Laserfiche WebLink
shirking their duty to their constituents because they will be giving up their <br />authority on these important boundary questions. <br />Amy Chinitz Springfield Utility Board, Springfield, said she is SUB's water <br />quality protection coordinator and she was speaking on behalf of SUB. She stated <br />that SUB was concerned that the proposal to modify the Metro Plan Boundary to <br />be co- terminus with the Springfield UGB, weakens Springfield's ability to protect <br />its drinking water sources. She noted that 31 out of 35 SUB and Rainbow Water <br />District wells are located outside the UGB. She stated the source of over 75 <br />percent of Springfield's total groundwater based production capacity is located <br />between the UGB and the Metro Plan Boundary. She noted that the Metro Plan <br />establishes a means for coordinating planning across jurisdictional lines. She said <br />planning for the protection of drinking water source areas that follow hydrologic <br />instead of jurisdictional boundaries is a logical subject for cross jurisdictional <br />coordination. She reported that currently any proposed zone change within the <br />Metro Plan boundary that would have an effect on Springfield's water supply <br />would allow for multi jurisdictional decision making. She added that this process <br />allows the city of Springfield to participate in major decisions that could affect its <br />own municipal water source. She stated the proposed modification to the Metro <br />Plan Boundary would remove the city of Springfield from this process for areas <br />between the UGB and the current metro plan boundary. She said SUB, Rainbow <br />Water District and the city of Springfield adopted a pro active drinking water <br />protection program in 1999. She said they value the partnership with the County <br />and look forward to furthering their work together but even with successful <br />partnerships with Lane County, they view the city of Springfield's participation <br />and decision that could affect their water supply absolutely essential. She <br />believed it was possible to avoid the setbacks for drinking water protection while <br />still meeting the County's goal of establishing jurisdictional autonomy. She asked <br />that this conversation continue during the JEO process so they can be sure that <br />shrinking the Metro Plan boundary does not lead to any unintended harmful <br />consequences. <br />Joe Meyers Springfield, said that he has lived in Springfield his entire life. He <br />noted that the cities of Eugene and Springfield are inside of Lane County and <br />surrounded by Lane County and not the other way around. He believed they <br />should have some sort of control on what goes on directly around the cities. He <br />thought it would be bad for an entity to have sole jurisdiction over so many <br />people. He thought it added to mistrust and the potential abuse of power. <br />Donna Riddle Eugene, said she would personally benefit from Phase 2 because <br />she has five acres that border the UGB west of I -5 and the city limits of Eugene. <br />She said her main concern is clean water. She stated that intedursidicitonal <br />decision making on water is better to protect the rivers and the other wetlands. <br />Rodney Meyers Springfield, said he has a shop near Cedar Creek. He said if <br />there are setbacks, he asked what the affect would be on the operation of his shop. <br />14 <br />