Coakley told the council at the Community Development Committee meeting July 12 that the reason they had to re-vote was because motions involving expenditures require five votes. And with only six aldermen and the mayor present at the June 21 meeting, the vote was 4-3.
“The attorney, in error, stated it was approved,” said Coakley. “The next morning he called and said he made a mistake. The motion is now [not passed].”
As happened at both the June 14 and June 21 meetings, the council wrestled July 12 with funding this project. Library Director Sandy Whitmer told the council that several safety concerns with the commons necessitate the improvements. Having a permanent flat surface for performers, she said, was a needed improvement because the stage has uneven boards.
“Some performers have tripped over the rollout board [stage],” she said, “Or their equipment has fallen during performances.”
But she sited seating area accessibility and zero access from the library to the commons as its main safety concerns.
Despite calling it a worthwhile project, Alderman Stu Aschauer said he could not support it. “I don’t have a problem entering an agreement allowing the library to spend the money they choose on this,” he said. “But I don’t think it’s the best choice for city tax dollars. We should concentrate on providing core services.”
Alderman Fred Bevier said he was worried about the money the city keeps spending while Cantera is trying to reduce their taxes and with large construction projects coming up such as
Alderman Matthew Wiesbrock said he supported the project “100 percent,” calling it an “investment over time” and “a good way to spend $15,000 in taxpayer money” compared to the project’s original projected cost of $300,000.
And Alderman William Weidner said he had investigated studies that concluded property values rose when communities invested in parks because new residents and businesses want to relocate to areas with “attractive parks and settings and community events going on.”
“It all works together,” said Weidner. “It’s an enhancement that makes the community much more viable for its residents, and it also pays back dividends.”
The council voted in favor of the project at the July 19 regular city council meeting by a 4-3 margin with the mayor casting the required fifth vote for approval.
