2004-02-17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9 Ms. Linda Peacock, Assistant City Manager, said the Health Department is asking for funds for this fiscal year. Sh e said Health Department's budget did not reflect increases made by the General Assembly last year. She noted that the County has approved the request. She said she has information on the Health Department's clients and services she will provide to Counc il. Mr. Schilling made a motion to deny the Health's Department's request to retain funds given the circumvention of the budget process. Mr. Caravati seconded the motion. The motion to deny the request was approved by the following vote. Ayes: Mr. Caravati, Ms. Richards, Mr. Schilling. Noes: Mr. Cox and Mr. Lynch. Ms. Peacock said the funds will go into the General Fund and she will find out the impact on the Health Department. PUBLIC There were no matters by the public. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Schilling said he feels that development on Preston Avenue could benefit the City, but in watching the process for Preston Commons played out he has been troubled by those affected. He said residents and business owners are concerned about this speci fic proposal and its placement. He said he is no longer supportive of it under any circumstances. He said he believes Ms. Richards does not support it. He said one member of Council voted against the RFP without public input. He said the committee does not support the project. He said he does not support putting any more money into it. He said potential developers should be aware of the false support for the project. He made a motion to withdraw the RFQ for Preston Commons and terminate city pursuit of the project. Ms. Richards seconded the motion. Mr. Lynch said he was not initially in favor of the RFP and wanted to see more neighborhood input into the process. He said to the credit of the Mayor and others he thinks it has been a fair process an d he thinks a number of residents and business owners are on board. He said the time to express concern was when the RFQ was approved, but he feels it would be irresponsible for Council to cancel the project a week before the RFQ is due. He said the conc erns should be expressed after we get proposals. Mr. Caravati said he has misgivings about the project, but from a business perspective he does not agree with canceling it now. He made a motion to delay the decision until the March 1 meeting. Mr. Lync h seconded the motion. Ms. Richards said the decision to go with an RFQ was done in closed session. She said she originally supported the RFP because she wanted to see what would happen. She expressed concern that if the decision is delayed the process will be vetted, projects will be narrowed and a prevailing developer recommended. She said she would like the opportunity to pull the plug on the project and wants reassurance that it will appear on the next agenda. She said this is a project no one unde rstands and no one supports. Mr. Cox said he has followed this project from its inception. He said it brings attention to Preston Avenue. He said he has spoken to dozens of supporters who would like to see what is going to be proposed. He said he has received positive responses from developers about the project. He said he cannot figure out why Councilors do not want to see the RFQs the week before they are due. He said as long as there are three Councilors who support it, it will go forward. Mr. Co x argued that March 15 would be a more reasonable time frame so the committee can meet and review the RFQs.