Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
<br />e of bUilding acquisition were included in the campaign, and said that it <br /> should come as no surprise to the voters if the City decides to purchase the <br /> building. She said that the City would need to go to the voters for a deci- <br /> sion on the financing of library operation, but noted that capital costs <br /> would likely be financed with General Obligation (GO) Bonds. She noted that <br /> a disadvantage to continuing the option is the possible loss of momentum on <br /> the issue. <br /> Mr. Boles agreed with Mr. Nicholson that the council would save money by <br /> optioning the building. He said that he wants assurances that the voters <br /> support some method of library operation in addition to site acquisition. <br /> The council should refer this question to the voters at the next available <br /> election. <br /> Mr. MacDonald said that it would be unwise to tie the decision of building <br /> acquisition to a decision on operation which will invariably be made at the <br /> end of the Eugene Decisions process. In doing so, the council risks losing <br /> its momentum on this issue. <br /> Mr. Bowers recommended that if the council chooses to proceed directly with <br /> building acquisition, it wait until the complete environmental review has <br /> been done to negotiate a purchase price for the building--approximately six <br /> months. <br /> Mr. Boles moved, seconded by Mr. Robinette, to authorize staff <br /> to negotiate with the owners of the former Sears site to con- <br />e tinue the current option, which expires June 30, 1991, for a <br /> period of one year. <br /> Mr. Robinette urged the council to withhold a decision on building acquisi- <br /> tion until after the Eugene Decisions process in order to be sure that it has <br /> a commitment for library operation. <br /> Mr. MacDonald said that support for library acquisition in no way demon- <br /> strates a lack of commitment to the Eugene Decisions process. He expressed <br /> concern that by holding an option, the City is attempting to protect downtown <br /> urban renewal funds for some other use. He does not agree with that strate- <br /> gy. <br /> Roll call vote; the motion carried 4:2; with councilors <br /> Bascom, Robinette, Boles, and Nicholson voting aye, and coun- <br /> cilors Ehrman and MacDonald voting nay. <br /> Mr. Boles emphasized that the vote to continue the option rather than proceed <br /> with acquisition should in no way imply a lack of support for the library <br /> project. <br /> Mr. Boles summarized the following points to be considered in option negotia- <br /> tions with the owner: 1) that half of the cost of the option be applied to <br /> the cost of the bUilding; and 2) that the costs of the environmental assess- <br /> ment be borne by the owner. <br />e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 12, 1991 Page 6 <br />