Independent Budget Analyst Andrea Tevlin believes that the city should put the question of whether to build a new CIty Hall to a vote of the people, whether or not it is legally required.
The idea of a vote was proposed by City Councilmember Carl DeMaio, who cited a section of the City Charter that requires a vote of the people when the city enters into a “major public project” that would provide “significant private benefit”. In a report relased today (PDF) Tevlin argues that the most expansive proposal from developer Gerding Edlen would indeed provide benefits to a private citizen. But the IBA goes further:
Regardless of the legal perspective, it may be desirable to take this project to a vote to
garner public support and involve the community in this monumental project. It is of
the utmost importance that the financial viability of this project holds up to public
scrutiny ensuring a transparent process. This is similar to the process used to develop
PETCO Park.
The Independent Budget Analyst does suggest the city begin negotiations with Gerding Edlen. She suggests that the city and the developer devise a well-defined framework for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA). Such an agreement would prevent the city, within a set period of time, from discussing the new city hall project with any other developers, but would not require the city to actually build anything.
The City Council’s Rules Committee will hold it’s second meeting about the new city hall on Wednesday, June 10, when it will decide whether to recommend an ENA to the full City Council.
June 5, 2009 - 4:48 pm at 4:48 pm
this new city hall is an absurd idea. thank goodness Carl DeMaio is raising strong opposition to it. DeMaio probably sees that the special interest developers have bought the votes on city council, so he’s hoping to get the project put to a public vote so he can defeat it at the polls.
June 8, 2009 - 3:04 pm at 3:04 pm
Both the ideas of building a new city hall and expanding the convention center should be put up to a public vote. Do we need billion dollar boondoggles like these when the city’s general fund is over $100 million in the red and it’s facing pension and health care liabilities of more than $2 billion? I
think the majority of voters don’t think so.