The biggest hammer.

Byline: The Register-Guard

In Eugene, the mayor sets the City Council agenda - and Mayor Kitty Piercy used that authority to good effect Monday by delaying a vote on a proposal to buy two parcels of property as park land. Piercy said she needs more time for analysis, and she's right. The proposal raises a number of questions about Eugene's program for acquiring land for parks and open space, and would involve the use of a power that governments should employ with great restraint.

The two tracts, totaling 65 acres, are in the forested hills of southeastern Eugene. The land is zoned for residential development, but the steep, forested terrain makes construction a challenge. A plan to build houses on one of the parcels has been rejected by the Eugene Planning Commission. The owners of the other withdrew their third development plan after the city staff gave it an unfavorable review. Neighbors have argued against development of the properties for years on environmental, aesthetic and technical grounds.

This long-running land use controversy abruptly switched lanes in April when the council, with Piercy casting the tie-breaking vote, set in motion the process to acquire the properties as park land through eminent domain. It was this process that Piercy put on hold Monday, postponing a vote until the council's July 9 meeting. It will be surprising if the uncertainties can be resolved by then.

First is the matter of price: No one knows how much the two parcels would cost the city. The city would at first attempt to negotiate the purchase of the properties from the owners. If no price were agreed upon, the matter would go to court, and a jury would determine how much Eugene would have to pay to fairly compensate the owners for the loss of their property. There is no upper limit on this figure.

At the very least, the City Council should have reliable appraisals in hand before moving to acquire one or both properties. Only then can councilors gain even a rough idea of the eventual cost. The value of the parcels depends on their potential for development, a matter that remains in dispute. It's likely that appraisals would provide price ranges rather than fixed amounts, but even this information would give the council a better basis for decisions than it has today.

With some notion of the properties' value, the council could weigh these acquisitions against other potential purchases of park land and open space. Eugene has money on hand, thanks to the voters' approval last year of a bond measure that included $18.5 million for such purposes. Though the city should be able to take advantage of unanticipated opportunities to buy desirable properties for parks, the two south hills parcels were not on the list of projects presented to voters as part of the bond measure campaign.

That leads to a second matter: By moving forward with condemnation, the council would in effect be putting two unforeseen acquisitions at the top of the city's list of park and open space priorities. Neighborhoods throughout Eugene, some of which have waited many years for additional parks, could be affected. The council has not balanced the merits of competing claims for limited acquisition funds, and it cannot do so without better information about prices. Nor has there been much discussion of how the two south hills parcels would be managed if they were added to the parks system - for instance, whether parking, restrooms and trash pickup would be provided.

Finally, the use of the power of eminent domain should always give government officials pause. Eminent domain is the biggest hammer in the land use toolbox. It involves the taking of private property against an owner's wishes. This power should be exercised only for vital public purposes, and only after all other options have been exhausted. Piercy is right to hesitate.