Laserfiche WebLink
construct with a Memorandum of Understanding. Such an approach would give the City more control, which <br />it would lose if the utility was given charter authority by the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner suggested the council to postpone substantive discussion on the resolution until the regular <br />meeting when EWEB representatives would be present. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Meisner regarding the number of elections that would occur and whether <br />EWEB would seek authority to provide content from the voters, Mr. Klein clarified that the resolution called <br />for an election to approve the business plan and an election to authorize the issuance of bonds. Mr. Kelly <br />added that EWEB had made no commitment to go back to the voters if the future if it determined it wished to <br />provide content. Mr. Meisner found that unacceptable. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner asked legal counsel if either the charter amendment or Memorandum of Understanding provided <br />a greater level of legal protection to the City in the case of a law suit. Mr. Klein said that the if someone <br />decided to challenge what EWEB was doing, it was unlikely the City would be named as a co-defendant. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner suggested that the situation pointed out the need for a charter review process regarding the status <br />of the City and EWEB as distinct entities. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mayor Torrey, Mr. Klein confirmed that as drafted, the charter amendment <br />gave EWEB the authority to provide content without voter approval. He said that the City did have continued <br />authority over bonding; with or without Mr. Rayor's amendment to the resolution, if EWEB wanted to issue <br />nonrecourse or any other bond for a period beyond 12 months, it must return to the council for approval. The <br />council could condition its approval of voter approval of the provision of content. Mr. Klein noted that the <br />use of nonrecourse bonds did not preclude the use of water and electric revenues to support the system; <br />EWEB has stated its intent not to use those revenues orally, but not in writing. The amendment to the <br />resolution made it clear that those revenues would not be used. <br /> <br />Mr. Wong pointed out that unless the council called for a public vote on the bonds in the resolution or the <br />charter amendment, EWEB was not obligated to take the bond out for a vote. Regarding the use of <br />nonrecourse bonds, Mr. Wong doubted that EWEB would let those bonds default because it would impinge <br />on the ratings of its other bonds. The utility would have to pay those bonds from some source. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor noted her support for EWEB's proposal, but said she also wanted an process that protected the <br />consumer. <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br />Jim Johnson <br />City Manager <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 28, 2000 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />