Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6: Ordinance on Use of Eminent Domain for Property near Amazon Headwaters ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Action: An Ordinance Authorizing the Institution of Proceedings in Eminent Domain for the Acquisition by Condemnation of Property for Park and Open Space Land near the Amazon Creek Headwaters in South Eugene Meeting Date: December 10, 2007 Agenda Item Number: 6 Department: City Attorney’s Office Staff Contact: Glenn Klein www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5080 ISSUE STATEMENT This item is before the City Council for action regarding the possible acquisition, by condemnation if necessary, of the Beverly and Green properties. BACKGROUND In response to prior council direction, a public hearing was held on May 21, 2007, on an ordinance authorizing the use of eminent domain for acquisition of the two parcels in South Eugene. Action was scheduled to occur on July 9, 2007. On July 9, the council did not act on the ordinance, but instead, passed a motion that directed the City Manager to: a) obtain appraisals for the Beverly and Green properties based on low, medium, and high levels of development intensity, and to contract with whatever other consultants (besides the appraiser) are needed to develop the information that the appraiser needs for his or her appraisal; b) schedule a work session to bring back information related to the property, eminent domain and potential sources of money for the acquisitions; c) bring back the condemnation ordinance after the work session(s) with certain changes spelled out in the motion; and d) report back to the council after the City has contracted with the consultants about when the work session(s) can be held. The motion further directed that the sequence of action was first, bring back the appraisals; second, hold the work session (including executive session); and third, bring back the revised ordinance. A friendly amendment to the motion also stated that the work session should be held in October. A work session was held on October 22, 2007. As part of the materials and discussion for that work session, staff updated the council on the status of the preparation of analyses from the experts retained by the City, including the appraiser and the soils engineers. In addition, staff informed the council that some funds from the 2006 Parks, Athletic Fields and Open Space bonds could be used for acquisition of one or both of these parcels, and also addressed the question related to the possibility of personal liability if the source of funds was later determined to be an improper source. With respect to that latter issue, the October 22 Agenda Item Summary stated that the City Attorney’s Office concluded that councilors would not be personally liable should the council decide to use the bond proceeds and a court later determined that the bond proceeds should not have been used. F:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M071210\S0712106.doc At the July 9 meeting, the council requested that when the condemnation ordinance came back for action, that the immediate effective date clause in the ordinance be deleted, and that language be added describing the importance of preserving the property. Discussion at the council’s October 22 work session also included a request by some councilors that the action be split into two ordinances, one for each property. Attachment A is a revised ordinance with the changes requested at the July 9 meeting, applicable to the Beverly property. Attachment B is an identical ordinance, except that it is applicable to the Green property. At the July 9 meeting, the council also asked for additional information. In response to that request, attached are several documents. Attachment C is a vicinity map that shows the location of the two properties. Attachment D is a copy of a May 11 memo from the City Attorney’s Office that provides an overview of the condemnation procedures. Attachment E is a copy of a May 3 memo from the Planning Division that describes the zoning and history of each of the properties. Attachment F is a copy of a May 4 memo from the Parks and Open Space Planning Manager that provides information from a “parks” perspective on the value of the two properties. Attachment G is a copy of an October 25 memo from the Finance Director that discusses potential funding sources for the purchase of the properties. Attachment H is a December 4 memo from the Finance Director that includes updated information about potential funding sources and the trade-offs that the council would have to make in using those resources for purchase of these properties. RELATED CITY POLICIES The Parks, Recreation and Open Space Project and Priority Plan was adopted by the City Council on ? May 22, 2006. A Parks, Athletic Fields and Open Space Bond Measure was passed by Eugene voters on November ? 7, 2006. COUNCIL OPTIONS 1.Direct the City Manager to (a) make offers on one or both properties based on recent information related to the fair market value of the property, and (b) bring back to the council whatever action is necessary to use the [ insert name of fund or funds] to pay for the acquisitions. 2.Adopt one or both of the condemnation ordinances and direct the City Manager to bring back to the council whatever action is necessary to use the [insert name of fund or funds] to pay for the acquisitions. 3.Direct the City Manager to bring back to the council more information about possible funding packages and trade-offs related to the use of certain funding sources for acquisition of one or both of the properties. 4.Take no action. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends taking no further action on these ordinances at this time; however, the acquisition of these properties will continue, providing the owner(s) indicate a willingness to sell at land values consistent with our previous acquisitions along the ridgeline. The City Manager recommends delaying action because the cost of acquiring the properties would place a substantial burden on potential funding sources, thus limiting the City's ability to pursue other important projects or property F:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M071210\S0712106.doc acquisitions that have been prioritized through public process. The funding identified for projects of this type is not sufficient to cover the appraised value. Further, it is not in the City's best interest to allocate large amounts of discretionary funding at a time when there are issues of trust between the City and the public. The City's first commitment should be addressing other identified priorities such as street maintenance. Moving ahead with the ordinances now would expose the City to litigation costs with an uncertain outcome limiting the ability to pursue other park property acquisitions. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to take no further action at this time. ATTACHMENTS A.Ordinance authorizing condemnation of Beverly property B.Ordinance authorizing condemnation of Green property C.Vicinity map showing location of Deerbrook PUD (Beverly) and Green Valley Glen PUD (Green) D.Memo dated May 9, 2007, from City Attorney: An Overview of Condemnation Procedures and Statutory Authorization to Acquire Property for City Parks E.Memo dated May 3, 2007, from Planning and Development Department regarding the zoning, history of land use applications, and conditions of the Green and Beverly properties F.Memo dated May 4, 2007, from the Parks and Open Space Division providing information regarding the “park values” represented by these properties G.Memo dated October 25, 2007, from the Finance Director regarding potential funding sources for purchase of Beverly and Green properties H.Memo dated December 4, 2007 from the Finance Director providing estimated balances of potential funding sources FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Glenn Klein Telephone: 682-5080 Staff E-Mail: glenn.klein@harrang.com F:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M071210\S0712106.doc