Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman indicated her intention to support the motion. She asked the rental cost for space at the Wells Fargo building. Denny Braud, senior development analyst for the Community Development Division, responded that he thought it was a little over $1 per square foot. Ms. Bettman asked if the City was assuming the lease for the Wells Fargo location. Mr. Sullivan replied that the City would be signing a replacement lease and not subletting the space. Ms. Bettman hoped that the City would not be a tenant. She felt it was a potential and not a “given.” She thought the development would increase interest in developing other sites in the downtown and would be beneficial to everyone. Mr. Clark said he was eager to see the project succeed. He expressed appreciation for the creativity that had been applied to make the project go forward successfully. He indicated he would oppose the motion at this time because of the unpredictability of future costs and some of the unknowns related to the project. He was concerned about cost increases due to increased construction costs as it would fall back on the City if the City were the main tenant in the building. Ms. Solomon wanted the project to move forward but was concerned about how quickly the City was pursuing the project. She wished the council could have held another work session to try to reconcile the discussion on City Hall and City office renovation, and the Beam Development project. She said she could not vote for the project at this time because she would have a difficult time explaining to people why the City was choosing this course. Ms. Taylor congratulated Mr. Ruiz on the idea of having the City serve as a “back-up tenant.” She felt the project would be great news for the community. Mr. Zelenka also complimented Mr. Ruiz and staff for getting this in motion quickly. He felt it was understandable given the timeline. He underscored that the City had no subsidy going to the property. Given that the Centre Court building and the hole next to it would finally be developed, he thought serving as a back-up tenant to ensure the project would go forward was prudent. He pointed out that the reason that Beam had been brought in was the company’s prior development record. He added that if Beam Develop- ment had not “stepped up to the plate” and guaranteed the monies he would have been more reluctant to move forward. The motion passed, 5:2; Ms. Solomon and Mr. Clark voting in opposition. The meeting adjourned at 12:27 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson) MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 21, 2008 Page 3 Work Session