HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence Miscellaneous 5/27/2004
"
,
MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY
I I
DATE:
May 27,2004
TO:
Interested Persons
FROM:
Dave Jewett
Attorney for MWMC
Meg Kieran
Attorney for City of Springfield
Jerome Lidz
Attorney for City of Eugene
SUBJECT:
MWMC Processes
The Home Builders Association's (HBA) complaint about the processes employed by MWMC to
seek elected officials' approval for needed improvements to the regional sewerage facilities
arises out of flawed assumptions about the statutory framework for government actions
regarding the provision of public facilities for wastewater conveyance and treatment and their
funding with System Development Charges,
Backaround:
MWMC was formed by a 1977 IGA between Eugene, Springfield and Lane County to construct,
operate, maintain and update regional sewerage facilities (Regional Facilities), MWMC is
governed by seven commissioners appointed by the Governing Bodies, three of whom are
elected officials of the Governing Bodies,
MWMC constructed the Regional Facilities with about $115,000,000 in federal grants and local
matching funds based on a facilities plan that was developed by MWMC's consultant, CH2M Hill,
in 1979 (208 Plan). Pursuant to state and federal rules, the 208 Plan planned the Regional
Facilities to have a design life of 20 years. The Regional Facilities opened in 1984, Since then,
the community has invested several million dollars more in preserving and upgrading the
Regional Facilities. '
While MWMC operates the Regional Facilities pursuant to a NPDES Permit issued by DEQ
(Permit), the Permit implements federal and state discharge requirements to protect the water
quality of the Willamette River. For several years it has been clear that, without significant
improvements, the Regional Facilities will soon be incapable of accommodating projected metro
area growth while meeting the discharge requirements of the Permi!. The driving factors include
the need to manage peak flows to the Water Pollution Control Facility, to properly dispose of
residuals and to meet new Permit requirements governing the temperature and ammonia levels
of discharges to the Willamette River. Date Received
MAY 27,Of
Planner: BJ
(Joc.84616)
MWMC Memorandum re: process
May 21, 2004
Page 2
Determining the scope of the needs, planning to address them and funding their cost is complex.
The HBA's complaint about the processes employed by MWMC oversimplifies and misstates the
rules that govern the processes,
MWMC 2004 Facilities Plan:
The MWMC 2004 Facilities Plan is a comprehensive 20-year facility plan that replaces the 208
Plan, However, the 2004 Facilities Plan is the product of a long, multi-phased planning process
that has involved significant public involvement, including three citizen advisory committees, It is
an outgrowth of and combines and updates prior studies such as the 1997 Master Plan, the 1997
Biosolids Management Plan, the 1997 Systems Development Charge Methodology Update, the
2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan, and the 2003 Management Plan for a Dedicated
Biosolids land Application Site. The previous:plans were reviewed by MWMC, the public, and
the Governing Bodies and have provided the basis for the annual MWMC Capital Improvements
Program (CIP) since their adoption, Of the $144,000,000 in projects currently anticipated in the
2004 Facilities Plan, $100,000,000 in projects are carried forward from the prior plans, MWMC
has proceeded to implement each of the projects and policies in the plans, which has been
reflected in each annual MWMC budget and CIP.'
Several key planning considerations were factored into the completion of the 2004 Facilities
Plan. Among them was the implementation of recommendations from Citizen Advisory
Committees that represented diverse community interests, values and involvement and which
had been adopted by MWMC as. plans and policies. The City Councils have also adopted the
Wet Weather Flow Management Plan, The 2004 Facilities Plan also needed to factor in new
regulatory limitations DEQ included in the Permit. This factor caused some modifications to the
type and phasing of already planned projects, and resulted in $44,000,000 in additional projects
over twenty years. The 2004 Facilities Plan was adopted by MWMC on May 6, 2004 after a
number of public meetings and two public hearings, MWMC chose to refer it to the Governing
Bodies for concurrence pursuant to Section 3 of the IGA.
land Use Plannina:
The proposed upgrades to the wastewater treatment facilities system are to be done at three
different locations including the Water Pollution Control Facility, the residuals site and the
beneficial reuse site as well as upgrades to pump stations serving the primary collection system
at three separate locations, Since the Metro Plan did not include wastewater among the list of
services to develop within the UGB and did not identify the wastewater treatment facility system,
MWMC proposed a number of amendments to the Metro Plan to correct the omissions, In
addition, MWMC proposed a number of changes to the Public Facilities and Services Plan to
correct similar omissions and make this functional plan internally consistent with ,the Metro Plan,
Consistency was to be achieved by inserting various tables and maps identifying the six overall
projects and showing their location as well as including a condition assessment for MWMC's
treatment and primary collection system. The proposed amendments to the Metro Plan and the
PFSP were submitted for consideration by the Governing Bodies' planning commissions and
subsequently by all three Governing Bodies as required by the Springfield Developme~ Received
the Eugene Code, and the lane Code, That process is continuing with its attendant p&dl2-Lv
. MAY 2 7 16f
(doc,84616)
Planner: BJ
.... ,
MWMC Memorandum re: process
May 21, 2004
Page 3
meetings and hearings,
Svstem DeveloDment Charaes:
MWMC has had a SDC since 1991. The methodology that is the basis for the current SDC was
adopted in 1997. In June 2003, partly in resP9nse to concerns expressed by HBA. MWMC
directed staff to retain a consultant and form a CAC to review the 1997 Methodology and
recommend changes, Home Builders designated a representative who participated on the CAC.
The consultant, CH2M Hill,and the CAC recommended changes to the 1997 Methodology, On
April 1 , 2004, MWMC adopted a revised methodology after a number,of public meetings and a
public hearing (Proposed SDC Methodology),
. <.,
ORS 223.297 to .223.314 governs SDCs. ORS 223,309( 1 ) requires the adoptioh of a facilities
plan and a capital improvements list prior to the establishment of a SDC. The pertinent MWMC
resolution states thatthe 2004 Facilities Plan including the 20-year project list are being adopted
to provide the facilities plan and list of capital improvements that are required by ORS
223.309(1). ORS 223,314 provides that the establishment, modification and implementation of a
system developmentcharge,and a facilities plan and list adopted pursuant to ORS 223,309 are
not land use decisions pursuant to ORS chapters 195 and 197, "
Pursuantto Section 30f the IGA, MWMC referred the.Proposed SDC Methodology and the 2004
Facility Plan and' Iisttothei Cities of Eug~ne and Springfield for implementation through their
respe9tive City Codes in accordance with theSDC statute and applicable city code procedures.
That process is continuing, ! ' '
Conclusion:
Three separate processes are involved in MWMC:s effort to obtain the Governing Bodies'
approvals necessary to plan, site and fund the improvements that are necessary so the Regional
Facilities can continue to meet federal and state er:lVironmental standards governing wastewater
discharges to the Willamette River as well as the disposition and beneficial reuse of residuals,
For the reasons explained'above, HBAs' complaint inappropriately combines and misstates the
processes involved with which MWMC has fully complied. "
(doc,84616) ,
Date Received
MAY 27,0~
Planner: BJ