Laserfiche WebLink
Veneta City Administrator Ric Ingham said the water contract between EWEB and the City of Veneta was <br />time - sensitive because of its tie to a State Rural Development grant and loan package with a 2015 <br />expiration date. Preliminary engineering indicated the project could take up to four years to build, <br />although he hoped it could be done sooner so Veneta could take advantage of lower costs. Mr. Ingham <br />emphasized the positive economic impact that pipeline construction would have on Lane County. <br />Mr. Ingham said Veneta was a young community that was still developing much of its major infrastruc- <br />ture. The city had incorporated because of water quality issues. Veneta did not have access to good <br />aquifers or to surface water sources as most communities did. However, Veneta was mandated by Goal <br />14 to have a 20 -year supply of drinking water as well as the supporting infrastructure to meet the needs of <br />its projected population. Mr. Ingham said that water would not drive Veneta's growth rate one way or <br />another. <br />Mr. Ingham noted the many studies that had occurred to identify a water source for Veneta, and said the <br />studies pointed to the pipeline project as the preferred alternative. <br />Veneta Community Services Director Brian Issa, Project Lead, distributed and reviewed copies of a <br />PowerPoint presentation entitled A Comparison of Water Source Development Scenarios for the City of <br />Veneta. The presentation summarized Veneta's water situation and included information on demand <br />projections, existing supply, options for long -range alternatives, the costs of supply development <br />scenarios, and rate comparisons and projected systems development charge (SDC) increases. <br />Mayor Piercy solicited council comments and questions. <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Clark, Mr. Ingham indicated that Veneta had employed Rural <br />Development financing in 1998 to expand its wastewater plant, and all improvements to the water system <br />made in the last 20 years were funded by urban renewal. Mr. Ingham did not anticipate the City's bond <br />rating would be impacted by the water situation. <br />Ms. Ortiz asked what amount of water Veneta needed. Mr. Issa said the project had been sized to <br />accommodate 3 to 5 million gallons daily. Ms. Ortiz suggested Veneta's SDCs would be so high people <br />would be discouraged from building. Mr. Ingham emphasized Veneta's efforts to foster the creation of <br />local jobs for Veneta residents and said his concern was how the SDCs would impacts the community's <br />business development goals. <br />Mr. Poling believed that Veneta had thoroughly documented its water need and questioned what other <br />options Veneta had given the restrictions placed on other potential sources by the Oregon Department of <br />Water Resources. He hoped at minimum to move the item on to the public hearing phase for the sake of <br />regional collaboration and partnership. <br />Mr. Poling asked what Veneta would do if it was unable to secure water from EWEB. Mr. Ingram said <br />Veneta would continue to seek an alternative source, which would likely involve efforts to draw water <br />from the Fern Ridge Reservoir. However, there were obstacles created by the need for Congressional <br />approval, water filtration requirements, and the potential impact of drought years on the reservoir's water <br />levels. He emphasized that Veneta had sufficient water to meet average demand for 20 years but would be <br />challenged to provide water for peak demand within the next few years. <br />Mr. Pryor spoke to the pros and cons of the proposed water contract. Speaking to the question of whether <br />the sale hurt Eugene's water supply, he pointed out that the contract helped to perfect EWEB's water right <br />MINUTES— Eugene City Council November 10, 2010 Page 2 <br />Work Session <br />