My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution No. 4506
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Resolutions
>
1996 No. 4474-4510
>
Resolution No. 4506
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2010 4:47:04 PM
Creation date
7/11/2006 3:35:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Recorder
CMO_Document_Type
Resolutions
Document_Date
10/14/1996
Document_Number
4506
CMO_Effective_Date
10/14/1996
Author
Warren G. Wont
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />RESOLUTION NO. t..fSDh <br /> <br />A RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE SITING OF A <br />STATE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY IN THE EUGENE/SPRINGFIELD <br />METROPOLITAN AREA <br /> <br />The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: <br /> <br />A. In 1995, the Oregon Legislative Assembly adopted, and the Governor signed, <br />House Bill ("HB") 2214 in order to establish an expedited process for the siting of additional <br />correctional facilities in this state. Pursuant to that process, the Oregon Department of <br />Corrections ("ODOC") solicited from local governments statements of interest in the siting of <br />correctional facilities within or near the local jurisdictions. Numerous local governments adopted <br />resolutions expressing such an interest. Neither the City of Eugene, City of Springfield nor Lane <br />County adopted a resolution expressing any interest in having the State locate a correctional <br />facility in or around the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area ("metro area"). Among other <br />factors to be considered in determining whether to nominate a site, HB 2214 requires that ODOC <br />base its decision on (a) the interest demonstrated by local jurisdictions in having a site selected <br />for a corrections facility within their jurisdiction, and (b) the availability of, or the ability of the <br />local jurisdictions to provide, adequate infrastructure (such as water and sewer) to serve the <br />facility. There was no interest expressed by any of the three governments and there are <br />unanswered questions about our ability to adequately serve the proposed facility with needed <br />infrastructure. <br /> <br />B. On October 2, 1996, officials from ODOC met with local officials to inform them <br />that ODOC was considering nominating a site in the metro area for a medium security correctional <br />facility. Prior to that date, no state official had indicated any intent to site such a facility in this <br />area. Nor had Eugene, Springfield, or Lane County expressed any interest in having the State <br />locate a correctional facility in or around the metro area. <br /> <br />C. ODOC indicated that the site under consideration was located near the Eugene <br />Airport. The site is approximately 400 acres in size. Half the site is located within the urban <br />growth boundary ("UGB"), and the other half is located outside. The medium security prison <br />would incarcerate up to 1600 medium security prisoners. In addition, up to 600 correctional <br />facility guards and staff would work at the prison. The facility would require approximately 2.4 <br />million gallons of water per day, and produce up to 1.4 million gallons of wastewater. ODOC' s <br />consultant indicated that the facility would obtain its water from the Eugene Water and Electric <br />Board ("EWEB"), and would need to dispose of its wastewater to the regional wastewater <br />treatment facility serving the metro area. <br /> <br />D. For several reasons, sufficient or adequate water may not be available to serve the <br />proposed correctional facility. First, EWEB may not have the capacity to provide on a daily basis <br />an additional 2.4 million gallons of water without jeopardizing EWEB's ability to provide full <br />water service to its current customers. Second, it is unlawful for EWEB to provide water service <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.