Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2009-04-15 SpecialCITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES April 15, 2009 Mayor Jack Hoffman called the special City Council meeting to order at 6:08 p.m. on April 15, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue. Present: Mayor Hoffman, Councilors Hennagin, Moncrieff, Olson, Tierney, Johnson, and. Jordan. Staff Present: Alex McIntyre, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Robyn Christie, City Recorder; Brant Williams, Director of Capital and Economic Projects 3. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting at 6:08 p.m. to Executive Session pursuant to ORS 192.660 (2) (d) to conduct deliberations with persons designated to carry on labor negotiations, and (h) to consult with attorney regarding legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. Mr. Powell reviewed the Executive Session parameters. 4. RETURN TO OPEN SESSION Mayor Hoffman reconvened the open session at 6:46 p.m. 5. STUDY SESSION 5.1 West End Building Decision Process Mr. Williams presented a new draft (dated April 15), revising Councilors Olson and Moncrieff's draft of a West End Building Decision Process (dated April 13). He read the five guiding principles with the implementing strategies listed below them. He noted that Guiding Principle #1 was Councilor Jordan's suggested principle. He indicated that the 12 items listed under Guiding Principle #5 were in priority order. He reviewed key issues that came up in last night's Council discussion. Was the City keeping or re -selling the West End Building? What was the Council's long-term intention? Did the Council no longer want to focus attention on a community center at the West End Building? Were there other public uses or purposes that had long-term value for the property to incorporate into the plan? He suggested that the Council focus on the issues and leave the wordsmithing to staff. Councilor Hennagin commented that his business experience affected his perception, in that he always tried to keep open as many options as he could for his client. He referenced his understanding that a substantial portion of the city residents wanted the Council to make a decision on what to do with the West End Building, yet the Council agreed that it would be a mistake to put the building on the market at this time. He pointed out that they could not predict whether the economy would recover in any given number of years. He expressed his concern that the Council might be doing the public a disservice by predicting what it would do with the building in the future. He argued for leaving their options open respecting the building, if they were going to keep it and try to make it productive in order to help fund its own debt service. Councilor Jordan concurred with Councilor Hennagin that they should keep their options open. She pointed out that the property was theirs, and sale of the property was not the only option; a property trade as part of a development plan was another possibility. She commented that a new City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 11 April 15, 2009 Council might want to keep the building. She agreed with not putting a time limit on dealing with the building. Councilor Johnson commented that she did not know whether she would be on the Council in three years and have a say on the disposition of the building. Therefore, for her, the more immediate question was the need to finance the building. She agreed with keeping their options open but urged the Council make the immediate short term decisions before the long term decisions. She reiterated her point from yesterday that they should look at decentralizing city services, as opposed to centralizing them all, including the library, in a huge community center. She observed that the idea of providing new opportunities for services in both the Downtown and the West End was not included in the revised draft. Councilor Tierney mentioned that there were a number of points that they might want to modify in some ways. He described the critical question as Guiding Principle #3. He held that the way the draft was written did not preclude actions in the future. He spoke of the need to move forward with the information they had today. He said that one variable was the compelling case that the City had bought the building for a reason, which, in today's environment, was not valid or achievable. He recalled Mr. Williams' comment last night that there were only two other really functional uses for the West End Building: City Hall, a library or a combination. He said that he supported the concept that the City Hall and the library were integral parts of the downtown, and needed to stay in the downtown. He described the building as an asset that was surplus to the community's needs in looking forward. He commented that if the Council adopted these principles, then it was saying that selling the building was the direction it was taking. If things changed dramatically, the Council could always re-evaluate the situation. He argued that they could not get a community consensus or broad public support with a position that was neither A or B, as a middle position appeared wishy-washy and delaying, satisfying no one. He spoke of sending direction to staff about what it was that the Council wanted to do: keep or not keep the building. Councilor Olson concurred with Councilor Tierney that the Council could not get public support by deciding to keep the West End Building in its