Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Torrey urged the council to seriously consider purchasing the property. He pointed out that the <br />worst thing that could happen as a result of the purchase was that the council could realize it needed the <br />money and then sell the property and take advantage of the upside of the valuation of the property. He <br />stated that the property would, in effect, represent a reserve, and opined that a reserve was not a bad thing <br />for the City of Eugene to have. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly opined that he could not imagine that the property would be purchased and then sold. He <br />reiterated his opposition to the motion. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Kelly, Mr. Corey stated that the seller was the Giustina family. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson asked what percentage of the budgets the money requested for the purchase represented. <br />Mr. Corey estimated that the $1 million reserve would drop by $35,000. Ms. Nathanson responded that it <br />was a small amount. She cited the City Manager's indication that the organization could observe this and <br />maintain City operations and services to the residents and called the purchase a "good move." <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman called the benefits to the purchase "speculative." She reiterated that some of the assumptions <br />were incorrect. She alleged that the land in that area cost $120,000 to $140,000 per acre. She felt the <br />price the City was being asked was "extraordinary." She did not think it could be resold for the amount the <br />City had offered to pay for it. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner agreed the property was over-priced, stating that he had spoken with owners and appraisers in <br />the area it was located. He reiterated that he would need to know what the net income from lease revenues <br />would be prior to making this decision. He asked who would be liable in the case of a fire. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner stated that $105,000 per year over three years out of the General Fund would pay for a lot of <br />staff work. <br /> <br />Mr. Taylor assured the Mayor and City Council that the City had used professional appraisers. He <br />underscored that the strategic issue was the maintenance of the facilities and infrastructure. He asserted <br />that it was not unusual for a municipality to purchase property and then not use it for up to 20 years. He <br />said, regardless of what future needs would be, the purchase was consistent with the City's long-term <br />planning. <br /> <br />Mr. Corey stated that the net figure for lease revenue was $160,000 and this was subject to lease <br />renegotiation. Regarding insurance, he said coverage on the facilities would be similar to other buildings <br />owned by the City. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner expressed concern that homeless people used the buildings and asked what the City's liability <br />would be should an indigent person be injured or killed on the property. City Attorney Glenn Klein stated <br />that the lease would need to be examined in order to determine whether it required that the lessee or <br />occupant carry liability insurance. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner conveyed his discomfort regarding the unknown level of responsibility the property held for <br />the City. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon emphasized that the City had used professional appraisers agreed upon by both parties. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon asked Mr. Meisner if he would prefer to table pending further information. Mr. Meisner <br /> <br /> <br />