City Council Minutes 1993 04 20 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Davidson: Mayer: Davidson: Mayer: To clarify your motion, what do you mean "if necessary"? If we have to expend money on attorney's fees and the like, that's less money than we can probably offer on the property. Basically, your motion is to enter into negotiations to purchase the property, with the property owner. If those negotiations fail, start the eminent domain process to acquire the property for open space? That's correct. Hornbostel, seconder, agreed. Sisk offered a friendly amendment that given the tax consequences, that this could be done under the potential threat of condemnation, therefore, the tax payer would have tax rights in terms of reinvestment potential. Mayer and Hornbostel accepted that. Lathrop: I don't support eminent domain against a private citizen, unless there is a very compelling need. This does not support a compelling need, to negate someone's private property rights, who acted in good faith, who bought the property with an easement. The easement has been determined to be in existence and it is legal. This, in my opinion, is an exercise that is a double barrel approach to a single shot solution. I will not support eminent domain under any circumstances for this property in particular. I think Mrs. Allenbaugh has made a very, very genuine effort to address our concerns and with some minor adjustments, I think could easily satisfy my remaining concerns as to the use of this property and the safety issue, preventing us from having to "stomp" on a citizen. Hedding agreed with Councilman Lathrop. He stated that with access to this bike path that's just half a block away, which means that 16