back pocket in case it found a use for it down the road. She agreed that it was surplus. She pointed out that the Council had other identified priorities that it needed to focus on. She agreed with Councilor Hennagin that it was difficult to predict the future, but argued that they could still make the decision not to keep the building, since they had no use for it in their future plans, Mayor Hoffman indicated that he did not necessarily agree with Guiding Principle #3. He commented that a factor important to him was the people who were not in the room -- the 7,000 other people in the community who voted a year ago to keep the building and from whom the Council has not heard. He said that he was not certain that he agreed with the idea that there was no support in the community for a community center, despite the public opinion research findings. He spoke of keeping their options open because they did not know what would happen in a few years. He acknowledged his known support of the downtown and civic buildings in the downtown, but indicated that he could be talked into moving City Hall to the West End by redevelopment experts making such a recommendation. He commented that Guiding Principle #3 contained a lot of assumptions that gave him pause. Councilor Moncrieff held that the Council's main priority right now was refinancing the line of credit and having a long-term stable finance plan for the $20 million, which was separate from the facilities discussion. She spoke strongly in support of starting to maximize the use of the West End Building today, such as leasing it out for public/private partnerships, since it did not make sense to sell it in the current market. She indicated her discomfort with making a definite decision far out City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 11 April 15, 2009 into the future. She commented that she did not know that they needed to make that decision today. Councilor Olson commented that she did not feel this was the time to be looking for reasons to keep the building for possible civic use. She held that the Council knew what it needed to do. She spoke of thinking more conservatively than futuristically, in light of the current economic realities. Councilor Hennagin commented that it was a given that the City needed to refinance the building, no matter what decision the Council made. He asked whether obtaining a lower interest rate meant that the City could pay off some of the principal, rather than paying only on interest. Mr. McIntyre explained that interest only payments were always cheaper from a cash flow basis because when one started to pay down principal, then the payments increased significantly. Mr. McIntyre commented that he has struggled with budgeting for the West End Building financing. If he was financing for the short term, then paying interest only made sense. If he was financing for the long term, then the City needed to start drawing down principal. He indicated that he put a placeholder of $800,000 in next year's budget to pay for a five-year bond for interest only payments on the assumption of short-term financing. He reassured the Council that he had the documentation analyzing these various options, which he would present to the Citizens Budget Committee. Councilor Jordan argued that in the short term, whether the Council kept the building or sold it, the best way to go with the financing was Mr. McIntyre's short-term financing strategy. She pointed out that using a five-year bond to make interest only payments did not preclude the Council from deciding in three years to keep the building. She commented that the large payments going towards both principal and interest would only pay down a minimal amount of the total, because, until the principal reached $2 to $3 million, they still carried a lot of interest, even with principal payments. Mr. McIntyre mentioned that he had considered reducing the principal to $18 million by drawing down the reserves. However, he learned at the bond rating agencies meeting that those agencies wanted to see huge reserves. Therefore, that strategy would work against the City obtaining a good bond rating for the LOIS project. The agencies cared much more about how the City managed a liability than the fact that it had a liability. He indicated to Mayor Hoffman that they could structure the bond for an early call, although the longer they could push the call out, the less risk there was and therefore, lower expenses. Councilor Moncrieff asked if the agencies would look favorably on selling the West End Building as a management strategy. Mr. McIntyre said that they had not asked that question of the agencies, and therefore, he did not know the answer. However, his instincts told him that the agencies would not look favorably on the City attempting to sell an asset in a market that it knew would not support the original sale price because that meant that the City would have to make up the difference from the reserves. Mr. McIntyre indicated to Councilor Jordan that he thought the agencies would look favorably on the City refinancing the debt at a lower interest rate with an eye towards selling the property in a few years. Councilor Jordan concurred that the real issue was how the City managed its debt. Councilor Hennagin pointed out that there were projects that had to be done at some point in time, such as the South Shore fire station remodeling, the desperately needed Maintenance Service building improvements, and a new seismically sound police