CC MInutes - 05/14/01 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mayor Torrey recommended that the council pay attention to the interests of the broader community before it expended all the funds in question. He said that without the involvement of School District 4J, the northern portion of the community would have not parks enhancements. He said the council should look to the future for the next level of funding, and involve the community. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to direct the City Manager to continue acquisition negotiations for the stream corridors on the Beverly property as highlighted on the map and to direct staff to process a supplemental budget #3 request for the funds necessary to finance the acquisition. Ms. Taylor said the south hills were a community asset used by all residents and the importance of the acquisition reached beyond the south hills. She said the acquisition was also important for wildlife habitat and water quality. Mr. Kelly expressed appreciation for the work done by staff on the property acquisition and to minimize damage from vegetation removal. The motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to ask staff to investigate ways to find the money to buy the entire Beverly property, including stormwater funds, grants, and gifts. Mr. Kelly tentatively supported the intent of the motion, but said he could not do so at the expense of the other high priority sites. Mr. Pap~ opposed the motion because the City was putting too much emphasis on the property in question and not enough in other areas of the community. Mr. Rayor thought the public understood the City had limited dollars. He said that the property in question was 25 acres of the larger 300 to 400 acre headwaters area, and he thought it shortsighted to concentrate on the property. Ms. Bettman said staff good job of prioritizing projects. She thought the motion merely gives it direction to look into a larger purchase, taking into account other priorities. Ms. Nathanson asked if the motion would mean the remainder of the property not addressed by the immediate acquisition would be considered the higher priority for purchase than the other eight or nine high-value properties on the list developed by staff. Ms. Taylor said yes; the property was in more danger than the other properties on the list, and it was her intent to make it a higher priority. Ms. Nathanson indicated she could not support the motion because there were other properties in danger of development that were designated as high-priority acquisitions. The motion failed, 4:2; Ms. Bettman and Ms. Taylor voting yes. The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 14, 2001 Page 14 Work Session