Bojack has definitely returned to his scandal sheet since having the premise flatly debunked, yet the original and flatly inaccurate headline remains unchanged. His entire response has been to post two additional comments that essentially attempt to call Williams' story into question. He worries that other meetings were held that are not listed on the report. Uh, maybe he didn't attend those meetings? And as I indicate below, Williams' attempt at excess disclosure is turned by Bojack into something just as 'suspicious' as if he'd not disclosed at all...
-------------
Since last week, when a new and much more City-favorable agreement was reached with Merritt Paulson on the remodeling of PGE Park for an MLS Portland Timbers franchise, I've been figuring on professional Drudge-accurate curmudgeon Jack Bogdanski either shutting up for good on the subject, or going into hyperdrive to keep his festering opposition going.
Can you guess which he picked? Undaunted by news that the primary sticking point of "taxpayer funding" has been largely eliminated due to the tabling of urban renewal dollars, that Paulson is now agreeing to pay 2/3 of the estimated costs, and the City's administrative honcho says there's plenty of money in the Spectator Fund to cover the rest even if ticket sales don't pan out, Bojack continues to try and find angles for his opposition.
His complaints on the deal from the day the agreement was announced (I'm not going to link to any of it except the specific story I'll reference in a moment) were that it was foisted on Council with only 10 minutes of lead time (uh, plus the two weeks they're taking before voting on it), and the possibility that Paulson will ask for more money later (rather than celebrating the $6mil reduction in overall costs for the new plan).
Oh, but that was just for starters! Subsequently, Bojack fed the home-team trolls at his site with stories on:
"Uncomfortable" stands (despite apparently being an inch wider than standard)
Poor soccer attendance...for a Timbers AWAY game
Rain for the AAA All-Star activities at PGE, as a way of lamenting the jettisoning of the Beavers from current plans
The fact that Paulson doesn't routinely open the books of his private holding company to the City
and the City of Petaluma failing to reach a deal with Paulson in 2006 for a single-A franchise.
Today's hit piece, however, represents the apex of drive-by blogging--using his frequent source of "an alert reader" to attack his target. Maybe Jack would do well to vet some of those reader comments before he publishes under a blustery headline like OHSU is Involved in Paulson Stadiums Deal:
When Portlanders get a strong hit of that real estate development scam smell, a number of suspects immediately come to mind. But who would have thought that Oregon Health and Sciences University had an interest in the Paulson soccer-baseball empire?
An alert reader points us to this document-- a disclosure of lobbyist contacts with Portland city officials for the first three months of the year. And there we find that OHSU had someone named Mark Williams have no fewer than five personal meetings with Fireman Randy to discuss "soccer/baseball." In 31 years in Portland, we thought we'd seen everything, but the explanation for this one ought to be a doozy. Williams heads OHSU's planning, development and real estate unit. How is that connected with the Paulson deal?
It doesn't take long before someone actually investigates this "someone named Mark Williams," apparently a job that Bojack found himself unwilling or unable to do. Turns out Williams is the real estate development chief at OHSU--which would actually make sense in the context of the hospital potentially considering land sales for potential baseball stadium sitings.
But that's not his only rational connection to the plan; he was previously on the region's MERC board, with an emphasis on spectator facilities in the area. That's probably why he was also named to the soccer baseball task force set up by the City. Oh. So, he's a guy who a) knows real estate in this town, b) knows stadiums in this town, and c) was asked to offer his expertise on the deal by the City of Portland.
But what really is going on with this OHSU connection? Was the hospital really sending a lobbyist to meet privately with Randy Leonard about the deal? Um, no. You know how I know? Williams himself replied in the comments:
Oh for gosh sakes,
My participation on the soccer committee had absolutely nothing to do with OHSU. Sam appointed me to the committee because i used to run MERC, which included running civic stadium. I never had any private meetings with anyone on this thing--I just listed times i attended soccer committee meetings on my lobbying report where city commissioners were there (even though i didn't have to) because i like to err on the side of full disclosure on those things. Sorry, but there's no conspiracy here!!
That echoes what another commenter wrote, indicating that the meetings were listed in the interest of full disclosure. Damned if you do, damned if you don't with Jack, I guess.
But I wasn't satisfied. Was it REALLY Mark Williams? I first verified that there were indeed task force meetings on each of the days that Williams indicated on the disclosure. Then I called him directly, and asked him to confirm that he did not have any additional meetings with Leonard on those days, beyond the public meetings of the task force. He did.
This process--looking up the meeting dates, getting the OHSU switchboard and being immediately transferred to Williams, and confirming with him that the references are to his expected attendance at task force meetings--took all of about 5 minutes. If you're going to try and push slime on the rest of us, it would be SO helpful if you would, you know, check your sources and your facts before publishing. Or at the very least, find a more questioning headline, one that doesn't directly accuse a public entity of something they didn't do, in a dark and sinister manner. Otherwise, you might tend to come off as, I dunno, a dishonest and fact-sloppy crank?
And I have to ask: is that explanation enough of a "doozy?"