Item 3D: Adoption of Resolution on 108 Funds for Construction Funding

Home Browse Search

ATTACHMENT C Public Comments Received From: Mary Ann Holser [mailto:mahols@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 17:20 To: Mary Ann Holser Cc: eugene.budget.committee@ci.eugene.or.us; eugene.budget.committee@ci.eugene.or.us Subject: Beam dowtown proposal To: Eugene Budget Committee Members, City Councilors, the mayor and Finance Committee staff I , unfortunately, missed the forum opportunity to testify about supplemental, capital , and urban renewal funding for the proposed greatly scaled down Beam development of Centre Court. With the council, I sincerely hope for a good outcome for our financial support to Beam and I am sure all they will try hard to obtain tenants. However, I want to express high caution in carrying out this financial plan, dependent on loans to Beam to buy the property of 3.5 million and 5.2 million in Federal housing and urban renewal, grants, and a 1,3 million federal grant construction. Eugene will contribute 350,000 of local downtown revitalization funds and Beam will contribute $750,00 for construction. Beam has presented a scaled down version of and office and residential building, Council will meet for approval of the Beam proposal and city and financing proposal on January 11. Presently Beam has located tenants for only 9,000 square feet of the lower cost space of the 50,000 square feet of the building. The HUD funds are expected to be approved and the whole package is to be approved at that time. The only councilor to express concern was Mike Clark who discussed what could happen if tenants weren’t found, the Hud money was not approved and if Beam could not repay their loans? Beam does not plan to develop the pit, which shall remain a big hole downtown, although Beam suggests that restoring and fixing Centre Court will encourage development there! What options would the city have? Find a new developer? Develop the property by the city? I hope the optimism of the council, the City manager and Beam is validated, but think we should hold off the risky venture until Beam finds tenants, and the big piece of HUD money is actually approved. Though very slightly improving, the economy shows very slow recovery and commercial and residential real estate ventures are still risky. Downtown has empty office spaces. I would recommend advice on this venture from outside the real estate and housing market industries. It is their function to remain optimistic to remain in business. Governments are expected to be more cautious with public monies. Mary Ann Holser Citizen Budget Committee member