Willamette Week: THE HUNT FOR DEEP VOLT State pursuing leak in Texas Pacific_PGE deal.

I posted a proposed comment as follows:

I had been trying to sue the State Treasurer on the Measure 29 bonds from October 20, 2003, through January 2004.

If I had knowledge of the confidential report it might have aided my claims that the State Treasurer's apparent blanket unreviewable discretion on reviewing the supposed legal claims by [PERS] beneficiaries on the bonds and upon all things pertaining to the actuarial report either exceeded his authority as State Treasurer and or was part of some corrupt monkey business with regard to prospective investment choices.

I had only remarked, in passing, in a memorandum how hard it might be for citizens to boycott PGE if it was owned by the Oregon Investment Council. The OIC's investment in PGE, via their partial ownership of Enron, would assure that any loss that PGE might sustain would result in a demand by the State Treasurer to issue bonds if necessary, characterized as Pension Obligation Bonds, to cover such loss. The OIC's investment in Fred Meyer, [and] Safeway, etc etc which have operations in Oregon are all clouded by grotesque opportunities for corrupt back room deals for the personal benefit [of] private folks and public folks claiming to represent the public, but [who are] really planning for their future among the private co-conspirators in future corrupt enterprises involving government largess.

I still insist that the Measure 29 bonds are and were unlawfully issued, and I did not appeal it so another appropriate entity or party could raise again the issue of the lack of authority of the State Treasurer to exercise "appropriations" authority that is dedicated to the legislature and for which the legislature is not authorized to delegate to anyone else. It is thus a live issue, and if the challenge is to the State Treasurer's authority then it is not time barred. The time bar only works against parties challenging decisions that are within [someone's] lawful [exercise of] authority, not against their exercise of unlawful authority.

I would suggest that the WW pickup where I left off, on the bond issuance. But they can add to it the chicanery of the AG's office for trying to plug a leak, a leak based on someone's promise backed by a signature. What is the "harm" to the state to which the AG wants to seek a remedy? Is the harm the revelation of corrupt and deceitful conduct by a cabal of renegade thieves masquerading as public servants? These guys have got some excess testosterone if you ask me.

Given the passage time, a new effort to attack the bonds, if done vigorously, and subsequent to the very important Struck case, could be very enlightening to the public about the real business of the Oregon Investment Council and their connections to the investment and bonding community.

I'd tell Tim Nord to get his priorities right and start protecting the public rather than the crony pigs he seems to be protecting. If I were a conspiracy buff I'd say that the number of participants in a cover up are growing.

The City of Portland claims that they won't negotiate away their right to use bond proceeds for the PGE purchase to perhaps exercise the use of their power of Eminent Domain. Yet they quite readily bargained away their right to speak about matters pertaining to Enron as part of the purchase plans. I cannot think of legal basis, in the spirit of an open public records law, that would trump a simple Public Records request upon the matters to which the City of Portland claims that they should keep secret. The City of Portland, by negotiation with Enron cannot effectively rewrite public records laws enacted by the legislature. Ha, these guys are really, really funny. The same claim of confidentiality would apply as well for the stuff to which the AG wants to discover the leak. Get your head on straight Mr. Nord.

This ain't over yet, not by a long shot.