HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes - 06/14/04 Mtg MINUTES
Eugene City Council
Regular Meeting
Council Chamber--Eugene City Hall
June 14, 2004
7:30 p.m.
COUNCILORS PRESENT: Bonny Bettman, George Poling, Nancy Nathanson, Scott Meisner, David
Kelly, Betty Taylor, Gary Papd, Jennifer Solomon.
His Honor Mayor James D. Torrey called the regular meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. He
noted that Councilor Solomon was excused for the first part of the meeting.
1. PUBLIC FORUM
Mayor Torrey reviewed the rules of the Public Forum.
Gary Nauta, 2300 Oakmont Way, #201, President of the International Alliance of Fire Fighters Local 851,
shared information on union bargaining regarding the proposal to privatize fire service at the Eugene
Airport. He related that he had met on June 4 with the bargaining team in a ~last-ditch effort" to attempt a
possible remedy to the issue, but the meeting lasted 20 minutes and the City's proposal was completely
~unfeasible." He asserted the City was unwilling to consider other options and the two units remained at an
impasse. He said bargaining was otherwise complete, with the exception of a few unanswered questions.
The only question for the council was whether it would allow the City Manager to continue on the path
toward privatization of this service.
Mr. Nauta continued to believe this was a policy issue and not an issue on which the City Manager should
have the unilateral capacity to decide. He stated he failed to understand how the council, as elected officials,
would not intervene on this issue. He stressed the importance of the council taking a stand and sending a
clear message to the City Manager that privatization of the fire and emergency medical services (EMS) at
the airport was a damaging and unsafe business practice. He underscored that no taxpayer money would be
saved by such a change and questioned the wisdom of placing the traveling public at a greater risk in these
times of heightened security.
R. Kris Millegan, 39830 McKenzie Highway, Springfield, said he was coordinator of a Eugene event that
was part of a world-wide movement to legalize marijuana. He asked under what authority the City of
Eugene could supercede the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights and prohibit his right to
use cannabis. He also questioned the right of the City to arrest, charge, incarcerate, and cause financial loss
to a person for possession of marijuana. He called marijuana a ~gifl from nature's God." He asserted that
cannabis possession statutes were ~void admissio" and that that elected officials could be held personally
liable for wrongful arrest. He noted that the prohibition of alcohol had required a constitutional amendment.
He said civil rights were inalienable and should not be denied. He provided his testimony in writing.
Councilor Solomon arrived.
Mayor Torrey, noting that 20 people had signed up for the Public Forum, asked for a motion to extend the
time allotted for it.
Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to limit the time
of each speaker to two minutes so that all speakers could have a chance to
be heard. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 7:1 (Councilor Taylor voting
no).
Bill Dwyer, 125 East 8th Avenue, Lane County Commissioner, opposed the privatization of fire and EMS
services at the Eugene Airport. He did not find the proposal to be in the public interest. He said the job of
elected officials was to balance responsibilities and weigh all factors related to the issues before them. He
held great respect for the professional firefighters and police and how they placed their lives on the line for
citizens on a regular basis. He acknowledged there was a great investment in their training and the salaries
of the personnel at the airport were paid for by the airlines and, as a result, the passengers. Mr. Dwyer said
if he thought paying people less or having people who were not as well-trained do this job would result in
lower fares, it might interest him more. He opined that everyone knew this would not happen.
Mr. Dwyer asked why the City would choose to save money for the airlines at the expense of losing
professional service. He called it an ~ill thought-out attempt to institutionalize poverty at the government's
expense." He asked who picks up the cost of health and retirement benefits when the private sector
abandons them. He stated that the burden fell on the shoulders of government. He reiterated that privatiza-
tion of the essential service benefited the airlines, while it shifted more financial responsibility for people
without adequate health benefits or adequate salary on the taxpayers. In closing, he asked the council to
consider the effect this had on employee morale, labor relations, and human relationships.
Peter Sorenson, PO Box 10836, Lane County Commissioner, thanked the City Council and the Mayor for
the work they do. He asserted that landing fees should pay for both the regular EMS and fire service as well
as the Air Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) services and property taxes should not and do not pay for those
expenses. He stated that ARFF was required by federal mandate. He felt a person should feel protected at
the airport just as anywhere else. He said whether a public service should be privatized was a policy issue
to be determined by the Mayor and City Council.
Jill Simmons, 2381 Dale Avenue, president of the Oregon School Employees Association (OSEA) Chapter
1, said she represented 900 classified employees and served as a Zone 4 State Director for OSEA and
represented 26 chapters in the state of Oregon. She spoke to the City Manager's proposal to privatize
ARFF services at the airport. She related that she had experienced similar issues with the school district as
the district had instructed management to explore outsourcing some food service and custodial positions,
affecting approximately 170 living wage jobs. She stated that contract language had been entered into
requiring that a task force of management and workers be formed to explore all options to meet needs of
management and workers and maintain the same high quality and standard the community had come to
depend upon. She said, because this process was used, the school district had made the %orrect" choice for
the community and continued to enjoy a high quality work force of employees who were invested in schools.
Regarding the recommendation for privatization of ARFF services, Ms. Simmons predicted that such
privatization would reduce dramatically the level of fire and emergency service at the airport and the low-
paid contract employees would have minimal training and be unable to fight structure fires, vehicle fires,
wild land, and grass fires. She asserted the contract employees would also have little or no training to
provide emergency services. She stated that Eugene firefighters were highly-skilled professionals with
training in hazardous materials, weapons, mass destruction, confined spaces, and technical rescue.
Bob Bussel, 3054 Grand Cayman Drive, spoke as the director of Labor, Education, and Research Center at
the University of Oregon and as a citizen concerned about the security of the community. He said it was
clear the private contractors who were profit-oriented had incentive to keep expenses down and one method
of doing so was by providing less extensive training. He asked if, in the wake of the tragic events of
September 11,2001, the City wanted workers at the airport who were less qualified to handle emergency
situations. He noted that after September 11,2001, the federal government determined that baggage
screeners should be government rather than private employees for just this reason. Private contractors also
save money by paying less in wages and benefits.
Mr. Bussel asked if the City wanted to risk having workers receive experience with the private contractor
and subsequently leave in search of employment that paid better wages and offered better benefits. He asked
if the community really wanted to take family-wage jobs and downgrade them as private contractors
invariably do. He questioned whether this was the signal the City wanted to send as a matter of public
policy and an expression of what the community valued. He felt that the City was prepared to displace
committed, highly skilled employees and replace them with lower paid, less-qualified people. He asked the
council to let the firefighters continue to perform the needed public service.
Robert Ackerman, 186 Harvey Drive, State Representative of District 13, spoke on the airport privatiza-
tion issue. He said public safety had always been a major reason for municipal organization and the citizens
have never compromised on this. The post-September 11 environment required that the City maintain the
highest level of public diligence and he asserted the privatization of ARFF services at the airport would
seriously compromise this. He called it ironic that, in the event of a real emergency, the private fire
contractor would have to call the Eugene Fire and EMS as a back-up. Ultimately, he said, this would
subsidize the private contractor, and he wondered how this was factored into the bid.
Mr. Ackerman predicted this action would also set a precedent of other public safety functions. He felt that
opposition to privatization of police services warranted opposition to the privatization of airport fire
services. He thought it "amazing" that the community paid so little attention to the cost of public buildings
and commented that "we easily digest" other large expenses, such as $120 million for a new basketball
stadium, $350 million for Sacred Heart Hospital, and $75 million for the new courthouse. Mr. Ackerman
asserted the cost of airport fire services should be viewed in the context of these enormous costs.
Bruce Miller, PO Box 50968, Eugene, conveyed his agreement with the former speaker.
Mr. Miller said he attended some graduation ceremonies at the University of Oregon. He announced he was
running for a seat on the school board for School District 4J.
Gary Gillespie, 790 East 23rd Avenue, opposed contracting out fire and rescue services at the airport. He
underscored that not every plane would crash, nor would every passenger experience a medical emergency;
but in such an instance, the service was there. He called the service "insurance" against tragedy. He did not
think that fares would be lowered should landing fees be lowered. He asked which elected or appointed
official wanted to be the first person to have to step before the press and the public and explain what went
wrong when something did happen, why it went wrong, and why the services that could have been provided
were not there.
Zach ¥ishanoff, Patterson Street, expressed his concern about nanotechnology. He said he provided
information on alleged hazards of nanotechnology to the council in writing.
Mr. Vishanoff conveyed his concern regarding the proximity of the railroad tracks to the potential hospital
site. He hoped there would be a public hearing on this. He felt it had been difficult to speak at the public
hearing on the hospital's certificate of need.
Mr. Vishanoff asked if the privatization of fire services at the airport was a part of "Smart Growth." He
thought there was much in the idea of "Smart Growth" that was not being brought to light.
In closing, Mr. Vishanoff asserted that the former Condon School could be razed and asked that it be
designated a historic building instead.
