April 20, 2006
Paul Allen South Lake Union Boondoggle even more expensive than expected

Today's Seattle Times reports that the City of Seattle will end up paying $4.2 million more than expected in renovations to South Lake Union Park as part of a boondoggle deal with Paul Allen.

[City Councilmember Richard] McIver, who leads the council's finance committee, said the council is obliged to approve additional spending for the park because Paul Allen's team got the best of city officials in a complex deal approved last year.
Maybe Richard McIver and other city officials who approved the deal can make partial recompense to the taxpayers by disgorging some of the campaign contributions they have received from Paul Allen's Vulcan Ventures and its employees.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at April 20, 2006 08:55 AM | Email This
Comments
1. The real question is why isn't McIver trying to get Ken Bounds fired for screwing up the design and the budget rather than moaning about getting out negotiated.

Posted by: Steven Donegal on April 20, 2006 09:57 AM
2. Is it a surprise to anyone that Paul Allen employs better lawyer/negotiators than the City of Seattle?

Posted by: Heartless Libertarian on April 20, 2006 10:17 AM
3. 1 Both City Councilmember Richard McIver and Parks Superintendent Ken Bounds should consider resigning
2 In the real world vs latte land, an error this big generally costs people their job
3 It's sort of a shame, I've seen McIver on Seattle cable show and he appeared somewhat knowledgeable

Posted by: Green Lake Mark on April 20, 2006 10:23 AM
4. Bottom line, rich get richer - Allen in debt $20 billion, declaring bankruptcies here and there, and continues to rake in taxpayer monies.
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0616/allen.php

Posted by: jackman on April 20, 2006 10:26 AM
5. Gee, who doesn't Vulcan give to? That's pretty much the whole state legislature and whole city and county councils there.

Posted by: stu on April 20, 2006 10:27 AM
6. This guy is a public nuisence and a menace to society. I'd like to see him tarred, featheres and ridden out of State on a rail. As long as he remains in the State the taxpayers will be his prey.

Posted by: JDH on April 20, 2006 11:36 AM
7. I thought liberal were agwainst give aways for rich capitalists. I guess this proves they are just higher class hoes.

Posted by: pbj on April 20, 2006 12:19 PM
8. Should the pulic pay for the Sonics?

Poll at Seattle Times:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002941360_keyarena20m.html

Posted by: Erik on April 20, 2006 12:41 PM
9. "...the council is obliged to approve additional spending for the park because Paul Allen's team got the best of city officials..."

No, Paul Allen's team and city officials got the best of taxpaying citizens. You can bet the deal was quite lucrative for Allen and the city officials.

On one side of the negotiations you have the billionaire moocher Paul Allen, Washington's own diamond studded welfare queen, second only to Boeing. On the other side, negotiating on behalf of the taxpaying citizens, you have thieves in public office with free access to lots and lots of your money. What do you expect? That they will act in your best interest instead of their own?

Why do these thieves keep getting elected? Is it because the poor, the middle class and the stupid think they will plunder rich people like Paul Allen and share the loot with them? Yeah, right. It's easier and more lucrative for rich moochers and thieves to plunder you and share the loot with each other.

Posted by: ken on April 20, 2006 01:09 PM
10. Looks like the city officials are the only one surprised by this latest development. Duh!!!! The whole deal smelled like yesterday's fish when it was first announced. When are this government yahbos going to figure out what the rest of already know--PAUL ALLEN DOESN'T DO ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T BENEFIT PAUL ALLEN!!!!! Any reasonable person would have told Allen to buzz off in the first place because of all the strings attached his "gift", but, no, our b*tt kissing city officials give in to the bully.

Whoever the city hired to study the seawall must have been a "special" contractor, because a reputable firm would have noticed the problems now causing the price increase. McIver should be going after that firm and the city's legal negotiators for doing such a p*ss poor job. That won't happen because McIver is the same doof who played the racism card when he wasn't allowed into the WTO riot area without proper credentials, so common sense is obviously lacking.

Posted by: Burdabee on April 20, 2006 02:58 PM
11. can anybody name a govt project that has come in on budget? i can't, but surely one must exist....

Posted by: dinesh on April 20, 2006 03:01 PM
12. If you believe the Sound Transit spokesmouths, they are coming in "on time and under budget". That is, after the original plan was scrapped, shortening the line.

