Spokane7
49°
December 1, 2009 in City
With caveat, city takes county money for Y
Council leaves room for developer to step in
Most members of the Spokane City Council on Monday spoke in favor of transforming a building on an acre surrounded by Riverfront Park into apartments and commercial space.
But facing a Wednesday deadline, a $4.3 million debt and budget deficit in 2010, the council tentatively agreed to accept county money to pay off what the city owes on the land, a step that would turn the property into park space and require the building, the former downtown YMCA, be torn down.
Even so, they kept open the possibility of private development within the park by unanimously voting to allow a final attempt to find a developer willing to transform the 43-year-old building. The provision approved by the City Council requires the city to create a bidding process to ask for ideas for renovation before accepting the county’s offer to use existing Conservation Futures property taxes for the purchase.
The amendment was added in a last-second compromise pushed by council President Joe Shogan. Before the change, it appeared unlikely that there were the four votes necessary to maintain the option of using the county money to buy the Y.
Besides Shogan, council members Bob Apple, Steve Corker and Al French voted in favor accepting the Conservation Futures money if no acceptable development option is found.
The council voted last summer to borrow $4.3 million to pay the remaining debt on the YMCA, for which the Spokane Park Board agreed to pay $5.3 million in 2006. The Park Board paid $1 million from its reserves and persuaded county leaders to finish the purchase.
But county leaders stipulated that they wouldn’t use the money for the Y unless City Council agreed. They also set Wednesday as the deadline for the council to make a decision.
If the City Council had rejected the county money Monday, Mayor Mary Verner and some other city officials warned that the $350,000 annual payment on the city’s debt would create a hole in the 2010 budget that would require cuts or layoffs.
In keeping development of the Y as an option, the council sets aside the recommendation of the $17,000 study it demanded be performed on the building. That analysis said the best financial option would be for the city to accept Conservation Futures money, because the building needs significant renovation and would not generate positive revenue for the first 10 years.
But some council members rejected the report, saying it ignored key factors, and Ron Wells, a developer who has specialized in renovating historic buildings in the core of the city, testified Monday that the structure could be revitalized with high-priced apartments facing the falls, and low-income apartments and high-quality office space elsewhere. He suggested that the city consider crafting long-term leases that would require improvement be paid by developers. Wells said he is willing to make a bid on a long-term lease.
MAC faces angry crowd 
liarsinnews on December 01 at 12:32 a.m.
If the Spokane voters bail out the reckless spending habits of this city council and Mayor Verner, with another increase in city taxes, the voters deserve what they get. If this shell game continues, and it looks like it may, it will be added debt of the millions of dollars for the Y added to the rat hole money the taxpayers are now forking over to the River Park Square developers for the next 25 years for a garage that has the potential of killing another person. Talk about getting forked.
Fuschia on December 01 at 1:24 a.m.
While they voted one way, they certainly spoke another way during the Council meeting.
We need to clean the council of these buffoons.
Snyder was similiarly lackluster in his understanding of the basic concepts and kept apologizing for being an uninformed newby.
lewis8457 on December 01 at 8:20 a.m.
They will take what they want no one has any guts to stand up in the town we all deserve what we get.
To stand up you need to make amends with the big guy upstairs because you will have Rocky and the SPD gunning for you.
I feel safe don’t you?
lewis8457 on December 01 at 8:22 a.m.
Spokane voters that work private sector do not have a vote in this town. there are so many government workers here they are the only ones with secure employment that stems on some of these taxes so of course they always vote for them.
My advice get a government job.
liarsinnews on December 01 at 8:31 a.m.
Ron Wells should talk. Wells has received more tax exemptions than anyone in town, with the exception of the Cowles Dynasty.
Dazzeetrader11 on December 01 at 11:06 a.m.