Ken Martz, 3077 Willakenzie Road, related that the Monaco company jet had dropped a wheel off the
tarmac in January 2004. Airport fire services had arrived quickly and had leveled the aircraft and prevented
a large and potentially dangerous fuel spill from occurring. He stated that the aircraft had been pulled back
onto the tarmac without incident. He attributed this to the skill of the ARFF personnel at the airport and
stated that they expected this same level of safety and service to continue.
Mike Blomm~, 1634 Lorane Highway, director for Monaco Coach Corporation, stated that the company
had a large investment at the airport. He related that the company wished to be assured that the airport fire
department training, coverage, and support would not be diminished in the future. He questioned whether a
contractor's crew would have been as attentive to or as able to handle the incident related by Mr. Martz.
Major Dafoe, 93370 Highway 99 North, Junction City, owner of the Oregon Horse Center, commented that
the City was working with the McDougal brothers on annexing and trading a large piece of farm land behind
his property to build houses and a City park. He predicted future residents of such a development could
decide that they did not want a horse facility in their neighborhood and he could be evicted from the area.
He said his center was booked for 49 weekends of the current year and was a huge success. He said it
provided activities for young people and brought people to the community who paid for hotel rooms and ate
at restaurants. Major Dafoe stated that he had devoted much of his life and his money in the venture and
asked that the council consider keeping it rural.
Vicki L. Walker, PO Box 10314, State Senator for District 7, recalled that the Eugene firefighters had
received a letter from then City Managerpro tern Jim Carlson in March 2003, that said that airport finances
were in dire straits and the airport was at risk of losing airlines if there was not a substantial reduction of
expenses and lower landing fees charged to airlines. On January 21, 2004, the City Council met in a work
session to discuss the concept of a regional airport. At that time, Airport Manager Bob Noble and Public
Works Director Kurt Corey were both optimistic about the future of the airport, particularly the financial
picture. She did not know why the airport would choose to privatize ARFF services as it would not be in the
best interest of the public nor the eight family-wage jobs it provided the community. She underscored that
this change saved money for the airlines and did not benefit the taxpayer in any way.
Gary Henry, PO Box 2592, provided a packet of information in writing to the council. He related he had
the option to buy property adjacent to the Eugene Airport outside of the urban growth boundary (UGB). He
proposed that the council consider bringing the property inside of the UGB for future development. He
suggested that the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) could move there. He asserted the properties in
this area were currently being neglected and the change would "clean up" the area around the UGB.
Phil Barnhart, 182 Sunset Drive, State Representative for District 11, considered the possible privatization
of fire and emergency services an important policy issue as it involved an essential service for public safety
at the Eugene Airport. He asserted that maintaining current services at the airport was in the best economic
interest of the facility as well as a perception of lower safety standards could make people disinclined to
utilize the local airport. He encouraged the council to act to prevent privatization and maintain the growth
of the airport and its contribution to the local economy.
Kevin Matthews, PO Box 1588, president of the Friends of Eugene, doubted the Eugene Airport could
provide a critical mass for a robust independent fire service contractor.
Mr. Matthews opposed limiting testimony to two minutes as most people came with three minutes of
prepared testimony. He thanked Councilor Taylor for her opposition to the limit.
Mr. Matthews asked that Item (D), concerning a road right-of-way issue, be removed from the Consent
Calendar and discussed in greater detail. He asserted the transportation infrastructure planning in the
courthouse area was not right because there had been and continued to be systematic misrepresentation of
public testimony. He alleged that staff had dismissed 17 pieces of testimony without giving it consideration.
Nick Urhausen, 2858 Warren Street, called the recent election results a "legal left-wing takeover" of City
government. He advocated for City Councilors to be voted into office citywide instead of by ward.
Ron Teninty, 999 Brookside Drive, a 37-year representative of the Teamsters Union, shared that he had
dealt with the issue of privatization in many venues. He said the reason privatization worked was that it
"got the job done more cheaply" and the reason the job was done more cheaply was that it paid workers less.
He asked the council to consider the long-term effect on morale of sending a message to employees that their
jobs were up for bid any time and all of the time. He stressed that the value would no longer be placed on
the quality of the work of an employee and this would degrade services.
Floyd Prozanski, PO Box 11511, State Senator, provided Bill Dwyer's comments in writing as a favor to
his fellow colleague. He agreed with Mr. Dwyer that first responder services should never be privatized.
He called it a "commitment with the community" to ensure the services were there. He reiterated that, in the
event of a catastrophe that a contractor could not take care of, Eugene Fire and EMS would be called, and
there would have to be cross-training to make this work. He felt such training with a private contractor
would be unfeasible.
Mr. Prozanski registered his opposition to the use of motorized vehicles on the bike paths as they posed a
safety hazard.
Mayor Torrey closed the Public Forum and called on the council for comments.
Councilor Taylor apologized for the two-minute limit on Public Forum testimony. She reiterated her
opposition to the privatization issue. She felt the evening's testimony to be very compelling.
Regarding testimony on agricultural land, Councilor Taylor conveyed her firm belief that it should stay
zoned for agricultural use, as that type of land was needed.
Councilor Pap~ noted, with interest, the level of attention the privatization issue had brought to the
foreground. He stated that when the City of Eugene had tried to raise interest in regionalizing the airport in
order to gain more support from the surrounding area for it, no one stepped forward. He said the City paid
from the General Fund into an Airport Marketing Fund. He suggested, given the level of interest in the
airport, the creation of a special district be reinvestigated. He felt it unfair that the promotion of the airport
should only fall on the backs of the taxpayers of Eugene.
Councilor Bettman apologized for the shortened time for testimony. She added that this had been a part of
council process rules adopted by a majority vote and it was important to adhere to the rules. She encour-
aged all those who testified to submit their testimony via email to the council. She stressed that it would all
be read.
Councilor Bettman stated that the City paid a lot for the training of its fire and first responders. She
believed that the public needed to be able to trust that, in the event of disaster, those would be the profes-
sionals that would respond. She looked forward to the work session on the item.
Councilor Bettman commented that there was inequity in how properties were brought or not brought into
the UGB. She said she would address this further in the next discussion.
Councilor Solomon indicated she would address Mr. Dafoe's concerns in the course of the Consent
Calendar.
Councilor Kelly thanked all of the people for testifying. He felt the testimony regarding privatization had
made a number of compelling points.
Councilor Kelly also thanked Mr. Dafoe. He felt Mr. Dafoe raised a legitimate concern and that people
moving into a potential subdivision next to Mr. Dafoe's horse center could take offense at the odor.
Councilor Meisner thanked all those who spoke about privatization of City services. He had been gratified
that when he requested the work session on the policy issue, his colleagues had to hold it. He concurred with
the remarks of Mr. Prozanski. He appreciated Ms. Walker's testimony regarding the more favorable
financial picture of the airport that had been painted when the issue of creating a special district was raised.
Mayor Torrey noted the work session on privatization of fire services was scheduled for June 23.
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of City Council Minutes
- February 10, 2004, Joint Elected Officials Meeting
- May 10, 2004, Work Session
- May 10, 2004, City Council Meeting
- May 12, 2004, Work Session
B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda
C. Approval of HOME Investment Partnerships Program Funding for Low-Income
Housing Projects
D. Resolution 4790 Authorizing the Institution of Proceedings in Eminent Domain for the
Acquisition of Property Interests for Improvements to the Transportation Infrastruc-
ture in the Vicinity of the New Federal Courthouse
E. Initiation of Metro Plan Amendment to Swap Residential Land Inside and Outside the
Urban Growth Boundary and Add 77 Additional Acres to the Urban Growth Bound-
ary for a Community Park for Santa Clara
Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to approve the items on the Con-
sent Calendar.
City Manager Dennis Taylor indicated that Item (D) had been removed and placed on the agenda for July 26
for further discussion.
Councilor Kelly submitted corrections to the minutes via email. Mayor Torrey deemed them, without
objection, approved.
Councilor Solomon pulled Item (E). Councilors Bettman and Taylor indicated their intention to pull that
item as well.
Councilor Bettman noted her submission of corrections to the minutes. Mayor Torrey deemed them
accepted as submitted.
Councilor Poling said he had previously submitted corrections to the minutes. Mayor Torrey deemed them,
without objection, approved.
Roll call vote; the motion to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of items (D)
and (E) passed unanimously, 8:0.
Councilor Solomon sympathized with Mr. Dafoe. She opined that the City had run the horses out of town.
She asserted he was providing a great service. She supported the proposal for the land exchange but
advocated for building in language into any agreement that would address some of the concerns he had
expressed.
City Attorney Glenn Klein stated that the process had not passed the point at which it could not be revised.
He said the council was merely initiating a planning process, a process in which Mr. Dafoe could partici-
pate, and the process would include public hearings. He added that if, after the process, all concerns had not
been addressed the council could vote it down.
Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to amend with a
substitute motion to direct the City Manager to return to the council with a
resolution to purchase the 77 acres, identified for a community park in
Santa Clara, at fair market value and to include the provision of exercising
eminent domain if necessary.
