Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

incremental approach and a $100 million bond, in addition to the $40 million in reserve, would achieve much of the council's goal for a facility. He also wanted the patrol facility and City Hall to be an integrated project. Ms. Bettman said she would not support the motion, as it would result in prematurely eliminating the County-owned site. She said the County had initiatives for which it wanted the City's support and the City could therefore rely on the County's cooperation. In terms of consolidation, she thought a $100 million bond, $50 million in urban renewal funds and $40 million in reserves could complete the entire project. Mr. Zelenka said his first choice was the butterfly lot, but there were too many problems with the site, including unwilling sellers of adjacent parcels. He said the County might sell the lot but would expect a new parking facility to be built at a cost of $12 million in addition to the $2 million purchase price, which was too expensive. Mr. Clark supported the current City Hall site but would vote against the motion because he felt that establishing stable funding for the transportation system was a priority and the council needed to make more progress on that before initiating a new city hall project. He said the County was facing difficult financial choices and would likely ask the City to take up the slack in some services; moving precipitously on the City Hall project could remove some options from the table. He said that downtown redevelopment was still in the planning stage and a clearer vision of downtown was needed before making a decision on a new city hall. Mr. Pryor stated that he was equally passionate about transportation system funding but thought that could move forward concurrently with a new city hall project. He would not support a significant public financial obligation until the council had a better handle on transportation funding, but that did not mean the City Hall project had to be halted. He noted that even if the County was willing to sell the butterfly lot, acquisition of privately owned parcels necessary to complete the site was uncertain and he did not want to see the council involved in another condemnation action. Mr. Clark said there was still uncertainty about other government-owned buildings in downtown and he felt the council was moving too quickly. Ms. Taylor commented that the current City Hall site was a good location, but not the only land the City owned, such as the former Sears site. She was not certain the public was ready to support a large expenditure. Mr. Zelenka said the participants in the public process represented a broad spectrum of the community and voting supported as first choices the current City Hall site and the butterfly lot, with the Sears site and ShawMed site as second choices. He did not want to consider either of the second choices because they were included in the downtown redevelopment plan. The motion passed, 4:3; Ms. Bettman, Mr. Clark and Ms. Taylor voting in opposi- tion. Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to direct the City Manager to approve the development of a master plan for a wholly or incrementally consolidated con- cept on one site. Ms. Bettman asserted that from the beginning there was discussion of consolidating City services in one facility and she believed that an incremental approach should not be taken, as she feared it would be too MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 11, 2007 Page 6 Work Session