Laserfiche WebLink
3. The URA would decide during its due diligence period not to acquire the properties. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy asked if a meeting with Connor/Woolley had been set up regarding the properties. Mr. Braud <br />replied that initial discussions had occurred. He said the City had extended a request for additional time. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman opined that all three options seemed to indicate the project was not workable. She felt it was <br />“contingent on the contingencies.” She thought a modified Option 1 might work. She called Option 2 a <br />“poison pill.” She said the City should buy the property by July 1. She averred that the City had the <br />resources to go out for another Request for Proposals (RFP) if necessary. She believed it was an attractive <br />project and another developer would undertake it if Beam could not. She also did not see a reason why the <br />project money needed to include Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) money. She stated <br />that there was $2 million in the Brownfield Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) assets and $4 million <br />in URA assets. She believed the City could secure the loan with the other assets in order to pursue the HUD <br />money. She recalled that originally the HUD money was only slated to be spent on acquisition and said it <br />could still be used for that. <br /> <br />Mr. Braud stated that the BEDI grant had to be used with the Section 108 guaranteed loan money. He said <br />they were negotiating with the goal of having Beam make a $475,000 deposit by May 8. He related that <br />with that deposit the City intended to move forward with the purchase of the property. He explained that the <br />problem arose when it became apparent that Beam was unwilling to make the deposit at this time. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked who made the recommendation in Option 2. Assistant City Manager Angel Jones <br />responded that the options before the council had been developed prior to Mr. Ruiz’ arrival as City <br />Manager. Ms. Taylor felt the City should purchase the property if necessary. She opined that the project <br />provided the most promise for the downtown area. She disagreed with people who were concerned that <br />spending money on this project would preclude spending on another project, adding that the City should <br />focus on doing the Beam project right. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked how much the City was helping ORI to decide on taking up tenancy in the Beam building. <br />Mr. Braud replied that the City would extend as much assistance to Beam as it could to help garner ORI for <br />a tenant. He noted that Beam had the ability to pass on benefits, such as low-cost financing. <br /> <br />Susan Muir, Executive Director of PDD, stated that she was meeting with the director of ORI regarding <br />their decision-making process as they looked at a number of sites in the downtown area. She reiterated <br />staff’s willingness to do what was necessary. <br /> <br />In response to a follow-up question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Braud stated that the option agreement would be <br />extended with the recommended motion. He noted that the City had paid additional option money when <br />extending options in the past. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor reiterated her support for doing whatever it took to helping Beam succeed, even if that included <br />purchasing the property. She was not in favor of the motion as stated. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Clark, Mr. Braud explained that the $19 million listed in the Agenda <br />Item Summary (AIS) included the Washburne Building. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 16, 2008 Page 2 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />