Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Zelenka said he trusted the City Manager understood the council's intent with respect to the Beverly and <br />Green properties and the motion was not necessary, but it was important to provide clear direction. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka offered a friendly amendment to direct the City Manager to preserve the ability <br />of the City to fund the Beverly and Green properties. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor did not feel the additional language was necessary. <br /> <br />City Manager pro tem Jones said the cost of one of the properties was still unknown and directing her not to <br />spend resources for both of the properties was still vague because she did know what that amount would be <br />or the source of funds. <br /> <br />Mr. Lidz suggested specifying the amounts would be equal to the appraised value of the two properties to <br />provide some guidelines. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka revised his friendly amendment to direct the City Manager to preserve <br />the ability of the City to fund acquisition of the Beverly and Green properties up to <br />an amount equal to the appraised value of the two properties. Ms. Taylor and Ms. <br />Bettman accepted the friendly amendment. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said the Beverly and Green properties were a higher priority for acquisition than two properties <br />the City was considering that were outside the UGB. She surmised that voters did not anticipate buying <br />property outside the UGB when they approved the parks bond measure. She asked if it was necessary to <br />specifically identify park bond measure proceeds, stormwater acquisition funds and system development <br />charges (SDCs) as funding sources to be preserved. City Manager pro tem Jones replied that those three <br />sources had insufficient funds to acquire the Beverly and Green properties and the motion would also cover <br />other funds. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz said she would support the motion. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon thought that discussions of the two properties had been separated, particularly since the <br />owners of the Green property were willing to negotiate with the City, which eliminated the need for eminent <br />domain. She felt a discussion of funding sources was inappropriate while negotiations were ongoing and <br />regretted that the impatience of one councilor to have a motion considered would bump an agenda item that <br />had received a full poll. She would not support the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark hoped that the council would be willing to add time to the agenda to accommodate the item that <br />might be supplanted; otherwise it was an affront to those councilors who signed the poll to place it on the <br />agenda. He asked if the motion would require the City Manager to stop work on any current activities. City <br />Manager pro tem Jones said it would not. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy said she supported Ms. Taylor's intention, but believed the City Manager was clear about the <br />council's direction and would not support the motion. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said a memorandum from the City Manager regarding parks bond measure proceeds that caused <br />her concern prompted the motion and her intent was to prevent anything that would stop the acquisition of <br />the Beverly and Green properties. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council January 30, 2008 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />