But public outcry over the library appears to have been heard loud and clear.
Earlier this week, councillors Nicola Young and Laurie Foon said publicly they have had a change of heart.
Today, Foster put a new proposal on the table acknowledging the "will" of his council.
He is suggesting the council exceed its proposed cap of a 225 per cent revenue-to-debt ratio in the first three years of the budget.
This would keep the building in full public ownership and allow it to reopen in 2025.
Estimates are the debt cap could be as high as 226 per cent, 234 per cent, and 228 per cent for the first three years respectively.
But even that might not eventuate as Foster is also proposing to use any underspend in the capital programme to offset the temporary breach of the debt cap, rather than allocating it to new capital spending.
If agreed to, this will be the council's preferred option for the public to consult on.
Libraries portfolio leader councillor Fleur Fitzsimons went a step further and got support around the table to completely remove the option of a private partnership from public consultation documents.
"Really, it's about drawing a line under this", Fitzsimons said.
But Councillor Jenny Condie said she was uncomfortable about not including the proposal for public consultation.
"I get very concerned when we sit at this table and we assume we know what the people in the city already think."
She said there was also a legal risk of judicial review for not following good process.
Foster echoed those comments and said the council has to allow for minority viewpoints to be heard.
There was a real risk someone might "have a go" legally, Foster said.
"Be confident in our community, let them give us the feedback and if you are right, then it won't be a problem", he told Fitzsimons.
The debate became more heated when councillor Rebecca Matthews started her speech with a definition of privatisation she found on Google.
Foster disputed several of her claims, including that selling part of the library was never brought up in Long Term Plan workshops.
Committee chairwoman Sarah Free cautioned that her comments were getting personal, which Matthews rejected.
Matthews went on to say: "This was a poor decision poorly made."
Free asked her to lower her tone because it was upsetting people.
"I'm sorry but I am also upset," Matthews said.
"It's not the job of councillors to please each other's tone, actually."