station/LOCOM/Municipal Court center. He spoke in support of exploring the possibility of locating a public safety/justice center on the backside of a partitioned West End property, where it would be more centrally located in the community. He pointed out that rezoning and partitioning the other part of the property for Kruse Way office development would give it a higher commercial value. Mr. McIntyre agreed with Councilor Hennagin that there were many options available for dealing with the property. He indicated that Mr. Williams was working on a variety of scenarios, including public/private partnerships and a police station on the back parcel. He commented that he has City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 11 April 15, 2009 come around to the Urban Land Institute's conclusion that the West End property was not an ideal location for a police station. He commented that generally speaking, a police station was probably not the highest and best use of the property; however, if the City already owned the land, then it might be. He described it as a question of priorities. Councilor Jordan commented that she thought that all Council members agreed that they wanted the best use for the West End Building, which was not what the City was using it for today. She said that while she did not know what the best overall use of the building would be, she was confident that it was not a 100% publicly financed use. She argued that they needed to move away from a 100% publicly financed use as much as they could, whether that involved a public/private partnership or selling at least part of the property for private residential or commercial use in order to drive economic development, while retaining a small portion for a civic use. She referenced the guiding principle of providing a concept plan for the development of the West End property and other undeveloped properties in the Boones Ferry/Kruse Way area. She clarified to Councilor Hennagin that she was focusing on what was the best use of the property for economic development purposes, and for the City recouping the cost of the property. She indicated that she has not seen a good concept yet to achieve that goal. She agreed with Councilor Olson that Safeco's use of the property for an office building was not its best use either. Mayor Hoffman observed that the Council needed to reach agreement on these concepts and statements. He noted Councilor Moncrieff's statement that she wanted to refinance the building and maximize its use today. He indicated that Councilor Olson's remarks regarding thinking conservatively resonated with him. Councilor Tierney stated that he wanted to get away from the rock and the hard place position that the Council was in, and make a decision. If the decision had to have widespread community support, then the Council should present a proposal, such as moving City Hall and the library to a community center, and vet it in the community to see where it went. He held that the financing question, while a critical issue, was tangential to that discussion. He commented that an interest only loan did not seem a sound strategy to him, as that seemed to be the foundation problem in the U.S. economy. Councilor Jordan commented that the original idea behind moving City Hall to the West End Building was that it was closed weekends, and therefore, was not an economic driver for the downtown over the weekend. She noted that the library was an attraction all week long and into the evenings. She mentioned that library supporters wanted a larger library, no matter its location. She indicated that she had come back to keeping both those facilities in the downtown corridor. She speculated that the only way to pass a bond measure for the West End Building was to include a comprehensive plan for a library at that site. However, that would have to be something in the future. She mentioned her discomfort with using the word 'resale,' as they needed flexibility and keeping their options open until they made a decision about the building's use, either as a public or private facility in the future. She pointed out that a public entity other than the City might buy the building. She said that it was a matter of keeping options open, while making it clear that the City did not have a use for the building in the near future. Mr. Williams recalled that during the community center design development process, the Steering Committee took the library off the table of potential community center uses for the building because locating it at the West End Building had been so controversial among library supporters. Councilor Jordan acknowledged the point but noted that the Steering Committee still left 44,000 square feet empty for a possible library. She speculated that the more densely populated Westlake and Mountain Park areas would likely vote in support of a library at the West End Building. She indicated that she was not certain that that would be the best decision. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 11 April 15, 2009 Councilor H nnagin commented that Councilor Tierney's position made sense; yet, the information currently available to the Council demonstrated that moving both City Hall and the library to the West End Building would be substantially less expensive. He reiterated that he did not think these two facilities were economic drivers for retail businesses. He noted that the City could sell the properties. He said that he felt compelled in these economic conditions, to take a position that was the least expensive for the Lake Oswego citizens. He speculated that in the long term, the City could add a community center and a police station on the West End property. He argued that this was less expensive than decentralized services. He spoke of the Council's duty to be fiscally responsible, which he defined at this time as spending as little money as possible rather than pursuing big dreams. He held that the Council had a duty to the other 30,000 citizens in the city just as much as it did to the 6,000 citizens who were adamant about keeping it near their neighborhood. Councilor Olson disagreed that it was a neighborhood issue. She asked Councilor Johnson for clarification on her position. Councilor Johnson confirmed that she supported not keeping the building for civic purposes. She concurred with Councilor Hennagin that the Council needed to be fiscally responsible, which she defined as looking at what was the best use of the property, especially as an economic driver. She asked if City Hall was not an economic driver in the downtown, why they wanted to move it to an area that needed an economic driver. She reiterated that she thought there were some limited civic uses possible for the West End property, but it should not be a 100% public building. The Council should be looking to get as much out of the ownership of that area as possible, while maintaining the option of assigning some civic use. Councilor Moncrieff concurred with Councilors Tierney and Johnson. She commented that rezoning the property for higher density development seemed a step towards getting more back from the property in the long term. Mayor Hoffman commented that he thought the decision facing the Council was more complicated than simply selling or keeping the building. He directed the Council discussion to looking at the guiding principles one at a time, and seeing if there was any agreement. Mr. Williams read Guiding Principle #1 (p.1): "Overall provide safe, adequate, and sustainable public facilities that reflect the needs and quality of life of the community and are sound and lasting investments for Lake Oswego." Mayor Hoffman noted that no one disagreed with the first guiding principle. Mr. Williams read Guiding Principle #2 (p.1): "Insure to the extent possible broad public support and community consensus with an emphasis on bringing the community together." The Council agreed that it needed to get public support, and that it was unlikely that it could get community consensus (100% support). Mayor Hoffman noted that the Council agreed with the concept that the decision involved more than just the seven Council members. The Council agreed that it wanted to get the broadest public support possible for the strategy attached to the resolution that defined the guiding principles and priority of implementation strategies (per the wording on the April 13 draft). Mr. Williams indicated that he would delete 'community consensus.' Mayor Hoffman read Guiding Principle #3 (p.1): "Forego the idea of the city -initiated community center at the West End Building and maximize the value of the property for future resale." He argued for a more general phrase than 'future resale.' The Council considered 'future use' and 'best use.' Councilor Hennagin reiterated the need to keep their options open. Councilor Tierney argued for making a decision, while acknowledging that it was not a permanent decision; the Council could change its mind. He advocated for stating what the Council wanted to do with the building. Mayor Hoffman pointed out that everyone had a different view on what to do with the building. Councilor Tiern y said that if the Council did not have sufficient information to make a decision City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 11 April 15, 2009 tonight, then it should forget the guiding principles and focus on figuring out how to finance the building in the short term. He commented that he knew that the decision he made today had a good chance of being the wrong decision, yet he was prepared to make a decision. Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Hennagin that renting office space elsewhere for the City uses currently housed at the West End Building would cost approximately $300,000 a year, which did offset some of the costs of maintaining and financing the building. Councilor Moncrieff agreed with Councilor Tierney that nothing was set in stone. She said that she was fine with 'maximizing the value of the property for future resale.' She supported rezoning the property for its best use, as the City did not need the entire property. She commented that it might not be the best location for civic uses in the West End, given its lack of access by public transportation. Councilor Olson concurred with Councilor Tierney that they needed to make a decision. Councilor Jordan commented that one of the most difficult things about the process was the fact that the City bought a building that it could not use the way the building was, and now it was stuck with a building that did not work without a lot of changes. She speculated that if someone bought this valuable piece of property, he/she would likely tear the building down. She indicated that she liked the property but she did not want the building; she did not want to deal with trying to make the building into something that it was not. She commented that she wanted to keep their options open because the land was valuable. Councilor Johnson indicated to Mayor Hoffman that she agreed with maximizing the value of the property for future resale. Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Hennagin that the West End property appraisal completed before the economic downturn looked at the property value as zoned and the property value if up zoned to Campus Research and Development (CR&D). He recalled that the difference in value was between $300,000 to $400,000. Councilor Johnson argued out that their job was to look at the economic development of the corridor as a whole and maximize the value of the West End property. Councilor Jordan suggested saying "maximize use for future redevelopment," and listing resale as an option underneath the guiding principle. Mayor Hoffman indicated that he liked `redevelopment.' Councilor Olson argued that 'future resale' needed to be in the guiding principle in order to show that the Council made a decision. She held that 'redevelopment' implied that the City planned on redeveloping it for its own use. Councilor Olson referenced Councilor Jordan's remarks that she liked the property but not the building. She pointed out that the Council bought the property for a community center, which the City was now not going to do. She argued that if they were not going to move City Hall and the library to the site, then they had no use for the property. She said that if the City had no use for the property, then she had trouble justifying keeping the property in the City's back pocket simply because it was a valuable piece of property. She held that that was not the Council's job. Councilor Jordan clarified that she had meant to point out that if the property were a blank slate, or if the City could tear the building down and build a community center with a library from the ground up without having to try to retrofit an existing building, then the City had a better opportunity to do what it wanted with the property for less money. Councilor Olson concurred. Mayor Hoffman indicated that while he was not comfortable with committing to a resale, he could live with it based on the discussion. He noted Councilor Johnson's suggestion of a possible civic opportunity at the site. He concurred with Councilor Olson's questioning why they were keeping the building if they had no use for it. Mr. Williams pointed out that the Council would have an opportunity to revisit this language after sending it out for public review. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 11 April 15, 2009 Councilor M ncrieff indicated that she was still committed to the idea of a recreation center, but she was not convinced that this was the right property for one. Therefore, she was fine with 'resale.' She spoke of keeping Guiding Principle #5--12. Councilor Hennagin spoke in support of 'redevelopment.' He questioned whether saying 'resale' led the community to believe that the Council would be selling the entire piece of property, as opposed to keeping some portion of it per Councilor Johnson's idea. He expressed concern that if they sold it, the community would never find another piece of property for the community center that he thought the community wanted in the future when it became economically feasible. Councilor Jordan reiterated her suggestion to use 'redevelopment' in the guiding principle, and to place 'resale' and 'develop a plan for the corridor' underneath the guiding principle. Mayor Hoffman noted that there were two for resale and three for redevelopment. Councilor Johnson reiterated that the end goal was to maximize the value of the property. Councilor Tierney indicated that he heard in the conversation a desire to resell the property and to maximize its use, which he would like clearly stated in the guiding principle. Councilor Olson observed that this was an issue of defining what the Council meant by 'resale.' Councilor Moncrieff confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that she was defining 'resale' as anything from 100% of the property to something less than 100%. Mr. Powell mentioned the possibility of 'resale' including the concept of a developer agreement with a purchaser that would achieve something not achievable in the open market alone. He suggested including a bullet under the guiding principle mentioning resale, which clarified that resale did not preclude City involvement in what happened afterwards. Councilor Jordan indicated that she was still not comfortable with `resale' in the guiding principle, but she was comfortable with spelling out underneath the guiding principle that what they were trying to do was to maximize the property's resale value. She said that she would like to see a new draft of Guiding Principle #3 that showed Mr. Powell's suggestions underneath. Councilor Hennagin concurred. Mayor Hoffman summarized the discussion that Guiding Principle #3 was okay, but it needed some additional language in order to make everyone comfortable, and that would give the Council flexibility while still making a decision. Mayor Hoffman recessed the meeting for a break at 8:10 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 8:17 p.m. Mayor Hoffman read Guiding Principle #4 (p.2): "The plan must be financially feasible — one that will maintain the City's financial strength and stability with an eye towards the immediate balance with the long-term." He commented that he preferred the language in the April 13 draft regarding financial feasibility. The Council discussed Councilor Hennagin's suggested language that the principle speak of a plan that maintained the City's