Corruption proceeds. SPending money they don’t have. Nothing to repay the debt. Acquiring more debt for the people in Spokane. It’s ALL out money whether it’s from the City, State, County, etc. It’s our money. Nobody authorized this debt. Verner and her unions, Shogan and his union reps, bad votes, Who is writing this stuff..? It’s insane. Time to clean house in Spokane. You deserve what you voted for.. I watch these meetings online from other places. Shogan is the worst I’ve seen yet. Verner never appears to take a position but don’t kid yourself…somebody’s moving this crazy agenda forward. It’s your Mayor. All this money spent and nothing to show for it.
Competency is key. Find someone competent and hire her ;)
MrNatural on December 01 at 12:16 p.m.
The Falls needs to be preserved for all to experience and enjoy. This is a rare and wonderful opportunity to reclaim Spokane’s most beautiful natural attraction. I’ve gathered by reading the Spokesman that some influential citizens (that is influential within the Spokesman editorial staff) want this site strictly to turn a profit and that money and privatized greed is at the forefront. I would go as far as saying that the Spokesman is influencing council members by some covert pressure. I despise this when the Spokesman has an agenda contrary to the will of the citizens of Spokane. Open Spokane Falls for its natural beauty and we can attest to being near nature near perfect.
steveeugster on December 01 at 5:00 p.m.
Last night’s council meeting on this subject was a bit more than interesting. It became abundantly clear that some elected officials of the City of Spokane and Spokane County are intent on wasting over $5.3 million. These officials simply want to throw this money away. This is more than a misuse of precious resources, it is malfeasance.
This letter may be of interest — www.steveeugster.com/pdf/Conservation_Futures/arkills_richman_12_1_2009.pdf
Ron_the_Cop on December 01 at 5:23 p.m.
The real culprit here is the past actions of the unelected Park Board. OK I can somewhat go along with the notion of preserving pristine river front property for the publc’s enjoyment.
The critical thinking skills in local government are very lacking though when spending other people’s money (OPM). I would be in favor of dividing the Broadview Dairy property that the Park Board purchased with 2000 Park Bond money with a footnote for yet another science center that the voters have already once rejected. Leave a green belt for public access along the river and sell the back portion for commercial development to pay for the YMCA property.
We might as well take out the middle man, the MOBIUS Project, on the Broadview Dairy property and recover our money directly than the convoluted cross subsidy plan to support the science center that will be a drain on the general fund if the current plan as proposed falls flat.
For more on this read:
MOBIUS PROJECT - Brunt’s vs. Connor’s version you decide
http://friendsofmarkfuhrman.org/blog/?p=185
and
RPS fraud & new Idaho lawsuit & Cover up of manslaughter death of Jo Savage in RPS garage
http://friendsofmarkfuhrman.org/blog/?p=176
skeugster on December 01 at 7:49 p.m.
The Spokane County assessor in 2009 assessed the YMCA property at $5,230,000. Of that $1,246,000 represented land, the remaining amount represented improvements of $3,984,000 — land was 24% of the value. Of the $5,300,000 YMCA purchase price, about 76% represents improvements or $4,028,000.
Our elected officials are going to tear down the improvements, demolish them. To do so, they will have to spend another $850,000. In the end, the building will be demolished and trucked away. In terms of dollars, $4,878,000 vanish. The value destroyed will not increase the value of the land The value of $1,246,000 will be a constant. So, in the end, our elected officials will have spent $6,150,000 to gain an asset worth $1,246,000.
There is something very wrong here.
It is wrong to use Conservation Futures Tax revenues for the purchase of this particular property. The laws simply do not allow it. But there is something worse, terribly worse, – certain of our elected officials are intent on simply throwing away some $4,878,000. Is it reasonable to think they can do this?
Does anyone think that the members of the Spokane City council could pass a law that said they could stand on the bank of the Spokane River and, one by one, burn 4,878,000 dollar bills obtained from the public treasury in celebration of a public display of affection for Riverfront Park?
MrNatural on December 02 at 8:54 a.m.
…as I said before…that some influential citizens want this site strictly to turn a profit and that money and privatized greed is at the forefront…they have no perception of spiritual value beyond their own hubris and self-righteousness….but now cosidering the source…I especially wish to express that this reclamation of the falls is pricless…regardless of how some wish to vomit numbers against it