CCMinutes - 06/14/04 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

increases in the system. She reported that the SDC methodology before the council was the consensus outcome of the advisory committee's work. She stated that the SDCs would not pay for all capacity, but the cost would be constant as what growth did not pay would become the burden of ratepayers. She said the current permit expired in 2006 and the region needed to demonstrate compliance with new treatment requirements. She reiterated that delay would increase construction costs and delay in adoption of the revised SDC methodology placed additional costs on the shoulders of existing ratepayers. Walt Meyer, 3987 Brae Burn Drive, stated that the MWMC Facilities Plan naturally led into the development of the SDC methodology. He related that the MWMC hired legal counsel and financial consultants to determine whether the changes were legal and were accurate. He said the MWMC continued its relationship with its engineering advice so that it was assured that the legal and technical pieces melded together in the development of the SDCs. He stressed that the MWMC had the responsibility to come up with the appropriate balance between services fees, paid by existing users, and SDCs, which were a mechanism to pay for growth. He conveyed his confidence in the resulting proposed methodology. Roxie Cuellar, 2053 Laura Street, Lane County Home Builders Association, provided a 25-page letter from the association's attorney and a 20-page letter from herself. She asked that the record be left open as she had two boxes of further testimony to submit. She alleged that the MWMC wanted to go to court over the SDC methodology. Ms. Cuellar said the problems with the new methodology were that it had never been done before in the State and it had no numbers attached to it. She asserted that 18 months ago, a group had discussed how to clarify the existing State statutes to reduce the number of misunderstandings that occur between the development community and jurisdictions and to reduce the number of resulting lawsuits. She related that she asked for two clarifications, one of which was to prevent jurisdictions from doing the "double-billing" that she alleged the MWMC methodology would have done, and the other had to do with the improvement fee methodology. The latter clarification was added to the statute. She asserted that the methodology was not based on the project list as the MWMC had indicated it did not think it needed to be so based. She asserted that this was illegal. She cited Senate Bill 939. She opined that the MWMC was not willing to sit down and work things out. Councilor Pap~, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to keep the record open until June 16 at 5 p.m. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 7:1; Coun- cilor Bettman voting in opposition. Mayor Torrey adjourned the meeting at 9:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Ruth Atcherson)