financial strength and stability with an eye towards the future. Councilors Moncrieff and Jordan concurred with Councilor Hennagin about looking at the long term. Mayor Hoffman and Councilor Olson supported additional language addressing the short term as well as the long-term. Councilor Olson suggested saying, 'the plan needs to be financially feasible and maintain the City's financial strength with an eye towards maintaining its financial stability.' Mr. McIntyre asked for clarification on what "financial strength and stability" meant. He asked what the measure was for determining whether the City was financially strong and stable. He concurred that the Council needed to consider both the short term and the long term in making a decision. Councilor Jordan argued that maintaining the City's financial strength and stability was inherently a long term objective. She pointed out that there were always ups and downs, but that did not mean that the City was not financially strong. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 11 April 15, 2009 Mr. McIntyre asked if the City would still be financially strong and stable if the rating agencies did not uphold the City's AAA bond rating. He concurred with Councilor Olson that a lower rating would mean that the City was not as strong or stable. He reiterated his question about what was the measure of financial strength and stability. He indicated to Councilor Olson that the City already had long-standing financial policies in place. Councilor Tierney held that the answer to Mr. McIntyre's question was the adoption of the budget. He described this statement as one of five guiding principles that the Council should keep in mind when making decisions relative to City facilities, most particularly the West End Building. He indicated that the principle as stated was fine, in that it said that the City would be as financially smart as it could be. He did not see that it needed to be tested against anything. Th Council accepted the phrasing, "The plan must maintain the City's financial strength and stability." Mayor Hoffman noted the agreement on including the concept of long-term and short- term in Guiding Principle #4. Mayor Hoffman read Guiding Principle #5 (p.2): "Given the complexity of the City facility issues and needs and their associated costs, develop an overall implementation plan for the long-term." Mr. Williams noted that the implementation plan was long-term in nature. The Council agreed on Guiding Principle #5. The Council discussed the implementation strategies associated with the guiding principles. Councilor Jordan requested language at the beginning stating that the list of implementation strategies was not exhaustive. Mayor Hoffman read the implementation strategies for Guiding Principle #1. The Council discussed "Address the underlying health and safety problems with City Hall." Councilor Hennagin asked if they should include the potential maintenance and mechanical issues at City Hall. Councilor Moncrieff noted that the original draft said "Address health and safety issues within existing City facilities." Councilor Tierney argued that since the principle itself spoke to safe, adequate, sustainable public facilities, this implementing strategy was redundant. The Council accepted the language "Address health and safety issues within existing City facilities." Mr. Williams indicated that staff would list all the public facilities with health and safety problems. He commented that he would condense the first three implementation strategies into a list of facilities that the City would address over time. He noted that the asset management plan dealt with the preventative maintenance for all City facilities. Mayor Hoffman agreed with Councilor Tierney that they should mention the library specifically somewhere. Mr. Williams indicated that he had put 'provide additional library services for the community' under Guiding Principle #1 because that principle spoke of the needs of the community and quality of life. The Council discussed the implementation strategies listed under Guiding Principle #2. Councilor Jordan suggested deleting the 'forego community center' strategy under this principle. Councilor Johnson argued for deleting any of the implementation strategies listed that did not relate directly to a strategy for bringing the community together. Councilor Jordan held that part of the plan was to set out the issues that the Council was taking to the public for feedback. Mr. Williams clarified to Councilor Hennagin that Guiding Principle #5 did not present new strategies, but rather it prioritized the strategies listed under the first four principles. The Council discussed 'retaining City Hall in the downtown.' Councilor Olson pointed out to Councilor Hennagin that the Council could always change its decision in response to public feedback. She held that the Council needed to say initially that it thought retaining City Hall in the downtown was the right thing to do, and then see what the public said about it. Mayor Hoffman concurred. Th Council discussed 'build a new, larger main library downtown.' Councilor OI on observed that most people agreed that the City needed to do something about the library services. She suggested 'improving library services' instead. Mayor Hoffman argued for retaining the idea of a City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 11 April 15, 2009 new larger main library because about half the people in the community wanted a larger library. The