03/11/1998 - Packet Book
INTERGt ' RNtVIN' 'VVAR° AR1�'.'�
. I . .... ...................:-......:::.....:...::::.:::...:::::..::::::::.:::::::::::::>::::::.::::..................
g g :. u'. (.--A,:::....ur3tt rn u ::: tZ t ` :.::::::.;:::::::::::;;;;;:<.;:;;:
- A � .
w :: : :
P
1. Ca to Order 11
2. Roll Call and Introductions - ' >:<<'>' > >> ><= » > <> ><<>««««€ <>
.. .... ................. ..............................................
_. ...... ...... ..._.... .... ___._....................................
. ............._......... .... ...........................................
. .. ... . . . ..............................................................................................
- _..................................... ._.. .........................................._.
...................................................................................... .
_. ..................__.--_................................................
.. ...... .... _. . ....................................... ..................................................
.. ....... .... .... . ... . ....... . ..........................................................................................
. ................ .. .. . ..............................................................................................
... ..............................._...._.. ........................................ ..
...............................................................................................
............................................................................................
. _................................ ........._....................................
.........................._..............................................
.. . ... .... . .. ....................................................................................................
.... ..... ...... . . ............................................................................................
.. ... ... ..... .. ............................%-------.,.......... ..............................................
........... . ..
.. ...............
...
...................................... ............................................
................... .......... ....._...............................................
..........I. .. ............................. ..................................................
...........
3.
Visionin - Liz Newton
g
is fM <
4. Election,of Officers& ntmen(o berat..:. ::::::::::::<': <'>_<::>: `' ...> > ><`< : < €:€>:€€ »>
. . .. .......:::::...............
... . ... .. . _ .............................................
......... .. .. ...... ......
Lon Tenor Water Su 1 :U . : w;Ed e::.er <: -. >> '> > _<< . :_ << > :`:<:`::::::> >
5. g Pp Y I _ . — .:.
6. Fiscal Year 199$/99 Bud et Draft:DEst�assion.�-1�I� tVCilier ::':< `'. ` > :< ; , - :<:::`.
7. Visitors Comments
.
8. Non Agenda Items
9 Adjournment
Executive Session. The:.Inter oxermnental VVat�r:
Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting Minutes
January 14, 1998
1. Call to Order
The meeting of the Intergovernmental Water Board was called to order at 5:30 p.m.
2. Roll Call and Introductions
Roll call was taken and Bill Scheiderich, Bev Froude and Jan Drangsholt were present
with Paul Hunt and Patrick Carroll absent. Mr. Wegner introduced stated that he would
introduce the consulting team when it came time for their presentation.
3a. Long Term Water.Supply Update- WWSA, Ed Wegner
Mr. Wegner stated that tonight's meeting was open to all the representatives to the
members of the City Councils of King City, Durham, Tigard, the Tigard Water District
Board to listen to a presentation on the pilot treatment program. After reviewing the idea
of the Willamette River with all the Boards in November and December it was decided to
have a presentation to further discuss the treatment facilities and the processes.
Montgomery Watson who completed the pilot study for Tualatin Valley Water District
were in attendance at this meeting. The WWSA through the City of Tigard has put
together a team of consultants to begin the preliminary engineering work on this project.
Chris Uber was also in attendance from Murray, Smith and Associates, Joe Glicker and
Pete Craft from Montgomery Watson and Brian Bell from Bowler Associates who has
been hired as the public relations firm. The WWSA has signed members of Tualatin
Valley Water District, Tigard, Tualatin, Canby, Clackamas River Water, and Gladstone
with the Sherwood City Council deliberating this month. The City of Tigard and TVWD
as members of the WWSA have been working with the Department of Corrections and
Wilsonville on putting together a partnership agreement to provide water and funding.
3b. Long Term Water.Supply Update- Preliminary Engineering Report, Chris
Uber
Chris Uber stated that Murray, Smith and Associates have contracted to complete the
preliminary engineering work which includes three primary physical components 1) river
intake, 2) treatment facility and 3)transmission system. This preliminary review will
define the project and address questions important questions such as, how big will the
system be and who will be connected, what are the sizes of each component and the
demand that each user needs will dictate how big the components will be. The intake has
several options which relate to regulations related to fish protection. Mr. Uber stated that
Mr. Glicker and Mr. Craft will be talking about the water treatment plant and the
1W Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting -January 14, 1998
Page t
treatment process. Mr. Uber stated that now that the capacities are known we can now
define more precisely what the components of the system will be. "10
Mr. Uber continued by describing some of the issues with the treatment system that will be
determined as a part of the preliminary study:
• The Willamette River and Wilsonville distance from Tigard and there is currently no
transmission system in place that can transmit the quantities of water we are talking
about. This transmission system becomes important for Tigard since it will connect
the treatment plant to Tigard and will determine where it will go, alignment and
routing, the size and capacity of the line, where connections will be and the actual
hydraulics of the system.
• Along with this transmission needs this preliminary study will cover pumping needs of
the system. Next to the treatment facility will be a high service pump station which
will actually pump the water from the purification plant and send it into the
transmission system. At this time it appears that the terminal point for the City of
Tigard will be the 10 mg reservoir, Tigard water service areas largest water source
vessel.
• Another large issue that will be covered is the cost or financing of this system. Once
the size of each component is determined, a cost can be estimated for the capital costs
as well as the operation and maintenance costs. This can then be translated into cost
of providing water to the customer in the Tigard water service area.
