New Search
Comment 2: Charles Biggs expressed concerns with the facility planning and <br /> funding structure underlying the proposed increase. He felt more analysis was <br /> needed of the mix of funding sources to be used to meet project funding needs. He <br /> had seen a presentation on the MWMC Facilities Plan and felt that more cost- <br /> effective solutions to handling peak flows existed. He also questioned the validity of <br /> the magnitude of needs identified by consultants working on the facility planning <br /> project, perceiving a conflict of interest for a consultant whose recommendations <br /> could result in more work for themselves. He criticized public hearings being held at <br /> 7:30 AM and noon and felt hearings should be in the evening so that more of the <br /> public could attend. He asked that the period for public comment be extended by <br /> two weeks. <br /> Comment 3: Larry Hale expressed concern about the proposed increase. He had <br /> watched the Lane County meeting and felt the County was being stampeded into <br /> projects that may not be needed. He felt that projects were being characterized as <br /> rehabilitation when they were for new facilities and capacity. He contended that <br /> sewer overflows were not actually raw sewage going to the river but were treated <br /> wastewater. He questioned the need for increases related to the timing of projects <br /> and felt funds would be over-collected to create a "slush fund". He felt the City <br /> should think the rates over more completely as the targeted funds were really not <br /> needed. <br /> Comment 4: Peyton Liewellen explained that he was planning to open some <br /> laundry businesses in the area and in checking on proposed rates felt that the <br /> increase was very substantial. His understanding from talking with "EWEB" (utility <br /> customer service) staff was that the increase for hypothetical laundry customer with <br /> 100k gal consumption per month would be 40% or approximately $100. This was a <br /> large impact to such a business and he was uncertain if it was justified. <br /> Findincts: The fee increases have been calculated based on the revenue needs of <br /> the City in providing the services and after review of the recommendation of the <br /> Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission. The above comments do not <br /> provide information that would warrant changing the proposed fees. In addition, <br /> given the significant amount of public notice and media attention around the <br /> proposed increase, there is no need for extending the public comment period. <br /> Therefore, no changes are being made to the proposed fees as a result of these <br /> comments. <br /> Although no changes are being made to the proposed fees as a result of public <br /> testimony, during the comment period staff noticed that a typographical error had been <br /> made on the Notice that had been posted and published for the proposed fee for High <br /> Strength Customer for MWMC. The fee should have been 3.127 rather than 2.127 and <br /> <br /> Administrative Order -Page 2 <br /> C:\Documents and Settings\cewakjl\L.ocal Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK16C\04WastewaterUserFees - 2 ao (l)0087419).DOC <br /> <br />