Loading...
01/12/1993 - Packet TIGARD WATER DISTRICT 8777 S.W.BURNHAM ST. P.O.BOX 230000 TIGARD WATER DISTRICT TIGARD,OREGON 97281-1999 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PHONE(503)639-1554 REGULAR MEETING 7:30 P.M., JANUARY 12, 1993 AGENDA 6:30 General Session (open). Call to Order. 1 . Oath of Office for Hill Hampton. 2. Executive Session (closed). The Tigard Water District will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (e), (h), (i), and (j) to discuss real property transactions, possible litigation, and personnel. 7:30 Regular Meeting (open). Call to Order. 1 . Visitors. 2. Minutes of the December 17 Special Board meeting. Recommendation: Approve minutes. 3. Payment of vouchers. Recommendation: Approve payment. 4. Revisions and updates to Rules, Rates, Regulations for Water Service. Recommendation: Second reading of Ordinance 2-92 approving the revisions. 5. Amend TWD Pension Plan to remove the loan provisions. Recommendation: Approve Resolution 1-93 approving the amendment. 6. Initiate proceedings to dissolve the Tigard Water District and liquidate all assets. Recommendation: Approve Resolution 2-93 approving initiating the dissolution. 7. Administrative Director's Report. A. Work Accomplished Report. B. 1992 Year End Work Accomplished Report. C. Computer RFP. D. Lead and Cooper Rule E. Lake Oswego F. Intergovernmental Agreement and RPAG meeting on January 19. G Telemetering system (SCADA) 8. Chair's Comments. 9. Commissioners' Comments. 1/12/93 Board Meeting Agenda 10. Other Business. 1 1 . Executive Session. The Tigard Water District will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (e), (h), (i), and (j) to discuss real property transactions, possible litigation, and personnel. Adjourn 4 2 r A TIGARD WATER DISTRICT 8777 S.W.BURNHAM ST. TIGARD WATER DISTRICT P.O.sox 230000 TIGARD,OREGON 97281-1999 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PHONE(503)639-1554 MEETING 3:30 P.M., December 17, 1992 MINUTES -- DRAFT PRESENT: Board of Commissioners ABSENT: Audrey Castile Bob Wyffels Jon Kvistad John Haunsperger Clarence Nicoli Staff Jeri L. Chenelle, Administrative Director Randy Volk, Superintendent Lorry Christian, Administrative Assistant Mike Miller, Engineering Technician Ill Call to Order at 3:30 p.m. 1 . Minutes of the December 8 regular Board meeting. Recommendation: Approve minutes. The minutes were unanimously approved without changes. 2. Revisions and updates to Rules, Rates, Regulations for Water Service, first reading. Recommendation: First reading of Ordinance 2-92 approving the revisions. A motion to read the ordinance by title only was approved 3-0. Ordinance 2-92 was read and approved 3-0. The second reading will be at the regular Board meeting on January 12, 1993. 3. Appointment to Board vacancy January 1, 1993. Administrative Director Chenelle referred to her memo to the Board, saying that Roberta Schumann will be moving to Washington within a week, so she won't be available to be considered. The remaining applicants are Dale Evans, Hill Hampton, and George Morgan. Ms. Chenelle's memo also stated that she talked with Patrick Hearn, Executive Director of the Oregon Ethics Commission who said the code is not really clear about the possible conflict of interest for Hill Hampton. There was a brief discussion about each of the candidates. Commissioner Clarence Nicoli made a motion to appoint Hill Hampton to fill the vacancy in position 1 on the Board. The motion was seconded by Chair Wyffels. A voice vote was called and the motion was approved 3-0. 4. Adam Davis, Decision Sciences, Inc. Proposal. Administrative Director Chenelle presented a proposal from Decision Sciences, Inc., • 12/17/92 Special Board Meeting Minutes regarding descriptions and cost information for conducting a survey and/or focus groups for the District about adopting a water conservation rate structure. The Commissioners decided to not take any action at this time. 5. Conservation Pricing Rate Structure. Engineering Technician Mike Miller gave an overview of related work being done by Portland Water Bureau and Tualatin Valley Water District, and the likely format for an inverted block rate structure for TWD. Other Business A. Negotiations with Lake Oswego. Administrative Director Chenelle updated the Board on the discussion about the rate structure recently submitted by the City of Lake Oswego. Ms. Chenelle relayed the concern and comments from the Dec. 17 Board meeting to Doug Schmitz, City Administrator from Lake Oswego. Mr. Schmitz said he would talk with the City finance staff and get back to us. B. Negotiations With City of Tigard Regarding Sewer Billing. Superintendent Volk reported that he had talked with Patrick Pine, United Sewerage Agency, who is very interested in having TWD take over the sewer billing. USA has difficulty with keeping billing records current because they are seldom notified when customers move in or out. Mr. Volk has also continued talking with the City of Tigard about TWD doing a combined sewer and water billing. C. Use of Public Rooms. Superintendent Volk reported to the Board that there is increasingly heavy use of the public rooms for monthly or weekly meetings. 6. At 4:18 p.m., the Tigard Water District went into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (h), (i), and (j) to discuss real property transactions, possible litigation, and personnel. At 5.42 p.m., the Board came out of Executive Session and into open session. 6. A. With a 3-0 vote, a motion was approved to authorized Administrative Director Chenelle to sign the settlement agreement with former TWD employee John P. Miller. B. With a 3-0 vote, a motion was approved to instruct Administrative Director Chenelle to have TWD attorney prepare a resolution to initiate dissolution of the Tigard Water District and present it at the January 12 meeting. The Board adjourned at 5:45 p.m. 2 Tigard Water District Ordinance No. 2-92 An ordinance adopting rules, rates, and regulations for service in the Tigard Water District. WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners wishes to adopt the following rules, rates, and regulations for service in the Tigard Water District. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Commissioners hereby adopts the rules, rates, and regulations for service in the Tigard Water District, enacted this day of , 1992, by the Board of Commissioners of the Tigard Water District by unanimous vote of the members of the Board. (Remainder of page left blank.) 4 RULES, RATES, AND REGULATIONS of the TIGARD WATER DISTRICT The Board of Commissioners has adopted the following rules, rates, and regulations for service in the Tigard Water District. Section 1. Application for Service. No service will be supplied or water furnished to any premises except upon the written application of the legal owner of the premises, or his duly authorized agent, upon the printed forms of the District. Such owner shall be responsible for all charges for service to said premises, whether supplied to himself or to a renter or occupant thereof, and for the compliance of any occupant with all rules of the District. Section 2. Use of Water. Water will be furnished for ordinary domestic, business and community purposes, and fire protection, only. No water will be furnished for the direct operation of steam boilers, machinery or golf courses, except on an interruptible basis, and the District will assume no responsibility therein. Section 3. Service Size. A standard service connection, with 5/ 8" x 3/4" meter, will be installed from the main to the street curb or property line. (See charges in Appendix I.) The amount of the meter installation charge shall accompany all applications. Larger meters may be required for some services. The additional charges for these are shown in Appen- dix 1. The size of meter shall be determined by management. District shall prescribe the number of buildings to be served from one meter and such determination shall be final. No user shall furnish water to any family, business, institution, or premises other than those occupied by that user; provided, however, that the Board may permit a user to supply others through user's service connection, in which event such user will be charged an additional monthly minimum for each additional user so supplied. Such permit may be revoked and separate service connections required at any time. Section 4. Separate Connection. A separate service connection will be required for each dwelling, apartment or motel, place of business, and institution. All outlying buildings and premises used as a part of such dwelling place or business or institution may be served from such connection, as well as all buildings on such premises operated under the one management. District shall prescribe the number of buildings to be served from one meter and such determination shall be final. No user shall furnish water to any family, business, institution or premises other than those occupied by that user; provided, however, that the Board may permit a user to supply others through users' service connection in which event such user will be charged an additional monthly minimum for each additional user so sup- plied. Such permit may be revoked and separate service connections required at any time. Section 5. Furnishing Water. The District shall not be obligated to furnish and install, at its expense, system facilities for all property within the District. The District shall, so far as reasonable and practicable and within its financial means, however, provide adequate source of supply, necessary primary feeder mains, storage facilities and other improve- ments necessary to make water service generally available to all areas within the District. Extensions to furnish water to areas not now served by the District will be made at the expense of those persons requesting service. Such extensions will be made by the District or by those expressly authorized by the District. All applications for line extensions to pro- vide new service are subject to review by the Board of Commissioners. Consideration will be given to the District's ability to serve and to eligibility for annexation to the District of the property to be served. Section 6. Private Service Pipes. All pipes from the meter to the premises must be in- stalled in accordance with good engineering practice, and maintained in good order by the user. Pipes must be laid 24 inches deep and provided with a stop and waste valve for drainage, and all standpipes or fittings of any kind must be so located, anchored and in- stalled as not to interfere with or endanger the meter. All pipes must be well protected from freezing. Section 7. Credit for Water Leaks. When a water leak occurs on the customer's side of the water meter resulting in an unusually high water bill, customers can apply for a credit to their water bill equal to 1/2 the cost of the leak (above the normal bill), up to a maximum of $150. Customers must apply for credit in writing, to the Water District, and forward proof of the leak being fixed in a timely manner. Section 8. Jurisdiction. All service connections, meters, mains and parts of the system through which water is served, except the pipes beyond the meter, are the property of the District, and under its exclusive control. No person other than the Administrator or autho- rized person shall install any service, make any extension, turn the water on or off, or otherwise tamper or interfere with the water or the system. Section 9. Waste—Plumbing—Inspection. Water will'not be furnished to premises where it is allowed to run or waste to prevent freezing, or through defective plumbing, or other- wise. Plumbing should be of high test and first class/and where pressures may become high, on 5/8" x 3/4" and 1" meters, a pressure regulator may be installed at the meter by the District to control varying pressures. (On meters 1 1/2" and larger, user is responsible for installing a pressure regulator.) The District will not be responsible for damage from varying pressures. The Administrator or authorized person may inspect pipes and plumbing at proper times. Section 10. Physical Connections with other Water Supplies or Systems. Neither cross connections nor physical connections of any kind shall be made to any other water supply, whether private or public, without the written consent and approval of the Board of Commissioners, and the written approval of the Oregon State Board of Health. (Included in this category are all pipe lines, appurtenances and facilities of the District system and all pipes, appurtenances, pumps, tanks, storage reservoirs, facilities, equipment, appliances, etc., of other systems whether located within or on public or private property, or the pre- mises of a water user.) The District's Administrator or other authorized representative shall have the right without being deemed guilty of trespass or unlawful act to check the premises of users for physical connections with other water supplies. Any such connection shall be removed by the cus- tomer within ten days after written notice to remove is given by the District. If not removed within the time specified, the District may remove or discontinue any connection which it may have for servicing the property. Section 11. Cross Connection Control Program. The purpose of this regulation is to protect the water supply of Tigard Water District from contamination or pollution from potential cross connections; and to assure that approved backflow devices are tested annually. The installation or maintenance of any cross connection which would endanger the water supply of Tigard Water District is prohibited. Any such cross connection now existing or hereafter installed is hereby declared unlawful and shall be rectified as directed by the Board of Commissioners or its authorized representative(s). The control or elimination of cross connections shall be in accordance with the regulations of Oregon State Health Division. The policies, procedures, and criteria for determining appropriate levels of protection shall be in accordance with the Accepted Procedure and Practice in Cross Connection Control Manual, Amer. Water Works Association, Pacific Northwest Section, current edition (OR Admin. Rules, Ch. 333-61.070). It shall be the objective of Tigard Water District to protect the potable water system from contamination or pollution due to cross connections. Water service to any premises shall be contingent upon the customer providing cross connection control in a manner approved by Tigard Water District. Backflow devices re- quired to be installed shall be a model approved by the Oregon State Health Division. Authorized employees of Tigard Water District with proper identification shall have free access at reasonable hours of the day to those parts of a premise or within buildings to which water is supplied. Water service may be refused or terminated to any premise for failure to allow necessary inspections. These requirements must be strictly observed as a matter of public health and to prevent any possible contamination of the water system. ---Section 12. Reading—Billing. Meters will be read on or about the 20th day of each month for the preceding two montes. Fifteen days or less will be billed as a half-month. Over 45 days will be billed as two full Months. Section 13. Payment—Delinquency. All bills are due on the 12th day of the calendar month following billing. The amount due must be paid to an authorized agent of the District. Unpaid bills become delinquent after the 12th of the month. When a delinquent bill is not paid, or a rule is violated, the water will be shut off and service disconnected until payment is received in full, and compliance with all rules is made. Section 14. Water Rates. See Appendix II. Charge for turning off and on when water service is discontinued for non-payment of bill: $5.00 for the first two times; $10.00 thereaf- ter. Section 15. Discontinuance of Service for 30 days or more will be made upon written application, without charge, provided all bills are paid. Section 16. Interrupted Service—Changes in Pressure. The water may be shut off at any time for repairs or other necessary work with or without notice. Conditions may cause a variation of the pressure. The District will not be responsible for any damage caused by interruption of service or varying pressure. When service is interrupted, hot water faucets should be kept closed to prevent back flow of hot water or steam. Section 17. Service Connection Maintenance. The Water District will maintain all stan- dard service connections in good repair without expense to the users. Each user is required to use reasonable care and diligence to protect the water meter and meter box from loss or damage by freezing, hot water, traffic hazards, and other causes, in default of which, such user shall pay to the Water District the full amount of the resulting damage. Section 18. Main Extensions, designed and installed by the District. All extensions of mains and laterals of the District, and installed by the District, shall be paid for by the per- son or their assigns who desire such extensions, at cost plus 10% for overhead and super- vision, and 8% for engineering. he estimated cost thereof, together with such 18%, shall be deposited with the District w en application for such main extensions is made. I e , I, Designed by others, installed by the District. When design or supervision of installation of improvements is performed by licensed engineers, subject to approval by the Water District, and installed by the District, a fee shall be paid of 10% for administration, inspec- tions, water loss, sampling, etc., and 2% for engineering review. The estimated cost thereof, together with such 12%, shall be deposited with the District when application for such main extensions is made. Designed and installed by others. When design, or supervision of installation of improve- ments is performed by licensed engineers, and installation is performed and paid for by others, subject to approval by the District, a fee of 12% of construction costs shall be im- posed for development charges. Size of such extensions, type of pipe, location, gate valves, fixtures, fire hydrants and other fittings shall be under District specifications and subject to District approval, and such mains shall be laid from the end of the existing main to the far end of the property to be served. No lines or laterals shall be laid until the estimated cost thereof, as hereinabove set forth, shall have been deposited with the District. All such extensions of mains and laterals, and installation of fire hydrants shall be the sole property of the District, without right of immediate refund on the part of the person or persons paying for such extension or on the part of any person or persons whomsoever. No extension of main will be permitted, accepted or served by the District unless such line be at least a 6-inch diameter pipe. Short extensions, such as cul-de-sacs, can be of smaller diameter upon approval of the District. When a person is required to pay the cost of extending a water main adjacent to property other than that person's own so that water service for domestic use is provided for such other property without further extension of the water main, the District shall require the owner of the other property, prior to providing water service to that property, to refund to the person required to pay the cost of extending the water main, a pro rata portion of the cost of extension. The right to require such refund shall not continue for more than 10 years after the date of installation of the extension of the water main. The amount to be refunded shall be determined by the District and such determination shall be final. Each construction contractor shall be approved by competent District authority prior to installing pipe lines, pumps, etc. Those installations made by private contractors will be thoroughly inspected and approved by District personnel to ensure compliance with plans and specifications. Back-filling of trenches prior to District approval is unauthorized. If water main extension is necessary to serve an existing single family dwelling and the main size required by the Tigard Water District is larger than a 6" line, then that single family dwelling will pay the cost of a 6" installation across the front of their property, plus the cost of the meter. Applicant(s) will agree to be bound by and comply with the District's main extension policy and rules and regulations and any subsequent revisions or amendments to same which may be made from time to time. Section 19. Limitation on the use of water as to hours, purpose, or manner, may be prescribed from time to time by the Board. Section 20. Temporary or Transient Service. Temporary or transient service for con- struction work will be rendered upon deposit in advance of connection charge and one month's estimated water bill, and payment on the first of each month of all accrued charges. Upon discontinuance of service, refund will be made for all connection materials usable by the District at their depreciated value, less the cost of removal and all charges due. No temporary service shall be installed for any residence or building where a perma- nent service connection may later be installed. + Section 21. Construction Water. Water used via a permanent meter installation for con- struction purposes will be billed at the one month's rate (See Appendix II) at completion of construction, but not to exceed a period of 6 months, unless authorized by the District. Section 22. Meter Out-of-Order—Test. If a meter shall fail to measure accurately, the bill shall be the average for the same periods in prior years. Tests will be made periodically without charge to the user. A user may demand a test upon payment of a $5.00 charge for such test. If the meter reads 5% or more over, such charge shall be rebated to the user. Section 23. Fire Hydrants. Fire hydrants will be installed by the Water District upon receipt of payment in advance of the estimated cost of the hydrant, fittings, and installation, plus 10% for overhead. Section 24. Fire Hydrant—Temporary Use. Any person who desires to use a fire hydrant for temporary water supply must obtain permission of the District. The user will be charged $25.00 for hook-up service plus the effective user rate as shown in Appendix II plus $25.00/ month for continued use. User is responsible for repair and/or replacement of damaged meter. Section 25. Illegal Use of Fire Hydrant or Meter. The penalty for connection to a fire hydrant or meter without proper authority is a $100 fine. Section 26. Amendments—Special Rules— Contracts. The Board may at any time amend, change or modify any rule, rate or charge, or make any special rule, rate or con- tract, and all water service is subject to such power. Section 27. Grievances. Any unresolved grievances as to service or complaint shall be reported and will be considered by the Board at the next regular monthly meeting. Section 28. The Administrator and Employees are not authorized to make any changes in these rules, rates, or regulations. APPENDIX I—Meter Installation Charges APPENDIX II—Water Rates Copper Service,including P-R Valve Monthly Minimum' Out of District if required,Connection Fee Meter Size (400 cubic feet) (Additional) Size of Meter Charge Schedule 5/8"x3/4" $ 6.50 $2.50 System 1" 10.50 4.00 Development Installation Total 1 1/2" 16.50 6.00 Meter Size Charge Fees Charges 2" 33.50 10.00 3" 61.50 15.00 5/8"x3/4" $845 + $250 = $1095 4" 103.50 19.00 1" 1690 + 350 = 2040 6" 144.50 28.00 1 1/2" 4225 + 715 = 4940 8" 201.00 38.00 2" 6760 + 945 = 7705 Rate over 400 cubic feet:$1.20 per 100 cubic feet. 3" 13,520 + cost plus 10% 4" 21,125 + cost plus 10% Fire Rates(Sprinklers)will be based on the size of 6" 42,250 + cost plus 10% the service going into the building or vault: 8" 67,600 + cost plus 10% $15 a mo.—6"&smaller $2200 10" 97,175 + cost plus 10% a mo.—8'&larger Bull Mountain Meter Rates Booster Pumps:For areas served by District 5/8"x3/4"$1000 + $250 $1250 owned and operated booster pumps,either to 1" 2000 + 350 = 2350 storage or direct to the system,an additional 1 1/2" 5000 + 715 = 5715 minimum of$1.50 per month per meter(regard- 2" 8000 + 945 = 8945 less of meter size)shall be made.This charge is 3" 16,000 + cost plus 10% not applicable to the booster pumps located at SW 4" 25,000 + cost plus 10% 72nd and Hunziker Road and SW Bonita Road 6" 50,000 + cost plus 10% near 1-5. 8" 80,000 + cost plus 10% 10" 115,000 + cost plus 10% Fire Service Connection: •Note:Billing is bi-monthly so amounts above Fee$1,250 per Fire Service Tap+12%Fee should be multiplied by 2 to compute bill for each based on Construction Costs. period. i Chair of the Board ATTEST: Administrative Director Date Commissioners Aye Nay Abstain Audrey Castile John T. Haunsperger Jon Kvistad Clarence Nicoli Robert C. Wyffels MEMO MEETING DATE: January 12, 1993 TO: Honorable Chai and Board of Commissioners FROM: Jeri L. Chenell ,Cadministrative Director SUBJECT: Amending the Pension Plan Statement of the Subject: Although the pension plan for the employees of the Tigard Water District says loans may be made to employees, the procedures are very complex, require a long lead time, and place an additional administrative burden on Water District. Recommendation: Approve Resolution 1-93, a resolution to amend the pension plan to remove the loan provisions in the plan. Analysis: A few months ago, the Administrative Director investigated the procedures necessary to obtain loans from the TWD employees' pension plan balance. It turns out that the procedures are very complex; the process requires a long lead time; TWD would, in effect, go into the loan business (not the plan administrator); and the full administrative burden would be placed on the Water District. At that time, a memo was given to all employees explaining the situation, the paperwork was made available for review, and an employee who had also reviewed the necessary documents offered to discuss it with anyone who was interested. There were only a few employees who asked exploratory questions, but didn't have any interest in pursuing the process. The procedures to implement the loan provisions were never formally adopted by TWD. Ameritus Life Insurance Corp., the plan administrators, have asked us to either adopt the loan procedures or remove the loan provisions from the plan. The required notice to employees has been posted. Funding Source: The $225 charge to amend the plan will be absorbed in the current budget. Alternative: Develop loan procedures and regulations, leaving the plan as is. LC 5. TIGARD WATER DISTRICT RESOLUTION 1-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO AMEND THE PENSION PLAN TO REMOVE THE LOAN PROVISIONS IN THE PLAN. WHEREAS, under Section 8.1 of the Pension Plan document the Employer has the authority to amend any provision of the Plan. BE IT RESOLVED, that the provision to allow for plan loans shall be removed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Pension Plan is amended, effective as of January 1, 1993. Chair of the Board Administrative Director Date APPROVED AND ACCEPTED: Trustee Trustee Date TIGARD WATER DISTRICT RESOLUTION 2-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS TO DISSOLVE THE DISTRICT AND LIQUIDATE ALL ASSETS. WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners previously adopted Resolution 16-92 committing to work with the Cities of Tigard, King City and Durham to create an intergovernmental agreement to form a Joint Water Agency; and WHEREAS, the Cities of Tigard, King City and Durham and the unincorporated area within the Tigard Water District have met with representatives of the Tigard Water District over the past year; and WHEREAS, creation of an agency comprised of the three cities is desired by the Cities of Tigard, King City and Durham; and WHEREAS, Tigard Water District is committed to a smooth transition so that the Joint Water Agency will be created by July, 1993. NOW, THEREFORE, the Tigard Water District resolves and finds as follows: 1 . The best interests of the inhabitants of the District will be served by the creation of an intergovernmental entity to deliver water services within the District. To accomplish this objective, the Board of Commissioners hereby initiates the dissolution of the District and the liquidation of the assets of the District through conveyance of the assets to the new intergovernmental entity. 2. District staff is directed to prepare findings of fact for adoption by the Board with respect to the following matters: a The amount of each outstanding bond, coupon and other indebtedness, with a general description of the indebtedness and the name of the holder and owner of each, if known. b. A description of each parcel of real property and interest in real property and, if the property was acquired for delinquent taxes or assessments, the amount of such taxes and assessments on each parcel of property. c. Uncollected taxes, assessments and charges levied by the District and the amount upon each lot or tract of land. d. A description of the personal property and of all other assets of the District. e. The estimated costs of dissolution. 3. District staff is directed to prepare a plan of dissolution and liquidation and to present the plan to the Board no later than February 9, 1993. �P • 4. District staff is directed to continue negotiations with the Cities of Tigard, King City and Durham regarding the provisions of an intergovernmental agreement. 5. The Board of Commissioners reaffirms its commitment as set forth in Resolution 16-92 to achieve formation of the joint water agency no later than June 30, 1993. Chair of the Board ATTEST: Administrative Director Date Tigard Water District Resolution 2-93, Page 2 1/12/93 Agenda, Administrator's Report Work Accomplished in December a. The card lock fuel dispensing system was finally on line and operational December 14, 1992. b. TWD installed 75 - 3/4" water services; one - 1" irrigation service; and one water sampling station at Bull Mountain Meadows, a single family residential development located on SW Scholls Ferry Road east of SW Beef Bend Road. c. TWD installed 35 - 3/4" water services, and one water sampling station at Harts Landing, a single family residential development located north of SW North Dakota Street at the west end of SW Black Diamond Way. d. TWD installed 42 - 3/4" water services and one water sampling station at Morning Hill No. 9, a single family residential development located east of SW 135th Avenue north of SW Walnut Street. e. TWD installed 44 - 3/4" water services and one water sampling station at Riverview Estates, Phase 2, a single family residential development located south of SW Durham Road at SW 103rd Avenue. f. TWD installed one 2" water service for the new addition to the Sherwood Inn located south of SW Upper Boones Ferry Road and 1-5 Highway. g. TWD replaced/reinstalled the existing 2" water service and 2" water meter plus replaced/upgraded the existing fire hydrant at the entrance to the Sherwood Inn (next to the 76 gas station sign). This was due in part to the construction project for the Sherwood Inn expansion. h. TWD repaired a 6" main break in King City that occurred Dec. 5 (a Saturday), and which was not weather related. i. TWD replaced 3 malfunctioning/stuck 5/8"x3/4" and one 1-1/2" water meters during December. TWD also replaced 10 fogged meter heads and raised one meter during this month. j. TWD repaired 5 - 3/4" pressure regulators, which are located behind the water meters, for the month of December. k. TWD repaired/replaced a leaking 2" water service at the Panorama apartment complex located south of SW Canterbury Lane between SW 106th and SW 109th Avenue. I. TWD installed 29 - 5/8"x3/4" water meters, one (1) 1" water meter, and one (1) 2" water meter for the month of December. 1 7. 4 . V 1/12/93 Agenda, Administrator's Report Work Accomplished by Private Contractors During December a. Private contractor installed 1 ,600 feet of 16" D.I. pipe; 110 feet of 12" D.I. pipe; 930 feet of 8" D.I. pipe; 245 feet of 6" D.I. pipe; and four (4) fire hydrants to serve 75 single family residences located on SW Scholls Ferry Road (Bull Mountain Meadows). b. Private contractor installed 1,040 feet of 8" D.I. pipe; 470 feet of 6" D.I. pipe; 190 feet of 4" D.I. pipe; and three (3) fire hydrants to serve 34 single family residences located north of SW North Dakota Street at the west end of SW Black Diamond Way (Harts Landing). c. Private contractor installed 50 feet of 12" D.I. pipe; 820 feet of 8" D.I. pipe; 850 feet of 6" D.I. pipe; 120 feet of 4" D.I. pipe; and three (3) fire hydrants to serve 42 single family residences located east of SW 135th Avenue north of SW Walnut Street (Morning Hill No. 9). d. Private contractor installed 900 feet of 8" D.I. pipe; 1,025 feet of 6" D.I. pipe; 125 feet of 4" D.I. pipe; and three (3) fire hydrants to serve 44 single family residences located south of SW Durham Road at SW 103rd Avenue (Riverview Estates No. 2). e. Private contractor installed 515 feet of 6" D.I. pipe; 60 feet of 4" D.I. pipe; and one (1) fire hydrant to serve a new addition to the Sherwood Inn located south of SW Upper Boones Ferry Road next to I-5. Work to be Accomplished in January 1993 a. TWD to install 1,150 feet of 12" D.I. pipe along SW Sunrise Lane, west of SW 150th Avenue. b. TWD to install conduits and prepare the Bonita Road pump station, High Tor reservoirs, and the #2 reservoir site for the installation of the SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) System. c. TWD to adjust to final grade the vault for the pressure reducing valve station located west of SW Aspen Drive. d. TWD crews to read meters January 18, 19, and 20. e. TWD to make asphalt repairs at various locations through the District. 