I finally managed to catch up with Portland Commissioner Randy Leonard, the tip of the spear when it comes to the MLS deal that has apparently precipiated the awarding of an expansion franchise to Portland beginning in 2011. However, we pretended that the news of yesterday wasn't official, formal or obvious--and in any case, we talked mostly about other issues surrounding the process, including his ongoing debate with Ted Wheeler about City and County finance, why he thinks the Blazers did an about face, and what should go into the proposed entertainment district for the Rose Quarter.
The whole audio file of our 39-minute interview is available here, so that you can hear precisely the questions asked, and Leonard's full responses. Be warned that it's a 20MB .mp3 file, and as such may put a strain on your PC if you are using older equipment. But it's worth the full listen.
However, so that you don't HAVE to listen to it, I've transcribed readable versions of some of the questions and answers that yielded the most interesting parts of the conversation. I would call the transcript "close to verbatim;" while I've edited some things out for readability and length, the edits do not change the meaning of the responses, and once he gets into the meat of his answer his words are almost 100% as he said them. And of course if you're skeptical about that, listen to the audio for yourself.
So with that, let's hear what Randy had to say on the eve of what shapes up to be an historic announcement in Portland tomorrow!
-----
What do you think Chair Wheeler is expecting from the "new covenant" suggested to bring the County and Portland Public Schools more closely to the table in the Urban Renewal District (URD) discussions for the PGE Park area?
He was referencing a broader conversation he and I have had with reference to Measure A, a resolution adopted by the county in 1984, that was a document that reflected the division of responsibilities between the City of Portland and County of Multnomah. Basically what Resolution A said was the county will do jails, the county will do human services, and the city will do police, fire, parks, infrastructure services because up until 1984, there really was no core delineation who did what, who was responsible for what.
Since 1990 and the passage of Ballot Measure 5 the County has had diminishing resources, then they've had administrations in the White House who've cut various funding for human resource programs, aging programs--that money has diminished at the state, and the state has diminished it to the counties. The County has found itself in the position of having all these responsibilities stay and even increase as we've had a growing aging population and in some case a growing poverty population where the resources have diminished.
What Ted was talking about yes, I think let's talk about URAs and the impact on us, but also this broader discussion--should Multnomah County really be saddled with repairing all the bridges anymore? Shouldn't they be the City's responsibility? Should we be funding Hooper Detox anymore, when really primarily the people that are being served by that are Portland people? I know that's what he was saying, because he and I have had that discussion before.
......why given that discussion do you think Ted made the argument he did, which you called disingenuous and something he should know better, if you were speaking to him about these issues previously? Why did he make that argument instead?
He and Jeff Cogen both--those of us on Council, some of whom have not said not it publically as I have-- have been frustrated by the language both Jeff Cogen and Ted Wheeler use. I gave an example at the hearing other day that the newspaper article that said, "We have kids without health insurance, while the city develops urban renewal areas," in other words implying if we didn't have those urban renewal areas, they would have the money for health insurance.
When you look at the Pearl today, and somebody says, "isn't it a shame that all of that money generated in taxes, stays in the Pearl district to create more investment"--what it misleads people into thinking is that that would have happened anyway. And the bigger point is urban renewal areas make things happen in terms of development that would not otherwise have happened. When you say the Pearl urban renewal district costs the County money, that's disingenuous, because that's money that would not have been available had the urban renewal area not been created in the first place.
...what impact do you see from the state bills involving potential changes to the City's authority to create and administer urban renewal districts?
I'm not sure it will affect so much the district that would go from PSU to Con-Way transport, which would include PGE Park. But there are some bills down there to amend the urban renewal statutes that I do think make sense. One of the bills would say that urban renewal districts would use some of their increment money to fund police and fire protection. I agree with that; I think it makes a lot of sense.
...the Convention Center URD is an option 3 district. It caps indebtedness. Do you think that would alleviate some of Chair Wheeler's concerns if the PGE URD were able to be established that way, because it would limit the money that could be taken out of it?
One would think so objectively--but the bigger point I'm trying to make is that we have option 3 districts, and they don't acknowledge those now, that are contributing to their services. The part I'm going to be really stubborn about, until it happens, is to get them to acknowledge that some of what they've said, even if they'll acknowledge the possibility, of misleading people about this debate. There are those urban renewal districts--I think there are five of them that are, that contribute significantly to the County.
