05/27/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Proposed Lane County Sewer and Water Policy Statement M. On April 14, 1975, Council had made its first response to part of the proposed County policy asking that the 1990 P~an concept of "minimum urban service" be incorporated in the proposed policy. Staff distributed an expanded summary report recently received and also distributed a proposed response. The proposed response stated tl~t cities should probably continue to provide urban services in Lane County. The real issue for the Eugene-Springfield metro area is whether or not the county should share in the provision of sewer and water service. The policy as now proposed may weaken the ability of cities to solve problems through annexation or other means. The revisions staff has suggested would allow cities to exercise the option of providing service to areas which should logically be annexed when development occurs. e The majQr change suggested by staff to the proposed Lane County Sewer and Water Policy Statement emphasizes that the county will only become involved if annexation is not feasible from the standpoint of the city, since it Would be difficult for a city to accomplish annexation if the county stands ready and willing to provide an alternate solution. The county proposal also suggests that a county service district is the preferred form for solution of the problem if city annexation does not occur. Staff feels it may be desirable to leave the alternate form of government more flexible. Another modification clarifies the proposed policy by providing that, where city annexation does not occur and a county service district has the responsibility to operate and maintain facilities, the expense would be entirely the responsibility of the users. Another clarification would emphasize that construction of water and sewerage facilities should be ,paid for by the users and that the county should assist only where serious health hazards exist or are imminent. Staff also recommends any further study of what services should. be provided by the county was very important to the cities and that such a study should be done cooperatively by the county and the cities. Mr. Keller said he has been uncomfortable when the County made their presentation in the fact that all of a sudden they felt a responsibility to solve all the problems, yet he does not see any way the county would be prepared to be in the sewer business. e Mr. Martin reaffirmed the City's position of still adhering to a policy of annexation and staff feels the County, in presenting the options, changes the environment as to whether people will seek annexation. Without popular interest in annexation, the City has been reluctant to suggest it. Mayor Anderson, in remembering the discussions of the Metropolitan Sewer Commission, said it seemed like the options are the same rigid ones adhered to for 6 years or more. He feels the need to come up with new alternatives that would address the problem, perhaps even some kind of limited annexation. Mr. Martin asked if the Council would like staff to put together a number of al~ernatives, and there were no objections by Council to doing that. Public Works Director said that the files are full of alternatives. He thought that, if some Federal programs are initiated, agencies wouid be in a favorable position to provide sewers to many people. It boils down to "what one is willing to give and another is willing to receive". Mayor Anderson felt the need to incorporate alternatives into the policy statement, definitely outlining :what the city is willing to do. Public Works Director said the Metro group is trying to get the same thing with the County but that the timing might not be appropriate for that report. He feels the staff should discuss alternatives, with a possibility of deferring a formal report on it if timing is not right. Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Keller that the Council give tentative approval to the proposed Lane County Sewer and Water statement as revised in the memo. Motion carried unanimously. Comm approve 5/?1/75 e 5/27/75 16 293