2 1/12/93 Agenda, Administrator's Report Work to be Accomplished in January by Private Contractors a. No contractor activity is expected during January. Work to be Accomplished in February a. TWD to install a pressure reducing valve station on SW 150th Avenue just north of SW Woodhue Street. b. TWD to continue to repair/install/relocate 2" blow-off assemblies within the Bull Mountain area. 3 Percentage of each type of water consumed, FY 1991-92 Month & Well Clackamas R. Bull Run Total Year Cu. Ft. Cu. Ft. Cu. Ft. Cu. Ft. Jul 1992 4,671 ,571 13,797,000 - 0 - 18,468,571 Aug 1992 4,717,910 15,955,000 - 0 - 20,672,910 Sep 1992 4,618,960 12,730,000 - 0 - 17,348,960 Oct 1992 3,685,550 12,366,000 - 0 - 16,051 ,550 Nov 1992 - 0 - 16,186,000 - 0 - 16,186,000 Dec 1992 - 0 - 15,245,000 - 0 - 15,245,000 Jan 1993 Feb 1993 Mar 1993 Apr 1993 May 1993 Jun 1993 Total 17,693 ,991 86,279,000 - 0 - 103 ,972 ,991 17% 83% - 0 -% 100% Unmetered water, FY 1991-92 Pumped Purchased Total Sold Loss * Month Cu. Ft. Cu. Ft. Cu. Ft. Cu. Ft. Cu. Ft. Loss & Year x 1000 x 1000 x 1000 x 1000 x 1000 wo Dec. - 0 - 15,245(L.O.) 15,245 13,049 2,196 14.4% 1992 -0-(Ptldl Total: 17.694 86.279 103.973 111 .154 (7.181 ) (6.9)% (6 Months) *Monthly water losses are not accurate. Billing is accomplished every month, with one-half of the patrons billed for a 2-month period of water pumped/purchased computed on a monthly basis. Summary of water purchased and/or pumped and water losses Fiscal Year Well Lake Oswego Portland Water Losses 1986-87 00/0 96% 4% 10.5% 1987-88 0% 97% 3% 3.9% 1988-89 3% 93% 4% 7.9% 8.81% avg. 1989-90 6% 90% 4% 6.05% 1990-91 5% 90% 5% 9.0% 1991 -92 7% 89% 4% 15.5% / 1992-93 17% 83% -0-% (6.9)% (6 Months) 1992 Year End Work Accomplished Report 1 . During the 1992 calendar year, TWD installed the following services within new subdivisions and commercial/industrial parks: 584 3/4" Water Services 1 0 1" Water Services 2 0 2" Water Services 1 2 Water Sampling Stations 2. TWD, over the course of the year, installed the following meters: 399 5/8"x3/4" Water Meters 3 9 1" Water Meters 10 1-1/2" Water Meters 4 2" Water Meters 1 3" Water Meter and Vault 3. The following is the highlight of various other work that TWD accomplished for the year: • TWD installed 160 feet of 6" D.I. pipe. • TWD installed one 12" butterfly valve to replace a defective one. • TWD lowered 130 feet of 12" D.I. pipe due to a street improvement project. • TWD relocated or replaced 9 fire hydrants. • TWD replaced 7 - 2" water services due to leaking services. • TWD installed an 8" pressure reducing valve station on Bull Mountain Road just west of the Aspen Ridge development. • TWD installed the 200 KW emergency generator at the TWD Operations Center. • A private contractor installed the 2,000 GPM pumping station at the 10 million gallon reservoir site. 4. During the 1992 calendar year, private contractors installed the following lengths of pipeline and number of fire hydrants throughout the Water District. The most significant activity was located in the north and west ends of the Water District. 1 ,600 ft. (.3 miles) 1 6" D.I. pipe 7,695 ft. (1.46 miles) 12" D.I. pipe 13,386 ft. (2.54 miles) 8 " D.I. pipe 8,985 ft. (1.7 miles) 6" D.I. pipe 1 ,250 ft. (.24 miles) 4" D.I. pipe 32,916 ft. 6.24 miles 111,001.7 Gallons Total Footage Installed Total Miles Total Amount of Water to Fill Pipe 5. And finally, there were 63 fire hydrants installed. RECE!V J . ., - i! ''.,'.:J CITY OF e, ?�. Mike Lindberg,Commissioner ;F: � � Michael F.Rosenberger,Administrator L fit-*:.illi` PORTLAND, OREGON , 1120 S.W.5th Avenue ,,,i�.� �:�• �;: Portland,Oregon 97204-1926 ;= " BUREAU OF WATER WORKS Information(503) 796-7404 December 30, 1992 Memorandum TO: RPAG Members FROM: Lorna Stickel - RE: Intergovernmental Agreement and RPAG January 19th meeting Attached you will find a third draft of the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) for Phase 2 of the regional water supply planning effort. The Portland City Attorney's office received several revision proposals and comments from RPAG members or their counsels which were incorporated into this current draft. We would like to ask that you and your counsel review this version and respond with any further comments by January 14 to Terry Thatcher (823-4047) or myself at (796-7502). Responding by telephone will probably be faster. We are then hoping to have a fairly final version of the IGA for the January 19th meeting of the RPAG. At this same January 19th meeting some important matters will be discussed. The consultant negotiation team will be making a report about the final scope of work budget for Phase 2 and the justification for that amount. We then will want to poll our members for their intent to take the IGA to their respective decision making bodies and discuss the timing issues involved. The consultants are asking for some fairly specific starting date so that they can schedule the project team members time appropriately. The ability to start the project as early as possible will also be a subject for discussion at this meeting. Hope to see as many of you as possible on the 19th at the Tigard Water District. As a result of these discussions the IGA will be finalized with any approved changes and filling in the appropriate sections on payment amounts and schedules, participants, and starting times. This IGA (if agreed upon) will then be sent to all of the participating RPAG members or other potential participants (if any). Tr. NEi{E IS SOME MORE INFORMATIONAL STUFF To READ WWI-E STAY/Net- WARM TAY/NCIWARM I AiSiEE NE%T Tb TUE FIRE INSTeAcs o f BE I NICs O&LT t b E AND it TURMINcx INTO A SNOW PERSON • ( s • A p�, 0 Additional Information from Administrative Director January 8, 1993 Attachments: 1 . Dec. 15, 1992 letter to Tigard Water District ORS 190 Committee from Gerry McReynolds, King City, re: TWD ORS 190 Agreement and Governing Board. 2. Dec. 29, 1992 letter to Tom VanderPlaat, Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County from Jeri L. Chenelle. 3. Dec. 31, 1992 letter to Regional Providers Advisory Group from Roberta Jortner, Portland Bureau of Water Works. 4. Jan. 4, 1993, "Demands for water give region $2.4 million headache", The Oregonian. • tic • Al DEC 17 202 :�' CITY OF KING CITY Y„; J. DATE: December 15, 1992 TO: Tigard Water District ORS 190 Committee • FROM: Gerry McReynolds, Mayor SUBJECT: TWD ORS 190 Agreement and Governing Board. John Buol has related the discussions to me pertaining to the ORS 190 Agreement and the make up of the Governing Board. In my opinion, the Governing Board should be made up of elected officials of the owning communities. The Governing Board should meet quarterly like WCCCA. The number of board members should be five - two from Tigard, one from Durham, one from King City and one from the unincorporated area as long as it represents five percent or more of the customer base. The TWD service area is within the Urban Growth Boundary of the respective cities. In my opinion, a Technical Advisory Committee consisting of the three city managers. The Technical Advisory Committee should meet monthly to carry on the business of the District. A Manager or Superintendent should be appointed by the Governing Board to carry on the daily water business. A seven member Board is too many. Four or majority member- ship/vote of the Board belonging to Tigard is not workable for King City. In other words if Tigard has majority membership/vote of the Board, there is no advantage or reason for King City to participate. CC: King City Council 1-5-13 To TWD 86°-(1 CLL./ Cv u 1"Q-- ciecidea- not 10 ,ccrmez/lc� -ached (esolu-fi'on i adopt Qt{ b ITh- 1° e_a_yno id 5 rfift-i,4p(essed r ��rn5 -bal( -t0 -1;,.9°.-r d G`t�t 111 r Sergi I. DEC-15-'98 TUE 16:25 ID:CITY OF KING CITY FAX N0:503 639-3771 t#418 P01 Pas�t--It"',bbr,,l /�J transmittal memo 7671 I r or 'g ► To / kJ �'!l /C/4 From /i i '_ l cni fd ' bePt- / i Phone /. Y—'Tt/fl P. Fa" 68'�f- 72-97 Fur ,4,g7- 77/ k = NG C2TY RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION STATING THE INTENT OF THE CITY OF KING CITY, OREGON TO WITHDRAW FROM. THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT AND TO ENDORSE THE FORMATION OF 4 WATER BOARD CONSISTING OF 5 MEMBERS TO FORM A WATER DISTRICT UNNDER ORS 190 TO SERVE THE CITIES OF TIGARD, DURHAM, AND KING CITY WHEREAS, the City .of' Tigard has requested the cities of Tigard, Durham, and King City to withdraw from the Tigard Water District, and for the unincorporataed area to hold an election on the issue, and WHEREAS, the three cities and the unincorporated area (if it elects so to do) would then form a water district under ORS 190 . BE IT RESOLVED by the council of the City of King City to recommend the following structure: Section 1. Composition of the Board. .The board of said water district should be comprised of five members; two appointed by the city council of the City of Tigard, one each appointed by the councils of the cities of Durham, and King City, and one member from the unincorporated area appointed by the Washington County Board of Commisioners. Section 2. Number required for a Ouorum. The presence of three members of such appointed board would be required to form a quorum. Section 3. Adiustment of Board Membership. If ownership interests substantially changed in the future, the Board might adjust allocation of Board membership by amendment of the agreement. In the event Board positions were added to the agency, the allocation of Board positions should be reexamined to consider changing the distribution of members . The number Board positions should remain in total as an odd number. Section 4. Terms of Office. Each Board member should be appointed for a term of two (2) years. Members might be reappointed to succeeding terms. All terms should have the same expiration date. Section 5. Vacancies and Removals. If a vacancy occured, the appointing authority of the agency member should appoint a replacement for the remainder of the unexpired term. A Board member (if appointed) might be removed by the appointing authority for any reason. . „ • •,„• ‘1 1hZ•4•,•••&1•11Q1•11Ilh11111•ZIlthl1,5Z1&•;••1,;ZIZIZIZililiZ3•1•iZ: • "'' " " . • ' - -'98 TUE 16:26 ID CITY OF KING CITY FAX NO:503 639-3771 - #418 P02 • Approved by the City Council of King City this day of , 1992 . CITY OF KING CITY, OREGON / • Mayor Attest : By City Recorder • • • 4 • • TIGARD WATER DISTRICT 8777 S.W.BURNHAM ST. P.O.BOX 230000 TIGARD,OREGON 97223-9917 PHONE(503)639-1554 December 29, 1992 Mr. Tom VanderPlaat Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County 155 North First Avenue, Suite 270 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 Dear Mr. VanderPlaat: Thank you for your time today in responding to my questions about your recycled wastewater program. I amhappy to attend a presentation you are doing for the City of Tigard so that you do not have to give two different presentations. I look forward to hearing your comments and learning more about USA's ideas for the future of recycled water. The Tigard Water District would like to have further dialogue with you regarding ways in which we might be partners. I will appreciate your keeping me informed. • Cordially, auto-a- Jeri L. Chenelle Administrative Director cc: Board of Directors CITY OF o`' Mike Lindberg,Commissioner n N Michael F.Rosenberger,Administrator 'M ' 'z` PORTLAND, OREGON 1 1120 S.W.5th Avenue `%?ti: �`i '11+ � ; Portland,Oregon 972041926 ... ����'�,,0 Information(503)796-7404 `' ;- a°;' BUREAU OF WATER WORKS Memorandum TO: Regional Providers Advisory Group FROM: Roberta Jortner DATE: December 31, 1992 SUBJECT: Willamette Basin Reservation for Future Municipal Water Use On December 18, 1992 a meeting was held to discuss the status of the Willamette Basin municipal water reservation,and what steps should be taken next to ensure that water rights will be available to meet future water needs. The meeting was convened by Joni Low, a new League of Oregon Cities (LOC) staff person assigned to water and wastewater issues. Attending the meeting was a mix of city water providers and water districts. Of about 15 people who attended, most had been involved in the previous effort to establish a reservation in the Willamette Basin Plan(and administrative rules) adopted by the Oregon Water Resources Commission on January 31, 1992. RPAG members included myself and Bill Elliott from Portland, Dale Jutila from Clackamas Water District, and Mike Water from Tualatin Valley Water District. There were also representatives from - the cities of Salem, Eugene, Cottage Grove, Dallas, Sublimity, and others. The meeting began with a briefing on the history of the municipal reservation. A two-page synopsis is enclosed. The meeting participants then addressed a number of difficult and complex questions such as, "Should we pursue a reservation?","What will a reservation do to existing water rights or pending water right applications?", "Should the reservation include surface water, storage, and groundwater?", and "Which state agency would be the most appropriate sponsor for the municipal reservation application?"(since the law authorizes state agencies only to submit reservation applications). After some discussion, the conclusions reached were as follows. First, we think it is important to establish a basinwide reservation that will serve as a placeholder to ensure that water rights and water itself will be available to meet future municipal needs. Although concern was expressed regarding what effect a reservation might have on existing or pending water rights, the group agreed overall that a reservation should not affect existing water rights and could provide a framework for approving water rights and reducing the risk of continual protest by concerned citizens and interest groups. These assumptions need to be verified with Water Resources Department staff however. Second,there remains a need find out whether the Water Resources Commission would reinstate the municipal reservation request with a June 5, 1992 priority date(equal to the agricultural reservation request). This issue was not resolved at the meeting. 3• RPAG December 31, 1992 page 2 Third,the reservation should involve surface water,stored water, and groundwater only to the extent that it would be pumped as part of an aquifer storage and recovery pro_Lect. It was felt that quantifying groundwater availability outside of the ASR option would not be virtually impossible and could hinder the acceptance or approval of a reservation application. Fourth,providers need to work with the Water Resources Department,Department of Agriculture, WaterWatch,and others to ensure that the municipal reservation process goes as smoothly as possible. It was agreed that we would discuss the application with state agency staff and interest group representatives prior to submittal. Fifth, albeit somewhat controversial,the providers should request the Department of Land Conservation and Development(DLCD)to be the state a:enc s•o, • • •e reservation, and thus, be responsible for filing the application on behalf of the municipal water providers. Some of the reasons for selecting DLCD include the breadth of this agency's involvement with local land use planning(similar to the diversity and breadth of municipal water use), and the new Land Conservation and Development(LCDC)rules to establish "urban reserves" (or land to be urbanized outside the urban growth boundary over the long-term). It is clear that water supplies will be necessary to accommodate growth anticipated in local comprehensive plans and future urban reserves. Further, it is clear that LCDC and DLCD understand the conflict that can be caused when water supplies are not adequate to serve the level of development proposed in comprehensive plans. DLCD staff are familiar with complicated land use matters and should be used to participating in proceedings such as the contested case process. The meeting participants agreed that the workload to collect the information and conduct the analysis required to develop a complete reservation application should be shared among the water providers in the basin. A copy of the application submittal requirements is enclosed. The participants decided that for purposes of developing the application,the basin should be divided into four main sub-regions. The four sub-regions would include the areas around the cities of Eugene, Salem, Corvallis,as well as the Portland metro area. A subcommittee was appointed to coordinate the data and information collection effort for those sub-areas, along with the development of the application. The subcommittee would also be responsible for asking DLCD (or a different state agency such as Economic Development Department if DLCD does not work out) to sponsor the effort, and coordinating with appropriate state agency staff. The sub-committee members consist of Kimber Johnson- EWEB,Tom Penpraze- Corvallis, Dan Bradley - Salem, Roberta Jortner, Portland, Dale Jutila- Clackamas Water District, Craig Johns- Stayton, and Bob Sisson - Cottage Grove. Joni Low from LOC will continue to participate in the process as much as her commitment to dealing with the 1993 legislative session permits. It was also suggested that Burton Weast or some other representative from the Special Districts Association of Oregon be asked to participate in the effort. Bill Elliott gave a presentation on how the Water Resources Department staff estimated future municipal water needs for the previous Willamette Plan reservation effort. The forecasts were developed using local information on population growth and water use, if available. Where such information was not available, basinwide average annual population growth and per capita water consumption figures were used. Bill explained that the forecasts have since been refined since to reflect a four month peak season and to provide an extended forecast to the year 2100. The meeting participants agreed that the demand forecasts we already have probably provide a reasonable starting point with which to develop the new application. We also agreed that the subcommittee should check with population forecasting experts at PSU to make sure that the growth-related assumptions are viable. It was also pointed out that we need to confirm our assumptions regarding per capita water use, and decide how we should meet requirements to prove efficient water use as required by the reservation rules. RPAG December 31, 1992 page 3 The subcommittee will be meeting (hopefully by mid-January) to proceed with the process of developing a reservation. Possible strategies discussed include distributing a brief questionnaire to cities and districts in the basin. Since the application needs to include a lot of information, it is important that we collect data from as many entities in the basin as possible. The questionnaire would both inform them of this process underway,and serve as a device to collect the information necessary to complete the application. In addition,the committee will continue discussing unresolved questions pertaining to the configuration of the reservation (basin- or sub-basin wide, source specific),efficiency and conservation requirements,storage