Astoria City Council Nixes Birch Street Surplus Land Sale

     The City of Astoria is continuing with its program of selling surplus property, and citizens are continuing to question the details of the program.  Public hearings on each sale take place during regular city council meetings.  Only one lot was under consideration at this week’s meeting, one of a parcel of five city-owned lots on Birch Street in Alderbrook.  Mike and Judith Cahill, who own property adjacent to the lot, offered a bid of $12,000 for the property.  The Cahills were not at the meeting, but there was plenty of public comment about the proposed sale, and the program itself was the subject of questions and comments from several attendees.  

     Astorian George McCartin expressed misgivings about the program and the practice of offering neighboring property owners the first chance to bid on the properties.  He said the result is reduced prices for a select group, solely because their property is adjacent to a property the city deems to be surplus.  He also questioned the city’s asking price for the Birch Street lot, saying because the lot is level, buildable and has a partial view of the river,  it should command a higher price: 

     "The fact is you’ve gone ahead, time and again, and sold these for much less than they’re worth, and you’ve also sold them at a time when its  - we’re just starting to come out of a slump, and you could – just stalling off to wait a year or two, would pay you off at least a few thousand dollars on each of these parcels.  But this one here  - is disturbing that the asking price was $14,000, which is a bargain basement price, and the offer you’re considering is $12,000.” 

     Doris Queener of Astoria, a neighbor of the Cahills, also expressed her concern about the property sales,

     “I’m speaking for myself but I’m aware of other citizens of Astoria who are concerned about this process of selling city property.  What I would like to see is that the council stop the process and allow further discussion of the whole process, and hear from other concerned citizens in Astoria, and that includes a group that are gathering signatures and we’d like to present those signatures at the next city council meeting.”

Astorian Shel Cantor asked several questions seeking clarification on the total number of city lots deemed excess, the period of time expected to complete the sales, and requested that mapping  and property details for each of the properties be made available online.  He also asked if there were expected numbers of additional housing units that could spread the costs of water and sewer for Astoria residents, if actual costs to the city of maintaining the surplus properties have been determined, and if there have been formal appraisals for the value of trees on the properties. 

 

City Manager Paul Benoit spoke up to address Cantors concerns:

     "The properties that are deemed to be excess by the council were brought to a council meeting.  They were in the minutes that you were reviewing, and I don’t have them memorized, but Ken, (Ken Cook, Public Works Director) do you recall or Brett, (Brett Estes, Community Development Director and Assistant City Manager) anyone, how many parcels are in this first grouping that we’re bringing, I think it’s (Ken Cook said “approximately thirty”), so that the thirty that you mentioned, and I think those are the ones identified there and we brought then to the council with an entire list of those thirty.  That’s it.  Those are the only ones that have been deemed excess, and so the agreement was that we would just work from that list, and before anything gets added to it we would bring another group back to the city council for a public hearing and a discussion so today, and on into the foreseeable future – is that group of thirty-something.  And again, the maps are on the website and they’re on the wall.  We can make more for you.”  

     Benoit said only the city council can declare property to be excess. Staff can develop a list of recommendations, but declaring excess property is not a staff decision.  The timeline for completion of sales has not been determined.  Sales have been slow, indicating the lower prices are appropriate for the lots offered for sale so far.  Details on the lots, as to suitability for building and other factors, are available for the thirty lots to be sold, but descriptions written to comply with state regulations may not align with actual uses permitted by the city.

      “So we have data on the thirty.  We also have what is called, and its an unfortunate name because it implies that we want to build on them but the State of Oregon under Oregon statute requires every city on a regular basis to prepare a buildable lands inventory.  It doesn’t mean any city wants to build on those lands, its just the state term, and so that is a published report, its on the city website, and that goes to pretty exhaustive detail, that’s the tool that we’ve been using together with just local knowledge, zoning maps, but the BLI (Buildable Lands Inventory) is something that’s accessible on the website.  That’s the tool that Mike Morgan(hired by the city to manage the excess lands sales) and company were using to try to develop the list of thirty.”

     

     In answer to Cantor’s additional questions, Mayor Van Dusen could not offer any assurance that property sales would have any mitigating effects for Astorians in the costs of water and sewer, nor was a total maintenance cost to the city presented.  Councilman Russ Warr did say the small income derived from returning the parcels to the tax roles would be a public benefit, as would the reduced liability for the city if it no longer owned the parcels.  City Manager Benoit said that if a property with harvestable timber were to be sold, that the value of the timber would be a factor in the sales price. 

     At the conclusion of the public hearing, City Manager Benoit stated the staff recommendation was to accept the bid from Mike and Judith Cahill of $12,000.  Council member Karen Mellin moved to accept the bid, seconded by council member Russ Warr. Citing the lack of any testimony in favor of the sale, Mayor Van Dusen said he could not support it.  Council members Herzig, LaMear and Mayor Van Dusen voted against the sale of the Birch Street property which then failed, with three against, only Warr and Mellin in favor.