Coburg MWMC - Laserfiche WebLink

New Search

sufficient background to fully understand and respond to it. Just as an example, the letter describes Coburg's proposal for what they can afford to pay, how they expect to be charged and their conclusions about the resultant impacts to other MWMC customers. It would be difficult, if not impossible, for the elected officials to respond to Coburg's information and proposal without staff's assessment of its accuracy and whether it meets the guidelines set forth by the elected officials (i.e., that existing users should not subsidize the connection of Coburg to the system). Staff believe that such a meeting would simply frustrate the elected officials, because they already have directed staff to bring back the necessary information to support their policy discussion. We recognize that Coburg is anxious to move forward with this process, and we look forward to conducting the study work requested by the JEOs. We also recognize that Coburg has real environmental issues to contend with and that they believe a connection to the MWMC system would be acost-effective, environmentally beneficial approach to resolving along-standing problem. However, Coburg, the elected officials, and SEL need to recognize that the current priority is to meeting the needs of existing customers and maintaining compliance with applicable laws and regulations. In this regard, MWMC is already a year behind in implementing the 2004 Facilities plan for the Eugene/Springfield Water Pollution Control Facility, which means that we may have increasing difficulties over the next several years meeting our regulatory discharge limits. The discharge permit violations that occurred this May are examples of problems that will be addressed for the existing Eugene-Springfield customers if we can relieve the obstacles to moving forward with the necessary construction. If we are not able to focus the necessary resources toward getting the construction program back on schedule, we will have increasing probabilities of violating permit requirements, and can look forward to the possibility of fines, enforcement actions and third party law suits. Therefore, in order to efficiently and respectfully move forward in support of getting Coburg an answer, leadership and accountability are needed at the highest levels to avoid further delays and inefficiencies in implementing the Facilities Plan which was approved by all of the governing bodies in MWMC. RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION The issues involved in evaluating the costs and impacts of a Coburg connection to the regional wastewater system, whether such a connection would be supported by the governing bodies, and how it could be enabled are many and complex. Without the scoping analysis requested by the elected officials last year, they would not have the basis for a discussion on this matter. The letter that would be provided by Coburg is positional and presumptive of certain assumptions that would raise debate among the parties at a JEO meeting if staff were requested to respond. This would set an unfortunate tenor for the discussion, and staff believe that an objective report of the parameters and a possible path forward would increase the opportunity for a constructive and fruitful discussion by the elected officials. If further delays in implementing the MWMC Facilities Plan and financing tools can be avoided, staff can complete the work requested by the JEOs by late this Summer. This schedule supports a JEO meeting late August or early September. It does not appear to staff that this matter is ripe for further SEL discussion at this time, because the work that was directed by the JEOs, and subsequently SEL, has not been completed. We anticipate that scheduling a meeting in August for SEL to review staff's work product and determine a date for the JEO meeting would be appropriate. It is requested that no other action be taken on this matter at this time.