agreements, coordination with water users and interest groups,etc. Joni Low has also scheduled a meet with Dick Benner, Director of DLCD,for January 20 to discuss possible state agency sponsorship of the effort. We will be keeping you posted on this process. In the meantime,if you have any thoughts or questions about the reservation process,please feel free to contact me at 796-7493 or Dale Jutila at 656-5752. Happy New Year! cc: Joni Low Kimber Johnson Dan Bradley Tom Penpraze Bob Sisson Craig Johns d Historical Perspective on the Request to Reserve Water for Future Municipal Uses in the Willamette Basin From the Beginning of Life as We Know It to January 31, 1992: • After legislation was passed to establish instream water rights and reservations for future economic development. The WRD established rules to implement the statute. The rules authorized the establishment of reservations via the rulemaking process, specifically basin planning rules. • Municipal providers worked with WRD staff to develop a reservation request for inclusion in the Willamette Basin rule update. This cooperative effort started late in the basin planning process but was supported generally by the Water Resources Commission and staff. (A request for a reservation for future irrigation use, from storage only, had been submitted by the Oregon Department of Agriculture early in the three year planning process but was held pursuant to completion of the plan update.) A group of cities and water districts provided information that the WRD staff used to determine the amounts needed to reserve. Additional information normally required of reservation applicants was not developed during this time. • On January 31, 1992, the Water Resources Commission adopted the new Willamette Basin Plan and Administrative Rules. Those rules contained both the reservation for future irrigation use and a reservation for future municipal use submitted by the Water Resources Department itself. (Bill. to talk about methodology during "Next Steps" agenda item.) (It was determined that a contested process was needed to establish the reservation even after rule adoption). January 31 - June 5, 1992 • Water Watch of Oregon challenged the reservations and filed a case with the Court of Appeals. The primary complaint was that the reservations did not, prior to adoption, undergo a complete and documented public interest review as required by the authorizing statutes. Additional complaints were that the WRD did not follow established procedural grounds (e.g., their were no rulemaking hearings held for the municipal reservation). • The Oregon Attorney General office advised the WRC/WRD that reservations must be established via the contested case process rather than by rulemaking, thus calling the existing Division 77 rules and the recently adopted Willamette Basin rules establishing the reservation, into question. 1 • • On June 5, 1992, the Water Resources Commission adopted a new division of rules (OAR 690, Division 79) to govern future reservation applications, review, and actions. The new rules require a contested case process to establish a reservation, along with establishing new application submittal requirements. The new rules also authorize the Department to assign a priority date for a reservation based on the date of application instead of the date of approval. The previous Division 77 rules were repealed. The Commission also authorized additional rulemaking to delete the irrigation and municipal reservations from the Willamette Basin Rules. The Commission indicated its intention to schedule a contested case process to review the irrigation reservation proposal and gave the irrigation reservation proposal a priority date of June 5, 1992. The Commission also decided to rescind the municipal reservation based on a finding that there was inadequate information in the request upon which to accept and forward the proposal and inadequate public review. (The Commission also directed the Department to address municipal needs through the contested case on the irrigation reservation proposal.) Water Watch dropped the case in response to the adoption of the new rules. June 5 to July 15, 1992 • Municipal water providers submitted testimony for inclusion in the record at the July 15, 1992 rulemaking hearing to amend the Willamette Basin rules by deleting the reservations. Testimony submitted by the League of Oregon Cities and Oregon Water Utility Council urged the Commission to forward the municipal reservation proposal to contested case with a priority date of June 5, 1992. LOC's and OWUC's goal was to establish an equal priority between irrigation and municipal reservations and to promote an objective analysis and appropriate allocation of resources through the contested case process (letters available). • The Commission held a rulemaking hearing in Newberg on July 15 and received testimony on the proposed rule revision. July 15 - August 28, 1992 • The Commission amended the Willamette Basin rules to delete the irrigation and municipal reservations. The Commission maintained its previous decision to rescind the municipal reservation. Some additional language was to the rules based on a request by municipal providers. The purpose of this language is to provide policy guidance for future evaluations and actions during contested case that requires consideration of municipal and irrigation future uses based on plans and the public interest (690-502-030 (6)). 2 1 • r Priority Date - 690-79-040 The order establishing the reservation shall fix the date on which the request for reservation was filed with the Department as the reservation priority date. A request for reservatiot will be deemed filed on the date it is received by the Department provided that either: (1) The request contains all the information required under OAR 690-79-060; or (2) Any additional information the Department deems necessary to complete the application is received by the Department within 30 days of its request for additional information, or within such additional time as the Department provides, not to exceed one year. {adopted 10-28-88; 8-8-90; amended: 6-5-92 and renumbered from 690-77-200(2)} Term of Reservation •and Extensions 690-79-050 The Commission may approve the reservation of water for up to 20 years. Prior to termination of the approved term of reservation, the applicant may apply for a time extension of up to 20 years. The proposed time extension shall be subject to all rule requirements and standards governing review of initial reservations. An approved time extension shall retain the priority date of the original reservation. The Commission also may require review of a reservation at specified time intervals during the approved reservation time period. For the purpose of that review, the Commission may require the applicant to provide evidence that the purpose, intent, and amount of the reservation still meet the public interest standards of OAR Chapter 690, Division 11. {adopted 10-28-88; 8-8-90; amended: 6-5-92 and renumbered from 690-77-200(3)) Information Requirements 690-79-060 Requests for reservations of water for future economic development shall include the following information: (l) Agency name and address; (2) Purpose of the reservation; (3) Amount of water proposed to be reserved and evidence of water availability; (4) Source(s) of water to supply the reservation; (5) If the reservation is to be provided by existing storage, agreement to the proposed reservation by the party in charge of disposition of the stored water or evidence of authorization or allocation consistent with the proposed reservation; (6) If the proposal is to reserve water to be stored in a new facility, evidence that sites for the storage facility can he developed and that water is available for storage: (7) Approximate season(s) of use: (8) Approximate location(s) of use; (9) Evidence that the proposal is compatible with overall basin program goals and policies: 2 tu� (10)Identification of affected local governments and copies of letters notifying each local : government of the intent to file a reservation request accompanied by a description of the ,.r` reservation proposal. _1. (11) Intended types of uses(s) of the reserved water; (12) Expected duration of the reservation prior to application for use of the water; (13)Economic benefits provided; (14)Water sources alternatives; (15) Evidence that the proposal does not conflict with Scenic Waterway flow requirements. (16) Evidence that the proposed reservation and water use(s) will promote the beneficial use of the water without waste; and (17) Potential adverse impacts on water resources. {adopted 10-28-88; 8-8-90; amended: 6-5-92 and renumbered from 690-77-200(4)) Notice of Reservation Request 690-79-070 Within 30 days of receiving a request for reservation that is deemed complete by the Director,the Director shall notify: (1) The Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Environmental Quality, Parks and Recreation Department, Economic Development Department, other affected federal and state agencies and the planning department(s) of affected local governments; (2) Affected Indian Tribes; and (3) All persons on the Departments weekly mail list and reservations mail list. {adopted 10-28-88; 8-8-90; amended: 6-5-92 and renumbered from 690-77-200(5)) Copies of Reservation Request 690-79-080 Upon request from any governmental entity or other party, the Department shall provide a complete copy of the request for reservation. [adopted 6-5-92) Comment Period and Land Use Compatibility • 690-79-090 (1) A 60-day comment period shall commence on the day the Department deposits the notice in the mail of the United State Postal Service. All comments must be received by the Department on or before the end of the 60-day comment period. The notice will state the date by which comments must be received by the Department. a t2 •■ 4M THE OREGONIAN,MONDAY,JANUARY 4, 1993 �vH .. S U . _ .. . ,'''* S :Demands for water $region24 million headache give UThe region's water districts and cities ulation growth in each city or water district. Vancouver would pay 15.11 percent, or the study.He said it would cost them about payment system,"he said."The funds are in ''are being coaxed to join in a costly study Just how much each will pay depends on $362,640,if it should join.If it does not,the $10 per capita, versus perhaps only$1 per the capital improvement budget and won't of new water sources how many sign up for the study.The more Tualatin Valley Water District would be the capita in the more densely populated areas. come out of the water rates.I feel strongly participants,the less the cost for each. second-biggest participant at 13 percent,or "You can't convince me that Portland is that we need a long-range regional plan." •;ey ERIC GORANSON The study will look at increasing the stor- $312,000. more efficient than Clackamas," Harrison It is uncertain whether Sandy will take age capacity in the Bull Run watershed,in. Victor Ehrlich, Vancouver city engineer, said. "Once a water district begins serving part. •,of The Oregonian staff jetting winter runoff into the ground for said the city was interested but would not 25,000 to 50,000 customers,studies show that "I don't know if we should be in any re- summer use and tapping the Clackamas, make any decision until after the Jan. 19 there are no economies of scale." gional(water) solution, since we have our . About 30 Portland-area water districts and Trask, Tualatin, Columbia and Willamette meeting.He added that Vancouver had plen- The Clackamas district serves about 70,000 own plan and unused rights in the Salmon cities are wrestling with a request to help rivers ty of ground water,available and was inter- people, including residents of Gladstone, River," said Mike Walker, Sandy public :pay for a$2.4 million study aimed at finding Portland would like all participants on ested in the quality,reliability and cost of Oak Grove and Mount Scott. works director. new water sources to supply regional needs. board by the time the district and city rep any water sources it might develop. Ken Moon,manager of the Boring Water The Rockwood Water District in mid-Mult- ,, The study is being pushed by the Portland resentatives meet Jan.19.Portland paid for The Tualatin Valley Water District says it District,said he hoped the district would be nomah County just paid$35,000 for a study Water Bureau, which needs to find new the entire$615000 cost of a preliminary stu- , wants to help with the study. left out,despite the pressure to take part.He on tapping the Columbia River for water Sources to ensure that there is enough water dy that listed the six potential major supply "Our public is concerned where we'll get said that Boring's nearly$16,000 share of the and doesn't have any money for a regional .to meet the'demandsof population growth. sources.The$2.4 million study will narrow our water,and we've been looking forward cost would be three times the amount it study this year,said general manager Duane The supply problem is also worse during to it,"said Gene Seibel,district administra- spends annually on capital improvements. Robinson. drought years,such as 1992,when water use the list. tor."The study will be a road map for many The Boring area has a declining water table, The Rockwood Water District,which has ';was restricted from July to October. Districts react differently years into the future. But I have my con- and the state has limited well drilling. had strained relations with the Portland Wa- Peak water needs are expected to double cerns about the smaller districts taking Alan Fletcher, Clairmont Water District ter Bureau since it became a public utility to more than a billion gallons a day in 2050. Most districts and cities expect to take part." manager,sees no inequity in the program. district in the late 1980s,is thinking of devel- Estimates of the cost of capital im- part in the study.But there are some reser- The Clackamas Water District also will Clairmont, which uses Clackamas River oping its own sources and selling water to provements needed to meet that demand vations,particularly over the cost,which is help pay for the study,but Carter Harrison, water,covers 45 square miles including Red- other users. range up to$1.2 billion. double initial forecasts. district engineer,wants the study to look at land,Beavercreek and Holcomb-Outlook'It Gresham has no reservations about path- . Participation in the study does not obli- Portland will pay the lion's share—22.17 the cost of developing a Clackamas River is regarded as potentially one of the fastest- cipating. gate any water district or city to take part in percent,or$532,080 if all 32 districts and cit- Basin Authority,as well as looking at a re- growing areas, Fletcher said. Clairmont "We realize the only way to plan for the any capital improvements.The costs of the ies and Clark County, Wash., take part. If gionwide program. would pay $140,640, if all but Vancouver region's water needs is to do it together," study will be prorated over three years on Vancouver also joins, Portland's share Harrison wondered whether smaller,spar- should take part. said Greg DiLoreto,director of environmen- the basis of the estimated water use and pop- would drop to 18 percent. sely populated water districts could afford "We're not ... in disagreement with the tal services. 411( KING CITY 15300 S.W.116th Avenue,King City,Oregon 97224 Phone:639-4082 MEMORAMTIUM_ Date: January 20 , 1993 Tn: Tigard Water District Advisory Committee From: John A. Buol , City Manager Subject : Regional Providers Advisory Group On Tuesday i attended the RPAG held at Tigard Water District . The group had a discussion on the revised scope and budget for Phase 2 of the Regional Water Supply Plan. Attached is a memo from the Consultant Negotiation Committee with a fact sheet with reasons for participation in an Intergovernmental Agreement to finance and manage this project . The Negotiation Committee came up with a final cost of $2 ,320, 397 . Also attached is a list of budget changes and additions suggested by Engineer Barakat & Chamberlin inc. and a copy of monthly estimates for cash requirements . The RPAG approved the revised cost as suggested by the Negotiation Committee. The Advisory Group held a discussion on who would participate in the study. Attached is a list of participants with those indicating a yes or no in being part of the study. The City of Vancouver and Clark County, Washington have withdrawn. This should reduce the cost by 10 to 15 percent. Also, the cities of Newberg and Sandy said no. The staff of Portland will contact Gladstone and the other six entities of the non-RPAG members to see if they will participate. Another item discussed was the revised proposed draft of an Intergovernmental Agreement dated January 16, 1993 . i am enclosing a copy. The City of Portland's attorney will make the changes and mail out copies in the next two weeks . it is hopeful the agreements can be signed by April 1 , 1993 . The Tigard Water District will be required to execute the agreement with the other entities , JAB :mg 4 1993_ RECEI •• • January 13, 1992 Memorandum TO: Regional Providers Advisory Group FROM: Consultant Negotiation Committee RE: Revised Scope and budget for Phase 2 of the Regional Water Supply Plan We have completed our consultant negotiation process. We reviewed the proposal submitted to the RPAG by Barakat&Chamberlin as the prime contractor, and asked the consultants to respond to a number of questions posed by ourselves and other providers. We then met with them in series of four meetings to discuss those questions. The primary directive to our committee by RPAG was to refine the scope as much as possible,while still retaining a final product which will meet the objectives of a regional water supply plan. Both the process and the product must facilitate decision making on how the region will meet its immediate and long term water needs. The consultant responded to our request by proposing a number of scope reductions. The committee,however, was faced with being at the process stage between a proposal and a refined scope of work common to most large project contract/scope negotiations. This meant that a number of questions about proposal refinement had to be resolved,as well as an assessment made of what elements were more vital than others to retain the desired end product. Although a number of the scope reductions were acceptable,other refinements were identified as necessary to make the proposal into a scope of work which is detailed enough, and contains the right task elements to create a usable end product. One of the negotiating committee's goals was to develop a scope of work that allows a contract to be written with a firm bottom line cost. The idea was to avoid a process which anticipates changes in scope and cost during the project. The end result is that the scope has been improved and refined,but the cost($2, 313,965) has remained essentially the same as the lower of the original proposal estimates. It is the belief of the negotiating committee that this scope of work is appropriate to obtain a regional water supply plan which will enable us to make the decisions needed to meet our future water needs in the most cost-effective manner. Attached you will find a participation rationale which together with the materials you received yesterday will help explain the decisions which were made about the scope and project cost. Some additional materials are being prepared by Barakat&Chamberlin (an explanation of those items removed from the proposed scope and those which were refined or added in the negotiation process and a monthly cash flow for the duration of the project). The committee members would be glad to answer any questions that you might have about the negotiation process. In addition we will be able to respond to questions at the RPAG meeting on January 19th. Committee members: Gene Seibel,Tualatin Valley Water District(642-1511) Greg DiLoreto,City of Gresham(669-2402) Alan Fletcher,Clairmont Water District(656-7240) Lorna Stickel,Portland Water Bureau(796-7502) Victor Ehrlich,City of Vancouver (206-696-8008) A Portland/Vancouver Regional Water Supply Plan Reasons for Participation in an Intergovernmental Agreement to Finance and Manage this Project • Summary: The Portland/Vancouver metropolitan area's primary water suppliers and distributors have been developing a program to evaluate cooperatively the region's water supply situation. They have developed some information(called Phase 1)about demand,conservation,and new supply sources over this summer and have developed jointly a proposal for taking this information and moving into the next phase of a regional water supply planning process. This Phase 2 planning process will result in a regional water supply plan which will provide recommendations about how to meet short term needs that may exist in various parts of the region and will provide, within two years,phased implementation strategies for meeting the region's future water supply needs to the year 2050. This plan will provide specific guidance to the region's water providers and decision makers regarding the implementation of demand management/conservation programs,regional system modifications for greater efficiency,actions needed prior to development of specific new supply sources,and appropriate institutional arrangements for providing water service throughout the region. The region's water providers developed a conceptual scope of work to develop an integrated regional water supply plan. A specific proposal for accomplishing this work was then developed using a consultant selection and negotiation process that has involved many of the region's providers from throughout the geographic area. The prime contractor for this work is a firm called Barakat&Chamberlin. This firm will manage a team of consultants such as J.M. Montgomery,Barney&Worth,Parametrix,Murray,Smith&Assoc.,and Squier and Assoc. A detailed scope of work has been prepared and the total project cost is$2,313,965. The Regional Providers Advisory Group agreed some months ago that the appropriate way to fund Phase 2 was to apportion the costs among the providers based upon the high estimate of the amount of growth in water demand on a peak day in the year 2050. The water demand figures were generated by CH2M Hill in the Phase 1"Water System Demand Study". A shares table has been developed to allocate the costs based upon the total contracted project amount. This same method has been included in an Intergovernmental Agreement which would set up the financial and project management process for Phase 2. The time for making a decision about participation in this project is upon us. Why should a water provider participate in this project? Economies of Scale and Permitting Requirements • There are strong economic advantages to looking regionally at a complex matter such as water supply. The region is currently supplied by a number of different sources and systems,some of which are interconnected and others of which are not. Deciding how each provider will meet its own needs ten,thirty,or fifty years from now is very difficult and expensive in today's regulatory environment. The chances are very good that for any given entity,the amount of money being discussed as their share for Phase 2 would be spent many times over if they decide to look at meeting their own needs individually. 1 • The purpose of looking regionally is to identify all the interconnected issues related to meeting regional water supply needs and to allow decision makers and the public to understand how various options interrelate with each other. By studying the most promising supply options at one time,(including regional conservation potentials,new sources of supply,regional transmission and system efficiencies,and institutional arrangements)all of the issues can be evaluated together in a systematic and integrated fashion. Using this integrated resources planning approach will make it more difficult for agencies or other interested parties to claim that the alternatives were not evaluated properly. There are critical choices that this region needs to make,and making them in a regional context will be easier and more cost efficient than doing them piece by piece. • In today's regulatory environment many water supply utilities around the country have run into major problems with decision making about how to meet future water needs. For example the Two Forks project in Denver was a case where an option was selected and tens of millions were spent by ratepayers to gain needed permits which have still not been granted. On Weare Creek,Virginia a similar exercise has been occurring. Federal permits have been vetoed based upon insufficient alternatives analysis by project proponents. The East Bay Municipal Utility District in the Oakland,California area has been required to redo their planning process,to the tune of$15 million,to look at more alternative ways of meeting their future needs. Many regulatory agencies are requiring that water supply be looked at regionally and that watershed issues be addressed together before they will grant permits. Our region cannot afford,nor do we need to spend millions of dollars, pursuing multiple permit processes. The integrated resources planning process envisioned in Phase 2 will allow us to eliminate some of these problems by thinking ahead and doing our planning together in a regional way. The money spent now may well save us all from spending more money in the future. It will streamline our permitting processes by incorporating the regulatory concerns in the process up front. • This planning process is forward thinking and may well meet requirements to look at integrated planning on a watershed basis that will be developed in the near future within federal legislation such as the Clean Water Act,the Safe Drinking Water Act,or the Endangered Species Act when they are reauthorized by Congress. We may well be ahead of the game by conducting Phase 2. • This is a regional water supply plan which would be financed and directed by you,the region's water providers. No one provider will direct the effort. It is designed to meet the multiple needs of the entire region. Alternative scenario options will not only look at regional options but will include looking at meeting needs on a subregional basis. It is designed to be your project done in a joint fashion. • Any work that is being done by individual providers is able to be incorporated into Phase 2. It will complement many planning activities which are already underway throughout the region and will integrate them into the regional plan. An Interstate Effort • There are advantages to looking at the needs of Clark County,Washington along with the tri-county metropolitan area. Clark County is a growing part of this region and it faces similar problems with supply sources as providers in Oregon,such as groundwater permitting and contamination of groundwater sources. The Phase I work indicated that looking at the Columbia River as a new source of water should be done from a bi-State perspective. Evaluating this source jointly provides economies of scale that will promote a look at the issues from the perspectives of both states in terms of intake facilities, treatment,and transmission. 2 • The integrated nature of this plan will enable Clark County to look at supply side and demand side options for meeting their needs and will present the Columbia River and transmission system requirements as a potential option for them alone or in combination with Oregon. This work will provide the type of analysis that their permitting agencies will desire if surface water is an option they choose to pursue. This is the Right Way To Do It. • Integrated Resources Water Planning is the right way to do a regional water supply plan. By developing various scenarios for meeting different levels of water supply needs based on various mixes of conservation,new sources,transmission and system efficiencies our decision makers and the public will be able to see way the risks,benefits,tradeoffs,and costs are likely to be as well as how various public values are incorporated into the different alternatives. We want to meet our current and future clients'needs,and doing it in this manner,will present them with an understandable decision making process. The challenge of this process is that it incorporates all of the concerned parties,stakeholders and decision makers throughout the process. We all need to hear what people from throughout the region are thinking about how we meet their water needs. The planning process is designed to make technical matters understandable and presentable to various levels of interest by having a variety of targeted materials developed for review based upon the desire and needs of the recipients. The public involvement element is designed to be flexible and allow the region's providers to design the best outreach program and respond to issues as they arise throughout the project. • The consultant project team which has been selected for this project is excellent. The consultant team members have a high level of expertise which results in a cost effective project for the individual providers. All aspects of the project have people with expertise and experience working on them. The prime consultant firm of Barakat&Chamberlin bring special expertise in integrated resources planning in both the water and electric utilities arena and in the area of demand management analysis. J.M.Montgomery is an international firm with experience in water supply systems including transmission, treatment,and source development. The firms of Murray,Smith&Associates and Squier &Associates will be working with J.M.Montgomery to evaluate water resource availability,system design,and geotechnical issues. Parametrix is a firm with extensive depth in environmental analysis,while Barney&Worth has worked extensively in the northwest on public involvement and institutional analysis. The teamwork between the various consultants and the different providers will be a real benefit to this type of project. • We are the entities who know the most about supplying water. Although there are many water providers in the region,this need not become an impediment to meeting our future needs. We should be doing this planning now,and together. By developing a regional water supply plan we are making it clear to other bodies such as Metro,State agencies, and the legislatures in both States that we are responsible water providers. Metro has the functional authority to do regional water supply planning in the new charter,and the recent Goldschmidt Task Force recommendations contained in draft legislation gives us a brief window to conduct regional water supply planning. We do not need some other agency to take on this charge and do the planning for us. By looking at institutional arrangements and financing as a part of this work we will be involved and will be able to look in an objective way at what the future may hold for us. Gaining the agreement s needed to make this work proceed is very important to each of us if we wish to retain some degree of say in our future destiny. Having this work be coordinated and self directed is in our best interests. 3 • Past decision makers in this region were visionary in the work they did to make water available in a safe and efficient manner. Our challenge today is to equal this tradition of forward thinking and action. Times are different than they were for our predecessors,and these times require that we coordinate our efforts more than we have in the past. The work done by the Region's water providers to design a visionary process to take us into the next century is up to all of us to implement. Because the project is a major financial commitment for all the water providers it is vital that as many participate as possible,or it will not be possible to begin this integrated water supply plan. We can do it,but it will take a commitment from each of us to recognize the need and to meet that need in a timely and efficient fashion. Participation in Phase 2 presents the best opportunity to provide the necessary leadership. 4 '8u3ha«:solDrea; BARAKAT CHA IBERLIN INC. o,'anu 18tH Hoar J'+asn ngton,U.C. Oakland,California 94612 Toronto (510)893-7800 Portland,OR Fax(510)893-1321 Boulder Son Diego MEMORANDUM TO: Lorna Stickel FROM: Gary Fiske RE: Regional Water Supply Plan Budget Changes DATE: January 13, 1993 As a result of the discussions between the consulting team and the RPAG negotiating committee, we have agreed to a final budget figure of $2,320,397. At your request, following is a "road map" for moving from the budget included in our September 28 proposal to this final budget figure. (Task and subtask numbers correspond to the proposal.) We begin with the original proposed budget with options, which was: $2,470,873 From that figure, the consultants and the committee agreed to the following cuts: • Resource Plan Integration Optional Subtask 2.3B: $ 8,000 Eliminate • Resource Plan Integration Subtask 2.2: $ 2,160 Minor cost reductions • Resource Plan Integration Subtask 2.3: $15,080 Perform scenario analysis instead of probabilistic simulation. • Resource Plan Integration Task 3: $11,950 Narrow the universe of models to be examined. Eliminate formal written report. Regional Water Supply Plan Budget Changes January 13, 1993 Page 2 • • Resource Plan Integration Task 4: $ 3,600 Eliminate financial analysis (replace with PFM -- see below) • Public Information & Involvement Subtask 2.2: $ 2,500 Reduce focus groups from 3 to 2. • Public Information & Involvement Subtask 2.3: $ 5,000 Reduce interviews from 100 to 80. • Public Information & Involvement: $13,600 General reassessment of labor hours • Demand Management & Conservation Tasks 2,4,5, and 7: $36,317 Narrow the universe of measures to be identified and screened • Demand Management & Conservation: $ 8,002 Miscellaneous adjustments • Regional System Efficiency & Transmission Tasks 1,2,3: $30,300 Limit evaluation to "regionally significant systems " identified in Tri-County Pipeline Study • Regional System Efficiency & Transmission Task 5: $12,240 Reduce geotechnical evaluations • Regional System Efficiency & Transmission: $ 2,000 Miscellaneous adjustments • Source Option Analysis Task 4: $19,840 Eliminate consideration of ASR spreading option • Source Option Analysis Task 5: $47,332 Adjust cost for revised scope of environmental analysis • Source Option Analysis Tasks 7,9: $23,280 Focus on water treatment process train descriptions and limit conceptual design to selected alternatives Regional Water Supply Plan Budget Changes January 13, 1993 Page 3 • • Institutional Arrangement Alternatives Task 4: $11,450 Make more efficient use of RPAG members to develop evaluation criteria • Institutional Arrangement Alternatives Task 7: $ 4,400 Eliminate Financial Advisory Group (instead use PFM -- see below) • Institutional Arrangement Alternatives: $ 6,425 Miscellaneous adjustments TOTAL REDUCTIONS $263,476 SUBTOTAL NET OF REDUCTIONS $2,207,397 The committee and the consultants also agreed to make the following additions to the budget: • Resource Plan Integration Direct Expenses: $40,000 100 copies of 4-color final report • Public Information and Involvement: $ 7,000 New task added to develop initial PI&I Plan • Public Information and Involvement items to be performed by consultants rather than RPAG: • Meeting scheduling, organizing, facilitation $12,000 • Design and production of slides $ 3,000 • Subcontracting for design and graphics services $33,000 for newsletters, bill inserts, other publications • Institutional Arrangement Alternatives: $18,000 Subcontract to Public Financial Management for financial analysis TOTAL ADDITIONS $114,000 FINAL PROJECT BUDGET $2,320,397 MO Harrison Street BARAKAT CHAMBERLIN, INC. Oakland 18th Floor Washington,D.C. Oakland,California 94612 Toronto (510)893-7800 Portland,OR Fax(510)893-1321 Boulder San Diego MEMORANDUM TO: Lorna Stickel FROM: Gary Fiske cnSF RE: Estimated Monthly Cash Requirements DATE: January 14, 1993 Per your request, here are some rough estimates of the cash requirements for the Regional Water Supply Management Plan for the first 6 contract months: MONTH ESTIMATED BILLINGS 1 $ 70,000 2 $105,000 3 $210,000 4 $240,000 5 $235,000 6 $225,000 Please call me if you have any questions about these figures. cc: Bob Jossis, Brad Higbee, Skip Schick 1 RECEIVED JAN 1 3 1993 CITY OF ;��;?:' •.�s�;,, Mike Lindberg,Commissioner , 0% Michael F.Rosenberger,Administrator '='= 1zi PORTLAND, OREGON 1120 S.W.5th Avenue ,tib =; Portland,Oregon 97204-1926 • Information(503)796-7404 l : BUREAU OF WATER WORKS - 185 January 12, 1993 Memorandum TO: Regional Providers Advisory Group (RPAG) Members FROM: Mike Rosenberger (jce RE: January 19 RPAG meeting Attached you will find information based on the deliberations of the negotiation committee appointed by RPAG to refine the scope of work with the selected consultant team headed by Barakat &Chamberlin for completing Phase 2 of the Regional Water Supply Plan. The primary objective of the January 19th meeting will be to discuss individual participation in Phase 2. It would be helpful if you could look over the attached materials,particularly noting your provider share as computed on the RPAG Shares Table. This table is based upon the groupings of providers listed in Regional Demand Study completed last February by CH2M Hill with each provider share based upon the growth increment of peak day water demand in the year 2050 at the high range forecast. The use of this method for apportioning the shares was agreed upon by the RPAG a number of months ago. The table contains the figures for the 10% contingency budget called for in the draft IGA which you have been sent earlier. In addition,some what-if numbers are provided if not everyone financially participates in Phase 2 so that you can see how things change if full participation is not possible. This table is based upon a bottom line project cost of$2,313,965 which has come out of the consultant negotiation process. You will be receiving information from the consultant negotiation committee in another day about this negotiation process which should help in your deliberations. In addition a revised draft of the IGA will be available at the meeting. At the January 19th meeting we would like to be able to get an idea of the likelihood of your agency participating in Phase 2. Based upon this information we will then discuss our strategy on the IGA, the scope, and any potential project start dates. Regional Water Supply Plan Phase 2 RPAG Shares Table ' , Dollar Cost of Dollar Cost of Full Participation Adjusted Non Re Approtioned Full Participation 10% Non 20 % Non- Participants Share amount Participation Participation Share amount 10% Default Participation Participation RPAG Members Percent(%) Percent(%) Percent (%) Dollars ($) Contingency Share Increase Share Increase JWC Beaverton �S 2.11 2.11 2.11% 48,825 53,707 59,078 64,449 Canby 4,c) 1.64 1.64 1.64% 37,949 41,744 45,918 50,093 Clackamas WD -ec 1.91 1.91 1.91% 44,197 48,616 53,478 58,340 Gladstone ho -i-Q, 0.82 0.82 0.82% 18,975 20,872 22,959 25,046 Clairmont i,(-e 4.76 4.76 4.76% 110,145 121,159 133,275 145,391 Clark PUD ''U7 5.79 5.79 5.79% 133,979 147,376 162,114 176,852 Damascus q ..?c, 2.34 2.34 2.34% 54,147 59,561 65,518 71,474 Fairview ` p 0.63 0.63 0.63% 14,578 16,036 17,639 19,243 Gresham 3.95 3.95 3.95% 91,402 100,542 110,596 120,650 JWC Hillsboro i,t..Q5 5.24 5.24 5.24% 121,252 133,377 146,715 160,052 JWC Forest Groote tiv,iiripc{)y.. 1.94 1.94 1.94% 44,891 49,380 54,318 59,256 Lake Oswego I:(,PS )7,,r{'f'carr;-f- 3.31 3.31 3.31% 76,592 84,251 92,677 101,102 Milwaukie (i�. bys,bao 0.27 0.27 0.27% 6,248 6,872 7,560 8,247 Mt. Scott (a h Co, rJn1,**A 014412 2.42 2.42% 55,998 61,598 67,758 73,917 Newburg 141-7 0.92 0.92 0.92% 21,288 23,417 25,759 28,101 Oak Lodge (,(‘es 0.42 0.42 0.42% 9,719 10,691 11,760 12,829 Portland 4..e5 17.98 17.98 17.98% 416,051 457,656 503,422 549,187 Rockwood /j 5 0.65 0.65 0.65% 15,041 16,545 18,199 19,854 Sandy Iii p 0.71 0.71 0.71% 16,429 18,072 19,879 21,686 Sherwood �S- 1.31 1.31 1.31% 30,313 33,344 36,679 40,013 Oregon City Sherwood (41)S- 2.58 2.58 2.58% 59,700 65,670 72,237 78,804 West Linn i? 2.90 2.90 2.90% 67,105 73,815 81,197 88,579 Tigard j�-� 1.80 1.80 1.80% 41,651 45,817 50,398 54,980 Troutdalet-e 1.35 1.35 1.35% 31,239 34,362 37,799 41,235 Tualatin 2.59 2.59 2.59% 59,932 65,925 72,517 79,110 Tualatin Valley Wdtfe 8.48 8.48 8.48% 196,224 215,847 237,431 259,016 Vancouver 0 15.11 15.11 15.11% 349,640 384,604 423,065 461,525 Wilsonville i,I,ti 2.75 2.75 2.75% 63,634 69,997 76,997 83,997 Non-RPAG MemiJers' 3.32 3.32 3.32% 76,824 84,506 92,957 101,407 TOTAL 10 0.0 0 100.00 1 00.00/° 2,3 1 3 2,313,965 <:.>< i iM. >s ::aini:migaa >« > >' _> > . 6la1/Y ?tV Y- C/t 0 6-2 '''1/12/9 _ z_ e Fedde /12/9de C./Ss f 9:46 AM INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS A. ROLE OF THE CITY OF PORTLAND 3 1. Entering into Contract with Consultant 3 2. Day to Day Management Obligations 3 3 . Progress Payments 3 4. Review Work for Compliance 3 5 . Reports to Steering Committee 3 6. Manage Financial Aspects of IGA 3 7 . Present Amendments 4 8. Approve Minor Changes to Project Scope 4 9 . Notice of Participant Default 4 10 . Contract Assignment 4 11. Conflict of Interest Provision 4 B. ROLE OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE 4 1. Number of Members 5 2. Election of Chair and Secretary 5 3. Frequency of Meetings 5 4. Action by Majority Vote 5 5. Keeping Minutes 5 6. Quorum Required 5 7 . Authorized to Require Report on Project 6 8. Review Progress Reports\Provide Advice 6 9 . Review Consultant' s Material\Comment 6 10. Action on Amendments 6 11. Action when Member does not Participate 6 12. Designating Key Personnel 13. Participant Communication 6 C. ROLE OF PARTICIPANTS COMMITTEE 7 1. Action by Majority Vote of Quorum 7 2. Action on Major Amendments 7 3. Keeping of Minutes 7 4 . Action upon Vacancy 7 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page ii 5 . Removal of Steering Committee Member 7 6. Meetings 7 7 . Election of Chair & Secretary 7 8 . Contract Assignment 8 D. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS 8 1. Initial Participant Contribution 8 2. Payment Schedule 9 3. Payment Schedule--Amendments 9 4. Payment Delinquencies 9 E. AMENDMENTS TO THE PHASE II PROJECT 10 1. Minor Amendments 10 2. Major Amendments 11 3 . Major Amendment Cost Allocation 11 4. Amendment Approval Process ii F. REGIONAL WATER PLANNING FUND 12 G. BUY-IN OPTION 12 H. TERMINATION 14 I. SHARED LIABILITY 14 J. OWNERSHIP OF PHASE II STUDY PRODUCTS 15 K. OREGON LAW AND FORUM 15 1. Agreement Construed According to Oregon Law . . . 15 2. . Courts 15 L. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 15 1. Mediation 15 2. Notice of Dispute 16 3 . Issues not resolved within 30 days 16 4 . Function of Mediator 16 5 . Selection of Mediator 16 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page iii 6. Time for Mediation 16 7 . Performance, costs and obligations of Participants 16 M. NOTICE 16 N. INTEGRATION 17 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 1 AGREEMENT - DRAFT - THIS DRAFT -THIS :1.4:L430 `Nl t ', AGREEMENT '1 er fte*r .Agreexaeu' is entered into by and among (list cities and water districts) herein called "Participants. " This Agreement shall be effective WHEREAS, future regional water supply is an issue of great interest to the Participants; and WHEREAS, the City of Portland, in partnership with the Regional Providers ' Advisory Group (RPAG) , completed a Phase I study of regional water supply needs consisting of three planning studies: the Water System Demand Study, the Water Source Opticns Study and the City of Portland Conservation Study; and WHEREAS, these 4011 ; studies predict§4 potential significant shortfalls in water supply region wide, and in all source subareas, by2050 :, :::<,r,,.:,,.:::t:• ::«T<,.: :::v:<A:;<,..<:< ::Yt:x.,r .'Ar„.,,. pomp 't mpg4g,r„:x : : ::::;• : vvai i aii Lllly additional, detailed study in a Phase II Project; and WHEREAS, since the release of the Phase I studies -members of RPAG have: 1) developed and participated in public outreach/public involvement programs, 2) developed a draft scope of work for formulation of a regional water supply plan (Phase II) ; and 3) developed a process for adoption of an intergovernmental agreement to fund and manage the Phase II project; and WHEREAS , a Phase II Project description has been developed and approved by the Participants; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the Phase II Project is to develop aftg#W6gWi*O0 plan and phased implementation strategies INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 2 for meeting the region' s future water supply needs tbouNommig ;,., .,;: ;: ,;;,;.;;.; Q,;;-.J,g: . i3: to the year 2050; and -WHEREA1S, the Phase II Project objectives are to provide specific guidance to the region' s water providers and decision makers regarding the implementation of: 1) demand management/ conservation programs; 2) regional system modifications for greater efficiency; 3) actions needed to develkdp„LL L specific new supply sources (e.g. , environmental impact statements, water rights, permits, design) ; 4) appropriate institutional arrangements for providing water service throughout the Region; and WHEREAS, a request for consultant qualifications was issued, consultant proposals were reviewed 000(0010040#0 .: 10§ z + IN? andf: i% i? FX { h 4M " 41uf: ry tWOONNWPOWiedientriiiNNOROMOWKWOMMEM# chosen as the gum consultant for the Phase II Project; and WHEREAS, the RPAG agreed that a Steering Committee of the Participants would be responsible for overall pfiggimg Project direction; and WHEREAS, the RPAG agree that it would be most efficient to have one of the Participants administer the "'+nri4h4i:•:?4iii:3:mvi+:vi montiowomost contract ::mmaggii>::miovE and manage the day-to-day aspects of the Naga Project, and that this Participant shall be the City of Portland due to its greater staffing resources. • NOW, THEREFORE, the Participants agree to the following terms : INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 3 A. ROLE OF THE CITY OF PORTLAND Portland shall: 1. Enter into a contract with g ak ' > h ere to conduct the work described in the attached scope of work. The ♦.vaa L1.uL.:, w ;a.ggt�;;R '4aR'aa' :""";.`"'Ave vae`-".`';`:':' .y 11Q11 Lc a�t.Loll_ ii L11G LV11lL V1 L11C VllL .Q1]]L aLLaL11CU LV L111S QyLCC1LLC 11L. 111C Ci vY is, hol,c.vc1 , aUL11V11G�11 LV 1llu�tG \ 111i11yCJ o t11G 1.411tract, as L1C l.CSSQlY 1V1 .LLS j1.11a1 appluval ab 1Vlly aS SU411 1.11a11yCS du 11V.. subs .`ant±v .L iL1%-. Guse t11 . LvLul CUM-) L VL 1..V1Ll�JC11S a a.1V11 �UC. 2. Be v>i:4::i:::i:;ii:�:;��.::::<i%•:F:i:^'.i'•i':^i::iiw.;:.;r esponsible` agig € ::• ;x: ;:...; < >:> ►" :"-. for day-to-day administration of the Phase II Project contract, subject to review by the Steering Committee and the Participants as described elsewhere in this Agreement. In particular Portland will be available to the consultant to ensure that the consultant understands the obligations of the contract. Portland shall also monitor the scheduling and quality of the consultant' s work. 3 . Make progress payments to the consultant for work accomplished as provided in the contract with the consultant. 4. Review the consultant' s work for compliance with the contract with the City. 5 . Review and provide to the Steering Committee oral or written project progress reports as directed by the Steering Committee. Such reports shall include a discussion of work . accomplished to date, significant discussions with the consultant, any modifications to the scope of the Project, and any other issues warranting Steering Committee review and discussion. 6. Manage the financial aspects of L11C IGA including collection of Participant contributions. " .............................................. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry wrk\iga-3.3 Page 4 • 7 . Da- u_ L1 ..,. C.J. u...z..,c1,..-kL,11,,D Lv Lhc 1/4-vL,L.LuvL L1 lcwi CiLy avi.JJ_vval * Nwiting it; deignted project to make such enmenth EbweigaingetweviRalowaiiiiiiisivigmaxialegnefigotegagegtagattizo 0101XMONDANNICOMMovourooadtetbstu0004000484g0400 gRavaiinipaffigfit. * 8 . Be authorized to approve minor changes to the Project scope of work which will better accomplish Project purposes and objectives and will not result in substantial changes to the scope of work or any increase in cost granoplampgago iiiiiisinteigesweeaat. Examples of such changes might include substitutions of non-key consultant team personnel, product format and minor revising to the Project task order or methodology. 9agaMMOB0§1§§#01000110104441NanieWOMSAM mauxtu 004#041011:0401404NiiaiammOINVIMANWWWWWWNIM ORNIMOMMONONINION1400=11411411141110#10: tiAtIMAIIMMODIMINIMULMAIROMMIP#414.15aiiiiii01 gouggauggamommommosingomougaming - tommolowommatwor...lacwnlostoviorgen ..; :l geregiawgmagonaipiigatessommatemamer4.7!:: ::-miA gesespewowlegramontenowronexemmo convow B. ROLE OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE The Steering Committee shall, unless otherwise indicated, be made up of two Participants from each of the following areas: Multnomah County (One member of which must be from the City of Portland Water Bureau) INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 5 • Washington County;' ................. Clackamas County ` Clark County, Washington (one representative only){ Members of the Steering Committee shall be selected by the members of the Participants Committee from each of the listed geographic areas . The purpose of the Steering Committee is to provide the Participants with a body to review the work of the consultant and to participate, with Portland, in managing the Project contract. It shall be cause for removal from the Steering Committee if a member fails on more than four occasions in any six month period to send a representative to the Steering Committee meetings. MOWERIDIN#The Participants Committee fMR M .;:::,,;:-::v.:;.::;.<<:>::::;:::,:::::>:::<- :><><> ::........ . :. :,:: . . . . remove a r,_:a : a ragab to "a . may, by majority vote, e member of the Steering Committee for cause as described in this paragraph. A Participant may resign its membership on the Steering Committee upon thirty days notice to all Participants. Participants from the applicable geographic area shall replace any resigning or removed Steering Committee member by majority vote. The Steering Committee shall: 1. Have seven (7) members. 2. Elect a Chair and Secretary, who may hold those positions until contract termination or completion; provided that the Steering Committee may decide at any time to have the Chair or Secretary serve for shorter terms and elect successors to the or±gin&l Chair andlidt Secretary as needed. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry.wrk\iga-3.31 Page 6 • 3 . Meet at least once a month. * ' s ><> << ' ......:::.................. >th: :::i; c�L�Ly,�J �{ vav:•.;:vx .... .. :v.v,....x-..:w;4:SS{?t<4}L;p:S4:S<4:SK++•:},v.:w:x:x}}x:r.?b:S 4S?.%4%isSii?<?-:L:SSw.xvSvt{;xvvhv:;SSv?.n::uvv!!i:\.:4Yi%.}:56:-:5:..; RM14...a' 1%::�•.�.',:(.�j..<::}:'-:•`:i::;j'::::.n((.��'....,.+y.V..�� ....`�fj::iii:�i''..r::::'�.}.:..:::'!:.1yiiµ..(..�iS.i}:i}::::::: i{:;�i[:i;-�i?y!::::':i:::i}ii:♦:iy};i::i....:{:�y:;''j.>$Yx<:�:1{:::.•:.-�:y�':::i::...:. i::i.`i..+�1y:- i}'_::r`.:i:::til ti:. o rn:. vv:S.4}}i:.:v}}}}}} :}:iv : O 1.11000 hl40:}i�fY4W 1Y�+•31 �vi M M#M rl.'.'w::i: ::4: #;4W .NSF:.':i:j:ii 4. Shall act by majority vote only. Each Steering Committee member shall have one vote. 5. ' ? w=µ j at and make available to Participants minutes of each of its meetings. 6. Take action only if there is a quorum of members present at the applicable meeting or, if necessary, present on a conference telephone call. Four (4) members shall constitute a quorum. 7. Be authorized, at anytime, to �G l���t Bog� �� . that Portland's designated project manager report to the Steering Committee on any issue regarding project administration, direction({anSI, d progress. L\...11 1C�lalG.7L Allay LV AlluJC Ly V11G Vl 1llV J.G 1LLCAllLC1.. V 1 L113 LCC.L llLy .lJLLLLLLL L LCC. 8. Review the regular progress reports of Portland' s designated project manager and of the consultant and provide aCly l c a11C1RAW direction to Portland and the consultant on :c ::f.NE ro' ect �. «^t.�.^.y.M;y{ x y ' :. ::t,., ,.. %Sti-i%{ ++.•rSF.S+rvaN.-nwnxx•.4xv+.vxh � ��.^+:::isYY?1J.�:h'3:F:T:;:7rf %.� ��...::�i�'•,•••;��,-+.'?G-L.3:: �.�r1:1•%f . i7}1%►:+�:��' t+.. nr..xl:nxv.S.:v:u wi.:c.{x+wx.r.mnut�}..hnvdG.\:AwK.44�C�aY��v{i4 •N��W.t-+wGv}i •v•n• .::.•. .•�yv...,..::{•:+.•i;+/.u}Fi}:r<}}}:FY'::!ti%:f�r4:::'v_in:?:n}:mi•a::•:+:a;�.}f:!+..:+"??•}":+Fr.+iY.?:4..,...',v.4Y.xri}".4:r{�4:IN,HF.{/'h}:ht!?'. ..iC4•: :'v' :.fs'v:.: `:''.iF''-�e'`:e`7Ei#.�r'.'i i:i:}i. ' ;:>s::i}:.Wi, 1�.^. ;`L;� ,�i1y yAWyAjpy.