Laserfiche WebLink
Nathan Fendrich, <br />Firwood Way, Eugene, observed that 25 years ago the community built the Hult Center, a world- <br />class performing arts center. He said a few years ago the community built the downtown Library and it was time to <br />move forward again with downtown revitalization. <br /> <br />John Barofsky <br />, 2010Hubbard Lane, Eugene, stated that he was in favor of downtown development and the Beam <br />Development project; however, he urged the council to keep all costs in mind, particularly with respect to purchasing <br />property. He noted that the supplemental budget included attorney fees and loan fees and acquisition and renewal of <br />purchase options. He said there were many other costs as well and hoped they would not be overlooked when <br />negotiating the terms of an agreement with Beam Development. He suggested the City consider establishing “in- <br />house” legal counsel. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing and invited comments from the council. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark asked staff to address concerns he had raised earlier. <br /> <br />Denny Braud, Planning and Development Department, pointed out that adopting the supplemental budget would <br />allow staff to continue the council-directed process of acquiring the properties. He explained the purchase option <br />process and said the timelines included provision for refund of the ten percent down payment within a 45-day period. <br />He anticipated signing an agreement with Beam Development within that 45-day period and noted the agreement <br />would be reviewed by the URA. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark indicated that his primary concern was with Beam’s ability to secure tenants that would provide the <br />project with an adequate cash flow. He said the market was changing and it behooved the City to be prudent when <br />entering into an agreement on a project that might have appeared more certain before those changes. He felt the <br />voters were clear in the last election, but could support the supplemental budget as long as there was still an <br />opportunity for the City to back out of the arrangement without harm. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling said he shared Councilor Clark’s concern and was pleased to hear there was a 45-day period before <br />the agreement was finalized. He wanted assurance that the City had performed due diligence on the financial ability <br />of the developer to move forward with the project and would be protected in the event the developer decided not to <br />pursue the project. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka agreed with Councilor Poling’s remarks. He asked how the City would be protected on this <br />project. Mr. Braud replied that in previous agreements the City obtained earnest money from the buyer when the <br />sales agreement was signed. He expected that an agreement would be signed with Beam Development prior to May <br />8, 2008. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark clarified his criteria for an agreement with Beam: the level of investment from Beam in the project, <br />creation of a better environment in downtown, increasing the tax base and the benefits to the City as a result of the <br />project. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman said she hoped to see the “pits” developed instead of two public nuisances in downtown. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka said the benefit to the City from the Beam project was not yet clear. He asked if the level of <br />financial participation required of the City was known yet. He believed that any downtown development would <br />require some level of subsidy. Mr. Braud said the sales agreement would outline the City’s participation. He <br />anticipated the City’s role to be assisting with financing of the project through a loan, not by granting funds to the <br />developer. He said it would constitute gap financing for property acquisition and construction. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 10, 2008 Page 4 <br /> Public Hearing <br /> <br />