Request for Comments on Draft MLS Soccer/Triple A Baseball Evaluation Project Approach

Seems like there are better projects to invest in that would provide financial and social returns to the city. I don't think passive spectator roles are appropriate for the current climate. I'd like to see "city pride" continue to be defined by our advances in areas that are important to sustainability and active participation, and I don't think LEED certification of another sports arena really achieves that.

I'm sure I'm massively outnumbered. Maybe we could at least have the food vendors serving local, quality food instead of junk? We need to remold the next generation's expectations of this experience if nothing else. The current generation probably wants to eat ballpark junk because it's part of what defines the experience for them, but I don't think it's necessary to continue a tradition if it's detrimental.

Mayor elect Adams,

This is the worst kind of mission creep. The city charter doesn't say anything about subsidizing professional sporting venues. Major League Soccer is NOT an essential service and the City of Portland has no moral or economic rationale to subsidize private corporations that are in business to make a profit.

If you really want to boost economic development, why not use the City of Portland's budget to subsidize the reconstruction of the Sellwood Bridge? This would directly improve the lives of commuters and the many businesses that are currently trucking freight 8-10 miles further than if the Sellwood were reopened to commercial vehicles.

One of the great things behind Paulson's plan is that no General Fund monies are to be touched, thus allowing for your bridge and other assorted things to be done with the appropriate funds.
He is looking for bonds, to be repaid through a variety of sources that won't impact the general business of the city.
Go Merritt and go Timbers!

If this is such a great deal, why not let the milti-millionaire, looking for public assistance (welfare), raise the money from investors?

Perhaps it is not such a great deal?

It is time for Portland to stop millionaire welfare - we have far too many really needy. Why can't Portland's progressives help them instead of multi-millionaires?

Thanks
JK

THE TASK FORCE NEEDS TO VIEW THIS PROJECT AS A WAY TO COUNTERACT THE EFFECTS OF A RECESSION!!!!!

Funding these construction projects means income for local Portland families AND two community assets when done.

California voters recently voted to fund a $40 BILLION infrastructure project to build high speed rail. Shocking that they would volunteer to raise their own taxes in difficult times? No. It makes sense.

Despite the challenging times forecated by most economists, people there realized that it made sense to invest in a project that would not only employ lots of people but also deliver value to the community when complete.

Soccer is not high speed rail, but the realtively tiny investments in stadiums for Baseball and Football and soccer will add to the entertainment options in the city while also attracting tourism, jobs, etc.

With this MLS thing we are talking about a microcausm of that investment, one that probably won't actually draw much from taxpayer money anyway (revenue backed bonds do not equal a "taxpayer subsidy"). But it's a way to elevate the profile of the city and fend off the recession locally.

THE TASK FORCE NEEDS TO VIEW THIS PROJECT AS A WAY TO COUNTERACT THE EFFECTS OF A RECESSION!!!!!

Obviously there are going to be a lot of people that are automatically going to assume that this project will take away from others and that the city shouldn't be subsidizing sports, but this needs to be looked at in fair manner. The Timbers are already a well drawing team that oozes civic pride. The Beavers have been a mainstay in Portland for decades. If those city assets, which draw people from across the US and even abroad, need a small amount of help shouldn't we as a city be willing to support those teams? Sure it would be best to not be involved in building stadiums but few if any are built, especially in a downtown area with only private funds. Would Portlanders rally so quickly against help for the Blazers? This city deserves these teams and these stadiums and te owner is investing millions himself. For 1/3 what other cities are building new stadiums, Portland will have 2 that better serve our community...how is that a bad thing? I applaud the city government for giving this a chance and for understanding the benefits that come at a small cost and for moving forward with a commission to investigate what is best for the city...let's not judge this project before everything is known, we owe the city that much..stop the name calling and let's roll up our sleeves! Go Portland! Go timbers! Go Beavers!

This looks like a great group of people to examine the feasibility of bringing MLS to Portland and the possibility of two world class stadiums in our city. I especially appreciate the sensitivity of the mission statement's social principles. Just because these are stadiums that will serve pro teams doesn't mean that they have to limit the use by other citizens. Let's think creatively about ways to make PGE Park and a minor league baseball stadium into true community assets. I support this effort, especially if it doesn't draw away from other services. Thank you for your efforts!

If this proposal is done wisely it can benefit lots of people, several communities and elevate Portland soccer to the top level that this city deserves.

MLS opportunities will not be available indefinitely. This must be pursued and if it doesn't impact general funds nor takes away from the ability for the city to pursue other bonds and projects then it makes great sense.

I appreciate the approach of opening this up publicly. I also strongly support the MLS to Portland idea.

I also think that people need to read up on the proposal and on the history before commenting. It is quite frustrating dealing with some of the ignorance out there.

Lets be clear - this is BONDED money which means it is new revenue that is generated through city backed bonds that will be paid back. No existing general fund monies will be touched.

For the naysayers out there - one of the key facts in this whole discussion is that the City of Portland owns PGE Park. Paulson is essentially paying rent to put his two teams there. PSU Football does the same. So when you talk about use of public funds for a private enterprise - that is simply wrong. This would be the use of BONDED dollars to remodel a publicly owned facility. With the bond to be paid off through a surcharge on ticket sales.

Which brings me to my second point. Why are the fans interest not represented on this task force? It is going to be the fans who make or break this proposal through the purchasing of tickets that pay off the bonds. There needs to be someone representing Timbers and Beavers season ticket holders in the least.

Portland needs another major league team. We have been a one trick pony for too long. I know this plan can be accomplished through means that don't take money away from the general fund. We need to get this done and fast so that we don't get passed up again, and they don't give the team to another city. With the current level of support for the USL Timbers I have no doubt a newly renovated PGE would be an automatic sellout for an MLS team. This would go a long way in paying back any potential bonds.

Merrit has proven himself as a smart and effective owner of the Timbers. He paid back the debt from previous owners as an act of good faith towards the city, and he will continue to show this same responsibility bringing MLS to PDX.

Portland is in dire need of a second major professional sport, and soccer in Portland is a no-brainer. As many before me have said, this money is not coming out of the general fund, so doing this and still paying for infrastructure maintenance and improvements, parks, schools, etc. are not mutually exclusive. You can do both and create jobs and improve the quality of life in our great city.

This is a good plan, backed by a smart owner, in a city that has a void when it comes to these types of entertainment options in the Summer. This is an investment in our city, and a pretty sound one at that.

This is a golden opportunity for the City of Portland to raise national awareness and build civic pride along with providing scores of jobs to the people of Portland in this time of economic hardship. Merritt is asking to borrow 85 million to upgrade a City owned building (PGE.) No stadium has ever been built without city money, on top of that Merit doesn't own PGE, the city does. These are safe publicly backed bonds that will be repaid, there is no downside. Let's bring MLS to Portland.

Since the rebirth of the Timbers in 2001 Portland has begun to reclaim the title of Soccer City USA, and the city is widely recognized nationally as a hotbed of soccer support. We've had World Cup Qualifiers, Women's World Cup games, and a plethora of international friendlies; all of which have drawn great crowds. Not to mention the Timbers attendance, which has consistently grown each year, and which is now among the tops in the league (USL, one level below MLS).

If this plan is indeed safe for taxpayers - and I have seen nothing yet to convince me otherwise - it is a no-brainer. I believe that sports are a vital part of any large city, and with due respect to the Beavers and Winter Hawks, Portland needs another team in a top flight league.

Thanks for setting up the task force Mr. Adams. I hope it comes to the proper determination of what is good for the citizens of Portland.

-Lucas

The proposal as initially outlined works well for the whole city. People forget that the renovation of Civic Stadium/PGE Park was focused principally on bringing the facility into compliance with modern seismic and ADA requirements. By doing so, we can now finish the job and have a historic-yet-updated downtown stadium that will be a jewel for an MLS franchise, Portland State, and other events.

The plan would also bring much-needed investment into Outer Southeast Portland, and bring destination spots into the Lents district by way of the restaurants and meeting spots that would surely grow around a new Beavers' stadium.

Portland has a chance to raise its profile, and do so for a fraction of the cost that major league sports invevitbly requires.

Please, for once, let's think big in Portland.