If I thought that they were just dumb, I would feel better about it, because it'd be a matter of sitting down and saying "Look, guys, you need to understand this better..." But they both understand everything I'm telling you, and could probably explain it better than I can, to be honest with you, about how these urban renewal areas work.
But it feels more to me like they, for whatever reason, thought that this was some good strategic public relations campaign in order to get more money out of the City. That's all I can conclude. And I just want to be really clear, it's had the opposite effect on me. It's had the opposite effect. It feels like we've bent over backwards to give them money out of the general fund of the City of Portland...we've given them millions and millions of dollars to help them with services that came at the expense of us fully funding fire, and police, and fixing our streets, It's not though we didn't have things to spend the money on. And this disccusion we're having, honestly feels so disingenuous, I'm getting to the point where I'm having some trust issues with them.
...because the indebtedness is capped, the fipside is the pool of money available for development is limited. Have you figured out why J Isaac, the Blazers VP, did his about face in the hearing the way he did? He appeared worried that the MLS plan would take funds from the CC URD that were earmarked for their proposed entertainment district. At the hearing Steve Janik said that's not the case, that there is plenty of money. Can you confirm that, and speculate on why the Blazers seem to have turned against the deal?
It was shocking to me and shocking to Sam both, to hear J Isaac say what he did--because not only is what Steve Janik said absolutely true, we had met with J and Larry Miller, the President, a number of times, and explained to them that all the money we promised to set aside and dedicate to the entertainment district was still there untouched, designated for that purpose, and that the $18.3mil coming out of the CC URD was not coming out of that money.
So when J came in and said what he said, Sam and I looked at each other and said, "what in the hell is all this about?" We can only conclude that, their protestations to the contrary that they supported MLS and AAA baseball coming to the Rose Quarter are not true, that they view both of those endeavors as a threat to the Blazers. I don't agree with that; in fact I think it's complementary to the operation of the Blazers at the Rose Quarter, because I think by having the AAA stadium there, and our interest as well in creating that entertainment district, they'll both do much better with each other , than separately without each other...they being Merritt Paulson and Paul Allen.
...The centerpiece of the Cordish company's installations are typically a live music venue. Do you think the Blazers felt that it was not complementary--that the AAA park would compete with Cordish trying to put together a live music venue as well.
I think you're exactly right; I think that's exactly the issue. They continue to say we support MLS, we support AAA baseball moving to the Rose Quarter, but sometimes you have to look at how people behave and not listen to their words. The behavior betrays their words...I've told them repeatedly, let's be clear--you keep talking about this a sthough it's your property. It's our building; we get to build what we want that.
Having said that, we want to do it in a cooperative way that enhances your revenue. And we absolutely believe that will happen. But what I think they really want is a monopoly on all the revenues. And that's not gonna happen.
...the Cordish model seems to revolve around big box stores and chain restaurants. Do you think that kind of development in the Quarter fits in well with the City's vision for that area?
You're saying a lot of things that reflect my own sense. I'm very skeptical about that--not because I'm opposed to chains or big boxes, but I just think that our demographic has an attraction to local businesses, localized kinds of entertainment, and I don't think we fit the LA model or the Kansas City model. Well, I shouldn't say it that strongly. I doubt that it does. I'm not a businessperson; I'm open to listening to arguments and if they have marketing studies and that kind of thing we'll have to look at that. But it doesn't feel like it makes sense there.
What I'm saying is that opposed to TGIFriday's, you'd have a McMenamin's. That's the difference I'm talking about. I wouldn't argue that we don't need an entertainment district, and that we don't need an alcohol-oriented entertainment district, but that it should be very particular to Portland and how we like to do things. We like to do things very much based on local business, local entreprenuers...
I'm not a sports guy. I'm the last person in the world that should be in the middle of this whole thing to get MLS soccer. I've said that to people, that for that reason I'm a pretty good pick to be in it. One of the reasons I was so interested in pursuing this, is ironically because of Merritt Paulson. He lives here. He bought a house here. He had a child here. He has told me, "This is where I choose to live. I want to live here. I'm not, like, lighting in and getting up and moving away. I want to be part of this community."