Speaking to the motion, Councilor Bettman said the one major criterion for purchasing the property was that
there was a willing seller. She asserted the process had moved far from having a willing seller. She felt
%ver-more resources" were being committed to the negotiation of an %xtraordinary, unprecedented deal
with one developer." She asserted that this move had not been a part of the initial directive to the Parks and
Open Space Division.
Councilor Kelly commented that he was aware of the imbalance in park facilities in the community. He
strongly wanted to see a community park developed in Santa Clara. He thought the proposed swap had
become more complex. He expressed concern that the City was negotiating from a position of a disadvan-
tage. He supported the amendment and recommended that the City make a straight offer for acquisition of
the 77 acres. He added that, given that it would benefit the community and that no one would lose their
home, he was not entirely opposed to exercising eminent domain.
Councilor Solomon disagreed that the issue was complex or that the City was disadvantaged in any way.
She could not imagine a better deal for the City as it was proposed that the City would swap land that was
not viable for housing for land that was viable and was also getting 77 acres for a park. She commented
that whatever profit was gained and who gained it had nothing to do with the council's decision.
Councilor Meisner earnestly supported development of a park in Santa Clara. He felt the current incarna-
tion of the deal had become much more complicated as the City was adding to the UGB substantially in
return for 77 acres of park land and the opportunity to purchase Moon Mountain property. He asked if
there were other parcels in the Santa Clara area that might have willing sellers.
Andrea Riner, Planning Manager for the Parks and Open Spaces Division, stated that the parcel in question
was the ideal site for a park of this proposed size.
Councilor Meisner liked the concept, but wanted to look at all of the options. He asked how the acreage fit
into the work of the Region 2050 effort. He asked how the council could look at such things in a compre-
hensive way, adding that he did not expect the response at the present meeting.
Councilor Pap~ agreed that the park was needed, but recalled that the transaction was to trade some
property and change the UGB. He asked how it had become more complex. Ms. Riner responded that one
complexity was the council's requirement that more protections be added to the Laurel Hill Valley site. She
said the division moved forward on negotiations to acquire the property. She clarified that 100 acres were
being acquired and 30 more acres were being donated as a conservation easement.
Councilor Pap~ noted that the main motion did not include much initial outlay of public money. He asked
where funding would come from to pay for the amended motion. Ms. Riner responded that it would come
from the 1998 bond measure for park land acquisition.
In response to another question from Councilor Pap~, Ms. Riner stated that, should the City pursue the
eminent domain purchase of the 77-acre property, it would cost in excess of $3.5 million and approximately
$2 million for the 100-acre purchase.
Councilor Pap~ said he would not support the amendment.
Councilor Nathanson commented that the motion on the table represented a ~major change in direction."
She opposed making such a change until staff could provide detailed information on the pros and cons of
taking this new direction. She expressed concern regarding what would happen to the land in the south hills.
She was not willing to support the motion until it was studied further.
Councilor Taylor felt this was not an appropriate item for the Consent Calendar. She also did not think it
was appropriate for staff to have spent so much time on the item. She commented that she needed more
information on the pros and cons of the deal to base a decision upon and reiterated her concern regarding
removal of agricultural lands.
Mayor Torrey stated that the council did instruct staff to bring back a proposal and staff had done so. He
felt Mr. Dafoe had made a valid point and he supported the inclusion of language that would address his
concerns. He said, through the council's content discussion, legislative intent would be determined. He
surmised that, should the amendment pass, the City would have acquired 77 acres outside of the UGB and
would not be able to develop the infrastructure for the park.
Mr. Klein affirmed this. He said a Metro Plan amendment would still have to be passed in order to develop
the land.
Mayor Torrey remarked that there was benefit in having a community discussion on this. He called it a
~tremendously needed" park development. He indicated he would vote against the amendment in the event
of a tie.
Councilor Kelly offered a friendly amendment to add at the end of the mo-
tion the following language:
;;... and to initiate the necessary Metro Plan amendment to include the
77 acres within the urban growth boundary."
Councilor Bettman accepted the friendly amendment.
In response to a question from Councilor Kelly, Ms. Riner said the reason there was only funding for 19
acres and not 40 acres at this time was that the money had been dedicated for such a purchase ten years ago
and the land costs had increased.
Councilor Kelly had no problem with the profit the developer made on the swap, but was concerned with the
total cost and benefit to the community. He related that Laurel Hill residents were very nervous about this
deal. He recalled presentation provided to the council in November, which had indicated that more public
meetings would be held, but this had not happened. Regarding Mr. Dafoe's concern, he was uncertain how
his situation would be mitigated once 1,000 residential units were built in the area. He recommended the
motion be brought back as a straight acquisition of the 77 acres for the park.
