Item 4A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

ing of the terminology involved. When the board discussed the site and the potential of selling it, it had agreed it would be useful to issue and RFI and contract with a developer to help EWEB and the City determine what the master plan could be. Mr. Berggren said that at the present time, the issue that was most cloudy for the board was the degree of interest the City had in the property. He said if the City was to purchase the property, it made little sense for EWEB to do the master planning needed. However, it was EWEB’s intent to do what needed to be done and to work cooperatively with the City. Mr. Kelly emphasized the City’s interest in the property but though it was difficult to know the degree of that interest without knowing the price of the property. He thought further discussion was warranted, but suggested the discussion would be very different if there $20 million as opposed to a $1 million carrying cost until resale. Ms. Bettman said the carrying costs were a concern for her as well. A Metro Plan amendment and zone change would result in a “windfall” for EWEB in regard to the value of the property. She questioned if the City would acquire the property before those changes occurred and if any of the benefit would accrue to the City. Mr. Berggren agreed more discussion was needed. Mr. Papé concurred with the need for more discussion, but believed that the council needed more informa- tion about the timing of the sale and the price. Mr. Berggren noted EWEB’s hope to have more information by March 2007, but he was unsure if it would be available by then. Responding to a question from Mr. Papé about the location of the administration building, Mr. Beeson said that space had been reserved for the building between the operations building and employee parking. Responding to a follow-up question from Ms. Taylor regarding the possibility that EWEB’s administrative functions would be moved, Mr. Berggren said that EWEB made provision for that if it became appropriate at sometime in the future. Mr. Papé noted the City’s interest in purchasing, at minimum, property along the river on the existing site. Ms. Taylor determined from Assistant City Manager Jim Carlson that the Riverfront Research District contained approximately $90,000, but those dollars were already committed to the proposed east side parking structure. Ms. Taylor wanted to buy the EWEB property because community members would then be involved, through their council representatives, with what was done with the site. President Bishop spoke to the issue of where the benefit would accrue from a designation and zone change, saying that the board discussed whether to take those steps or simply move the industrial uses off the site and dispose of the property. She suggested that the council and board keep in mind the fact that EWEB’s customers and the council’s constituents were the same people, and the two bodies needed to work closely together to determine how to benefit them. EWEB needed to realize the money from the sale of the property to pay down the bonds and make the Roosevelt project work. If EWEB could not do that, it called into question whether EWEB had the ability to move. She suggested the two bodies had the same vision and goals but the board needed to focus on the needs of the utility. MINUTES—Eugene City Council/ November 15, 2006 Page 3 Eugene Water & Electric Board of Commissioners