My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 09/19/07 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2007
>
CC Minutes - 09/19/07 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 10:31:29 AM
Creation date
11/15/2007 9:16:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Work Session
CMO_Meeting_Date
9/19/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Ms. Bettman felt there were good recommendations in the report in terms of “rearticulating the new urbanist <br />concepts.” She hoped the City could utilize the recommendations as a basis for a Request for Proposals <br />(RFP) to redevelop vacant property “after the ballot measure fails.” She questioned why the council was <br />having the discussion. She believed that if the recommendations were “tweaked” by the council and “sent <br />off to the developer” there would be “obvious financial implications.” She predicted that developers would <br />return to the council with a much higher project cost. She asked if the City would then bring back another <br />spending increase for the Urban Renewal District and whether this would happen regardless of whether the <br />ballot measure passed. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy underscored that the council was trying to respond to the specific recommendations from the <br />committee. She said she had discussed with City Attorney Glenn Klein prior to the meeting what elements <br />of the conversation should not be brought up given the pending election and the legal parameters that <br />governed it. <br /> <br />Mr. Klein said the council was not, in the opinion of the City Attorneys, at risk of violating elections law. <br />He underscored that between the attorneys they had over 30 years of experience in advising state agencies <br />and they had a great deal of familiarity with this. In regard to the specific question from Ms. Bettman he <br />stated that if the developers returned in March with a need for $35 million more it would be an issue that the <br />City Council or Urban Renewal Agency would have to deal with. He stressed that this would not be a staff <br />decision and also that it was unrelated to the ballot measure. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman averred that the ballot measure was “inexorably” tied to the recommendations because all of <br />them would cost money. She felt the recommendations had not been factored into its financial implications. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark thanked the committee for its “hard work” and also expressed appreciation for the high integrity <br />of the work. He recalled that 70 to 80 percent of the people who participated in the first public forum <br />indicated they wanted the council to act and move forward on downtown revitalization. He said he <br />originally had been skeptical of Mr. Zelenka’s motion to bring in more public input. He felt that sometimes <br />too much public process slowed a larger process down. He had come to understand that the community <br />placed a high value on participation; if there was going to be a public investment in a project the public <br />would have to weigh in on it. He underscored that without public investment there would not be the <br />opportunity for the project. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 19, 2007 Page 3 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.