Residents pressed consultants about whether the old civic center at 2100 Ridge could house public functions, including a return of City Hall, while consultants reiterated the study will evaluate all community‑supported ideas and report feasibility findings.
"It's not off the table as far as our feasibility is concerned," Ryan Porter said of the civic center, while noting a prior City Council resolution said the council would not return to 2100 Ridge and that reversing that decision would require an explicit council vote.
Participants highlighted the economics of historic rehabilitation. "The federal tax credits I think were 20 percent on construction costs and the state ones ... give another 25 percent," said Shirley (participant), arguing that landmark tax credits can materially change developer economics for rehabilitation compared with moving city offices back in.
Public commenters disputed past city estimates for rehabilitation costs. One resident recounted city figures suggesting tens of millions of dollars to rehab the civic center and geothermal systems, while others reported vendor estimates much lower; consultants said they would 'start new' with fresh condition assessments and market data because older estimates do not reflect current inflation and market volatility.
Consultants and participants discussed multiple reuse ideas raised on the project website — including technical education, housing, a media center, and moving some civic functions back — and noted dependencies such as ownership by other public entities (for example, District 65 for the Kingsley site) and the five‑fifths tax‑increment financing area that could alter long‑term revenue implications.
Organizers stressed that all feasible ideas will still be subject to the usual land‑use processes, and that the federal grant covers the technical reviews. The team encouraged residents to post and support ideas on the website, noting the civic‑center tour on May 27 as an opportunity to see the building and ask engineers specific questions.