Board of Aldermen 02-23-2021 Page 17
design and the way that they are using those monies that we will be getting through the bonds and so on, |
don’t want to say “beautify” but to fix the area will give us the equal amount of spaces, so that in the end we
would end up with | think a few more than we what we would have had as it was. | think we need to be
cognizant of that.
While | do respect my colleagues who feel that we should bring this back, | do think that the developer has
made a lot of concessions and we have been going back and forth. To do that to them again | think could
possibly hurt this deal and | really don’t want to do that. | don’t want to delay it any longer. So thank you so
much.
President Wilshire
Anyone else on the motion to amend. Sir, | can’t have you speak it’s not public comment period. Alderman
Lu.
Alderwoman Lu
Just in response to a couple of comments, | don’t know if | would call this a good faith agreement. To me any
agreement that is going to (unidentified speaker talking over Alderwoman Lu) contract and it’s just more than a
good faith agreement. So for that reason (unidentified speaker continues to interrupt) going in, Sir, do you mind
muting, please? To know going in, what these contractual obligations are. | didn’t ask about how many
parking spaces, to me that is not even a concern. If we are paying $2.5 million dollars for a garage and at the
Budget Meeting, Director Cummings says there will now be 30 spaces. But the night that | come to vote I’m
told that it is 50 spaces and | am trying to decide are we paying $51,000.00 per space or are we paying
$83,000.00 per space? | mean that’s a substantial financial consideration in my opinion.
| just don’t think, | don’t understand why someone could speak to this wasn’t here tonight. In terms of we can’t
keep them waiting any longer, my feeling on that is that we considered this in April, never heard about it again
‘til | think September when it became an issue because the question of funding, of authorizing a bond for the
Performing Arts Center came into the discussion and all of a sudden we wanted to include $2.5 million dollars
because that would make this deal with Melbourne Lansing better, it is what they needed. So we approved that
and we didn’t hear anything until February. | mean | don’t think we are dragging our feet but we are just asking
for some concrete information before | commit to the financial obligations. Thank you.
President Wilshire
Alderman Lopez?
Alderman Lopez
So | don’t know what Alderman O’Brien is referring to in terms of plans for the internal planning structure but |
agree that we have definitely talked about the importance of parking in the surrounding areas ad nauseum and
it is very important that we address that. That was one of the primary concerns that | had with the building as
well. And | think one of the real victories about this project is that it has internalized parking that does account
for the needs of the community around it. | don’t know based on what Alderman Jette has said or 100% where
we ended up with that that has been assured as being part of the lease. If | understand some of what
Alderman Dowd said, that parking could still be modified and could still be changed so that it does not meet the
same level of need. And that was a major factor in my decision making to be in support of this.
| would point out, however, that the ground is not going to thaw any much faster if we tabled this just for this
Aldermen meeting and we do have an Infrastructure Committee Meeting tomorrow. If Director Cummings has a
plan, a map or whatever that was sent by the builder and has the lease, we could just refer it to that Committee
tomorrow and review it then and then | don’t think that much time would be lost.