Council agreed with Mr. Williams' suggested the wording: 'keep the main library downtown and consider opportunities for a new, larger library.' The Council discussed 'explore opportunities for siting 9-1-1 in a more central location.' Councilor Jordan observed that if the Council supported including the municipal court in with the police department and 9-1-1, then it needed to look for more space. Councilor Tierney suggested that they just say that the court would be part of the police/9-1-1 facility. The Council discussed 'consider providing a new library presence in the Lake Grove area.' Councilor Hennagin commented that he did not know how to do that without a branch, which the City could not afford. Councilor Olson concurred that a branch was not financially a good idea, but clarified that new services did not mean duplication of services. She spoke of providing services that the current library could not provide very well due to lack of space, such as a computer lab, research center, or meeting room. Councilor Jordan pointed out that providing more services meant more maintenance and more employees, which brought back up the centralized versus decentralized arguments. Councilor Tierney suggested the wording: 'explore opportunities and funding strategies to enhance the Lake Grove area, including providing civic services.' Councilor Hennagin noted that using that language would allow them to delete the next bullet point about exploring funding strategies for Lake Grove improvements. Councilor Jordan indicated that she wanted an acknowledgement of and respect for the Lake Grove Village Plan included in the guiding principles. Mayor Hoffman pointed out that they did not call out the downtown plan in the City Hall and City Library strategies. The Council accepted Councilor Tierney's language. The Council discussed 'develop a public policy strategy for a future recreation center.' Mr. Williams clarified to Mayor Hoffman that he included the phrase 'include adopting policies in the City's comprehensive plan' in order to make the review more comprehensive. Mayor Hoffman held that the strategy should be in the Parks & Recreation master plan, and not the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Williams indicated that that was what he had meant. Councilor Tierney suggested shortening the wording to 'develop a public policy strategy for a future recreation center/swimming pool.' Councilor Jordan suggested 'explore development of a plan for a future recreation center/swimming pool that would lead to inclusion in the City's Parks & Recreation master plan.' Councilor Hennagin questioned including a reference to 'public policy.' Mr. Williams pointed out that there had to be some policy basis for moving forward with the strategy. Mayor Hoffman noted that they all agree on the concept of looking at a strategy for a future recreation center/swimming pool. Mayor Hoffman read the implementing strategies listed under Guiding Principle #3. The Council agreed with the first bullet point (p.1). Mr. Powell mentioned including language that did not foreclose the possibility of post -sale City involvement through options such as a development agreement, a partnership, or retaining a portion of the property. Mayor Hoffman suggested letting Mr. Powell draft language to that effect. He commented that the Council needed to be comfortable with all the bullet points underneath this guiding principle. Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Tierney that the chances of a concept plan coming back that did not recommend rezoning the West End property were pretty slim. Councilor Tierney recalled that the Council had been in favor of doing what it could from a legislative/policy level to help maximize the value of the property. He commented that maximizing the value would require some investment that would not come back in the short term. He spoke to articulating that fact so that people could decide whether they agreed with it or not. Councilor Tierney indicated to Mayor Hoffman that he would prefer 'consider rezoning the West End property.' The Council concurred. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 11 April 15, 2009 Councilor Olson suggested adding 'consider leasing the main portion of the building.' Mayor Hoffman recalled that the Council discussed a variety of options last night for maximizing the value, including leasing the unused portion of the building. Mayor Hoffman read the implementing strategy listed under Guiding Principle #4. He indicated to Councilor Olson that talking about the redevelopment district should not be confusing because their discussion included other City facilities in addition to the West End Building. Mr. Williams indicated to Councilor Hennagin that staff would make it clearer that the plan included all facility improvements. The Council discussed the priority order of the implementation strategies listed under Guiding Principle #5. Councilor Tierney suggested expanding 'public hearing' in Priority #1 to 'public outreach and hearing.' The Council concurred. Mr. Williams asked for more direction on what the Council was interested in, in terms of public outreach. Councilor Jordan observed that a public hearing was the last step in a public outreach process. Councilor Tierney referenced the outreach activities discussed by the Council with respect to their Council goal of communication and public engagement. Councilor Moncrieff suggested moving #11 into the top three. Mr. McIntyre indicated to Mayor Hoffman that the