Councilor Meisner said he was prepared to support the amendment based upon what he had heard.
However, he felt many questions had been raised.
Councilor Meisner, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to postpone fur-
ther discussion of the item until July 12.
Councilor Nathanson asked if the delay would benefit or hurt the City in the property acquisition. Mr.
Taylor replied that it did not make it better. He expressed his preference for the council to agree with the
recommended negotiation. He felt holding the item delayed the acquisition. Councilor Nathanson asked
staff to provide information on how this was affecting the assessed value.
Councilor Bettman asked if there were other unwilling sellers who may have been interested in offered
similar benefits. She noted that originally a 40-acre park was being sought, and now the proposal included
77 acres and the acquisition of Moon Mountain as well. She felt there should be a comparison to what other
opportunities were available and also with the changed criteria. She wanted to know the cost of staff
resources invested on this item to date, and how much more the cost was projected to be.
Councilor Taylor asked what the property was currently worth. She also wondered why the City was not
pursuing a purchase of 40 acres as had been originally planned.
In response to a question from Councilor Kelly, Mayor Torrey recommended submitting questions via email.
Councilor Pap6 expressed concern about the credibility of the City organization. He felt the City ;;moved all
over the map" in its decisions. Mr. Taylor responded that it was an important community decision and more
information would benefit the decision process.
Roll call vote; the motion to table passed, 6:2; Councilors Bettman and
Solomon voting in opposition.
Mayor Torrey called for a ten-minute break. The City Council reconvened at 9:10 p.m.
3. PUBLIC HEARING:
2004 Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Facilities Plan and 20-Year Project
List
Peter Ruffler, Public Works Wastewater Division director, noted that Metropolitan Wastewater Manage-
ment Commission (MWMC) members were available to respond to questions.
Mr. Ruffler explained that the MWMC was comprised of members representing the three jurisdictions. He
said the City of Springfield had held a public hearing on the facility plan and project list on May 17 and had
adopted the plan on the same day and the Lane County Board of Commissioners held a work session on the
facilities plan and project list on May 19, a public hearing on June 9, and were scheduled to take action on
June 23.
Mr. Ruffler requested that the following be entered into the record:
· A letter from Michael Kortinhoff, Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) manager, water
quality permit section, addressed to the Lane County Board of Commissioners regarding the
MWMC facilities plan;
· A memorandum from MWMC member Susie Smith and himself to the Lane County Board of
Commissioners on peak wastewater flows in response to the public hearing held before the
commissioners;
· A letter from Dave Jewett, attorney for the MWMC, Meg Kieran, attorney for the City of
Springfield, and Jerome Lidz, City Attorney for Eugene, on the subject of MWMC processes,
dated May 27, 2004;
· A letter from Matt Noesan, project manager, and Mark Lazwell, of CH2M Hill, on the subject
of MWMC systems development charge (SDC) methodology;
· A memorandum from Ms. Smith and himself to the Mayor and City Council on the council as-
signment response to request for information on MWMC public involvement notification activi-
ties;
· Examples of project allocations, MWMC SDC update prepared by CH2M Hill on June 14,
2004;
· Typical costs for residents wastewater utility rate and SDC survey prepared by Eugene, Spring-
field, and CH2M Hill;.
· An email response from Mr. Jewett, MWMC legal counsel, to Roxie Cuellar, president of the
Homebuilders Association of Lane County, providing answers to questions submitted by her;
· The contractual agreement between the MWMC and CH2M Hill, consultant technical services
to the update of the MWMC facilities plan and redesign work.
Mr. Ruffler noted that the Lane Board of County Commissioners held the record open until June 16 at 5
p.m., and he encouraged the City Council to do the same.
Given the lack of time for staff to respond to questions, Councilor Kelly asked how council questions would
be addressed. Mr. Taylor suggested the councilors submit questions by email, with copies to all councilors,
and staff would answer the questions also providing copies to all councilors.
Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing.
Anne Ballew, 225 5th Street, Springfield, chair of the MWMC, said there was a need for a new facilities
plan as it was 27 years old and the facility itself was 20 years old. The commission, made up of elected and
appointed citizens from the cities of Springfield and Eugene and from Lane County, saw a need to evaluate
the whole plan. She related that the commission's consultant, CH2M Hill, and staff had worked diligently to
produce the plan, designed to meet new national pollution discharge elimination system requirements. She
noted the new elements the facility was required to address, the ammonia, the temperature of effluent in the
warmer part of the year, and a status quo on discharged solid waste. Additionally, she said the plan had to
improve the ability to handle stream flow increases in wet weather periods and accommodate future
population increases and possible businesses that would settle here.