I love that. I like that for the same reason Portlanders like that kind of thing. They like seeing their businesspeople be local, live in the community and be part of it. Merritt is very much that kind of a person. To a certain degree, so is Paul Allen. I think people very much like the Blazers to the level they do, because Paul Allen is always at the Rose Quarter sitting there. I like that. So I think we need to really think about that, because I do want them to succeed, I don't want to do something that later we'll regret. If we do it, let's do it right and understand who we're doing it for. In this area, if you have McMenamins and Widmer and local folks being the ones we build the entertainment district around, I think it will be a grand slam.
[Note: this article yesterday from the Portland Daily Journal of Commerce addresses exactly the issue we're discussing there about the entertainment district, and suggests that "sustaintability" may well be something the Cordish people are open to considering. Good news.]
...You've been assessing the the mood and the sensibilities of the City's residents. Give me your honest take on what you think the temperature of the City's residents are for this current agreement.
I would say "skeptical" unless you're a diehard soccer fan. But I think they sent people like myself and Sam to City Hall to use our best judgement for them. So I think skeptical, until we prove otherwise. I was obviously persuaded--because I've got a lot riding on this as well--that soccer is going to succeed, and that baseball will take off in the Rose Quarter in a way it couldn't in PGE Park, for a variety of reasons.
I am persuaded that people will start going to baseball games that never thought about it before, simply because of where the venue is at, and because of the intimate atmosphere and downtown being the backdrop. And I think we'll fill up the new AAA stadium, 9,000 people, every time they play. I think Merritt is thrilled and excited about an MLS team, because I think he knows something that all of us probably should think he might be right on--that he's going to fill PGE Park. People are going to come and watch soccer, and buy a bunch of stuff in our city, and pay a bunch of taxes, which we love.
...one of the things I've heard come up for scorn is the concept of the Paulson's personal guarantee. How would you respond to someone highly skeptical that the Paulson's can be literally forced to repay the money, when they have the some of the best lawyers at their disposal. How do you get your positions across, to persuade the public that we've got a good deal?
I think you're actually talking about a very small number of people, who are very loud, and just don't like the deal--and they'll create any reason to say that there's something wrong with it. The fact of the matter is that our attorneys have been very clear: we do have a personal assurance, it will be in writing, it will be a solid personal guarantee, and there will be no way out of it.
I just learned in the business that I do, that there's a small, vocal group of people who get up every morning angry. And when they're angry about something, you're not going to talk them out of it. If you answer that question, then they'll have another and another, and it doesn't end. I'm confident we have a personal guarantee, and we fought for it hard. I honestly thought it was going to be a deal killer, they weren't going to do it--but they openly agreed to do it and they're doing it to the satisfaction of our attorneys.
When you look around at other deals in other cities, we do have a unique deal., Some have said, "But this is the wrong time, because of the economy, to strike a deal." My response is that you wouldn't have GOTTEN this deal in a good economy. Merritt would have been rightfully able to respond back, "You guys have resources here, here and here, and you can afford to do this like other cities," and if we wanted to do it, that's what we would have had to do.
...how strong is the intent to persist with the PGE Park URD as the primary vehicle, and what other avenues are available to pursue, failing that?
I very much disagree with those who suggest that urban renewal dollars for the rehab of PGE Park are inappropriate. I think it's exactly why urban renewal was created, it's a tool to do things like rehabbing PGE Park. I was very clear at the hearing the other day; I told Dan, "I'll vote for your amendement to take the $15 million out--not because I agree it should come out, but because I'm a political realist and at the end of the day I wanted three votes to pass this thing. So I'll vote for it for that reason.
But having said that, I want to be real clear on the record, that I intend to continue the quest to get the $15 million from that urban renewal district." He nodded, and said "That's fine--we just wanted to have the County at the table." I want to sit down sooner rather than later to have this discussion--and of course this will be a fact-based discussion--about forming an urban renewal area, forming it around PGE Park, and the appropriateness of using the $15 million dollars from that urban renewal area for the renovation of PGE Park.
RSS Feed: http://www.loadedorygun.net/rss/rss2.xml
