Laserfiche WebLink
Fund (BDF) portfolio was about $2.5 million with $500,000 available for the project, although that fund <br />revolved quickly with short-term loans; there was about $2 million currently available in the Downtown <br />Revitalization Loan Program. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said he was nervous about tying up a majority of funds in those programs for a significant period <br />time. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said he was interested in motion language that would require any financing package from the City <br />to return to the council for review and approval of terms and conditions before being finalized. He also <br />wanted to see a projection of ORI’s reasonable expectation to repay the loan and over what period of time. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé agreed with comments about the value of ORI to the community and would have been more <br />favorably inclined towards the financing options if the discussion was being held in April or May of 2003. <br />He cited Ms. Bettman’s motion on May 12, 2003, regarding ORI’s purchase of the Sears site. He felt the <br />motion should have included a requirement that the site was under contract at the end of six months. He <br />also felt that information had been hidden from the council. He cited council minutes from a June 2004 <br />Urban Renewal Agency meeting regarding the consequences if the deal with ORI fell through and asked <br />about the status of the provisions requiring ORI to reimburse the City for all costs. Mr. Braud replied that a <br />repurchase option was included in the purchase agreement requiring ORI to reimburse for costs, but would <br />have occurred after closing of the sale and in the event ORI did not move forward with the project. He said <br />the sale had not been closed so the repurchase option was not in effect. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé commented that the City’s investments in the site were not recoverable. Mr. Braud said the City <br />had added value to the site by demolishing the building. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon stated that she saw no reason to continue with the transaction as the City had done all of the <br />work to-date and had nothing to show for its efforts. She said that ORI should reconsider the size and scope <br />and possibly location of its project if it could not obtain financing. She preferred to see the City start over <br />with another request for proposals (RFP). <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to direct the City Manager to pursue <br />a combination of Downtown Revitalization Loan Program and Business Develop- <br />ment Fund financing to provide financing in the range of $2 million for the ORI <br />project, and to encourage ORI to work with its developer and investors to close the <br />remaining financing gap in a timely manner. <br /> <br />Speaking to the motion, Ms. Solomon indicated that she vote against it as it was bad business and the City <br />needed to move on with another developer. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé stated that he could not support the motion. He said there was momentum for downtown <br />redevelopment and Conner-Woolley had expressed an interest in the site. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé proposed a substitute motion to direct the City Manager within 30 days <br />to return with a request for proposals for sale of the Sears site. Ms. Solomon pro- <br />vided the second. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said that so far no players had come to the table, including Conner-Woolley and Giustina, and <br />indicated that they wanted to do a project but had not asked for a public subsidy. She said that many people <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 13, 2006 Page 10 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />