May 12, 2005
'Tribune' Reports Potter Wants Beam/Opus To Share Bridgehead
Because This Story Hasn't Been Weird Enough
Just out this afternoon from Portland Tribune reporter Jim Redden is the word that Mayor Tom Potter is asking Opus Northwest and Beam Development to share the Burnside Bridgehead project.
According to the report, Potter made the request of both Bruce Wood and Brad Malsin via telephone, but neither Wood nor Malsin would comment to the newspaper. PDC Chair Matt Hennessee is quoted as saying that he is "very happy that the mayor has exerted his leadership on this issue".
The article also provides an overview of where things currently stand on the matter of Beam's appeal of PDC's decision to select Opus, and reports Hennessee as saying the PDC would need to hold a public meeting in order to approve any potential Opus/Beam collaboration.
Comments (33)
Lily on 12 May 2005
I think this SUCKS!! Why should Beam have to share the glory with those Opus pigs? Beam had the right idea all along and I think it is now very obvious that his Chinese investors are very serious about investing in Portland development. Opus STOLE all of the key elements from Beam and then had the contract awarded to them, when in fact they were outright thieves!
Randy Leonard and the City Club had the right idea. GUT the PDC and have district representatives on the board. Why not?? As it stands they have a board that votes in favour of the tried and true, to be built by the same old developers. The Bridgehead RFP was a contest and Beam won it, fair and square. Boy, I really campaigned for Potter around my neighbourhood, but I'm getting more disenfrancised him day by day.
SS on 13 May 2005
I think it's great that the Mayor has asked the 2 developers to work together. I do believe that OPUS won this race fair and square, it would only make sense to provide for out City, using the least amount of public subsidy necessary. Hopefully a peaceful resolution will come. This is the city we live in people, we should back and support the development that brings jobs and living to our economy.
justin on 13 May 2005
"This is the city we live in people, we should back and support the development that brings jobs and living to our economy."
I'm not sure how condos in the Pearl and Apartment towers on the Waterfront bring us jobs? But I'll admit they do look cool.
"OPUS won this race fair and square"
Maybe fair and square? Maybe not? OPUS did win though, and I think unless Beam can prove that PDC's decision was beyond all reasonable judgement, then the city should stick with that decision.
yoyoboy on 13 May 2005
b!X, if you were really all that good you would have dug this up.
Lily, here is your fair and square team. Dig the date.
Remember when you lie down with dogs, you pick up fleas.
(on Walsh Construction Co. letterhead) (part of the BEAM team)
April 4, 2005
Mr. Matt Hennessee, President/CEO
Quiktrak, Inc.
5005 SW Meadows Rd., Suite 400
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035
Dear Commissioner Hennessee,
I’ve been around Portland for most of my life. I served one mayor as Chair of the Portland Development Commission for eight years, and three governors as Chair of the Port of Portland for nearly thirteen years. I have been involved in many political issues, a few battles and an occasional dogfight. I win some and I lose some. I have been part of what made Portland great and have contributed to some of its dumbest mistakes. But above all, I have provided an unwavering commitment to leadership and integrity of purpose.
Your actions as Chair of the PDC on the Burnside Bridgehead Project are the worst example of leadership I have encountered in my 40-year career. Your public statements were undeniably self-serving and incredibly shallow. In short, you have perpetrated a hoax on the people of Portland. Not surprisingly, you were not even savvy enough to play out the charade for another 15 minutes to complete the deception. All you had to do was fake a board discussion, trump up a phony resolution and vote in an apparently thoughtful manner and nobody would have been the wiser. Admitting you violated public trust and the public meetings laws to the press simply topped off the debacle. In terms of political missteps, you scored the hat trick.
You will probably misconstrue this letter as “sour grapes.” In reality, you had both the right and, quite possibly, the justification to make the decision that you did—and by no means is OPUS a bad decision. What you lacked, however, was the guts to stand up for what you believe. Instead you exercised a blatant attempt to fool people. The adage “leadership talks and bullshit walks” is certainly fitting in this situation. Unfortunately, you failure in leadership has caused incredible harm to PDC, to our community and to our city. The only good that will eventually come out of this is future community awareness. You can’t fool all the people all the time, and eventually life has a way of balancing things out.
Unlike you, I don’t think there is much to misunderstand from this letter.
Signed,
(Bob)
Bob Walsh
HMMMM? who is a pig now? Seems to me that the OPUS guys should be disgusted with the competition. In reality you had the right......the justification.....and by no means was OPUS a bad decision.
Why appeal?
yoyo
The One True b!X on 13 May 2005
b!X, if you were really all that good you would have dug this up.
I especially like who everyone has their own conception of what I and this site are "supposed" to be.
In reality, I and this site do more than I and this site did two years ago, and two years from now I and this site will do more still. I'm comfortable with the progression of that arc.
hilsy on 13 May 2005
I'm not keen about calling either of the bidders "pigs" (or their supporters or detractors) and I think it detracts from the situation and just further needlessly inflames both sides.
As far as Mr. Walsh's letter, I'm not sure why yoyo is so upset about it. To me, it seems that the gist of the letter is that Mr. Walsh is upset with Mr. Hennessee's actions because he believes that the disregard for public input that is/was perceived due to Mr. H's actions has caused grave damage to the PDC. This seems like a legitimate concern, especially with the recent news of serious calls for the abolishment and/or complete reorganization of PDC.
Whether or not actual laws were or were not broken and whether or not deals were or were not made, the damage is done and there are a lot of people upset about both the outcome and the process. It is less about facts at this point and more about perception. It will be intersting to see how this all plays out. Though I am getting really tired of the name-calling.
yoyoboy on 13 May 2005
Still b!X, this proves that you have aligned yourself and this site with old boy assholes in the Bridgehead decision.
All you had to do was fake a board discussion, trump up a phony resolution and vote in an apparently thoughtful manner and nobody would have been the wiser.
Seems that Bob has done this before?
i do approve of your arc. agreed on that.
yoyo
The One True b!X on 13 May 2005
You can't throw a rock in this town within hitting old boy assholes. It's a little inevitable you or I or anyone else is going to back one of their proposals once in awhile.
This, of course, is presuming the letter is real, since I haven't seen an actual copy and yoyo seems to have posted all of three comments here, not quite enough to judge his or her credibility yet.
Alan DeWitt on 13 May 2005
Uhhh... Yoyo, I think you blew it. This letter is dated 21 days before the staff report was issued, and 23 days before the PDC board issued its decision.
Therefore, one of the following must be true:
A) This letter is mis-transcribed in at least one respect
B) Walsh can see several weeks into the future
C) This letter is entirely fake.
While (B) is kinda hard to rule out*, you could demonstrate that (A) and (C) are false by providing some source or link for the original letter so that we may authenticate it.
That said, I think that the content of paragraphs two and three of this letter seems pretty much on target.
Yoyo: "Seems to me that the OPUS guys should be disgusted with the competition."
Maybe, but Opus should be even more disgusted at the PDC. If Opus really did win fair and square, the PDC has handed them a huge undeserved headache and a not inconsiderable additional cost by bungling the public announcement of their decision. If (as seems likely) the decision was not rigged, it was presented by the PDC in such a way that it looked rigged. (If the decision was rigged, it was rigged incompetently.) The PDC's damage control afterwords hasn't been so good, and the PDC is certain to be damaged by the flap no matter the outcome of investigations or appeals. It's hard to attribute responsibility for the whole mess to anyone but Hennessee.
Mind you, it would have been better if someone uninvolved (or from Opus) gave Hennessee this message, but it's clearly something that needs saying.
*: If (B) is true, then I know who the next head of the Department of Homeland Security ought to be.
yoyoboy on 13 May 2005
Alan, the letter is real, date and everything......find out before you bullshit.
yoyoboy
The One True b!X on 13 May 2005
Yeah, Alan you forgot the other option: Walsh (or his staff) misdated the letter. I would assume that was why yoyo said "dig the date".
yoyoboy on 13 May 2005
b!X, to quote Ed Mc Mahon, "you are correct sir!".
