New Search
Two scenarios are provided for discussion purposes. The scenarios would require significantly <br /> different levels of resources made available by MWMC and regional wastewater staff to support <br /> and be accountable to Coburg and its customers. They would result in significantly different <br /> .levels of intergovernmental coordination and public policy accountability. It should be noted <br /> recent and past experience amending the MWMC IGA, or creating new agreements to provide <br /> service (i.e., the previously proposed Short Mountain Leachate connection), informs us that <br /> development and approval of IGAs by all parties on MWMC-related matters can be time <br /> consuming and resource intensive. This is reflected in the estimated time frame and costs for <br /> developing and adopting amendments to the MWMC IGA, as well as creating new IGAs, which <br /> are provided in Attachment A. <br /> .Scenario 1: Coburg as a Customer Under a Service AEreement <br /> This scenario would require minor modifications. to the IGA to allow for MWMC to serve <br /> customers (such as Coburg) other than the paztners to the IGA and outside the UGB under a <br /> defined set of circumstances that comply with all applicable state laws and Metro Plan policies. <br /> .Coburg would not be a signator to the MWMC wastewater discharge permit and would not have <br /> a role in developing MWMC policies, plans, budgets or user chazges. The City of Coburg would <br /> - be billed monthly for its combined discharge and would be responsible to provide all services, <br /> public information and accountability to individual Coburg sewer users. Coburg would be <br /> obligated to provide all necessary flow metering, monitoring, and analytical data necessary for <br /> 1VIWMC to determine flows, strengths, and compliance with regulatory requirements. <br /> This scenario would require the least amount of time and resources on the part of the MWIVIC <br /> partner agencies to implement both initially and in the long term. It would place the <br /> responsibility for customer accountability and services within the City of Coburg organization,. <br /> and would make Coburg's relationship to MWMC similar to other regulated Significant <br /> Industrial Users (SIUs) within the service azea. This scenario would require an IGA between <br /> MWMC and Coburg, which would outline the obligations and commitments of Coburg as <br /> conditions of being provided wastewater services. Additional IGAs also could be developed to <br /> enable contracted services to be provided to Coburg at the City's request. <br /> Scenario 2: Coburg as a Limited Partner <br /> This scenazio would require negotiations among the Governing Bodies to determine an <br /> appropriate/acceptable level. of partnership Coburg would be extended, and the attendant levels <br /> of accountability, intergovernmental coordination, involvement in MWMC matters, and <br /> liabilities. Regional wastewater program staffing, budgets and review time frames would need <br /> to be expanded to serve MWMC administration and procedural requirements of the Coburg <br /> organization and City Council as a member organization. The issues that would need to be <br /> addressed under this scenario include, but are not limited to: <br /> • Appropriate representation on the Commission or other means of accountability; . <br /> • Level of Eugene-Springfield staff involvement and/or ongoing coordination and <br /> provision of public information and basic customer services to Coburg customers; <br /> • Coburg's role in development and/or review of MWMC policies, plans, budgets, and user <br /> charges and how to recover the costs .and address the impacts of this level of involvement <br /> if it is disproportionate to the customer base served; <br /> • Coburg's responsibilities and liabilities regarding the NPDES permit; and <br /> <br /> f. <br /> City Council page 451 ~ Page 15 <br /> <br />