Item 3: PH on MWMC IGA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

· Modify the dispute resolution process to provide that, after the Metropolitan Policy Committee makes its recommendation, the commission's action takes effect only after all the governing bodies agree, except that the objecting governing body's recourse is limited to submitting the matter to the commission for reconsideration when: 1) The objection is to the commission's determination of rates and amounts pursuant to Section 3.e. 1. Note that the current IGA contains a comparable clause that committed the Governing Bodies to adopt rates and connection charges that were sufficient to comply with the wastewater grant requirements of the CFR. · Provisions were also added to Section 13 to facilitate adoption of the MWMC budget by the start of the fiscal year (July 1). Changes also are proposed to Appendix A of the intergovernmental agreement to reflect a revised definition of"regional" wastewater facility. This revision shifts the current definition from an arbitrary pipe size, to a consistently applied concept of"shared flows." The new language establishes a logical ownership pattern whereby components of the overall wastewater collection and conveyance system that serve only Eugene or Springfield are owned and maintained by the appropriate agency. Components that transport or treat wastewater from both Eugene and Springfield are defined as part of the regional MWMC system. This revision reflects the actual practices used by the cities' local sewer programs and the Regional Wastewater Program for many years. The City Council of Springfield held a work session on the proposed amendments to the IGA on March 21, and an additional meeting on April 18, 2005, for the first reading and public hearing on the ordinance related to the proposed amendments to the IGA and the related issuance of the revenue bonds. Two members of the public spoke at the public hearing, and the council maintained its schedule for final action on May 2, 2005. The Lane County Finance and Audit Committee first discussed the proposed amendments to the IGA on March 15, 2005. This committee is comprised of Commissioners Anna Morrison and Bill Dwyer, and staffed by the County Administrator, Bill Van Vactor, and the County Tax Assessor, Jim Gangle. A follow-up meeting of the Finance and Audit Committee was held on April 11, at which time the committee voted to forward the proposed amendments to the full Board of Commissioners for consideration. The first reading of the ordinance approving the updated IGA is scheduled for May 18, 2005, with a second reading and public hearing on June 1, 2005. Amending the IGA requires consensus of all parties to the agreement; therefore, if any one jurisdiction does not accept the amendments, the IGA remains as it is currently written. In this eventuality, the MWMC would not be able to utilize revenue bonds as the most cost-effective mechanism for raising the revenue necessary to implement the 2004 Facility Plan and would have to turn to higher cost options, which include substantial increases in user rates or borrowing at significantly higher interest rates. It is unclear, given the out-of-date nature of the IGA and potential conflicts among the governing bodies, whether any external borrowing (even at higher interest rates) would be possible. Should the governing bodies not universally agree on the need and language for amending the IGA, any of the parties to the agreement have the option of terminating their participation in the agreement, by providing one year's advance notice of termination to the other governing bodies. If the County Board of Commissioners was willing to withdraw from the MWMC, the change could be handled as an amendment to the existing IGA and potentially could happen fairly quickly. If the County was not a willing partner in such a change, the dissolution of MWMC and subsequent reformation of an agreement for management of the L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050509\S0505093.doc