Has anybody that is against a new city hall ever actually been to the existing one?

It's kind of an embarrasment for such a large city.

Ya many times, and am actually more embarrassed by the residents than the building.
Over the years dozens of times I would take boy scouts to council meetings as part of their requirements for citizenship in the community merit badge. I am not sure why but invariably it would turn out to be one of the meeting with large conflicts between special interests, or the council making decisions in direct opposition to votes/referendums of the voters. How did I end up there for the red light cameras, closing munson, the arts center I cannot explain. But I could not explain the outcome to the scouts either. To have the city attorney tell the council that a decision would open the city to legal action and them saying they did not care does not instill confidence in young residents.
So yes its not pretty. But if all we get is pretty out of the proposal to spend millions I will deal with ugly. The only thing I have seen we will get out of a new city hall is happier bureaucrats, dryer files, room for more overhead(staff) and a building on par with other cities in the keep up with the jones race.
Show me how doing this will streamline dealing with the city, remove needless and ridiculous regulation and lower the cost of delivery of services to the residents and I will consider it.

Surely there is an abandoned building of decent size and decor that the city could lease or acquire rather than build one.

The Westinghouse building looks like a feasible site with much room for future expansion for 100 years or more.


...and don't call me Surely.