My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2008
>
CC Agenda - 07/14/08 Meeting
>
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:27:26 PM
Creation date
7/11/2008 10:26:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
7/14/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
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
properties and was participating on the acquisition committee in good faith, although disagreement among <br />committee members had resulted in the chair’s resignation. He felt it was important to determine how <br />citizens felt about the issue. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman stated that when the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) bond was on the ballot it <br />included acquisition of natural resource properties, which generated public support. She said the Amazon <br />headwaters was not an emergent issue and a task force was working on it. She did not want to preempt that <br />process and put the entire burden squarely on the shoulders of taxpayers. She asked for a copy of the <br />OWEG grant application. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka said the acquisition committee’s report would be presented to the council in June and did not <br />see a need to refer the matter to the ballot at this time. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor stated she would vote against the motion as the bond measure included funds for open space and <br />natural resources. She thought saving natural resources and water quality was far more important than <br />solving temporary problems. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor said it was a challenging issue. He wanted the City to acquire the property, but did not want to <br />condemn it or pay more than it was worth. He said the financing structure was complicated and it would be <br />difficult for the voters to give a definitive answer without clearly understanding the details of a purchase. <br />He preferred to develop a financing proposal first and thought there should be another appraisal of the <br />property because market conditions had changed dramatically. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling thanked Ms. Solomon for bringing the issue forward. He was hearing from an increasing <br />number of people in the community, including those who had worked on getting the PROS bond passed, that <br />the asking price for the property was too high. He would support the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark pointed out that the map and list of identified projects associated with the bond measure did not <br />include the Amazon headwaters properties. He felt it was appropriate to discuss use of bond funds for the <br />acquisition, although that meant they would be taken from another use. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka commented that the City was still awaiting notification about its Oregon Parks and Recreation <br />Department grant application. He agreed with Mr. Pryor that more information was needed and would not <br />support the motion at this time. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman pointed out that the cost of acquisition would need to be identified if the issue was placed on <br />the ballot. City Attorney Glenn Klein said that would depend on how the item was placed on the ballot; a <br />general advisory vote on whether or not to buy the property would not need to include an amount, but asking <br />the voters for additional revenue for the purchase would require a specific dollar amount. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said there were still too many outstanding questions to place the matter on the ballot. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon disagreed. She said if the council believed that acquiring the property was a priority for the <br />community, citizens should be able to confirm that so the City could move forward without any hesitation. <br />She said several issues clouded that decision, including inflated property prices and questionable participa- <br />tion on the committee by a member who owned land contiguous to the subject property. She felt that was <br />potentially a conflict of interest and the contentious nature of the committee’s efforts was ultimately a <br />reflection on the council, potentially undermining its credibility. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 12, 2008 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.