As I speculated a few weeks ago in these pages, it appears that the tail really is wagging the dog… again.
On the agenda for the Nov.16 city council business meeting is a Status Report on Pioneer Hall and Community Center. It confirms that the interim city manager, Gary Milliman, has decided to ignore the clear direction of the city council concerning how and when to proceed with reopening the Community Center, and to discount and ignore the recommendations of the ad hoc committee.
Here are the pertinent comments found on page 4 [emphasis is mine] [errors are in the source document]:
“Direction was given by the City Council to proceed with opening the Community Center to the public “at the earliest convenience” following the presentation by the Ad Hoc Committee on September 21, 2021. At that time, members of the Ad Hoc Committee opined that the building could be opened for public use until and while the recommended rehabilitation work was being accomplished. This recommendation was not vetted with the City’s Building Official, management or risk management staff. The City Manager Pro Tem is concerned that, in light of the earlier report from Marquess and the fact that the building does not meet Building Code standards, allowing the building to be occupied prior to rehabilitation would present a safety risk to its users and staff, and would expose the City to financial risk and would potentially expose City employees and officials to personal liability.
“In order to reopen the Community Center for public gathering use, a permit must be applied for to address the structural concerns identified by the report provided by Marquess and Associates, as well as any other concerns brought to light by design professionals who are assigned the task of addressing structural deficiencies. Detailed plans and calculations which clearly identify how the areas of concernare [sic] to be addressed need to be provided by an Oregon licensed design professional Only after these plans are approved and the repairs are made will the building be safe to occupy. [sic] able to safely handle the loads imposed on it, and it will be safe to occupy. [sic] When all inspections are complete and the occupancy permit is signed off, only then can the Community Center be utilized by the public.”
But wait, there’s more. APRC has offered its opinion, since it has been operating the facility. Their input is being ignored for the time being. From the same page:
“APRC has also expressed concerns related to the functional suitability of the building for rentals. Aside from the structural repairs that are needed for the Community Center, APRC has noted several areas of concern with the lighting, sound, restrooms, kitchen and other accessibility and functional issues that affect the appeal and usability of the Community Center by the public. APRC staff has requested that those issues be addressed with any improvements that are made to the building.
“Staff understands that City Council direction was to address only the structural defects of the Community Center this time. Thus, the project that will be designed and advertised for bid will focus on the structural aspects of the building and will only address those APRC concerns mentioned above if there are elements that would impair the structural work or are repairs/improvements that can be made without impacting the overall timeline for project completion.”
In other words, APRC doesn’t accept the direction of council either. Appropriately, staff discounts APRC’s wish list, but basically offers to take them into account if staff can rationalize them by virtue of remedying “structural defects”.
But there’s one more, great big fly in the ointment, a major complication and further explanation for the city manager’s reluctance to proceed. From page 5:
“Public/Private Partnership Proposal:
Councilors Hyatt and Seffinger were recently contacted by local resident Allan Sandler with a concpt [sic] for redevelopment of the Community Center through a pyblic [sic] private partnership. Please see the attached outline. Essentially, the proposal is to lease the building from the City for a period of 20 years, enter into an agreement on continuing public use of the building under the management of Mr. Sandler, with full funding for rehabilitation to be provided by Mr. Sandler, who would set and retain user fees. Mr. Sandler has requested to discuss this matter with the City Council to determine the level of interest in pursuing this proposal. Perhaps such a discussion could occur at a study session. Staff has not yet met with Mr. Sandler or vetted the proposal with the City Attorney.”
So where does this leave us? Staff makes it clear: they want a do-over.
“STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is seeking direction as to whether to pause the current plan for the retaining wall and rehabilitation of the Community Center building until the proposal from Allan Sandler is fully explored.”
“ACTIONS, OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS
Consider motion to pause the current engineering design work on the Community Center building and retaining wall pending a full review of the proposal for leasing and rehabilitating the building as proposed by Allan Sander.”
Do you think the Community Center should be under the control of a private individual with the ability to determine uses and fees? Is the tail wagging the dog? You be the judge.
Dean Silver
Ashland
