06/20/2000 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 6/20/2000 .,~ putting in sidewalks and widening BartonBradley. He grew up there and knows how ;,~: horrible the traffic is there. He does not think it is wise for City Council, without studying what is out there, to go ahead with this when they don't know what else is out there. He has been asking for a city planner for three years. There might be other spaces that might be just as good if not better. We have to take the time and look at it. If somebody has that knowledge, they have never shared it with him and he is the guy that has to vote on it. It's not a green space issue, it's an information issue. He is not against green space. He is against not knowing what he is voting on and not knowing the ramifications of it. • Mr. Koeth asked if Mr. Gareau was saying that he hasn't really found out what was going on after two years. Mr. Gareau said he has asked. Mr. Koeth said other people know a lot about it. In the last administration, there was a meeting of Council members actually going out to the site along with soccer and baseball people and there was speculation as to what could be done with the land. Mr. Gareau said he also has gone out to the property. It's not that he is not aware of this, but it's the specifics. Mr. Koeth said the real alternative here (when the vote is taken) is green space or industrial space. Mr. Gareau said he did not agree with that. • Mr. Miller told Mr. Koeth that, if NOSO has taken a bad rap for this, no one on any side of this issue intended that. What we perceive is, if soccer fields have an additional field, then maybe something else comes loose for ball diamonds. It's a ripple effect. Certainly, no harm was meant for NOSO. Earlier, Mr. Bouman said we ought to be obtaining all the properties with the green lines. (Map that Mr. Bouman showed). We do own, or other various governments agencies do own, a lot or all of that property and we should be utilizing it. That goes to the tax issue that was mentioned earlier. If we are borrowing money to buy green space when we have immediate needs and we have immediate available property, then in order to make that property usable for ball diamonds or soccer fields, etc., we have to raise taxes. (Or if it's to rebuild the pool with the wall that is collapsing--any of those different issues.) If we don't use it, if we spend the money and borrow it for this green space, then we have to raise taxes elsewhere in order to accomplish our immediate demands. Would this purchase raise taxes? Maybe not. Would the effect of borrowing for this property raise taxes? Probably in order to accomplish our immediate needs. • Mrs. Kasler said that Mr. Koeth made her point that she is going to make when voting. Her concern is that she does not have the answers that she has asked for. She and Mr. Gareau have verbalized and written requests and have not yet received answers in order to responsibly vote on this. It isn't even a question of green space. She regrets the fact that she cannot even get to the point where Mr. Koeth is--that he wants this for a reason, that he has an idea about this. She doesn't know what the idea is because no one has told her. She has asked, over and over and over. She still has unanswered questions for over a year and a half. That disturbs her because she has a responsibility to vote on something she completely understands. What is possibly a very positive purchase for this city has turned into a very negative issue--that's a shame and it's not the responsibility of Council. • Mr. O'Grady said both Mr. Gareau and Mrs. Kasler stated it wasn't a green space issue. It is in his opinion. We have two possible futures for that area and one is limited or light industry, perhaps long-term storage garages. He is thinking about the 11