CC Minutes - 04/14/08 Work Session

Home Browse Search

fit the hospital’s needs, including the EWEB site. She said the hospital had indicated that certainty was very important and the two north sites had not risen to the top as it did not appear there was unanimous support for either site. Mr. Zelenka commented that Ms. Bettman’s suggestions had merit and he was intrigued that Ms. Cate indicated McKenzie Willamette was still interested in the Riverfront site, which meant the council should continue its interest in the site and more creative thinking could result in a hospital in Eugene. Ms. Piercy pointed out that considerable work was done on the EWEB site, but it was eliminated because EWEB had no plans to move; now EWEB was moving and the possibilities for the site changed dramatically. She thought there were challenged with all of the sites and it was a matter of time to work through those issues. She said if the City really wanted a hospital on the south side of the river it was reasonable to continue to negotiate on the Riverfront site, as well as revisit the work done on the EWEB site. Mr. Pryor, seconded by Ms. Bettman moved to support the continued discussions re- lated to the 4J site and the Register Guard site as potential hospital sites in Eugene. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Zelenka, moved to substitute a motion to support the continued negotiations with the University of Oregon and McKenzie Willamette Medical Center to see if the timeline and financial needs of the University can be ne- gotiated to better align with the timing needs of the hospital and the financial re- sources of the hospital and the City of Eugene and to direct the city manager to con- sider bringing in outside expertise to negotiate some of the elements of financing, land acquisition and other elements to expedite negotiations and position the City to best advantage while addressing the needs of the University and the hospital. Ms. Bettman spoke in support of her motion and the importance of engaging in negotiations with all assets and requirements on the table. She said the Riverfront site was in the best interest of the community’s health care, the hospital’s needs and the City’s tax base. Mr. Pryor was not certain it was an “either/or” situation and his original motion could be passed, followed by Ms. Bettman’s motion. Ms. Bettman suggested a friendly amendment to add options 2 and 3 to her motion. Mr. Pryor said he would add those options as a friendly amendment if he could also include a requirement that a final decision would be made by the end of May, based on the hospital’s timeline. Ms. Bettman asked if the end of May was a hard date. Ms. Cate replied that given the length of time the hospital had been seeking an appropriate site it was time for the hospital to make a decision in the next month or two. Ms. Bettman agreed to accept a friendly amendment to include options 2 and 3 and require a decision to be made by the end of May. Mr. Clark urged the council not to send a message that it preferred the hospital in Springfield rather than a site in North Eugene. He could support the motion as it kept all of the options open. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 5 Work Session