Posted by: Palouse on April 20, 2006 03:08 PM
13. They do come in dinesh.

I've had several at 10% or greater because I hit the contractors when they aren't working (i.e. my timing was right). Other times I have heard of the staff making outrageous contingency estimates, so that there wouldn't be an overrun.

Actually, that question came up before we bid on Sound Transit. The answer by the pimps were that the estimates and money requested all had more than enough contingency in them, so that if you voted "yes" then you weren't going to have to worry about overruns.

Well, we know how that turned out, didn't we?

Posted by: swatter on April 20, 2006 03:26 PM
14. The only rule that is universal is there are no parameters when it comes to advancing Lib candidates or causes.

Have you heard ST's on time and under budget adds?

Hey if I left home to go pick up the new Mercedes S500 that we agreed to spend $105,000 on, and then stop by and play pinball at the corner tavern on the way home and told my wife it would cost $20 for the evening and I would be home by midnight......then after leaving home I decide to fly to the Bahamas, gamble off $75,000 and be back by Christmas with a new Ford crown Victoria, I will be dipped and rolled if I am going to try to tell her that I accomplished the task ‘on time and under budget’ just because I actually only gambled off $70,000 and made it home by Thanksgiving.


Posted by: JDH on April 20, 2006 04:09 PM
15. And the problem is?

Seattle's finest at work deep in the pockets of taxpayers. I am so glad I moved out of Seattle 35 years ago. Told them so then and telling you so today. Seattle has run amok!

Do forget that Ron Sims pressure the private company to rehire the fired illegals. And Seattle is a refuge for illegals. Read what Georgia did to curb the illegal aliens. There are some states getting it right. Back to the topic.

And the problem is?

Posted by: snuffy on April 20, 2006 04:38 PM
16. Can anyone estimate how many thousands of dollars Allen has saved via the GOP tax cuts of the last few years?

Posted by: Smarm on April 20, 2006 08:10 PM
17. At least Allen has made bad financial decisions in someplace besides Portland. Hopefully, the Trailblazers will find a buyer to absorb his bad judgment, so they won't have to move. Sonics are in a similar but different bind.

Posted by: KS on April 20, 2006 09:19 PM
18. So much Paul Allen bashing.

It would be interesting to compare what the city has spent in co-operation with Allen that has amounted to so much waste being flushed down the toilet versus the same amounts that Seattle government spends to buy votes from the local unions. I'd be willing to bet that what Allen receives is a drop in the bucket.

Hate Paul all you want, but if Seattle had decided to work with him on fixing the Mercer mess back in the 90's, the city would probably have a lot more tax revenue overall, and that part of the city would not be an eyesore and a royal paint in the rear to drive around in.

At least Allen's projects will eventually result in higher property values and the taxes and investment that come with it. What have the government employees unions given us for their big fluffy paychecks other than the same thing that the private sector could provide for 60% of the cost?

Posted by: johnny on April 20, 2006 10:53 PM
19. Johnny--if you are referring the Commons Project, fixing the Mercer Mess called for removing a lane on Mercer without increasing road capacity nearby and eliminating a lot of the existing street parking. The thought process was that everyone would be "inspired" to walk or take the bus. This is unrealistic when you consider Mercer is one of the main feeds onto I-5.

Also, the city is keeping quiet about what kind of tax deal was worked out with Allen. Although you are correct that property values will go up, I would be interested in seeing any documentation that shows when the city will actually come out ahead. Allen is not a stupid man, so you can bet the taxpayers are going to chip in a lot more then they get back for quite some time.

Posted by: Burdabee on April 20, 2006 11:18 PM
20. Agreed that Allen does intend to make a profit. I guess that doesn't scare me.

My real point what that everyone in Seattle seems so willing to bash Paul Allen when he tried to partner with the city to get things done, but they tend toward a blind eye to the continued rape of this cities finances by the unions here.

The simple fact is that if you compare the cost of getting anything done here versus other parts of the country, it costs more here, and the cost keeps going up.

My daddy used to say "Think big business is dangerous? Wait until you've had a taste of big government!"

I'd amend that a bit to say "Think big business is bad? Wait until you've had a taste of big government unions."

Posted by: johnny on April 24, 2006 10:54 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?