New Search
In response to a call for a summary from Councilor Nathanson, City Manager Johnson said that the City <br /> owned Leo Harris Parkway, the asphalt parking lot, and lots 8 and 9. He said that the asphalt parking lot <br /> under Option 1 (the main motion) would be used for the queuing of people using Lane Transit District services <br /> during games with buscs being parkcd on Leo Harris Parkway. He went on to say that thc 1997 <br /> intergovernmental agreement would need to be amended if Councilor Bettman's amendments were passed; in <br /> order for the University to get Option 1, the City would need to retain control of all of the parking and rate - <br /> setting on Leo Harris Parkway and lots 8 and 9. He said that the City Council would have to determine where <br /> the revenue would go if the amendment passed. <br /> Councilor Taylor noted that the amendment was just the City establishing control of its property. <br /> In response to a question from Councilor Meisner regarding foreseeable difficulties in reworking <br /> intergovernmental agreements with the University of Oregon, City Manager Johnson said that according to the <br /> proposed council action, Option 1 was contingent on amending those agreements and that was a large <br /> incentive to come to an agreement. <br /> Councilor Pape raised concern that the council was not looking in the context that was agreed upon. He said <br /> that the 1997 Intergovernmental Agreement had concessions on both sides. <br /> Mr. Klein said, in terms of the parking agreement, his opinion was that at the same time that the University got <br /> the parking for game days, the City used the parking for events at the park or the Cuthbert Amphitheater. <br /> In response to a question from Mayor Torrey regarding her intent for her first amendment, Councilor Bettman <br /> said that it was: <br /> 1. To make sure that the City had control over City property. <br /> 2. To keep WISTEC alive. <br /> 3. To ensure the City would get revenue from Leo Hams Parkway. <br /> 4. To get the University out of lots 8 and 9 by the end of 2006. <br /> The amendment to the main motion passed, 6:2; councilors Pape and Farr voting in <br /> opposition. <br /> Amendments 2 and 3 <br /> Councilor Kelly noted that the current University offer on WISTEC compensation was $222,947 dispersed <br /> yearly until 2007. He said that the difference between the amendment amount of $260,000 and the <br /> University's offer should be viewed in the context of an $80 million stadium expansion. He opined that it was <br /> a small matter for the University. He urged support for the amendment. <br /> Councilor Bettman said that her intention was to come up with an amount that everyone could live with. She <br /> added that the extra amount would help keep WISTEC afloat long enough to fmd other funding. She reiterated <br /> that WISTEC was an asset to the area and stressed the importance of keeping the facility open. <br /> Councilor Meisner said that he would not support the amendments because the issues were separate and <br /> WISTEC needed to fmd its own support. He could not agree with the second part of the amendment that if the <br /> University declined the agreement then they would choose the second, third, or fourth options. <br /> MINUTES— Eugene City Council January 22, 2001 Page 11 <br /> Regular Meeting <br />