Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Pryor noted that WG’s willingness to work with the City to determine more reasonable timelines for the project <br />had been instrumental to his position with regard to his vote on the approval of the purchase and sale agreement. He <br />noted that while he had initially agreed with Ms. Bettman in her support of the Opus NWR proposal, the will of the <br />council had been to choose the WG Development proposal instead and that as such he wanted to give WG the good <br />faith opportunity to complete the project as they had proposed. <br />Mr. Pryor noted that while he continued to support the continued development relationship with WG Development, he <br />was reluctant to support any further extensions to the project timelines. <br />Mr. Clark, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to extend the discussion of the work session <br />agenda item for an additional five minutes. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br />Mr. Clark indicated that while he had greater confidence in the financial health of Opus NWR as a developer and <br />agreed with certain elements of Ms. Bettman’s position, he felt that the development of the project with WG was the <br />best option for the City, particularly in light of the architectural merits of the proposed building as well as the strong <br />level of public support for the WG Development proposal. He stated that he would not support Ms. Bettman’s <br />motion. <br />th <br />Ms. Taylor commented that while she still hoped that the City might have turned the 10 and Charnelton site into a <br />public park or community garden, she continued to prefer the WG Development project after listening to the concerns <br />of the community. <br />Ms. Piercy called for a vote on Ms. Bettman’s previously stated motion. The motion failed, <br />2:6, Ms. Bettman and Ms. Taylor voting in favor. <br />Mr. Pryor, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to direct the Agency Director to enter into a <br />th <br />Purchase and Sale Agreement for the sale and development of the 10 and Charnelton <br />development site consistent with the outline of terms included as Attachment A, and in the <br />event that the URA would be unable to successfully execute an agreement by March 31, <br />2009, that the URA enter into negotiations with Opus NWR Development. <br />Mr. Ruiz asked the Council to clarify the nature of Mr. Pryor’s motion with regard to the possibility of continued <br />negotiations with Opus NWR. Mr. Pryor clarified, saying the motion directed further negotiations with Opus NWR <br />only after March 31, 2009, and not before. Mr. Ruiz commented he was sensitive to the issue of timing with regard <br />to continued negotiations with Opus NWR, and that it might be advisable to begin negotiating a backup plan with <br />Opus NWR now instead of waiting for March 31. <br />Mr. Pryor responded that, in the interest of fairness and good faith to WG Development, his motion was designed to <br />specify a date on which to re-enter formal negotiations with Opus NWR, but that it would be acceptable if the City <br />Manager’s office chose to proceed with informal negotiations with Opus NWR in the interim. <br />Ms. Ortiz appreciated Mr. Pryor’s clarification of his motion, and noted her support of a continued development <br />relationship with Opus NWR. <br />Ms. Bettman indicated she would not support Mr. Pryor’s motion and restated her belief that the WG Development <br />proposal was not a strong proposal to begin with. <br />Ms. Piercy called for a vote on Mr. Pryor’s previously stated motion. The motion passed, <br />7:1, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Clark, Mr. Poling, Ms. Taylor, Ms. Ortiz, Ms. Solomon and Mr. <br />Zelenka in favor. <br /> <br />MINUTES: Eugene City Council October 22, 2008 Page 6 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />