I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O
EUGENE WATER & ELECTRIC BOARD Public AffairsTO: Commissioner Farmer, Brown, Cassidy, Cunningham and Ernst
FROM: Jeannine Parisi and Patty Boyle April 28, 2009
RE: City of Eugene Rate Changes
Recently, staff supplied you with information regarding future rate changes for City fees that appear on EWEB billing statements (see April 14 memo from Patty Boyle). This memo addresses several billing-related issues that were raised at the last Board meeting.
As of July 1, 2009, the City Manager will amend the fee schedule for both stormwater and wastewater charges. A five percent increase is planned for stormwater fees, which for medium residential customers, will result in a $.42 increase to that portion of their monthly bill. A more significant change is associated with local and regional wastewater charges. A 24 percent increase is planned for local wastewater charges, and an 18.1 percent increase was adopted by the
Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) for sanitary sewer service. Together, these fees will add an additional $4.68 per month to a typical residential billing. The EWEB July billing insert will provide customers with more information about these rate
adjustments and EWEB’s role as billing agent.
The City continues to consider strategies to address on-going funding deficiencies for the operations and maintenance of the local transportation system. In the past, the City and EWEB have discussed a transportation utility franchise fee as a potential new revenue source for operations and maintenance of city roads, bike paths and sidewalks. The most efficient and economical way for the City to apply a transportation fee would be as part of EWEB’s billing process. Attached is a memo from the City Manager to Randy Berggren providing the current status and background on transportation maintenance funding within the City of Eugene. The City Manager is interested in opening a dialogue with the Board regarding interagency collaboration on the issue.
More recently, the City has considered two other road funding alternatives: a transportation surcharge to commercial garbage haulers, with no impact to EWEB’s billing statements, and an 8% right-of-way fee applied to the revenues collected to support the city’s stormwater and
wastewater system. The City held a public hearing on the garbage hauler transportation surcharge on April 20. The following week, the City Council voted against adopting the surcharge, which
Regarding the proposed right of way fee, the City has chosen to defer action on this strategy to a future date. However, an ordinance amendment was developed that would allow a one-time transfer of stormwater and wastewater reserves to the road fund for the 2010 fiscal year (with no impact to EWEB billing). The ordinance amendment also included a forward looking provision that enables consideration of the value for use/occupancy of the City right of way when setting
wastewater and stormwater rates, and to apply this portion of the fee to road maintenance activities. This ordinance amendment passed unanimously. Staff has shared this ordinance with legal counsel for review.
Please don’t hesitate to contact either of us if you have questions regarding this topic.
City Manager’s Office
City of Eugene
777 Pearl Street, Room 105 Eugene, Oregon 97401-2793 (541) 682-5010
(541) 682-5414 FAX www.eugene-or.gov
Date: April 24, 2009
To: Randy Berggren, General Manager, EWEB
From: Jon R. Ruiz, City Manager, City of Eugene
Subject: Update on Strategies to Maintain Street Service Levels in Eugene
As you know, over the past several years, the City has been working to develop solutions to the serious transportation funding challenges in our community. We’re not alone in this issue. With the decline in state and federal support, communities across Oregon face similar funding
challenges. The purpose of this memo is to share with you and the members of your Board Eugene’s current approach, forecast our likely next steps, and request your insights.
Overview of Road Repair Backlog
Over the past decade Eugene’s road repair backlog has grown from $30 million to roughly $173 million. Several strategies have been implemented since 2003 to address the backlog. In August 2003, the City began collecting a 3-cent-per-gallon local fuel tax. In 2005, the Council increased the fuel tax to 5 cents, with a sunset provision on the additional 2 cents that expires in 2011. In November 2007, an ordinance to increase the fuel tax to 8 cents was rejected by voters. Eugene currently receives about $3 million annually from the 5-cent fuel tax.
In November 2008, voters approved a $35.9 million bond measure dedicated to 32 specific street repair projects. Bond-funded street repairs will begin this summer and will continue over the next five years. In the spring 2009, the Budget Committee decided to allocate $1 million in general resources for two years to fix potholes. We recently learned that the City will receive $3 million in one-time economic stimulus funds for four specific street repair projects.
Even with these efforts, the level of ongoing funding is insufficient to keep up with street repairs. Without new ongoing funding, we anticipate that the backlog of street repairs will continue to grow.
Overview of Road Operations Deficit
In addition to the street capital repair backlog, the city is also incurring growing operational deficits in our road operations fund. State gas tax revenue, the primary resource for local road operations, has stagnated. In addition, county revenue sharing, which once provided $2.5 million for city road operations, has been discontinued. Recent operating deficits have drawn down fund
2
balance to the point that, without new revenue in FY10, we would need to reduce traditional city street services by roughly one-third.
In an effort to close this gap and keep street services intact for next year , this month Council has been considering a 5% surcharge on solid waste haulers, and a one- time use of fund balance from the local stormwater and wastewater funds. Council has also directed that $1.4 million in local gas tax be redirected in FY10 to street operations. A public hearing on the surcharge and one-time use of utility resources was held on April 20, and a council decision is scheduled for April 27. These short-term strategies do not represent a comprehensive or sustainable solution, but they would help us maintain street operations services through FY10.
Next Steps
Ultimately, the City is committed to finding locally-controlled, sustainable sources of revenue to address the capital repair backlog and fund ongoing street operations and maintenance services. One of the current priority goals of the City Council’s Transportation Initiative is to “Develop mechanisms to adequately fund Eugene’s transportation system for cars, trucks, bikes and pedestrians, including maintenance and preservation and capital reconstruction.”
In the coming months, Public Works Director Kurt Corey and I will be engaged with the City Council and the community to explore options for comprehensive and sustainable transportation funding. We’ll continue efforts to promote a statewide solution, and we’ll collaborate with regional partners for regional solutions. I’m very interested in opening a dialogue with you and your Board to gather your insights on the issue and explore opportunities for interagency collaboration.
If you have specific questions or would like more detailed information about our road funding needs and goals, I encourage you to contact Kurt Corey and his staff in Public Works
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O
EUGENE WATER & ELECTRIC BOARDEMPLOYEE, CUSTOMER AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DIVISION
TO: Commissioners Farmer, Brown, Cassidy, Cunningham and Ernst FROM: Lisa McLaughlin, Staff Biologist
Cheri Wilson, Associate Engineer DATE: April 28, 2009
RE: Walterville Fish Return Channel Modifications
Issue Statement: Pursuant to the Board’s comments during the April 21, 2009 meeting, the approach for improving the effectiveness of the Walterville Fish Return Channel is provided.
Background: The fish return channel at the Walterville tailrace (Return Channel) is intended to reduce project-related impacts to fish, mainly spring Chinook salmon, by providing access to the McKenzie River below the Walterville tailrace barrier. Observations of salmon holding below the tailrace barrier have raised concerns over the effectiveness of the return channel in guiding fish back to the river. The ineffectiveness of the return channel is likely due to problems with the entrance geometry as well as low velocities through the channel. Since construction in 2002, EWEB has instigated a number of initiatives to remedy the problem including bi-weekly powerplant shut-downs when adult salmon are holding below the tailrace barrier, scheduling the annual maintenance shut-down when it is most beneficial to fish and capital improvements to the river diversion.
In 2008, EWEB retained the service of R2 Resource Consultants, Inc. (R2) to evaluate the existing conditions at the Return Channel, provide a biological and engineering opinion and present three conceptual designs to improve the effectiveness of the channel.
Discussion:
Existing conditions - The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has developed standard criteria to be used in designing fish passage facilities. These criteria were used to assess the existing
conditions.
1. Head Drop at the Return Channel Entrance – At low flow (1,050 cfs in the Walterville bypass reach) head drop at the Fish Entrance is 0.02 ft, below the current NMFS criteria. 2. Transport Channel Velocities – Velocities through the Return Channel are variable and are at
2 3. Attraction Flows – The low Return Channel flow is approximately 6.5% of the high fish
passage flow in the tailrace and meets the current NMFS criteria.
R2 Recommendations – R2 recommends the following for improving fish passage at the Return Channel:
Entrance Modifications – Rebuild the fish entrance to produce a higher velocity jet that extends into the main tailrace channel flow to attract migrating salmon to the entrance.
Return Channel Constrictions – Increase velocities in the Return Channel by constricting cross section in the areas where the channel is currently deep and wide.
Additional Considerations:
License Article 417 & 418
A FERC required upstream passage study (Article 417 & 418) to assess upstream migrating spring Chinook salmon delay through the project was scheduled for summer 2008. The cost of the study is estimated at $638,600. Due to poor salmon returns and concerns regarding injuring fish, the study was delayed by the regulatory agencies until the Willamette River spring Chinook salmon run is forecast at a minimum of 69,000 fish. Although salmon returns to the upper Columbia River are expected to be quite high in 2009 (299,000 fish), the Willamette River (including the McKenzie River) is considered a separate population. Adult returns to the Willamette River were extremely low in 2008 (27,000 fish) and are forecast to be similarly low in 2009 (37,600 fish), well below the 69,000 fish required to obtain a permit to conduct the upstream passage study. The salmon return forecast for 2010 will be available in December, 2009.
Had the study been completed in 2008 or 2009 it could have indicated a problem with fish delay at the Walterville tailrace. EWEB could then be required to address the problem and complete a second study to assess the effectiveness of the repair. It is staff opinion that EWEB should make improvements to the Return Channel prior to conducting the upstream passage study. If the salmon forecast for 2010 reaches the 69,000 fish necessary to trigger the upstream passage study, during consultation with the agencies EWEB will recommend that the study be delayed until the
improvements can be made. Monitoring
During the low Chinook returns in 2008, very few fish were observed holding below the tailrace barrier. This is likely due to a combination of factors; 1) low numbers of fish in the area, 2)
increased flow and velocity in the Return Channel as a result of the realignment of the upstream end of the channel in 2007.
Construction & Continued Maintenance
In fall of 2007, the upstream entrance of the return channel was realigned and a flow control structure was installed. The realignment increased the flow into the channel from 27 cfs to
approximately 142 cfs when the river is at its lowest level, 1050 cfs, and the Walterville Project is at full operation.
During high flow events in winter 2009, a gravel bar developed at the upstream entrance of the return channel. Due to the river morphology of the area, gravel bar formation is common in this reach. Therefore annual maintenance and improvements will be necessary to maintain the desired channel capacity and operate within agency criteria. This work requires annual permitting.
Future work will be needed to address long-term erosion protection to preserve the Flintstone Dike area (See Figure 1). Currently the site is being monitored for erosion via annual survey analysis. This dike provides downstream protection for the channel and aids in preventing overtopping during high flows.
Recommendation: Construct improvements to the Return Channel that bring the channel into compliance with NMFS fish passage engineering criteria.
Staff plans for R2 to complete 30% design in summer 2009 with permitting and agency consultation beginning in late summer. The project is expected to be contracted for bid in late winter 2009, with construction beginning during the annually scheduled Walterville shutdown in June 2010.
Suggested Motions: No motion necessary, for information only. Please feel free to contact Lisa McLaughlin at 344-6311, extension 3304, or lisa.mclaughlin@eweb.org with any further questions about this issue.
4
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O
EUGENE WATER & ELECTRIC BOARD Employee, Community and Customer Service Division
TO: Commissioners Farmer, Brown, Cassidy, Cunningham and Ernst
FROM: Mike Logan, Key Accounts Program Manager April 17, 2009 RE: Federal Economic Stimulus Projects - Update
Issue Statement
Staff has now completed the initial round of submittals to compete for federal funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, commonly known as the “economic stimulus package” signed into law by President Obama earlier this year. We are now providing the Board with an update on our efforts.
Background
To meet the intent of the law to stimulate the economy, the federal government is using existing state programs all over the nation to the fullest extent possible to infuse federal dollars approved under the law. To that end, in the state of Oregon, the two categories receiving the most attention of late in the application process are: (1) the Oregon Department of Energy’s “State Energy Program” or SEP, which is the path for utilities to compete for energy project funding and; (2) the state of Oregon’s Revolving Loan Fund. That fund is administered by the state’s Drinking Water Program (Department of Human Services) and is the path to compete for water infrastructure projects that the Board’s resolution allowed us to pursue on April 7.
Discussion
At this point, both of these funding paths are basically at the project identification stage, and the determination for funding awards won’t occur until later. Here’s a recap of where we are right now:
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Projects: There has been a flurry of activity since ODOE’s
March 30 meeting in Salem that Jason Heuser and I attended, which was the first specifics we learned about in terms of project eligibility and application. For some perspective on the level of competition for these funds, as of March 30, ODOE reported $500 million in proposals had been identified statewide in anticipation of stimulus funds. EWEB’s list of energy efficiency and renewable projects totals nearly $14.6 million (funds requested: $13.5 million). At this point, it is our understanding that Oregon has received $49 million total. On April 15, we submitted 14 energy efficiency and renewable project concepts for consideration under the SEP via the designated ODOE website, which completes the first step to compete for the available funds.
The SEP project concepts we developed were grouped into three categories as follows: Greening of Public Infrastructure:
• Bethel School Energy Efficiency (lighting upgrade)
EWEB Board of Commissioners Page two.