This would be a wonderful plan at any time; Portland - already nationally know for it's unique soccer culture and the Timbers Army DIY support - gains world class soccer, Beavers baseball gets a better suited home in an area set up for events, both the west side and the Rose Quarter gain valuable infrastructure and economic invigoration, the city generates temporary and permanent, sustainable job creation, follows a "green" plan, and has no financial risk to the tax payers.

As I say a wonderful plan at any time, but this is even better given the window of opportunity we are being gifted. Out of all the cities competing for the few remaining MLS spots, PDX is far and away the front runner if this plan is approved. Likely, this is not only a great plan but the only time such an opportunity will be available. MLS will likely cap the league in two to three years. If we pass now our only option would be to buy an existing club from another city at inflated prices and we'd still have to deal with stadium renovations. Consequently this is not just a great plan but the plan we need now.

As a PPS high school teacher I am well aware of how tight general fund money is for basic needs versus frivolous special interests. As a life long political progressive I am equally wary of civic concessions to corporations. It is precisely because this plan is a bond issue repaid by the owner group and dedicated player salary tax that my fears are allayed. This makes good business sense; fiscally safe, not at the expense of other programs, benefit to the economy, and benefit to the community. This is simply good for the fans, good for the City, and good for Portland. This is simply a WIN-WIN-WIN!

Sam Adams, my thanks for setting up this committee though I agree with the previous poster in suggesting that a spot for a representative from the fans/supporters be added. Good job!

Don't let this become an emotional / culture-war issue.

Any resistence to this plan seems to be based on any the following NON-RELEVANT and/or INCORRECT prejudices:

*Soccer is unpatriotic or "Un-American"
*People incorrectly think this is taxpayer-funded versus largely paid back by ticket revenue and taxpayer salaries.
*People don't like Merritt Paulson's dad
*Sports just seems frivolous
*We have to 'hunker down' in tough economic times

THE PANEL SHOULD TAKE CARE TO LOOK FOR WHETHER ANY OF THESE EMOTIONAL PERCEPTIONS ARE BEHIND ANY ANTI-COMMENTS. In fact the only valid concern would be that the benefits do not outweigh the costs for Portland. This should be the only thing considered.

As one of the commenters also mentined, the city should not be afraid to invest in this project if it actually helps fend off recession. This is the time to INVEST, not hunker down.

I applaud Mayor Adams for critically evaluating the overall benefits to the city and hope Portland does not miss out on a great opportunity by getting bogged down in non-issues and prejudices.

Portland, this is our chance to think and act big. We have the chance to make our city the crowning jewel in a league that is gaining in popularity every year. This investment in our city would pay off in a number of ways. Most importantly, it would create jobs, help restore the economy, and become a source of pride. The USL Timbers already have one of the nation's finest supporters groups in the form of the Timbers Army. The TA would quickly become the pride of MLS. Imagine our city beamed around the world on ESPN with ranks and ranks of proud supporters filling every seat of a beautiful, remodeled PGE Park.

I know I don't speak for everyone, but I don't see how this can fail if it's done properly. Mr. Paulson has thought this through very well and his plan is sound. Let's strike when the iron is hot on this and not let it pass us by.

-Chris

This plan is fair and should be supported by the city. It is a perfect example of how a city should support a business. The ownership group headed by Merritt Paulson has shown themselves to be nothing but up front and honest. The city and the commission should support this plan.

The plan needs to go out to the people, newspaper, tv, radio...95.5 the game or the fan preferably the game. The greater the Blitz the lesser amount of uninformed responces to the plan to bring the MLS to Portland. The city is ready and has been for several year to get a 2nd professional sports team the time is now get it done!

Finnegan wrote:

"I appreciate the approach of opening this up publicly. I also strongly support the MLS to Portland idea.

I also think that people need to read up on the proposal and on the history before commenting. It is quite frustrating dealing with some of the ignorance out there.

Lets be clear - this is BONDED money which means it is new revenue that is generated through city backed bonds that will be paid back. No existing general fund monies will be touched.

For the naysayers out there - one of the key facts in this whole discussion is that the City of Portland owns PGE Park. Paulson is essentially paying rent to put his two teams there. PSU Football does the same. So when you talk about use of public funds for a private enterprise - that is simply wrong. This would be the use of BONDED dollars to remodel a publicly owned facility. With the bond to be paid off through a surcharge on ticket sales.

Which brings me to my second point. Why are the fans interest not represented on this task force? It is going to be the fans who make or break this proposal through the purchasing of tickets that pay off the bonds. There needs to be someone representing Timbers and Beavers season ticket holders in the least."

I could not agree more whole heartedly with Finnegans comment.

Now while I do not reside in Portland (I am a coastal Washingtonian), I do travel to Portland for just about every Timbers game, thusly spending my money in the most beautiful city in the NW, and I bring with me many others. Now think if you will the added exposure of a MLS side at PGE park. The money that is currently generated from our USL side will grow exponentially. This is a no lose situation, everyone benefits, especially the city of Portland and you good folks that reside within.

Portland now has an opportunity to set a tone in the local economic market. We can be on the leading edge and revitalize the incredible asset that we have in PGE park or we can just settle for what we have and let it slowly fall apart. MLS has grown since its inception, Portland fits perfectly into its future. PGE park could be the jewel of the MLS, and stadium with history it could be a Fenway, Lambeau field, MSG.

Merritt has proven he can pay for his obligations to the city and even pay for the mistakes of previous owners. The money for this project doesn't impact the city's general fund it is a new stream of revenue. That will never be tapped unless the city moves forward with this. No school, bridge, cop, road, or firefighter is affected by this. But they will likely enjoy benefits from the money this will inject into the city through construction, hotel taxes, and national media exposure.

This will only lead to bigger and better things in Portland. Portland is Soccer City, USA and it is time for us to live up to that. This plan is well thought out, the owner is responsible, the fans rabid, it is time to charge into the future.

This is the chance to do something amazing for Portland, and bring the best level of soccer to Portland. There's already passionate support for the Timbers USL team, and now we can bring that to the top level of US Soccer, while helping baseball thrive in a stadium specifically built for them.

This plan is really the city and private business working together towards a common goal for the betterment of Portland as a whole. I wholeheartedly support this process, and look forward to hearing more comments in the coming months.

As an avid fan of soccer and MLS, as well as someone intending to move back to Portland in the next year, I am very heavily in favor of the MLS to Portland movement. The atmosphere at PGE Park for a Timbers game rivals the best MLS crowds out there today, and just imagine how much better it will be with a stadium configured for soccer. While other markets are proposing massive retail developments near their new stadiums in the suburbs, Portland has the unique opportunity to have a downtown MLS stadium without the high costs of building it from scratch. Plus the MAX station is across the street, providing much easier and cleaner access than any of the other MLS stadiums I've been to (LA, San Jose).

It is important to stress that only those interested in attending events at PGE Park and the future baseball stadium are the ones that will pay for this project. I whole-heartedly agree that in a time of economic downturn a tax-payer funded stadium is not a high priority, but this is not a tax-payer funded stadium. This project is taking out a loan with the backing of the city's credit rating with the payments to be made by revenue from the events at the two stadiums. Please don't let people lose sight of how much they stand to gain with what little they have to pay.

-$85 million for two stadiums is a bargain in this day and age where new facilities typically run from $200 million to over $1 billion;
-Even after this effort, Portland will have the smallest public subsidy BY FAR for sports stadiums of any metro area with at least one of the big five (NFL/MLB/NBA/MLS/NHL) sports;
-At a time when construction projects are scarce, these projects would be a great shot in the arm for the local economy;
-Stadium-related revenues will be taxed first, and any additional necessary funds will amount to a tiny portion (at most, enough to buy a latte for every person in the Portland Metro area each year, but clearly not enough to build more schools, hire twice as many teachers, replace all the bridges and roads, or whatever else the naysayers are saying we should do instead);
-More international soccer friendlies and a soccer-friendly environment will give Portland a better profile as we attempt to boost economic ties with Europe and Asia.

MLS would be well supported in Portland, and will draw woman's national team matches and other high quality exhibitions to our city. A baseball stadium at the Rose Quarter could finally spur development in the Lloyd area.

This would be a great project for our city.

For the past several years I have been involved with the Lents Neighborhood Association and the Lents Town Center Urban Renewal Area. I have never seen a community work as hard at improving itself as Lents has- yet it seems that Lents if struggling on its own. It would be nice it the city could match the effort we are putting into the area- instead, yet again it seems, Lents is having the rug pulled out from under it.

We have been working for months with the Beaver's organization to iron out the details regarding how to go about building a stadium at Lents Park- in the case that they have to move from their current location downtown. Hundreds of citizen hours have been put into this effort- will it, again, be for naught? If all of our work over the summer and fall results in the Beavers moving to the Rose Quarter instead of Lents, what does this say to residents of Lents and the entire eastside of Portland?

I like you, Mr. Adams, and I've always voted for you- but how am I, and the Lents Neighborhood, not supposed to feel betrayed by this effort to refocus this effort into the Rose Quarter? And this isn't the first time we've felt this way. A couple of years ago, one of our former LNA chairs met with you to discuss the decoupling of Foster Rd. and Woodstock Blvd, in the town center. You wouldn't even allow the topic onto the table!

The Beavers possible move to Lent and the decoupling of Foster and Woodstock are two issues that are extremely important to Lents; they are our biggest hopes. We want urban renewal to work in Lents, and we can't keep having our best efforts halted by politicians who ought to be supportive of us.

I suggest that you come out to Lents and talk to us. We still like you! ...but our patience is beginning to wear a little thin.

Jeff Rose
Lents Neighborhood

The city of Portland should ensure that the risk it is being asked to take on behalf of ALL tax-paying Portlanders is weighted by a substantial pay-off. If Merritt Paulson wants to socialize the risk, he should be willing to socialize the gain, as well. What will the city of Portland get from this relationship? I am talking about the city as a whole, not a small subset of people who are trying to project their personal emotional attachment to private commercial enterprises (i.e. "sports teams") onto the rest of the people. Sure, they might get their shiny new stadiums, but the city should get something more than that back.

Since the city is essentially being asked to become a partner in this commercial endeavor, they should ask for a cut of all future revenues. Not just to pay back the bond, but beyond that, in perpetuity. Is Merritt Paulson willing to be a true partner with Portland? Or does he just see Portlanders as a "sure bet"?

Furthermore, what's to stop him from moving the team? What's to stop him from making bad business decisions? What's to stop the economy from getting worse? What's to stop the city from being left in the lurch by a "privately-owned" business who just got a free handout and can't pay it back? The city should get a guarantee from Merritt Paulson that should the bonds not be paid back by a certain time, he will be guilty of defaulting on a loan and have his business forfeited to the city.

But then the city would be left with a money-loser that it can't liquidate. It all appears too risky, and for what? Nothing that benefits the city as a whole.

Portland city council, you better represent the best interests of the people on this one. You are accountable to all of us.

I seem to recall that the City of Portland spent a lot of money on PGE Park, and had to forgive the loans (meaning: taxpayers ended up paying for it) made to the park operators who defaulted and ran out of town.

I seem to recall that the City lost money on the Rose Quarter.

I seem to recall that we were told we'd make millions with a new Convention Center. When the money didn't show up, we were told it was too small and needed to be enlarged, so we did it. When the money didn't show up, we were told we needed this massively huge hotel. Finally the boy cried wolf too many times and people started wondering.

We DO NOT NEED to spend a penny, whether it be actual money or city resources (i.e. City Hall employees working on this project) when we have unpaved streets, missing sidewalks, damaged water/sewer pipes, poor intersections that need rebuilt, fire stations that need rebuilt, areas of the city lacking police protection...you know, all of those basic city functions.

But I can't expect the City That Works to actually work, when we are more interested in building our way out of congestion (building more unnecessary Streetcar and MAX lines as a subsidy to rich, greedy developers) rather than fixing the transit system that we have (TriMet's extensive bus system and the MAX Blue Line to Gresham dating back to 1986.) It isn't sexy to fix things that are broken and since fixing what's broke doesn't make for good photo ops with the Portland television media for Sam to look good, it doesn't happen.

The last time I checked, I vote for a Mayor for someone who does the job (run the city), not someone who looks sexy on camera throwing the first pitch at a baseball game.

Your recollection is pretty hazy there Eric, but hey, if it makes your case, then you just run with it.

But seriously, I am in favor of the users shouldering more of the burden, which is the case here. Same goes for all of the unpaved streets which are being built through LID's. Makes sense to me.

I am reminded of the last great deal the City entered into to revamp Multnomah Stadium to what is now PGE Park. That gone wrong debt has yet to be repaid to Portland taxpayers. I agree with Oingo Holliday who suggested a better economic development purpose would be to budget funding to subsidize the reconstruction of the Sellwood Bridge, or even repave streets thereby reducing the backlog of road maintenance with money in hand instead of fiscally raping motorists for more tax dollars only to use the money for non-motorist infrastructure. The previous sports field debt needs to be paid off before any more good money is thrown after bad; and even then there are better necessary uses for City worker staff time and public dollars, and no need for new tax dollars if maintenance of infrastructure in place comes first, before and instead of new toys.

The Sellwood Bridge replacement is a $300 million+ project and is the responsibility of the county, not the city.

The MLS/AAA baseball stadium plan is an $85 million project which will be repaid primarily through stadium related revenues which would otherwise have accrued directly into the owner's pocket. And this is a city task force, not a county task force.

To require that the owner prepay bonds (which are current under the new owner) that aren't due for over a decade borders on the absurd.

To blur a stadium discussion into another mindless rant about bicycle infrastructure is, well, par for the course for someone.

The City needs to help bring MLS to Portland. I would love to see the Beavers new ballpark at the Rose Quarter. If taxpayers and voters are will to pay straight cash to help the zoo, then they should be willing to help bring soccer to town. GO TIMBERS!!!

So much dissembling, first, the talking points:

Existing City programs will not be cut to help fund the project – OK, so when Paulsen starts running out of money, who is left to pay the bonds? You guessed it CoP taxpayers. General fund monies will be touched once Paulsen falls short.

To the extent possible, revenues from the MLS/baseball enterprise will be used to finance the project. – What the heck does this mean? You know Paulsen is smarter than anyone on city council. You really think he is going to let the city get any of that profit? Have you seen what his father has done with the $700B we gave him?

The more financial risk the City assumes on the project, the City will need to have more control over those risks. – That worked really great when Glickman Jr and Gardiner sold Madame Vera a bill of goods to get her to throw $40M at PGE Park six years ago. No one on City Council has any idea on how to quantify financial risk.

Taxpayers should see a return on the public investment in the project in 3 to 5 years. – Uh, anything of any substance on this. No MLS team is turning any kind of profit right now, so tell us where these magic beans are coming from.

The other loosely constructed arguments:

People incorrectly think this is taxpayer-funded – Uh, you do realize what a bond is? It is a top-line CoP obligation to pay lenders. The taxpayer is responsible for this with the faint hope Mr Paulsen will show a profit to help out.

Portland is not a big league city without MSL – Great, now we’ll be right up there with Columbus, OH, Salt Lake City and Kansas City. Soccer has been trying to be the next big thing for 30+ years, get a clue – soccer ain’t it. Once Mr Spice girl left MLS is back to where it started 10 years ago.

We need this project for jobs – Oh goody ticket takers and hotdog vendors – this is your economic plan Mr Adams? As far as construction jobs, we have a lot of infrastructure that is pushing 100 years old in the ground. How about hiring people to fix that?

Stadiums re-vitalize parts of town – Look at the Rose Garden. Outside of 42 nights a year that area is no-mans land. Right next door is the OCC which is also moribund. So lets throw some more good money after bad and make it whole?

the crowning jewel in a league that is gaining in popularity every year – Read this:
http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/60481
Without the monkey in a cage (Beckham) attendance is declining again.

Council has no idea whether this is a good deal or not and is relying on building pretty shiny things to distract people from the real issues of decent jobs and attracting employers to provide those jobs.

Sports stadiums are the most threadbare object to garner public funding. Try to be more creative than taking some whole cloth and supposing it even stands consideration. Think big and be original!

PS – Next time Randy takes an all-expense trip to NYC, please realize what his ego strokes will cost the taxpayers.