refinancing would come through the budget process, regardless of whether the Council mentioned it in this document. Councilor Olson suggested mentioning refinancing under Guiding Principle #4. Mr. McIntyre described refinancing as another strategy to add to the list. Councilor Tierney discussed the priority order he would use. He said that #1 and #2 were fine, but #6 and #7 should move up to the #3 and #4 spot, as they were also West End issues. He suggested moving Lake Grove funding strategies (#9) into the #5 slot. He indicated that the priority order he saw was the West End Building, Lake Grove, City Hall, police, and the library. Councilor Hennagin commented that they would have to get police and LOCOM out of City Hall before repairing the building. Councilor Jordan suggested moving #6 and #7 under #2, and leaving #3 as exploring opportunities for siting the police/9-1-1- center. Councilor Tierney concurred, although he thought that funding strategies for Lake Grove took precedence over the police/9-1-1 center. Mayor Hoffman indicated that the policy issue for him was the importance of starting the concept planning (#6). Councilor Hennagin suggested using two headings, East End and West End. Councilor Johnson asked why they were putting these in numerical priority order. Mr. Williams indicated that staff would find short term, medium term, and long term classes easier to work with, given that they would be working on several at once. Councilor Jordan commented that she would not put the funding strategies for Lake Grove (#9) ahead of other things because she did not think that the Lake Grove process was close enough to that stage yet. Mr. Williams commented that the Lake Grove funding strategy might be the one strategy to pull out of this document because it had nothing to do with any of the facilities; staff had included it to show that the City was doing significant things in Lake Grove as well as in the downtown. Councilor Tierney said that that was why he thought it should stay in. Councilor Tierney commented that Lake Grove was still a priority issue with the Council, although it might be classed as mid-term or long-term. He suggested considering all items related to the West End Building as short term items. He confirmed to Mayor Hoffman that he thought it important to leave in the word 'funding.' Councilor Olson concurred. Councilor Jordan reiterated that she thought there were steps to take before getting to the funding step, including deciding what to do with the Boones Ferry/Kruse Way intersection. She questioned whether a redevelopment district in Lake Grove would generate sufficient tax increment revenue to make improvements. Councilor Tierney argued that the statement needed to be included in this document for political reasons, and because it was a complex, challenging issue. City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 11 April 15, 2009 Mayor Hoffman directed the discussion to classifying strategies as either short term, medium term, or long term. Councilor Jordan commented that she thought #12 should stay as #12. The Council discussed the public safety-related strategies as short-term. Councilor Jordan pointed out that #3 was short term and preceded #4, which was longer term. The Council agreed that #1, #2, and #3 were short-term. Mr. McIntyre clarified to the Council that while staff would initiate the strategic asset management plan, it might or might not pick up the facilities asset management plan piece. He concurred with Councilor Jordan that 'right now' probably meant 'three years out.' He indicated that staff could start on #1 now, but with the rest, it was a question of how to target the City's limited resources to produce the things that the Council wanted produced. He commented that the things on the bottom of the list were a ways out, except for #12. Since staff budgeted the Parks & Recreation master plan for this year, that plan would pick up #12, and #12 might move to the top of the list by default. He indicated to Councilor Olson that staff has begun the preliminary work on the facilities asset management plan. He said that they were recommending the sewer and storm water plans for this year, as those were utility -funded plans. Mayor Hoffman recommended that Mr. McIntyre and Mr. Williams develop a priority order list in light of available assets and the budget, and bring it back to the Council for review. Mr. McIntyre encouraged the Council to let him or Mr. Williams know if there were any issues discussed tonight that an individual Council member felt should be moved to the top or to the bottom of the list. Mayor Hoffman noted that the process ahead was staff returning with draft number three. He indicated that Mr. McIntyre and Mr. Williams would work on the resolution and a plan, while the Council members worked on public outreach ideas. At Councilor Olson's request, the Council discussed when to schedule the next West End Building decision process discussion. It agreed to put it on the April 21 agenda. Mr. McIntyre suggested that the Council start thinking about the West End Building process in terms of public engagement for its April 20 discussion of the public engagement/community engagement discussion. 6. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hoffman adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robyn Christie City Recorder APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL City Council Special Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 11 April 15, 2009