 PM
You guys are all mixed up. SJ isn't a ham-handed idiot who isn't wise to the conflicts rules. The real game is more subtle than representing both sides on the same deal.
We should be asking why the city is the biggest developer in town, but hasn't hired it's own team of capable attorneys to work on its own development deals? Why would there ever be a situation where outside help is needed to interpret and negotiate what should be straightforward contracts? The city simply shouldn't be getting involved in deals that require $415,000+ of outsourced explaining to understand.
Posted by IR | January 24, 2010 9:40 PM