FROM FORBES - Our estimates indicate the league is not yet profitable, with its 13 teams posting an operating loss (in the sense of earnings before interest, taxes and depreciation) of $20 million on revenue of $165 million. But there are signs of hope. In 2007, the three teams that were in the black--Los Angeles Galaxy, Toronto FC and FC Dallas--had a combined operating profit of $6.7 million.

http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/09/mls-soccer-beckham-biz-sports-cz_kb_0909mlsvalues.html

Great - After 10 years of operation, $160M income and -$20M in profits.

Explain to me again how Pualsen is going to back back those debts?

I agree that it makes sense to take a hard look at the numbers once they are presented. They need to be conservative, and it needs to spelled out clearly where the excess funds go, and where the shortfalls in funds come from.

Fortunately, in this case, you have a situation where the Timbers draw well even when the team is terrible. In minor league baseball, the success of the team has very little impact on attendance.

Sports build community. You can see it in the resurgence of the Blazer and the "Rip City" high of the city.

I have witnessed first hand the impact, both monetary and social, of the Timbers/Timbers Army Community. These are not just sports fans that passively watch a soccer match. They are members of the community who often times attend other events as a group.

My business is a recreational sports league who's players are 21 and over adults. We owe a debt of gratitude to the Timbers and Timbers Army community as they were some of the very first participants over 3 years ago and they continue to support our business. Without them, we would not have grown as fast or hired as many people.

I can only imagine if the stakes are raised. Imagine 5000 Timbers supporters attending your events, buying your products and talking about them with 4,999 others.

Thank you Portland for supporting such a great sport and community.

"Imagine 5000 Timbers supporters attending your events"

That is 5000 out of about 1.5M in the Metro area, isn't $80M a lot to spend on 5000 people? The Blazers draw 3x as many for about 8x as many games. So by your logic should we give the Blazers that much more money?

Or 2.6 million if you include Salem (which the 2000 Census did, but the 2010 Census likely won't).

Portland is one market that can actually benefit from MLS more than it could from NFL/MLB. The required investment is less, yet the room for growth is incredible. It's like buying a blue chip stock years before it valuates.

50 years ago American Football was played by trades men who had day jobs. The money was in baseball.
Now the NFL has some of the worlds most valuble sports franchise's. Two of the top five sports franchise's in the world are soccer teams. MLS is growing and nowhere is soccer growing than the USA. I truly belive that the Portland Timbers would no longer be playing at PGE park if it were not for Merritt Pauson. We can talk about how much is still owed to PGE Park but that was a previous owner group. MLS would fill PGE park.
There's an oportunity for Portland to have Fillet mignion for the price of fish and chips here.
I also belive that without MLS PGE park may go the way of Portland meadows horse track. Empty.
I once thought that the MAX and Street cars would never take off but now they are standing room only.
Please think of the potential up side here. Lets give people another reason to love Portland.

Steve,

What makes you think this is just a millionaires dream?

This is a dream of alot of people in this town and these folks are voicing that here in this forum as well.

We routinely fund things with public dollars all the time that do not necessarily turn a profit. The Zoo is a great example of this. The Zoo brings great joy to many children and adults. But at the end of the day it is a entertainment business that is being heavily subsidized by the taxpayers of the Metro region.

I personally dont give a rip about seeing animals in a cage. Does that mean there shouldn't be a zoo? That it doesn't provide an important social benefit?

Of course not.

The Portland Timbers and Beavers provide affordable family entertainment for over 500,000 Portlanders last year. That number would probably double in MLS. That is an awful lot of people. And 85 Million dollars in bonds is an awfully small amount to make that many people feel an even great connection to their community.

Greg wrote: "Neither the City nor the County is responsible for primary funding of local public schools."

Wasn't it about five, six years ago, that the City of Portland directly funded schools in what could best be described as a bailout of Portland Public Schools (and ultimately had to be expanded to include the David Douglas and Parkrose School Districts)?

If the City of Portland isn't responsible for school funding, has those funds been repaid by the respective school districts?