-: s:: �.. v �fl::i?i ::W.:'�:ij���: ti?: � •:A �'`uai.:.�.#:fv'•v'Yf"".Yili}f1•.. :tF�i.{Q� .��1�y+1J•yiy.f�x �i !�•:-0b:ti!•%:!•{i4.+..v::}�SS•:Sii:44}i:�}}i{Hfit4f 4<4}}} 4f•}i}i%4%•%N.•}}:;�•}}"fq+f.•:•Y.-:4%•'ft{{tw}}n }J:Yf.•iNi.\}SOC•Yiff/F}?in+ '•i:�:i4%+'Y:ro}i�ht'�J:O} iy}���.�yS �!��},j�•f:.::.}v,S.}•{:.:?+.:::�t!?:��C...{:��•./ff.+::�4♦}:ti?ati?i::.�:.�i>:!{?+iip4:+�:y?u•} .l. :i:.•.M.{++:•:'.j}:On :i.�\r;:;'{:'�•i g ti L'Y'v..ff�'A;�ri::'' lilvJl c LJ J. �.Ji vytcDS 4}S;•},x:+X<::•.�?v :4n.\�%•%-rives?Li}i}:{vF}>Y:Yri4}:+Y:Si}ii�'ay....n-:i."v}.vi> 9. Review written materials submitted to it by the consultant and, through a process agreed to by the Steering Committee, provide commentary and suggestions on such materials. 10 . Approve or disapprove minor amendments to the Project scope of work and recommend approval or disapproval of major amendments to the Participants Committee. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 7 • 11. Advise the Participants Committee if a member of the Steering Committee resigns or fails to send a representative to the Steering Committee meetings more than four times in any six month period. jri:-0l :::}} '''iO:i'}::::L4ii:Ail :::i? :Y:} ::�'f..,.•`::�1.7 �::�::�:>•�.,......z.. :s:�€<.:.::���::}:i>:4::� �::>�>�.ur�>:o:s a s: :�:�::::x��:c �€:��:s:::;�:. ..:�.:................................... ni}}:�}}}}:i{i•:{Sy-1.3vriv}%4}is3:•i}}}:: {i{•}}}:4:Lily'i.C3n•}:i4:•}i:3:{:.�:::.v.v�::{::::::::}}:{•}}}Y}Y}%v? i:.}:{{•:ii}:?viri{•:i•:{•:{•}:•:^:{{iii}:{3:?.,!{v.3:::.vv::n-:.vw:: •.•.,x�}.a,xwr r:::..y}v.?xf..}}}y+:;{.}:.iK!•f.}:•:{r•'3rd:+:v^}rif:•}iti4r'r:x:f:}}};n:{:.:5...:.:ri}Yfp}:r,:riv:i!:,:{3:{x.};x,v.3:{.:ti:nn:•i}Y++. xv Yl.3.v - �:!':{.+ff.{:: ::i:}F:tiS34\,:.v::•.Yfr'x4:{ .: .::^ .v .. :. f.. .. v:r::::r •: .:v'��' tfl. }rb•`. kF....:..r. vh{{i ,�j,,{7�.�.•..•rr... /1��j/�, ,x�_7 j1�•� #;�.�`(�i�.��••���•�• ::�Leh?::f� : :-': :iQQ77 i;'M'<::':: `:��-..�.�I.YY•W�•.....� �I^:::'::vv:: �i.::}i:::: '.. .: :/f��........ i}.:..r\.Ml;Ylt{:}�:v�MY :}: flf'.•}':•j'.�:M1M. :MlT1�• ....: ..:............. r rfv f•!' v, :T::: ,��':;:i: ::.T.}f,<,..:,.:.,.. ...�:.w><.r:..:xw::.wrx:rY:x:.,.rrx..,.:.,,.:M.:.,v.,.x..:.,.i.,..�xx.,,��.....r...Y.x.,..:..3rx.,,,.r:.,rw;:a:}i::3:s;.:. •W:::rrry;:•.}%/f•}fff{'r3}}:•vllr��•..xx .v��trv'1..:3Y:it}'fx!vv:.v�J.•1.•v,•}•i3i4f{Wr};:•{.r:•vi -.h•+fl lW Neff. Ak%h' •W''Y.}f;}'v'i'i`f.}}v:Wr{.i}:3i':•::}W�•::.f.•4••- }f{{:%SiiY•f.r..•v .:N;.r ..rYy •, .-.•'R:.;.•%`{` -•{;:r. v.Yr ..rit...if'Y :}YI}i /..v?+. }:r{:.r ':ii- •;'+ L'r:•Yr.vxvnvr:n' ::•v. '?•'••••�•'-�• '5:�n:0;{•:{4}:9:••G:'r"r,v\iQ•-nv�ifi•:•.}Y••••••,aw:3:{{Sk3nk� Sa{S.wxnJFh•:3}:ri{{3}%iii}i:3:i3w•:ii}3}Y.S:ti{ivri{v ......:..:...:...:.J.•:w}:•iivY:{{i3}:{•i}}wv+w'.w:x:.w:::.v'. ..vrr}.Sx:.::v.: x nrw." :x:.v... ...k3i: }}:ikf.•:f.{{.Y.!:'{f{{;:!rv`i..vw:f3,.v,.•;vr;.,v,!yf:{rf;.v:vx:r••{:f{{{:.tNx.Yi`rW3}:ri:Y.}3:{+f.•:S,:H.{3:3�2tY::+';Yfr {{{?£S:S:r ':f;�3xM":"�.}rx ..{K:•:?•'4 iii:$!off' �•�•`f/Y{f•F: .•:if' +� ::{,Y.�:.:' .:'i:ri-. •:.3.{rY.-:: '�M:SC}i 'at}�vey.`► �:..' }, 1!1• ':'!�Nr;o}:!!i:. :•.z.::l'.-.,.'..',-!•�M.-.`'"{{. :'�.a4F�'+:F i� ',.Oi:. :;.} :O .+iv:.Mi o:,.'i',.le;:5 •.r',.:;v ..:a bi, .`• , :!. `tom C"' .,.r+.,ri•.ai��.:x:�,.}.,!,:.;.,::.xx::,.:E:.::::.!a.....{.:..,+f,w•:.r:...:,-f+.��:...:.o•�:���{•c..'n.>c..r::.;.:.",:Si;::..o.::•.w.�}}:! WWWW1 1- . Any Participant may request, and shall be granted, the right to appear and address, orally or in writing, the Steering Committee at any regular or specially scheduled Steering Committee meeting. Written communications received after any Y::.:Y f•%x'•}'{IXi^:3:{?{:i{;wyn;:•.'f..}}v:n}; Steering Committee meeting shall be considered 3 =v>� at the next regularly scheduled SteeringlCommittee meeting;; 11111G►'�►� hc. l�ViluulLLGG vvLt'..5. LV VVi1J1uG1. 1.116 1J01.iG uL Qla GQ111Gt CIQLG. C. ROLE OF PARTICIPANTS COMMITTEE All Participants in good financial standing 0410: shall have one representative on the Participants Committee. The Participants Committee shall: -- ?.'f..}Y }}}-•}'SYffi}' "?-Y:fi {nf.{3 y3�},f.^: �rr ..f.•}:f.%Y.f•:f•:}:}}:C%W..,Y"3'vv?`•'F.:{ }}v:{?r .i:?'S:i:4rr nvr!•}'av:nv fh�:l('{{?•:F:`:ff,.:`{5`::ii.f` ....r}}f{.in} r ...... .v?? :i}v;{r{:i}}�::.{}:`.. v.:{C: .:;, .......ef:n.....:.Y::}i4:{{;:hi ......�.. ...�_.:•:.��5•:::.•:?..;i /�-..,:•y(�;��l�yl�}y. } :E.v:Jv%{� •r>::•: '{+�:•:: ;(;��[I•- ;�'}mow/vy.•` }EW:r.} :rH. ..••x cil ?�'J:N:F37i: Y. }Ii'.i3::r?:C.NiF:+�tY•,N-� :: vv<�;'.!{^ FF?::#.f'ii'�:� :r�iv •i(1iY,.. iM.,.YWl +'+::{•}!i3%-:}xv:::w.,??:v:x::x:rf.V. .vw::�:{{3:!{n...�-::{{}r}i}}:??.}; ,v,Gh.,vf:r.{vxi:i:{�:,:{-}f:.!:}x}.-0C{>i...vvxnri{vv.vu..FCvti{3}.?{{ifff.•:SY:i}}i:!4t}T:{S.�it<.}Y}}}}}}f: S;+fr:?.Y.'f.{^}}'3:•}'fr•.•: q„F.f3:{+'•i:{•:;:•}}:i`/::xn}v;}y{{ ::r::::x.:xr::•::,r,•,•.::rnvr.•r.•.vi::.vv::xx:xxn-.w.l}YSYf.{{{{{{xnyiJ.•}'f.3:{r;:r::}.... v.:{xxv...f L:{{.r/�{9}riY"`j... .. r. :xrvny);::};:v,'x is•':Y-."•.:.: :..:..Y.....v..:}.:.....v....•.v:••::.�:..;...-�-,vr. .. •::. .:...�� .:: ..y{ri`y }J,. ':r}}:� • 'r:r.'.i:; •'<ti'.} `':v.::{•:}.?:•':::! ::yam' ,�1� ':::L:v l'.. •v3:• ..yy11j�,�y )yy);;,,..•itiiF- '}i{{:�'' }* �!y .�.r)� �y�lt�. �yj�".{{. r'!{M1. :::�:{v � nv(y,��}:!} •.�:v{•�.Yf Y.�.�i'•!: '1 v.::.. {•.:. }.::i v:;v....' ...��til •'::+M!-... �:::. .��?F:� .�r.- :•:�:�1.*:�?�S'rI�YY: �:�if1114. : ;f :l�t.r•. rY.^.`: .. ... •:.vk;r vx•.:{•}:•}:::v::•:v-}••::v??{{{3}:ti:•}:{r..::}v-.:}1: •�rv:�:k{{3}}:i3ri•}.•.x.•:rf:}C{:;;p:::Yv:.....}.3:{{{b:-:•}Yr}:G:.}:3: Fr...xx ..:. ...:...w}}}':;r?..'{{• :•W..•:{•:':+.3%..;,..: :rY.M'•:;r?{r?O..•?•:} Y.y:%+frrx ..Y.v...:. :. w::.•iJex:.3.v:..W4:.C::.v:fr}:,+,vrr.fxw{:jx..f.Lv:Y}fiC3:fri i•Yri:!: wr.,3ff.:,vrf..rnl Y. friY.{SY• S} `, Y�•:9:Sn K{�fi}fr`�iC!iit,�3 ,v.•r::w3:.vr}}',..... :...:rv:::,w:::::::::.v::r..::}r:::i�;�;•{,.:Y'}::{}ir'•'!:.....}"}}�:a. !`�:... ,";: ..:. ;{f•.:. ::.. :;ni:!/,.:3}}}' '{3}}•.: i.::..:`..y•:..`:n:':•}n.::}:.`:- •::::}.'.•::�i:........:.::ht{.;.:.:.;:}v.}...ti.}.-..i:}':..tii: s::,. .vatono:}'.mq :e:..>. .........::.....+.....�,.::..nr.,,..:. .::.,..:::h. gia7 Review and approve or disapprove Major Amendments to the Phase II Project work as proposed by the Steering Committee. UNIPAIMNIIIMMOINNUMMIAMINMIN :.: >>:`A :�€:':azo•.<ts INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 8 ge:2-7-- By majority vote O ' [` E > >g :' :`<°, ......:....::::N::::::::::::::::. . : 1: 4: " "' a ; > : > > > replace members of the Steering Committee should vacancies occur:;:;; 111J1JL�11L rv�Lll tire? L C�JL CJCI1LQ Ll V11Q1 Q11V�.QL1 Vli . eL VLLL •111 JCV L • 1 V11 VV L111J Cly L.C CLLLC 11 L, Se3-:• By mai onitY vote ri ' : :.::..:.::;;: :::::::C#e.::: 1*..V. : : geographica 4 remove Steering Committee members for failure to attend meetings as described in Section B. Financial default will result in automatic removal. (See section D.4 . ) { 4- Meet as necessary to carry out its responsibilities. tom-.':::::>:s��;1:::.• .... �d��:> :�:� s � :�.:�<<��::;: ...:c�.......tibr.......a _ .............. ........... • �• •,.:-:•:•:-:�-1..•:• +ri{J.•:'f.•r:ri• • ::x},.nw. •.,v.::.vr::v::::r: •:::vx.:v.,.:n.vvl•.xvxxnvxn:r:.rrr.xx.4f:%�iv.8}•.;+. :� ;hAxv„•r%• v..n.n,v:...r::::nvr::.v::::n:•.vv::::x.:v:::::nv:.::. , .v:::::::.:::::. ........................................................::::nv .:•::::n:::.::n•:::: :::•::::::::::.::::::::::v::::•:n.:::iv{ :4Y?:::: .iyx: }:{.rir::•i:::'{rF..::::{:•::.,v.•xr::h•::::vv.n..:.::i v: ....... v:n• S-S i:4}: ;i: '-'-' .iL::i�iiri:{:. < *nr.M,• •{ W { Mt atilt x {vn......:...:nl: : • :v ...v........x.......w:.:...::nv ; ,r ..........................v:rl•Sv bP.5. �{ 49F*TNy n. • ..'.:<'•>:. ....i::<:i..;..i:..;iii;. :. .iii::...:t :;: .:::;:.:..:. ...:..:: .::;::' :>{: :: <.::: :: ...:..:f :.:::. :.:<: ::. '.�0 1 L 1L 1 1 J V L All a�L V rul L1.L.L�.l Ua1LJ CVllutl.LC L Lee hall bC Uy LIIUJ vl1 Ly VVl.C. A ljuVl.. lu77uJL Le 111 a.L LCll�Q11t.C 1 V 1 QLLy Llll�llly V V t.0 LLL . 1tLC1l(JC.L -h 11 1.Viia Lit' LC Q I�LLVl 11111. T1L� \ Vlllllll L L-ee—shell elect a chair and secretary who may hold those positions until contract termination or • :iti c om 1e do ffradiatiritgithdRZatie:. x,.,rteA0 ............................................:.::.......: v---:•:rv:::::nw.:....r .............::w::::{{:{Ci:-i'•::{{r.:•::n•:::: %r {r4:O:.xif{:...vii??'Fii::i:�{::?i?q;:i'lni•{.X.:•:!.�;.. :•?r:i::?'-:?:.:�:::?::.ii:v;;::^ni::%y:•?i....:...:::•.%;..,:: ....f,.{�i::.. :?::..::t}"?'.:.::i'::x.:i.':. :...r. .:'.....::'r,'�.y..:...:.Y::iY�y.:�:y:�.yr.�.t�:��1?n}: :y�1.f:{.ii�Y:•::.. ..?.�jy'yc. i';iii:-;.;:v is '{:ii:':•.:.:iii::a. : .ii::,.;.. .:?.i,{�.:.. ..ii'?ir.::.':.Mi-iii:'.�',.�.M.{.retiiF.•,'�'-,�'...i::?>:#!:eJL::tiX::FiCf ioW!:fii}M O -..�Y,<M ...iiii:�:•. ..� vr: �.::: �� ii:: ii:?'!1!, � .:::�1�!:..::: ..�I.f.:�1,!;.;!f....::ii.v::::::n�.:.:v:::w::::v:::::.'lf{{L{.ii::p::.i:b\v::.::nn::::::.vvi4.:±C ................... ;: v::w:ii:?i:•v�:ry.:.:::::::4:{.::':?.::n;:,n:::i{•.:?::n} :�::yiR•_.+ii:{ i.';;i:{?;iiii:viiii::ii:^:�:{}ii::ii{:?:•i:iy::ii::ii::i:•:;•i%-:i^i'yi;v:':iiii•:':•:•i:xi::? i..-.-r. ..... .. :.'.:.' .....:. ::::...:.w:..;.'..:ii?::'.i'. '.::i::Ji::;ii::JJ.�t::::i`': ?GJ:#':h�!iI.:.'''.iii'-:::...i::::V�.....:.................... .....{ i,....................:....:::.::::.::.�.::::..........:.::::::.::::.........................:.::.::.............:..............................,.........,.......n.......::n.n�..n :.:::: :.::: :.:.::::.� :.:{niii:.ii:.:i:.;:.i:?{.;::{.:i:{{;{<.:.:..:..:?.::<:.;:.i:?.:{.i:{?;?. :;.:.1 ::-::;:..x:.:.. .:.i:.:..::{.i•.::...:i' .i.:.i.:.::i�.. .: .{.: i:.>ii;�':'�rc:�:u:�{{{.�.•;:.ii:.e.�.�;� . exx:�.iii:�:�:is.r�.� �: .i:.i: n : {.:.;���.��{. ,.r. :...,r Donner; 5 • lia..11 rQl LLCC 1lLC1tUJCl J11Q11 have V11C vote. ';:':`...:x:..:::_;'�.':":'�'�': :::::;i-i:y<.••::.,.:::;,,;..,..;.:�;:'�'+.'..`:'.:::}:::::{::;::::`�:r:i.;;;;;;:i:v<:i..,•:.,...:;..{:,'""•`�''% •r'�':: ::::::}�.'::;i;.�.;; :;::i:;::;�:•,•`;�:.;r::-i>:^c.:`':'`:;:::.:};.;`.i:.;+.?{:°•::: .is:<�;.iy:.:�:.':r:.:}`.::�.?,%}`'�':: E:C��h::::�:C�'.�:::`�''•:�:'.�.•'.�.�: '.:,���....?r?� :#:;�%-:::::�r•�� S%%�'��,'�,•:�:4% ;::: ���} ��� hr� ;W; -l't�4r 4+++.�r •,.�vi.';.I,.S�r: i i i i;:is{Y.;Ali:;:i!>:-'.•:i?�i?i<:i i+.iiti?`ii<:y�:i<'ii ii?:i:i�:::?::t::ii;i:tj{;>�i;Y,.{i:�i :::f,.;:i:::i::i''?f`i}{i iv.$:ii;i-;::?::%i%.•i;i::::4:;:'}��:::i-:..;i yi!i?5:}:;:i::ii.-'v::ii::i:i1:j:Y,.i:4>i::i::ii::i:tiji:::i:::. .l.i::> . .........:;'>«::.. a a :cr:: :to::;: advance :e::>::.' ©.a ,s cif the: ;ro:3:>ect rc �.t�;:.;'�:rte:�::��:�:.ii::.::::::::::::::�.::{:::::::n.::::::::::::::.i.:.:?.i:.i':.�::{.::<.:..........:...:....�....:.:::::::.v ::::.:.,. .,..n:.,.:n.:..:.......:...r..:......:r <::>:::<;::<:;i:::i;>::><:»::'<>:::::<<::;;!<;::.i:-:i<:<: :;::::>:•»:- :';:?:'�;>;:<i:':.::>:.:. :{•i i::i•;:.i�::i:<:i?i.::;::i>;;i:{::i:{; '. ;•;.::'<;'iiii::;::.;::i::.;:.:ii{'>:':i':::::.i.::<:.;:i??<>:':':>: ,{<:i;:?:>.<:>;:.i_::.>:?.>::;i.:.:ii:.i•.i:::ii;::.;:.:i{?i?.;::i;:.::::.i::i:{:;:?i:::i:;ii::•i:::?.i:::'>-::::>:>;:iiii:{.;:.;:.i:.i;::<i:?.:?.i: • . .{{:::::. :: .::<:<.:;:. :.:.:.i:.is:;:::..::':>::ii::.>::..'::.:.: ><.<::::::. ' :.::a. :e::<i::::>::sa<�1::<:<:r�a���ab.... .....�..........................�........ INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 9 • gogroggagtimogimgooggigoiiiiioogiiiiaantousinatanagrea ................................................................. oggigigiggroggiggolgootogootiaormaneopowevenowew D. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS 1 . Initial Participant Contribution Each of the original Participants to this Agreement shall make a financial contribution to the Phase II Regional Water Supply Plan Project costs . Allocation of the costs shall be _proportional to the Participant' s share of the increase in peak- day demand (high forecast) as projected in the Phase I - Water System Demand Study (CH2M Hill, 1992) . As a result of this calculation, total contributions (except for additional of ::::::::::.....:.:::.::::.. re c contributions required or agreed in the case of default or major cmb ontract amendment >`>�ti» �: :� :::; : .::..................................:...::::�::.:::::.:.::. shall be as follows: s. Portland: $ Tualatin Valley Water District $ etc . 2. Payment Schedule Each Participant shall pay its contribution to Portland in partial payments as follows: 1992/1993 1993/1994 1994/1995 FL.March 1, 1993 Julynna 1, 1993 iot±yAUCet 1, 1994 Portland: Tualatin Valley: INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 10 etc ,,�,4 ej 3 . Payment Schedule - Amendments �( "'� rakyiev/7 Payment for authorized ( dments shall be received by Portland within 3-0- * '* ;day of approval by the P,p 1ap.d" nc_Oni/of the contract amendment. / 4. Payment Delinquencies If payment has not been received within 30 days of -the date due the delinquent Participant shall be considered in default of this Agreement. Portland shall notify the Participant of this default in writing, with a copy to all the other Participants. A failure to provide payment within 30 days of receipt of the notice from Portland will automatically remove the defaulting party as a Participant and, if it held a seat on the Steering Committee, shall automatically remove that party from the Steering Committee. The defaulting party will then be in breach of this Agreement and liable to the other Parties to this Agreement for recovery of the defaulted contribution Mignigiggi :{.}.:4}v;n'F.h::C:r:iS.:nM•i}f^::4:}::i:::v:n:};4:{S:r:i}fin};::::rc::.rv;.. .....�.:,...... ... _ 1x Lr.,r{.{,{ .i S.. :.i•: 'l'HSS,.:: n.,%k;:::., /.:•{r'�/• S'. '�'�''�'...�'.`'.'•:: fi>F'.�:A•. �:€'.:��� ��, a',�lf,�i�F`'��•`'' 'f+'� � ucr�R '• R .:. xi�..a •.+zr . .t::;r:•.xt�;ec: .:t�.r�'.�c'.;ro-xo}:{::}:hox,:i:.•x::x:::.:�.f�•ao..:costcaxvxc�NG.a;oc. ;'+a4�•,�e:•. wo-x,r:S,r.....}axv:,r...*ta:.... •«ao.a ..•::ire:.:.•..w.te� r}. {•v,.}.viitnw..i{;{{{::irry•}...,}. +.x±.'.�6,y,{n:<yv{ry.y.}::f.{{...Fr{;;;.;rx:J:.m?;"x� rx:.:r:..:;,k.{y,:,:.x•:;.r.:{•.w.ra:<:,:.;::.::..:.:::;•:�.:.:;;;:.....;ax;ca.::.:!:w..x+.:r...l.,:.{..:xa.}.;:;.::fs;::...:...o..•wR Upon default<arr " 1 :s . } :fix : , each non-defaulting share of the <;Mag#�">.:: .: 404#5- :. .... Participant' s :::::�3.:}::::::::::��::: �• :;:;:�.�.:-k:�.r::;;;.}ry:}x-y .;:,;:vrc....,.::....:.:.:.. Proj ..L ,.vJLJ shall be automatically increased pro rata with that of all other non-defaulting Participants to the extent of the deficiency created by the default, using the formula: EssN:a>7an<:#3biS:..:tisS<:>OMMONE.:.}:.:}:::::::::::R:::R...:,.:::::::f�:� ;provided, that the sum of all such increases for an individual, non-defaulting Participant shall not exceed, without consent of the Participant, an accumulated maximum of 10% of the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 11 • Participant' s original share of total Pruj L ,„.Lozoara;T m ttditsbh. x.. ............... In the event that t 3total defaults exceed 10% of the ............... ............... ............... rema: n:<>::::non d:e:fa::,It n. :::>: >art c: pan:ts:<x:: original :.h: r _:><.: ;<4#h. coma Cant :::a<:::�c t t: enact: .:on:::<>:t:or:::>:>°the::fPro ect Lu ,L and 04.41011.0„5: ...............n.:....•...:....:v............,.....v..... ::�ii:::?i:•;:•:is ii::::iiii:'::i:ii'Cii}iiiiYiti�::i'i;....::::nom � St2'ffiL.1Gllt Participants do not cons ent``'>> < Egi$ `;:".:':' giggiogig to an increase in their pro rata share € f to cure the deficiency, witir..i.i1 G-0 Jaythc. C:cf i ilt; this agreement will terminate and the City of Portland shall be authorized to terminate its contract with the consultant. E. AMENDMENTS TO THE PHASE II PROJECT 1. Minor Amendments The Steering Committee is authorized to make oratamMinor Amendments to the contract §etiPaVihaorkwork A Minor Amendment is an amendment to the contract scope of work which does not increase the total c,,01., ‘JI 0400100 gmonommigme the Project contract by an amount that would exceed the total, original contributions made pursuant to Section D. 1. above, plus any accrued interest tc the project accounts. Examples of possible Minor Amendment topics 4nclude but are not limited to: Expansion of, or follow up to, %.AJ11Li a..LCc, Project tasks as warranted based on new information or insight which will enhance the quality of the product but which can be done by reprioritizing other task(s) or involve only additional funds from the Regional Water Planning Fund' s accrued interestiliteMOt.MiiiiibtaKittitgaMiggiattaittatant 00004.4#0404IMINENOWNOMMOOTNOMOUNOMMIWAV .............................. ........................................................................... ........................................................ INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 12 • 2 . Major Amendments By majority vote the Steering Committee may recommend Major Amendments* >' ::'``<`' .::<` :> `: ''* to the Participants Committee. ..<: }",:.::': o yote g>' ::h».«Par ::::`":°i ...�.a A Major Amendment is an amendment to the L.vilJulLaL1L contract gmompagg which increases the total L.LJJ L LJf Lh . Pl.of ect �::••:m;5{;.};.v,.Y{n r..r., .....:;••f.}}}.vxxx::i•itir:;x:� j t NOOKO ..1/4,L1Li a%_L by an amount that would exceed the total, original contributions made pursuant to Section D. 1 . above plus any accrued interest to ea the Project accounts Examples of possible Major Amendments might be: Large expansions to the scope of contracted tasks or new Project tasks which are deemed essential to completion of Phase II purposes and objectives. 3 . Major Amendment Cost Allocation Allocations of the cost of Major Amendments will be arranged by the Participants. Portland will not execute any contract amendment until full financing is committed. An amendment may be fully financed by one or more of the Participants . 