Still this will probably enter the public record with this date on it.
The beam team was not lily white in this thing.
yoyo
Jonathan on 13 May 2005
With the flames aside, does anyone in their right mind think that two long-standing competitors can kiss, hug and come up with a project that's going to work? Presumably both have invested funds to date with an eye toward anticipated profit. Efforts at cooperation here will result in in-fighting, delays, finger-pointing and cost overruns. While I appreciate the Mayor's desire to work out a solution, I think that in this case, the sum is less than either part.
The One True b!X on 13 May 2005
The beam team was not lily white in this thing.
Well, Walsh at least, especially given the earlier revelation that he had contacted one of the PDC commissioners in violation of the RFP.
Alan DeWitt on 13 May 2005
Oh, well. I was really hoping he could see into the future. :-)
Still, is there any indication that this authentic? If so... go Walsh! Someone needed to say that. (But it's too bad that it was someone involved with Beam who said it, because the message might get confused with the messenger.)
yoyoboy on 13 May 2005
Alan, are you that stupid? Walsh is the Beam team. He is the only guy involved that was head of the commission, read the letter, he was the chair of the board at one time.
He is also the only guy on the team that has built anything close to this size of project. He is the credibility.
Brad Malsin is playing the whole CE like a drum.
DING!
yoyo
hilsy on 13 May 2005
Yoyoboy,
Could you please elaborate on what specifically upsets you about Mr. Walsh's letter? Please be straight foward with your explanation.
yoyoboy on 13 May 2005
Hilsy, here is a start. More later.
1) He suggests a way to dupe the public
2) He implies that the commission did that
3) It is as inflammatory as a letter can be
4) If he did misdate it, he is an idiot/you really want to give him $21 million?
5) He is costing you and me $ by dragging this out
6) Beam has hid behind the righteousness of the "cause", this guy is an asshole
7) He actually agrees with the commissions decision! Yet causes all this trouble with an appeal
8) He accuses the Commission of corruption, yet there was none.
9) All this is sour grapes and now Malsin is trying to hang on and will sell out the CE and make this comprimise so he can get something for himself. This hurts the "cause".
yoyo
SS on 13 May 2005
I say, let the project move on.. The longer it's debated, the more money it is costing the City of Portland, therefore, the more money it is costing the people who reside in the City of Portland. Don't you pay enough in taxes already??? To the people who sit around all day worrying about whether or not the decision was "rigged", get a job, because you obviously don't pay taxes and have way too much time on your hands.
yoyoboy on 13 May 2005
b!X, Barry Schlesinger contacted one of the commissioners by phone, during march, in direct violation of the RFP. Ask him.
man, you guys, this appeal is based on insider shit, yet the only thing I can find is Beam insider shit.
yoyo
Lily on 13 May 2005
"yo-yo" me thinks thou dost protest too much. I'm starting to get the distince impression that you people with your aliases are definitely working for the PDC or Opus. It's just a little too coincidental that most of the pro-Opus/Pdc posts are done by people using aliases. What's up with that? Posting on work time?? tsk tsk!
At least Walsh's letter definitely came after the City Club's report on the PDC. Try showing some imperical evidence. Like, some sort of link that proves the letter's provenance AND date. Meanwhile, I think it's a GREAT letter, right on Bob!!!
Alan DeWitt on 13 May 2005
"1) He suggests a way to dupe the public"
That, at least, was dead obvious whether Walsh pointed it out or not. The point of transparent processes is to make it more difficult to dupe the public in the way he suggested. The PDC blew it by appearing not to act in a fully transparent manner.
"2) He implies that the commission did that"
Implied, hell. He flat out says it. I don't agree with that part, by the way. There's no proof of malice or collusion, and "innocent until proven guilty" is a good rule. But the PDC board's own mistakes are what opened them to such a charge.
Look, as I've said elsewhere I don't give a rip who won the contract. Beam, Opus, Milo, Bill the Cat... it's all the same to me. I don't live or pay taxes in Portland. From the evidence I have seen, it looks like both Opus and Beam violated the non-communication provisions. Neither top bidder is lily-white. (The third bidder might be innocent, I suppose, but apparently their plan was a distant third... so they're not all that relevant.)
What annoys me, and should annoy both Beam and Opus, is that the PDC botched the public announcement of the decision so badly that reasonable people could reasonably speculate that the process might have been rigged. It certainly didn't help that the PDC allowed contacts in violation of the RFP, that a PDC board member had a staff connection to the winning bidder, and that the PDC board made a decision contrary to the staff report.
What's worse, the manner in which the PDC botched the process left them no credibility with which to apologize or rectify their mistake themselves. In order for Opus to ever look like they won fairly, an independent body will have to review at least the process, and possibly review the bids themselves. The PDC itself is already damaged because of this, and now its very survival is now in doubt.
That's not Opus's fault, and it's not Beam's fault. The PDC board blew it, and now every Portland taxpayer is going to pay for their mistake.
"3) It is as inflammatory as a letter can be"
Well, it's certainly not nice. Walsh let him have it with both barrels, that's for sure.
"4) If he did misdate it, he is an idiot/you really want to give him $21 million?"
Of your money? Sure! :-)
I'll let someone who cares who won answer your points 5-9.
yoyoboy on 13 May 2005
Lily, I work in the press. as for protesting too much, that is what this appeal is all about. Read your first post in this thread. In fact, you have protested more than it is possible to believe.
I just think that letter paints the picture, make your own judgements.
The letter is public record, ask PDC for it.
As for "right on BOB', It is always great when someone gets in bed with a man who just settled a racial discrimination suit against his company out of court.
yoyo
porkchop on 13 May 2005
I have a question.
Lets assume Beam gets part or all of the contract --
If Beam fails in his financial obligiations can a citizen sue the Mayors office? It is on record that a public/private agency legally entrusted to make these decisions public stated Beam is a financial risk. And voted against Beam.
Also, I read the Mayor's office and city council have "no legal" right to intervene in this decisions. If that is the case, and Beam is selected and fails, then can we sue the city? I for one am sick of paying for our elected leaders mistakes! (PGE PARK, CREATIVE SERVICES BUILDING, ARMORY?)
porkchop
allehseya on 14 May 2005
eh.
Let Opus have their little project. Potter should turn the Beam Team on to Centennial Mills and those of us in the Creative industry working on salvaging it from PDC demolition.
Peter Stark on 14 May 2005
Retgarding the letter Bob Walsh sent to Hennessee,
First let me say I am not hiding behind a name - I am a member of the beam team. Since there continues to be spin - I thought I'd add some insight, at least in regards to the letter Mr. Walsh sent.
1) Bob sent the letter after Opus was selected - Yoyoboy and others are likely correct that Bob just had the date wrong. Hey he was emotional - big deal.
2) The Beam team (with the exception of Bob) was not involved in the letter, didn't ask Bob to send a letter, and never saw the letter untill after it was sent. But, I've got to tell you - three cheers Bob!! His comments needed to be said and they were right on.
3) No one was copied on the letter but Comissioner Hennessee (a few of us on the Beam team saw it - but even we didn't get a copy). In fact we decided given our current situation - it would be best to let is stand and not copy anyone.
4) One day after the letter Opus let it slip that they knew about the letter and they certainly didn't get it from us.
Which leads to the following. I'm done with the spin. Opus and their PR/Lobyist have been spinning stories about Beam ever since we got the possitive nod from the Reccomendation Committee. So Yoyoboy you say you're with the press - maybe you are maybe your'e not. But who leaked the letter to you - I know it wasn't us. Since Opus learned about this letter so quickly I can only assume the PR ties between Matt and Bruce made it happen, or Matt wanted it to go out - so it could be spun as it's being done now, or you (Yoyoboy) are a plant working for Matt, Bruce or dare I say it both.
thinkbigpdx on 16 May 2005
Peter--
let's move away from the pointing fingers and the worries about "spin" and PR/lobbyist because you know as well as I do that BEAM had them too, including payments to the guy in that cute little hat in the cartoon, but I digress. what I want to know is how do you at BEAM justify your appeal while also supporting this statement from your boy BOB:
"In reality, you had both the right and, quite possibly, the justification to make the decision that you did—and by no means is OPUS a bad decision. "?????
it seems you should pull the appeal and let us all move on.
The One True b!X on 16 May 2005
including payments to the guy in that cute little hat in the cartoon
Back this up or retract it, because my records don't show any payments from anyone I know to be tied to the Beam team.
If you know somehting I don't, then spill it, and if it checks out, I'll disclose it publicly.
thinkbigpdx on 16 May 2005
Sensitive. You sure you want me to share what I know or would you rather re-check your records, re-think who you "know to be tied to the beam team" and how cavalier they might have been with details of how they achieved such powerful community support while gloating about their apparent "lock on this project" after certain community meetings? I'll let you sleep on it.
Nighty night little B!X, sleep tight, don't let the truth bite.
The One True b!X on 16 May 2005
Of course I'm sensitive when someone is trying to insinuate that I knowingly accepted money from someone connected to the Beam team while supporting their proposal.
You'll note, however (well, you won't, but other readers will) that I expressly admitted to the possibility that there's a name connected to the team that I never recognized as being connected to the team -- an inherent and open declaration that I have no problem with you backing up your claim if you can.
You can keep trying to back me into a corner where I look bad if that's what gets you off. But my point is this: If you have information, share it. If it's a valid connection to Beam, I'll post it a fresh item of its very own, not buried iin the comments.
I'm not the one trying to hide anything here, Mister Anonymous. You're the one making charges of conflict of interest and then doing a "I know something you don't know" and not releasing your data.
So I'll let my readers, once again, decide who is playing games -- me, or my critic.
Samuel John Klein on 17 May 2005
Of course, it's obvious who's the buffoon here.
Posters like "thinkbigPDX" illustrate what one of the perils of modern society is. The status of debate and discussion in this society is such that posters such as that feel perfectly justified in tossing in a big grenade, cutting, and running, without any sense of shame.
I seem to recall there was shame in acting like a buffoon in public. Posters such as this not only have no shame, they stalked shame, came up from behind in the the local park, knocked it unconscious, stole its wallet, spent all its money, and committed identity theft on it.
Thus, behavior such as that exhibited by Than Cleavinger and "thinkbigPDX" are now greeted with at least a shrug at at most a "hey, maybe he has a point there."
Well, he doesn't have a point. They may have no capability to be ashamed of the way they act, but that still doesn't change the fact that they should be. They have nothing but contempt for the citizen...that is, you and me.
Things around here are going to get worse before they get better.
Could someone remind me where I'm going, and just how *did* I get in this handbasket?
The One True b!X on 17 May 2005
FYI, the contributors list is short because it wasn't until a couple of months ago that I imposed a policy stating that, in order to further transparency, the names of contributors would be posted to the site. Therefore, that list is only of people who have contributed since that policy was put into place. It should have been in place from the beginning, but it hadn't occured to us, and we can't put prior contributors on the list because when they contributed there was no expectation that their names would be plastered across a website.
We do also have some people who we specifically asked, way before this policy, if we could list them as contributors, but I lost that list and need to go back through months and months of email to find those names again in order to add them to the list.
But anyway that's why the list is short. There have been far mroe contributors than that, it's just that most of them contributed before I put the transparency policy in place.
Mike on 17 May 2005
Beam Development is a ray of light for the Central Eastside - it's so unfair that someone so invested in it's positive development is not given a chance.
Good luck in the appeal BEAM!