Note: City of Eugene to upgrade heating systems via Energy Efficiency Block Grant funding. City Hall and 858 Pearl Building upgrades are not being pursued by the city at this time). • Hayden Bridge Solar Energy Project (a 300 kW1 PV system) 1kW = kilowatt = standard
measure of electric power = 1000 watts. (Note: kW is a measure of capacity and is often confused and incorrectly used interchangeably with energy, electricity or kilowatt-hour (KWh)).
Green Initiatives for Limited Income:
• HACSA Solar Water Heating Project (Housing & Community Services Agency of Lane County, 20-30 solar water heating projects on qualified limited income housing)
• Manufactured Housing Efficiency (Targets 3,400 housing units for efficiency upgrades) • Multifamily Housing Efficiency (Targets 15,400 multi-family rental units for efficiency
upgrades)
• Parkview Public Housing Solar Project (Solar PV project @ 150 units via HACSA)
• St. Vincent de Paul Energy Efficiency Project (energy efficient space / water heating system @ 35 unit affordable housing project – Donald Lamb Building)
Energizing Green Education:
• Adams Elementary Solar Initiative (solar system with other educational aspects – 13 kW) • Kalapuya High School Solar Project (7.5 kW system along with other energy education
activities)
• Lane Community College Solar and Electric Vehicle Project (80 kW solar PV system, 36 electric vehicle charging stations)
• Climate Masters Educational Series (supports energy efficiency and technology education program developed by OSU Extension Service and University of Oregon)
• Northwest Youth Corp Solar Resource Project (7.5 kW PV project and education program, partnering with Bonneville Environmental Foundation)
Finally, to close on the energy projects, staff has also been coordinating with the city of Eugene on the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grants which is another area in the allocation process the federal government has recently announced funding and application instructions. Under this process, the City of Eugene will receive $1,485,800 out of a total of $33 million that was allocated to all Oregon. cities. While EWEB cannot apply for this funding, we are encouraged that city staff intends to apply a significant portion of their allocated funds for steam conversion purposes.
Water Projects: On April 7, the Board heard our plan for the Revolving Loan Fund, managed under
the state of Oregon’s Drinking Water Program (Department of Human Services). Our water utility staff got the early jump on the federal stimulus funding application effort. For some perspective on the level of competition for these funds, by early February, $338 million in proposals had been identified statewide in anticipation of stimulus funds, including seven EWEB projects totaling $7.3 million. At this point, it is our understanding that Oregon will receive $28.5 million total. To recap, the applications we submitted on April 15 are as follows:
• Advanced Metering Infrastructure (Replace ~50,000 Water Meters)
• Water Metro Intertie (Line extension to accomplish EWEB & SUB system intertie)
• ODOT / I-5 Willamette Bridge Project (Re-locate 2 or 3 water mains)
EWEB Board of Commissioners Page three.
• Hayden Bridge Roof Replacement (Install new membrane roofing system)
• Roosevelt Boulevard Main Replacement (Install 2320 foot long, 12” diameter main)
• Multi-Stream / Trajectory Sprinkler Nozzle Rebates (Water efficiency rebate program)
Next Steps
For the water projects, the applications process is completed and we expect to hear back by May 15 as to whether or not our submittals will be funded.
With respect to our State Energy Program submittals, the next phase as we understand is to submit more detailed proposal descriptions by May 12 to ODOE. The guidelines for preparing those submittals are not yet clear, and we are in the process of seeking clarification from ODOE.
Staff has been awaiting instructions on several categories within the federal appropriation areas. Of particular interest are the following areas we are pursuing:
• $11 billion to modernize the nation’s electric grid, primarily at the transmission level, but includes activities related to “smart grid” technology
o Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI): The planning underway on establishing
two way communications at ~90,000 electric metering points aligns with the federal stimulus criteria in terms of modernizing the nation’s electric infrastructure and positioning our utility for “smart grid” applications, as that technology continues to develop
o Seneca Biomass Project – Transmission Portion: The transmission portion of the
Seneca Biomass project does not have a funding mechanism. All other portions of the project are well positioned. Federal stimulus funds would fill this gap and allow the project to go forward.
• $6 billion for new loan guarantees aimed at renewable-energy projects such as wind or solar, and for transmission projects.
o Harvest Wind Project: We are pursuing Federal Loan Guarantees through the
USDOE for conventional renewable technologies that would help address the current financing hurdles associated with this $250 million project.
• $6.3 billion for energy efficiency and conservation grants
o Energy Efficiency Projects (Not Selected Under SEP): There is a pending
competitive amount of funding we understand totals approximately $400 million nationwide that is open for grant applications. SEP projects that are not approved by ODOE might fit into this funding category and we may elect to pursue this path depending on the outcome of the SEP process.
We will keep the Board current as we progress further.