4 . Amendment Approval Process * JL11L.G FL'i Llai,d will LG C11LC1 Illy 111LV a L.LJ11 L1.QL.L w1L11 L11C 6,11..VaaJ LLl tI.LLL L, 41llGitcuuGnts 0,74;;;;• w : yg!r %4: .yC/nn « W gog;S}};'F,.;::?:;:::^:;J:%?:!^}:it^i'f44n+i;`r, ��;}'fikYf.•:}!,. ;;r ;w.>.:r.;x:; .u'ta+ vyz+F's, Lv Lic cLLGL.Livc, will havc t.v vrxT�ra:u IvllLJvv Lllc requi. cc. < i LY vi P7or tlallc. v7i Ci L17a11CG t,�v�.cC'lu1 c. Fvl. l.L LlJ' 6 city L.V LL11 L.11 0.111.01.v V al Jllall LILA_ LC vv L11111d aJ llJily QJ L11G a1LLCLLLLILCLl L .............................. is C.i 11 l.11L.1.L L+G� {e}� :.I:::;kY:: jG:d0..J i V V ldCU lded Llia L adkJid Li. i1 V L J LLL.li a LLLCLi(LLLLC11 L VY V LLICL 11V L V i%Jlal.,c Lha C1 Ly J Charter. , C.xi 61 ;Lily uL11C1 LaLC, Ldeial, lal lutra binding Ll1C Ci Ly ' J 0.L Liv11J . 1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16 , 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 13 ...:..:..:...:....:.......:. x . : ny F. REGIONAL WATER PLANNING FUND All payments made to Portland shall be kept in a separate account known as the Regional Water Planning Fund, from which C� GtiJGJ ummoggiommato# shall be paid. This account may &WM be an interest bearing account. * .-f 2�: 1J Gill 111 Lci co L LGa illy esccuull L, * Portland may retain one third of the interest accrued on the account to cover Portland' s costs in administering the Phase II project. Two thirds of any interest paid on any such account will be re-invested in the Regional Water Planning Fund and may be used to pay for any additional, approved contract expenses . Any monies remaining in the Regional Water Planning Fund at the completion of the Phase II project, and not necessary for project contract expenses, shall be returned to the Participants in shares proportional to each Participant' s original contribution, or such proportions as are applicable subsequent to one or more defaults, except in the case of any defaulting Participant, which shall receive no refund. G. BUY-IN OPTION Any water purveyor or other entity that was not an original Participant may request, at any time, to become a Participant in this Agreement. Such t/ui vcyui mom shall make its interest known to the Participants Committee which will a * Gl C1111111C, Ly luaj vi i Ly V V LC, w11C L11C1 V1 11V L LV 1/Cl ILL L :::, girg; ., k¢:,.:?4t!w,!w ;4%;M,:og toutt the purveyur to LL.umc. gamagg a Participant. The golo purveyor-'-s- he se;:<:>snare:::>:::o. .>::: e :.::. : y:::OMIA.:::W .s.::.c.a. :o:u .a .::: . i.:::: : :.:>::.;: ......... ha :;;; ;:;: ::<:: a.t:er>:.;: ::.:::s:tet.::;. ead.::: : u .:.:. :s:.:;::3: . ;:;; n;;;: n .:::........... INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 14 !11111 '`''%fI:F:F::?S:§�7 :tt>:::> �1f.Ew:>':7�' :. �3;�s�ft��3;�'�., 1. y .� `,�.::.}�..,.... Participant shall be calculated based upon the amount it would have been charged to become a Participant at the time of contract execution, plus a 10% surcharge and a pro rata share of any other costs incurred by the other Participants since that time-; provided that if there have been previous defaults or new Participants or contact amendments, the share will be increased or decreased as appropriate. The Participant' s Committee shall establish the share to be paid by any water purveyor or other entity not included .in the Phase I Demand Study taking into account at least the following factors: 1. Expected growth in population and/or water demand associated with the new Participant; 2 . Any increased cost of the Project as the result of the new Participant' s joining; 3 . Original project contributions; 4. Special needs or status of the new Participant. -::.:•:•::: .::.:.::::::.:::r:•::::::.::::.::.::::::•:.r::.::...::.::.v:r:..:::.;,..:f•:;.}:.?••r.:::::::::::.•r..::r:.:r}:u+:?{?.}.. f...cy{{;t:{..rfx?{:':�t??.'^�+f•Fr' ::••rr}wY+n•:...••v...,;.?•r:{{{a:%{r.;.:..r.}.. ��.�-::.##�`«�.•.:��3.'F.Jt: ,+{���?�r. :.��..: ::::�iµ,.7�{.,gr3,.�Sr;7ic;}Y .r:,�,i'•;,.'���`,:`�: ii�,:#:: ;}:: .,�i,+.::h��„1.iGi,,,.�h.4r".••.Y.. Jw'+,.: yF�4.,,L�!-„1,..�,.w'�:•'�'.'a«: ••C+:•Y: •:•.�•i}}:,vri •e:x{w::.vr::n,v.4.v.: :,+i}nv:AA.•.Ynvvw.vvvAvr:•�iaMr..U+K•+rSvif iwM•.v{A•}n•n}-w •:x {?•?}?:iJ}:i:•:i%• :i:{-}}?:4:.'.�v}}}}%{v: :::•. }.:'v-nw::::::x.:v.:C. v ................... ..........................r...vvw::•:::•:::::•w::;:•.v:;w:::::r::x::r:.::w:•:::::::w::::::;••:vv:.Y.%:iY+i}:•}:•%?.v}• ,r•fry?yY•.Y:+f.'ri.%Uf.{I'{{{r,:.:{+n..}. {{{{r.:.y.�:f•':::.;x::. ?.}}. :...`�::. ::+.•.:::'4C;}.?.. f.!:.':f::6{C .::jai •.?{.:• .yr; 3::-}} x:::.•.;{•W..y..?}}}Y:r:nvx:-.:..s:.v..n:.::}nv.:.:r:Y:{pi:..:.:n::.:::v?r.:v.:.+:.........r......:w.vn-:n.::w:i/:.YfnY: NY%?!{!WYH}.u•TYh:}i�i:{[n:}w'sib•..T::C!x:vh{L ... ......................... ...........:::r.......::nv::::x..::::::.:::v:.w::r:::::x.vx:::mnv:.:v::::::r:::::::::::::my::m::•:%,?..;rf:rr v:rnvxv::+'.. f:.id/�,'%r:.,,'}:.;r..•.:r..ti.hv..:'}:v: .....YF}}}iY.,};-..':::'iY%$;%•:M:.}•.}••.{!;x:.4.y::}3.;rn:;:v}-n•:.: f.•f.:.':::,f,.-.:Y�}vr'}.:nv::v:.vr:...:.F.'::r$'. -�::.}•::: :..�:.::{:L:v•::.::::.f rr5. :.fr':!.r” .-+.%:}}:. Yf.... �:�� :C�:.....:'..::{x•:Ya:f:���:�:.}v:1jA;ti•,T'J•'.w:�:i:: '::G•Y:l.:'4%:.f•Y;::%.IVgi:• :':•}f'{�vT:/::t:•Fh'h��•�'•'•v^^�M�Y�iC94tiY� .:v x.. :v.{4h..?, �:-v: ffi%{✓i/r :hf:i::ri:}'fi,C4:tt4:r:�::n,•ix}:iv:..•}.:;.'fl.-}}J:nf::.{•rv.-rrhC{v�n-0b:Jv}.✓rµ w'•:{-0:l .hir :•:•:{{N,•.. ::w;•:.ww:.:xw x: .. ... :•v:::.vv;:••::;:......••:✓.-??.%} {{{:..{:}}'w::•::::::rw::r:r:w:.:.•::+{.Yr:'•%.Y15{r{.::v,.•i/Ffi,:•:+{»'.':{+i.+lrrf,.Uf!•:•• ?�.•U(..�y:�?:i,,{}�r$y{?y+�}'}w%�+i•}'r.'Y:U•'fi:'''1.:}:,+. {;} {/, :sr-. •:i'}.-:'.:. l.'•?�+r/l;:•. r'g: , :: rf, 1h'�W.}tia"FiJi:Lll' }.f•' g ma�yy.. {f��y �y##..##�� �y .. :.:�,y;•;y, .. yy�:.'i .�•1�, �y ` �1y yy; 1}t ice!•:}:•}:YYMiM: �.IrY�Y: �l^''{{:::.,`,.,,�CtM•}::��I:f: .�I.•.�:�IF.��<'::�?ii+i`i!'•.. iM� ': . :4'.C4.4%'C,U:::i .:L?S:??vFit/rf{•iv.W'.4}rh-:.w:.vv4%J � •y;<,�w•YiCS4CivfkY'• •••.. r •,]h h]W''.?vAW'" h:h:ke:.vvv ..;;.:..:f:; r.:r:,.vry}}y:•• {U;}}:fS':f:Y A?:�•}:}:y:?iii;}••"h':'+ i}•x. .v .:;v.:::;}:F :x:x;•v ::{1+:'v"�f.+fl'.•..W h}•Fi:+. �".:FH..0'Y/4. 'YI�AYJ.{•?%? ,y,r},,. .4444, ' .:.?P^.?:•14:3;}:1:ilii:f:J::4:Y:..i:;.`.Z.''t iii r t.`+5%:y1.4i:f`•:.' {.}}: ;C�6.':';;.''.:• r�'''.'.4�•F....:. r�'.''•.} a+5'`l o:.::}fr::.{•}%,:lr}x.r.::.�.;?",{w::•%•s.i:}...}:.,•:.{✓},.,axh•.,•urx'.•.:?:{,,:r•.::{v::f{•..•.••.c•rx%{c...:.t„v:x{frtf a•.{rffr.,•x:.,/.•.,:r.• w:x..•�a mah v.{ ,;,.:. .r:.:.:.... ..:..+:...::..: .. r...,-.. r... r-r--'-f.fm�y•{n:{i:. ::•:::r{.•:.x•:•::::.;::.vxrv.. }:+:: • :.; •^•}' �.' h :{,....�. Y:. {: {ate ,}.� x;•.-:.;',,y:�•'••:• }f}; '�w .T w i. Otho cr'•,i....;a.,.:r:}~l!fat: :'i.''':if'"+`2sg}Yw''.�!'}? '}}:. :f3i.�i;�i�'• .. y% •M.�.' -i`:'.aii. iti•. ,�yi� :. ry� 4:v}%?vt4}i4}}f'{L:•ii%K<•:,4' •%•hVV:i{:i}:h•:r:.wwv:x}x:r::nvr.•:n!•.:v:x:.v::rx.:\:�.rv:.?, +.::.. •::x.•rnvn n,✓�:'�r1'r'ifiWWni:•hrirvi�h',OC' ��wrv •+-v0.ri{4}%r%:NniJ:{+:{�'�viw'%{vi{•'fii Y' ,`?;•• ,}%„�'” }>?`•'}`"•' " `{` "`:`; At the end of the applicable fiscal year all existing Participants shall receive a refund reflecting contributions from any new Participants. The refund; shall be allocated a pro rata b s d o± the existing Participants ' contributions to that point. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 15 H. TERMINATION This agreement shall terminate upon the final payment to the consultant, unless otherwise extended by the *tif t € PC * Participants . If this Agreement is terminated prior to the completion of the consultant' s work pursuant to Section D.4. , the remaining non-defaulting Participants shall be responsible for payment of the consultant for all contract work completed and not paid for at the time the contract is terminated GGLLLG1IL 1..C1L11111Q L1V11 and for which there are insufficient funds in the Regional Water Planning Fund. Each Participant shall be responsible for its pro rata share of the remaining contractual obligations, taking into account the default, calculated as ± lluwb .s o `` n ect mann Payment shall be made to Portland within 30 days of receipt of Portland' s final termination notice and billing. This obligation upon termination does not reduce or restrict the right of remaining Participants to seek payments from any defaulting Participant (s) . I. INDEMNI F I CAT I ONPT All r al_ Li .i JQLL Ci Ly vl rv1 l 1Qi1d any7cost. vi 3cxLLLZtgca �111LL1u�1L11y ccL�vilcaLlc itturney('o 1GGJ) L: vM LhiLd i./Q1Ly QLLLlVI1J Qyai.L.L L 1'V1L1QL1� Q11Jllly V{LL.,.,L�..,.iVl Vl ill ally way relaL.Gc1 LV P L 117d' J LLVLiLJ.{:4�..L rell.�l L LC 1.V11Jall.QlLl.. Payment VUlylyQLllJL1J J11Q11 LC �l177V�1V1 L1 V11a.L LV t CQI.�l Q1 LiLikdo.11Lr . VF11y 111Q1 ��n1..1.1�LLL1 V11 VL ouch V L11C1 1J1 V�JVl L1.Vil QJ .& lA�/�J11LLLL1,1G 1.f vatc `Jt ILLL).0 Pal LiL.i iQ11Lo 11avc d .Caul Lad. :i';ii«i:,:i is%:: :jtiy;i; iii:;;:iti{.:;�::•;Y.iiii i i"ii:i�::::}:ii::kii'::F:i'v:i'�i-%ii':i�::i::iiiiiii:ii ii<:i:::::i::%:::�:i'vi'?::ii��r,:v4:;:::j<y:.;i}i:88'(::it: +� #.':.�Y. 'yyii:-i:iiiii: :^�''y'i: :i�yJ,::�:'.li'�{::':' jam::::::.i::{:: :..is�.yj�:F�::::::.y:i::::�1i'':..:. ..�:`.IfY:::•::::Ti��:Lr'{.i�/:�':•:::•r:?•it'��:.WIi7:i:::�M!�.... ♦:;M. ::+'::}�4tF.�j•:. M+:!W:ilti��.};�; �.::: ���+..1,/ �.:.�.in.�.�:iF.;• !!:.:v:. �':.}-.y{ ::�: :�`�i:�:� •..::: :::::�:::::..:'ii;•::j'::L:::::.:.•.. :::...•:j.:{:.i: .••'.-.!,.•�. :.:�.•ii, is:r::: � .:'. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::•::::::::::.: �}yyyy Q "t. ::;:;iq:;ii;?.}i.t:;:: y:?ivvj:iii:::jj:i�iA::•:j::i::::::i�i{+i�{,::ii: ir:iY:?.i::i':.:::vn••:.;v.}+(l.�:y.�; �% {�: �t1{+� #�'W��i i:Y::'::4:%:::' i is is':':� :!:SG-. :•`1L''�'�.�. ::::::.:::4`:4:..•J:r1i .i:ii:i: �::iF::L ::: i::i::.���......n.4Y ....��:.. t�.. ��n.'4!;...F!.F;?M? :....:...:..........:.::::::::.::::.::::::.::,:.:::::::.:::..:.:................................................... .:.:.::::..:::..-::::::..:.z.::.:.:::.;.:.is:•i::•:4:;.::.::.::.:::.::.::.<.:......::.:�::-.�:::<-:::.::.�.:..:........... ............. ..:..:......:.:.::...:.......:a.:..:...:..:.ter..:...:..:.::. :...:... ..'i:;i::%?2;i•�i:? %•;�: ..:;::.:.�.:4.:..:. .::.:... ':4iic" :.::«i::r" ;: •:4i:N- ::4;;: : ;041#45#10 ::_:<g" , ..c"..'I.:'f;."a.. ::<«O ].. :;•.::: : . :A:; .: ::••s•" .•'!,•: ,.���?4.F.� ���. ..:.�v:i::::::n�:::::::::::::::::::::�v.:�::::::::::::::::-::�:::::v-w;..:...�w:v:::::.•..-::rv::�:v:.:w.::::::.•.4:x::::::::�lJ.::•.•:.4::x::mxw:rrv:.:.�..xv:....: •:::v,:•:::::::::::::::::�:�:::�:-:�:vii:•:� ............................................................4..r.n......:..vv...vv.v:.r..n......n :•ii;:i4:•i':itii<:'vb:•i:•ii:• ii:vt4};;•i`}iiii:4:•:ir:'vi4i::•iiii:?4:4::i::•i:•i:4+i:{i?•i}iii::j iiii:4:;:•:•i:Siii':i t:�.i::�i:;i:i�{S:ii�iir''i'�ii:iJi':ii:Y:i;`::+>':::i:::ii:}}9i•:i::'-i::i:•:4:;.+.;::ilii`�:i:i':::i.;vi:::'•'iv i'i5±••::'::,Y4:; A�•':�'A:<::` �i"'.:iir:::'.::::i:>'.::..:ii:>'.. k::<.4.,...':::>.:::''<'. :•%.:1/{' .. .:::i.: '.::.y-.. yam:.:. .}�'�}yy ,(���L �j,.�•� /� 4..: ....yy . ..}}.**.....::: :'ii:i•::{.},,�::: ..}{.i::::. ...��/y:4r:•:Y!F.•-��yy-:.:::.�1�.�.y�,. .... .•:I ::cif:i::::- '11�.+::'v :YY.fh kF�:li :::i::�f1! :::�:: : {�145tF.�.�.�llk/S :::::�.�i��w:� :i:��^•+ii:�.{.;.:::� rL-..::::::: rC-::::N1;.•�LF•'. .::.:�:.::.i._:•:::::.-:::.�::::.�:::••:•::::::.:::::::::::::::.:::.v::•::r.�.� :::...: ............................................................................................................................................. :..;„':<:-:><ii>;:.i;:<t •comi.><:.i:.>:::.::::::�-:;.;:;:::.:<;i:>>::::<'<:iiiu::.;:::.:i.:;::.;:i:i:ii:.:.......,........... INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 16 • dtMaNgOadiDdittMUMaitdOKIbtaRthibMA6WftetteVOTht :�a.��a..ozx.:::�.�.:::�..s:.::a : : .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... aas«.:::;u:vx;:•::G;;..u;;3r? 4a;=c4:::fir,:..::::Q' 0.:::40..:'.:....................................:MX#::.0 44«P4re....: ................... .......:..:Ant:.:W:::..::4..:a: ...a :....::.....:... 1444.......41P4.::::: :::::::440 :.::0: :: ta:axi:: >:« S�s:�€:se::hx�e�<::>6 ��>��::a::►;:•�:>�;:��:x�:=:� E::de�.efigea�>::>�uch:: :��.....::::ae: y.i:tiiti{:ti:ni;•:n}:.:.::.:.:.:.:: :.::!:•:.:,.:•is.;.%�.::.:.}JiiFF.{(nv,.i:ti.v; -. -}}:i?i`ti?''�ii?iii?}i}}ii'::i^ii;i^:••..}}•?....ii C:?i::..v^: :•:: .. �s ::.:.::,...,..::.:.::.::..:.... gagMPAIM urn_>�IP.��.. ::.�.��::.:� ?'�:�.,.;:U .�:c��'.:::�:�..�:<:�................. .... : J. OWNERSHIP OF PHASE II STUDY PRODUCTS Portland' s contract with the consultant shall provide that all work the consultant performs under its contract shall be considered work made for hire, and shall be the property of the titift4datadatid Participants . The S x4IAseMhParticipants shall own any and all data, documents , plans, software, specifications, working papers, and any other materials the consultant produces in connection with its contract with the City. 11 >000Weonatan < pran: arany the:>::: on: de: a It ::n.'. ` ' t� � � : : ;MNalai, . ' The agreement shall further provide that nt ani:::;:> I .. upon request, a.nd:,>:::<: . >.:: n ga ...n Za- r n upon completion or termination of its contract with the-City, the consultant shall deliver to the City, on behalf of the n => .............. aaddiEiW4 Participants , these materials. K. OREGON LAW AND FORUM 1. This Agreement shall be construed according to the law of the State of Oregon. 2 . Any litigation between the Participants under this Agreement or arising out of work performed under this Agreement shall occur, if in the state courts, in the Multnomah County INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 [Terry.wrk\iga-3.31 Page 17 • Court having jurisdiction thereof, and if in the federal courts, in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. L. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 1. All disputesio �::<:: : c 7a °> .ic p n :=:ca E arising ........................................... :...........:...... out of this Agreement shall, in the first instance, be mediated. 2. Any Participant wishing to dispute application or interpretation of this Agreement shall immediately notify the Steering Committee, in writing, of the Participant' s position. 3 . Any issue which has not been resolved within 30 days of notification shall be submitted to mediation. 4. The function of the mediator shall be to assist the disputing Participant(s) in finding a mutually acceptable resolution. 5 . The mediator shall be selected by a vote of the Steering Committee members within 45 days of a notice of dispute. r.'I.-}}:?r.:?r?r:1:+: ✓.-'r,.:iY.:;^:'f f•:h:H/}v,•:..rlr:4:vi4}iN.C{+..�.,X,.::...n%{:NAM:yfi:.}}:+"iv?}}:iy?K?ni?y.•: v':i 6. I f::i:>;:3 ........:::.'''r�...�.:::.�:�t:.>,�:::>:::�......... �....� '�i ��I`«<: ;%;r?..�t� :�...3�t�.�: �`x: ..........................v.n:........;•:IX{?•r:??.}��:•::?.}.n..:. }..:n..v...:..x....:...:.v...}..vv.n.......-CJ.nv...vv.\n:ti.: x:.•�:::nf..%vvvr. ? mediation fails to provide a satisfactory resolution the Participants will be free to seek all other legal forms_of redress . 7 . All Participants shall continue to perform fully during the mediation. If HRNEMBENEI5014 financial obligations • N}i}�:;ii is%;iiiSi:'£.S:fil f.%iiYf.•}%•ir iv.}}(??.}iii:•}:'?;}i}'fii:4•}f-•nG::rnni:?r:;SY.:T':y?'f.:• �i:•:�iiih rim ci.a iD.JLL'C;:iii;'.•': :%3`a4:::>: : u uz<d :f��ai : ate, and if a refund is due:vfa: <??.}:ii:.};i;;i:;;.iii:,:}:.i;;:�i;:r:i:;.}}i}i:;.}i;:.:i":.r::.... a::::: :: " : A3 , the successful disputing Participant ..... ...:.. shall receive a refund. O:.;:iOpOROh<::< O�WEaMAr>..Ng ' ::;v.:.. :J:•i:{Cti :.v:::•:x:::::vvv::•:•::::::::::::vv::::.v:::::::::x:::::x::::.v:.:v:v::::::w:::::.vx::•::::vx:::v:::::v::::::::.'l.?:.::.v:?.}:•::..r??�:!�:4:?r,.y^}:v:_:•yi v:???4:f6}}}iii}i:�i::...}i":vi:•iti??ti^::.................. ::.:}•v.;.:.i...}ii};.v'i ;?i::..n:;}':::...:':?::v..::.::.:;•i":h:;. :.4?::::.:::.:v..i':::::}}ii}f'::.:.:.::?in :::v... v::..?.i..:........ ?}i:': ':"^:.:::.... }.f' ?�:v..:...'(?:.:ii:-ii::i'.i{{:}Ah•.' �:�1�:.fM:.?::::::N'.-:#{::::':::�i:::iif{4!'X.�� +��.,'�,{�,{{�':i{{'���yn�isi::::.�i!{-Mi:�iF.'y[:�.):,lN•:4%?.:!•:'::i::�::� :: ::'.::::•N•i:�Ih �ifY.��++.::.� .....................................................w�....................... ...�+{..•^:..0..::::.:::......ALT.....::v:::::�w:v:::::::�v.............::v:.v-v::::: :-:i�}}}}}}}}i:;•i;;•i:•}}}}i}};;i}i}C:ii+:�•}}1}:;^}X.??-}}:":---.v v.v:::�•:nv::...,i,y{{-.}}�.-..-..v.-:x::::::::}}}}:iii}ii:;y:•:?{?•:??: ....W��: .��.:.:� �M{�!'!. � � ::�:'1! � .M�.Y:�;��!Y � :: -L. v:::...::::+•:•w.::..........:.....ii..:.:ruiv : ?;.}::}i::;:?:?•i:;:?ry:??vw:::�:::v::::::•:::w:::::::::::::.:•v::v::;:•::::::::::::::.:•::::v::::w:::::::um:::::::::.::::v::.:::::::::::.:.v.:.:.....:..S.n:v....:.::..:..:v:m:::.n:.....:......v........:...... fgairiiiaiiiiiZeifigeliamaampaiegigagfira ><::::: All disputing ParticipantsParticipantsWWWWW shall be responsible for their own INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT DRAFT OF January 16, 1993 (Terry.wrk\iga-3.3] Page 18 mc.diuLiti costs fagbaftiefeatiainagefieffiWalWEIEW including attorneys fees . M. NOTICE Any notice provided for under this Agreement shall be sufficient if in writing and delivered personally to the designated Participant or deposited in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to such person as the appropriate Participant has designated. Each Participant shall provide the other - Participants with the name and address of the employee or office which should receive written notifications under this Agreement. N. INTEGRATION This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Participants and supersedes any prior written or oral discussions or agreements .