Ms. Ballew reported that numerous opportunities for public involvement had been provided. She stated that
the commission had spent many hours reviewing the document before the council. She recommended the
council adopt the MWMC Facilities Plan and 20-Year Project List.
Walt Myer, 3982 Brae Burn Drive, citizen appointee to the MWMC and Eugene resident, stated that the
City had a responsibility to plan, build, and operate wastewater treatment facilities so that wastewater
discharged into the river was clean and protected the river. He asserted the facilities plan laid out such a
plan. He shared that he worked for an environmental engineering firm that worked in many of the counties
in Oregon. He assured the council that the plan before it was the right plan and met important goals. He
said it would allow the City to protect the river and would plan for growth. He underscored that the plan
maximized existing investment. Many of the improvements were retrofits and fixes of facilities. He urged
support for the plan.
Charles Biggs, 540 Antelope Way, expressed his uncertainty as to whether this was the right plan for the
area. He related that the public hearings were held at 7:30 a.m. and were not well attended. He felt this
hampered public input.
Mr. Biggs thought the gravel facility north of Beltline Road, rumored to be closing, could be utilized as a
bio-swale which would reduce the temperature and act as another filter. He recommended the council
oppose the plan.
Joshua Skov, 2089 Garfield Street, said he was a member of the SDC committee, a citizen of Eugene, and a
business owner. He noted his comments would address both items subject to public hearings. He stated that
the proposed facility would protect the quality of life in that it addressed continued population growth. He
underscored that the MWMC had met its charge as it had done %xcellent work" in engaging a number of
constituencies. If some views had not prevailed, it was not due to lack of representation. He called the
SDCs low by any current standard and said every comparable community in Oregon had higher SDCs. He
attributed the lack of higher SDCs to the past good work of the MWMC. He felt the current SDCs to be
abnormally low and, as such, they provided poor context for comparison to the proposed changes to the
SDC methodology. He supported ~getting on with the improvements."
Judy Volta, 91070 South Willamette Street, Mayor of Coburg, spoke in support of the MWMC 20-Year
Project List. She noted that Coburg had a population of 2,000, but employed 3,500. She related that it was
one of the last cities of its size in the state that did not have its own wastewater system. Industries ran on
septic systems. She said Coburg had recently been declared a regional groundwater management area due to
nitrate contamination. She shared that Coburg had participated in the annual United Front lobbying trip to
Washington, DC, and its representatives were asked if the area was working as a region to solve the
problem. Ms. Volta stated that, out of necessity, Coburg was working on a stand-alone wastewater facility.
She conveyed the desire of Coburg to work with the region to resolve wastewater issues. She said assurance
had been received from the Governor's Economic Revitalization Team that it would look for funding for a
feasibility study to look into the possibilities and whether it would be a good idea for Coburg be a part of the
MWMC. She asked the council to allow this discussion to take place. She emphasized that Coburg was
willing to pay its way and was projected to only raise the amount of effluent by one percent.
Roxie Cuellar, 2053 Laura Street, representing the Lane County Home Builders Association, submitted
testimony in writing. She alleged the facilities plan was tied too closely to SDCs. She predicted the addition
of Coburg would affect the project list and, as such, thought a decision should be deferred until it was
known whether Coburg would join. She thought the SDC issue could be settled without the facilities plan.
She asserted the public had not adequately weighed in on the plan and urged the City Council to call for
more public examination of it. Ms. Cuellar asserted that the community was only just getting involved.
Mike Hudson, 2760 Chuckanut Street, spoke as the City administrator for Coburg. He echoed the
comments of Ms. Volta, and reiterated the desire of Coburg to be a part of a new facility. He suggested that
Coburg could hold back its flow during peak hours if necessary. He said it was ecologically and economi-
cally appropriate for a partnership. He stressed that Coburg had no interest in "punching a hole" in the
urban growth boundary (UGB). He noted that the community of Turner had successfully formed a regional
wastewater district with the City of Salem.
Terry Connolly, 1401 Willamette Street, Chamber of Commerce, asserted that the MWMC Facilities Plan
and 20-Year Project List were very complex and technical. He said, post review of the plan, the chamber
was uncertain whether the plan was too much, too little, or too soon. As such, the chamber did not support
or oppose the project list, but was not indifferent to it as the $144 million price tag was the type of
infrastructure expense that warranted the attention of the chamber and of the public. He listed questions that
could illustrate items needing explanation before the public, as follows:
· How often does the region currently fail to meet 100 percent peak wet weather flow treatment
and would any of those occurrences have required a capacity expansion anywhere near the
magnitude of the 102 million gallons per day called for by the MWMC Facilities Plan?
