West Linn City Council Special Meeting on Oppenlander Park Direction - February 25, 2025

This special meeting of the West Linn City Council focused exclusively on providing direction regarding the future of Oppenlander Park, a 10-acre property owned by the West Linn-Wilsonville School District. After receiving public testimony and deliberating on financial constraints and community priorities, the council voted not to place a bond measure on the May 2025 ballot and instead directed staff to pursue a public-private partnership to acquire a portion of the property for park use.

Consent Calendar

• The council unanimously approved the agenda for the February 25, 2025 special meeting (motion by Council President Baumgardner, seconded by Councilor Groner; carried 5-0).

Public Comments & Testimony

• No speakers signed up for the general public comment period.
• During the Oppenlander Park discussion, ten community members provided testimony, all expressing support for preserving the park:
  • Linda Parker (resident adjacent to park) urged the council to place a second bond measure on the ballot, stating the Friends of Oppenlander had successfully canvassed and carried the first measure by a significant majority. She felt confident they could pass another measure.
  • Stephanie Kendall (longtime West Linn resident) shared personal memories of using the park and urged the council to listen to voters who already supported preservation. She expressed disappointment and disgust with the school district and city council's handling.
  • Harlan Borough (Icon Construction) expressed willingness to work with the city on a compromise, noting they were exploring alternatives that could include a senior field. He emphasized that giving up a third of the area (and revenue) was already a significant concession from their original proposal.
  • Michael Hedges (West Linn resident) framed the decision as a legacy moment, urging the council to do everything possible to preserve the park for future generations.
  • Roberta Staff (Apollo Road resident) asked the council to consider opening further discussion or putting a bond vote to the community, emphasizing the park's historical value and the loss if developed.
  • Susan Nicholson (neighborhood resident) expressed concerns about the environmental and traffic impacts of development, urging consideration of open space for recreation and wildlife.
  • Dean Suhr (Friends of Oppenlander, joining via Zoom from Washington, DC) thanked the council for holding the special meeting. He stated the Friends group is fully committed to passing a bond measure and to continuing support for other city needs even if the bond is pursued. He argued that the bond is the only current solution and that the Icon proposal should remain a backstop. He also noted that the school district has not heard from enough community members and encouraged continued negotiations.

Discussion Items

• Oppenlander Park Direction: The council discussed the school district's firm stance on price and timeline, the city's critical infrastructure needs (water system, roads, public safety), bond fatigue, and the feasibility of a public-private partnership.
  • Mayor Bialostosky stated that a $10 million bond (including purchase and improvements) could jeopardize support for other essential projects, such as the $44 million water master plan, $20-30 million public works operations center, and $7 million intersection improvements. He noted the city has not had time to poll community support or assess trade-offs, and recent bond measures in the region have narrowly passed or failed.
  • Council President Baumgardner emphasized that the city needs water, safe roads, and adequate ball fields. She described the decision as a balancing act between wants, needs, and means, and expressed interest in finding other ball field locations.
  • Councilor Bonnington reminded the public that the city does not own the park and urged residents to direct their advocacy to the school board, which has shown receptivity on other issues like school closures.
  • Councilor Groner criticized the school district's short timeline and take-it-or-leave-it offer, noting that both the city and district have incurred significant legal costs. He called for thoughtful deliberation.
  • Councilor Bryck highlighted that the city already owns and maintains 600 acres of parkland (excluding Oppenlander) and faces budget constraints. She noted the cost of placing a measure on the ballot and cited past failures of police and water levies.
  • City Manager Williams confirmed the city's capital needs, including about $100 million in water system projects, $30 million for transportation, and $50 million for a potential recreation center. He stated the city does not have a large contingency fund and struggles to meet minimum reserves.
• Public-Private Partnership: Several council members expressed support for exploring a partnership with Icon Construction to purchase part of the property for a park, using existing voter-approved funds or other sources. They emphasized this is not an endorsement of Icon's full proposal but a step toward a compromise.

Key Outcomes

• Council President Baumgardner moved, and Councilor Groner seconded, the following motion: "Not place a new bond measure to purchase Oppenlander on the May ballot for the reasons stated during this meeting, and direct staff to evaluate and pursue a public-private partnership for the City to purchase some of Oppenlander Field for use as a City park, utilizing existing voter-approved resources or other funding sources."
• The motion passed unanimously (5-0).
• The council clarified that this does not signal the end of efforts to acquire the park; negotiations with the school district and potential partners remain open. Councilors encouraged the public to continue engaging the school board regarding price and timeline.