Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Wilson opined her agency would continue to participate. She observed that EWEB board member Jon Brown was quoted in that day’s Register Guard saying this was not an adversarial position and there were not sides. It was a matter of everyone bringing forward their arguments for consideration by the court. Mr. Clark, referring to the three fundamental issues identified by Mr. Pryor, said he saw the council addressing the issue of authority to grant the privilege to sell the water tonight. Addressing if the water rights should be perfected, how they should be perfected and should water be sold to the City of Veneta should be addressed in the future. As a Eugene City Councilor, he had a duty to protect the largest amount of potential rights for future residents of Eugene. It was unknown how much water future generations would need or how much would be available. He had heard from some parties that selling water to the City of Veneta was in conflict with the City of Eugene’s GMP and unsustainable. He suggested if the City of Veneta were allowed to grow it might have an increase in jobs and industry which would mean fewer people would be driving from Veneta to Eugene for employment. He observed if the City of Eugene did not sell water to the City of Veneta, and the City of Veneta acquired water rights by another means, another facility would be required to withdraw the water from the river, which would not be very sustainable. He hoped the council would look at good data to determine the best direction to proceed. Mr. Zelenka said the council regularly made decisions that impacted other people which were not based on what those other people would do. It was legitimate for the council to assess an action based on the City’s principles and policies, to ensure they were consistent. Every action had an economic, environmental and social aspect, referred to as the triple bottom line. Every triple bottom line aspect and the impacts should be assessed to determine the impact on the community. Ms. Piercy asked if the council understood the triple bottom line impact of the sale of water rather than the City of Veneta taking water from their ground water supply, which would impact nearby rivers. She did not want the council’s action to be interpreted that the Eugene City Council disregarded the City of Veneta’s authority over its community or disrespect of the community. She asserted all of the local communities had a responsibility for regional planning. She saw the water sale issue as a regional and state responsibility for managing growth. Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to direct the City Manger to intervene in the validation proceeding and argue that the City Charter grants to the council, rather than EWEB, the authority to decide to sell water outside the City’s limits. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. The meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jon Ruiz City Manager (Recorded by Linda Henry) MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 28, 2010 Page 5 Work Session