· Is DEQ requiring the MWMC to build to the worst case scenario that may never occur and, if
so, have those assumptions been challenged?
· In terms of capacity size and system performance relative to population and total number of us-
ers, does the MWMC plan exceed, do less than, or be on par with what other communities were
having to do?
Mr. Connelly related the chamber's request that the council get as much information as it needed to make an
informed decision, given that the plan represented a substantial investment.
Craig Costello, 481 Ventura Street, expressed great respect for the MWMC Facilities Plan and hope that
Coburg could be a partner in it.
Phil Barnhart, 182 Sunset Drive, State Representative for House District 11, spoke in support of Coburg's
position on the issue of the potential expansion of the MWMC to include it. He called Coburg an "economic
engine" for the area with people moving back and forth over the "artificial boundaries" created by
government all of the time. He urged the city councils of Eugene and Springfield and the Lane Board of
County Commissioners to consider an expansion, over the course of this project, to include the City of
Coburg. He felt a pipeline between Coburg and Eugene would not be a difficult undertaking and would
ultimately provide cost savings.
Diana Abernathey, 2620 Oak Street, expressed appreciation for the councilors' service to the community.
She averred there may not be adequate protection of the water quality of the Willamette River. She urged
support for the plan before the council. A great deal of money had already been spent in determining
technical options, costing them out, and selecting the best of them. She called the process efficient and
effective and said the staff members, with input from citizen advisors, had selected the least cost alternative
that would meet the new federal guide lines. She commented that, while some complain of the high cost of
the proposed infrastructure, the health of the river was priceless. Ms. Abernathey termed it shocking to
consider that the City would plan to violate the discharge permit and pay the fines. She called this "highly
irresponsible stewardship." She stated that, due to a history of effective and forward-thinking planning of
infrastructure, the current SDC rates were among the lowest in the State. She underscored that the best plan
had been identified and any "foot-dragging" would only result in a greater cost to the public.
Steve Greenwood, 2169 Essex Lane, introduced himself as a former State regulator and a member of the
Willamette Restoration Initiative Board of Directors and a public policy consultant. He echoed the last
speaker's sentiments and underscored that all of the effluent eventually went into the river. He stated that
much of the Willamette River had very poor quality as defined by DEQ standards, with some areas of the
main stem violating the levels for temperature, bacteria, and mercury levels. He stated that significant
regulatory changes had taken place since 1977 and it was time to update the MWMC Facilities Plan.
Regarding the cost, he agreed that $144 million sounded like a lot of money, but emphasized that it was in
line with what other communities were spending. He added that, as a professional in the field, he found the
staff and organization of the MWMC was one that tried to reduce their costs as much as possible.
Camilla Pratt, 120 Westbrook Way, explained that she had served on a citizen advisory committee for the
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan for two years. She related that the committee had studied many
aspects of the plan and, in addition to meeting the requirements of State and Federal agencies, the committee
was concerned with the fairness of the plan, including its ability to be understood by various customer
classes and its ability to be administered effectively. She stated that the plan, completed in 2001, had been
adopted by the MWMC and the cities of Eugene and Springfield. Since then, she said several more years of
careful investigation and analysis had been invested in other aspects of the MWMC Facilities Plan and 20-
Year Project List. She called it the obligation and responsibility of Eugene to ensure a high quality water
resource for the needs of all downstream users.
Larry Gnnn, 32555 Beymer Road, spoke in support of the MWMC Facilities Plan. He opined that the cost
seemed reasonable and that it seemed the time was right for the council to endorse the plan. He recom-
mended doing the work now and not in the future when it would cost more.
Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing.
Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to keep the
record open until June 16 at 5 p.m. Roll call vote; the motion passed
unanimously, 8:0.
4. PUBLIC HEARING:
Proposed Modifications to Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission Regional
Wastewater System Development Charge Methodology and Rates
Resolution 4791 Adopting Amended Systems Development Charge Methodology For Regional
Wastewater System; Amending Resolution No. 4740; and Repealing Resolution No. 4776; and
Resolution 4792 Adopting Amended Systems Development Charge Rates for Regional Waste-
water System and Amending Resolution No. 4740
Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing.
Anne Ballew, 225 5th Street, speaking on behalf of the MWMC, explained that the commission had
convened a citizen advisory committee, hired a consultant, and held open public meetings in late 2003 and
2004 to arrive at an equitable and well-reasoned method for charging growth for its share in capacity
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)