10/10/1983 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

costs estimates by the new city, Eu~ene staff, and the Bureau of Governmental Research. Mr. Lindberg asked for flgures "if Eugene were to provide urban e services to the area." Mr. Farah reviewed the ways Eugene could provide the sewers in the most efficient manner. Mr. Sercombe and Mr. Farah said the range of urban services mandated to be provided within a city is outlined in the Metro Plan and by State law and therefore is not a debatable topic. Mr. Farah said that to the residents, police protection is the major issue. He did not believe self-determination was the major issue. People want urban services, he said. Mr. Farah referred to the summary. He stressed that no matter how it is done, adding urban services is costly, even to a "no-growth" city. The feasibility study estimated $4.63/1000; Eugene staff estimated a minimum of $13.52/1000 and with full funding (capital facilities) maximum $23.81/1000 assessed value. Mr. Lindberg said people fear the cost of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Mr. Farah said the councilors need to communicate that the process will occur over a very long time. Mr. Smith said 70 percent of Santa Clara is now curbed as part of the subdivisions. Mr. Carlson said Eugene does not have an agressive policy for sidewalks on neighborhood streets. Mr. Farah referred to page 2, 11.2 and 3. He said the Park District in River Road would have to expand park capacity. Provision for water and electricity would be from EWEB (owned by the City of Eugene). These costs will erode the $4.63/1000 figure. Mr. Carlson said EWEB is owned by the citizens of the City of Eugene. It has served the River Road/ Santa Clara area. The area could form a separate electrical utility, but would have to buy the present facilities. Water is more difficult. The City Council has kept the right to control the water supply. They vote on water extensions. The water is reserved for the citizens of the City of Eugene. It was assumed e that the River Road/Santa Clara citizens would one day be the citizens of Eugene. Mr. Lindberg asked if EWEB thought this. Mr. Farah said it was pointed out by the EWEB staff itself. It is in the charter and is quite clear. Mr. Farah discussed the cost of police to the new city, pages 8 and 13 in the feasibility study and the discrepancies of what is needed versus what is proposed. Finally, Mr. Farah noted that the feasibility study does not provide for capital assets needed by the new city. Mr. Farah talked about the negative impact on the Metropolitan Plan. He stressed the importance of getting service to the area. Mr. Smith said the incorporation effort resulted in the design of the most cost-efficient sewer system. He explained the design using plastic pipes under 15 inches in diameter. Mr. Sercombe noted November 3 and 17 for the public hearing before the Boundary Commission. If the Boundary Commission votes incorporation down, that ends the process. There could be an appeal. If the incorporation succeeds before the Boundary Commission, it goes to the County Commissioners for'an election (May 1984). This Wednesday, the City Council will vote on the resolution. Members thanked the staff for their excellent presentation. 7:10 p.m. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner Session October 10, 1983 Page 4