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
Ms. Bettman asserted that her substitute motion was the “only chance” for the development to move ahead. <br />She repeated the points of her motion. She believed it provided the City a level of protection and that it <br />would provide them time to put the transaction together. She opined that a vote against the substitute <br />motion was a vote “to kill the deal” and keep the project in the hands of Connor/Woolley. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka pointed out that this strategy would eliminate the incentive for Connor/Woolley to negotiate the <br />extension because the City would buy the property anyway. He underscored that the uncertainties in this <br />proposal did not have anything to do with the City, it had to do with the banks and credit agencies. He <br />averred that the substitute motion asked the City to assume or overlook risks. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor concurred, commenting that forcing peoples’ hands killed deals. He did not want to own the <br />property with no one to develop it. He wanted to retain flexibility. He felt the original motion moved the <br />project forward with diligence and prudence, showed good faith, but did not tie anyone’s hands behind their <br />back. He averred that the substitute motion was not supportable because it made things the City did not <br />want to have happen too quickly, happen in a manner that was too fast for the developer. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark commented that the only drawbacks in the original motion had to do with the reality of the <br />markets. He was not interested in those costs. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka offered a friendly amendment to include a review at the beginning of July to <br />assess whether Beam Development had put the deal together so that the City would have an <br />opportunity to opt out of the purchase of the property. Ms. Bettman declined the friendly <br />amendment. <br /> <br />The substitute motion failed, 4:3; Ms. Taylor, Ms. Ortiz, and Ms. Bettman voting in favor. <br /> <br />The main motion passed, 5:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting in opposition. <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 1:28 p.m. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Jon Ruiz <br />City Manager <br /> <br />(Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 16, 2008 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.