In a broader sense - citizens of this country have overwhelmingly stated that public education **IS** a function of the government. Citizens of this country have also overwhelmingly stated that for-profit sporting teams are **NOT** a function of government. If the City of Portland feels necessary to spend public resources for a sports team, will the City of Portland provide me with subsidized rent for my new business to make widgets? Or subsidized (below market-rate) parking in a city-owned parking garage for my new fleet of gasoline powered delivery vehicles on Hummer chassis?

The winner here isn't the City of Portland, but the owner of a soccer team. Where is the City of Portland's support for, say, the Winter Hawks? Is the City issuing bonds to rebuild P.I.R. to support IndyCar or NASCAR racing? (The track was recently repaved using money from an enterprise fund, which is completely separate from the taxpayer supported general fund. Why can't PGE Park improvements be funded in the same manner?)

As a Portland tax payer I would like PGE Park rented to a tenant for it's Highest income potential and best use. That would be MLS.

Well, it seems that there are two individuals who are VERY against it on this board and many who are for it. I'm a sports fan. I enjoy attending events with my friends, following the team, learning about other teams. I would be happy to pay some taxes to bring about a Major League Soccer team (that's MLS by the way), but that is not what is being proposed here. I do think that Merrit's plan should be backed by other assets of he and any other investors. That should be vetted to cover any event that the team does not become profitable enough to pay back the bonds. I personally do not see that happening. I go to these games. I know the fervent soccer fans in this area. If you know enough about Seattle's soccer support, the fact that they have sold over 18,000 season tickets means that Portland will do just fine. I've been to games there, including international friendlies and was surprised by how few people would attend. Portland on the other hand has a much stronger support base. So, let's get a good review of the plan, make sure the owner shows he can back up whatever doesn't pay for itself through revenue, and get this town a team!

Oh, I'm not a huge fan of baseball but, I do agree that it would be nice to put it out at Lents park. That would greatly improve the east side and bring some much needed improvements. I don't understand why people think sports don't improve communities or bring in revenue. I think the committee should look at the revenues gained during the Womens World Cup. That would show some of the benefits of large soccer events.

Mr. Adams and committee, please take a good look at this, get Portland a great deal, protect the tax payers, and attend a MLS game or two.

Thanks much,

Ben

The criteria for evaluating the proposal are inadequate
They read (among others):

"Existing City programs will not be cut to help fund the project.
Taxpayers should see a return on the public investment in the project in 3 to 5 years.
To the extent possible, revenues from the MLS/baseball enterprise will be used to finance the project."

Before any city assets are spent (including the goodwill involved in bonding) the question that must be asked is whether this is the MOST productive way the city could invest its next dollar--not whether it will pay for itself. There are plenty of projects that would yield some return on investment--far more than the city can actually fund. If this would yield $1.25 for the dollar and some other project would yield $1.50 for the dollar then the latter project is a better choice--assuming that the city wants to get into the investment business at all.

If we had $85m to spend on anything, is this the most
productive use for the money?

Suppose, for example, we added $85m to our school system--for example, by fixing up Benson HS and creating state-of-the art training in green technologies, funding more dual-credit programs, and adding new Advanced Placement classes to every High School. What sort of return might that yield in new jobs and investments? --assuming that for once Portland Public Schools actually spent the money wisely? My guess is that the multiplier effect would be much greater. The upfront benefits for new construction are the same whether they go to stadium seats or schoolrooms, but after the construction is completed, every dollar spent on a school pays a living-wage salary to a teacher and produces a more productive graduate and attracts new businesses and families to Portland all at the same time. Stadiums do provide entertainment, but they don't make anyone more productive and the few stadium jobs that are created are mostly at minimum wage or even below (part-time).

In addition, the full costs of the project also must be considered in the cost/benefit analysis, such as the delays extra stadium traffic may cause for commuters, extra infrastructure needs, the unproductive use of land for parking lots, litter, undesirable businesses (bars, prostitution) in neighborhoods, loss of the stadium land to other uses, the power consumption and light pollution from field lighting etc.

It seems to me that the Rose Garden has blighted, not benefited that section of Portland, and stadium projects in many other cities I have visited are also surrounded by ugly and unappealing business districts. This suggests that the costs may outweigh the benefits.