• Funding options on project of this size. Bonding requirements, are there other
programs (State or Federal) that might be available? If any portion of this project will
be bonded, the bonding requirements mandate certain information which will be
gathered as a part of this preliminary study.
• Structure of the organization - At this time, the WWSA is looking at the structure of
this organization and as a part of this engineering study will provide information to the
WWSA on how to structure this organization.
Commissioner Scheiderich questioned whether the determination has been made toward
gravity transmission versus on-site storage? Mr. Uber stated that the Regional Water
Supply Plan looked at large storage reservoir sites throughout the region and they were
basically ruled out due to elevation.
3c. Long Term Water.Supply Update- Willamette Pilot Treatment, Joe Glicker
Joe Glicker with Montgomery Watson who was commissioned by Tualatin Valley Water
District a few years ago to complete a pilot study. Montgomery Watson is known for
their treatment plant design world wide. Mr. Glicker stated that the information he was
provided was from the work that was done a couple years ago on developing the
Willamette as a regional water supply source. Mr. Glicker provided a hand out of the
information he covered.
Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting -January 14, 1998
Page 2
Pete Craft from Montgomery Watson discussed what is in the river and why and why we
have this kind of process. Mr. Craft stated that the two year monitoring study was done
for a couple of reasons a) to verify that what was observed during pilot study was actually
what happens all the time, and b) and to ensure that they were addressing the public's
concerns. Mr. Craft continued by saying that the Willamette River covers approximately
12% of the State, covers 300 miles river length with 70% of the State's population living
within the basins, 70% forested with 23% agriculture and 7%urban. The location of the
intake site is around river mile 41, upstream of Wilsonville, downstream of Newberg and
upstream of Canby in a section of Willamette known as the Willamette Pool. This is a 30
mile stretch of the Willamette that is relatively flat. This information was also covered in
the handout.that was distributed. After Mr. Craft's discussion, Commissioner Schedierich
questioned whether there would be any engineering necessary as to the chemical
composition of this water compared to Bull Run which will be intermingled with
Clackamas River Water? Mr. Craft stated that Montgomery Watson has not done any
work on what happens in a distribution system. Mr. Uber stated that Tigard currently has
a multiple source system and water is currently being mixed and when the Willamette is
brought in it will be the primary source.
At this time, Mr. Wegner introduced Kevin Hanway from TVWD working with
Wilsonville and DOC as well as Mr. Nicoli, Mayor of Tigard. Mr. Wegner stated that it is
Tigard's intent to pursue all the avenues that have been discussed here tonight as well as
some that have not been discussed (preliminary engineering, public information,
monitoring, funds needed to set up a pilot monitoring system). Mr. Miller has taped the
146W presentation tonight that will be available for other agencies if interested.
Mr. Polaris questioned when the public would become involved? Mr. Wegner stated that
the City has contracted with Bowler and Associates to work on some focus groups made-
up
adeup of residents from Tigard/Tualatin/Sherwood area and they are in the process of
developing a public information program that hopefully by the first of February we will
have a draft for the WWSA members to look at.
Commissioner Drangsholt questioned whether there was anything new with City of
Wilsonville? Mr. Wegner stated that we are continuing to work daily with Wilsonville and
DOC and as of now, per Kevin Hanway a draft agreement should be ready tomorrow and
signed on Friday.
4a. Director's Report-Menlor Update, Ed Wegner
Mr. Wegner distributed the December update on the Menlor Reservoir site, with the basic
note being that the project is currently six weeks behind schedule due to weather and they
are working as much as possible on weekends with weather permitting. This does not
mean that the project will be six weeks behind on putting the reservoir online with the
projected date of August 1.
Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting -January 14, 1998
Page 3
4h. Director's Report- Department Update, Ed Wegner
Mr. Wegner stated that John Early, Utility Manager has resigned and return to Texas and
the Department is temporarily re-organizing with Mike Miller assuming the role of Utility
Manager as of Monday. Two of Mike's main task as Operations Manager was plan
review and inspections of construction projects and these will be contracted out for the
next ninety days.
Budget preparation is taking place right now and we will return to the March meeting and
Mike will make presentation on anticipated water budget. On February 4 at 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Nicoli will host an open house for all agencies that have signed with the WWSA as
well as all other interested parties. Wilsonville has made it clear during the last few
months that they do not want to be members of the WWSA but they do want to
participate in the long range planning and development of the Willamette as a water
source.
5. lisitor's Comments
Mr. Polaris questioned whether there were any members of the IWB on the WWSA and
why were there no members of King City, Durham or the incorporated area members?
Chair Scheiderich stated that the WWSA Board is made up of elected officials or
designated staff with the accountability being with the various City Councils. Mr. Polans
questioned whether the members of the IWB could be deleted in the future as far as the
IGA with the various entities? Chair Scheiderich stated that he could not recite from *moo
memory how the IGA created the Board. Mr. Wegner stated that when we speak of
Tigard that includes Tigard, King City, Durham and the unincorporated area since January
1, 1994. Chair Scheiderich stated that this will not be a unilateral action by the City of
Tigard.
6. Non Agenda Items
The Board discussed the three expired terms of Commissioners from King City, Durham
and the At large position. Since King City and Durham have not appointed another
member the existing members will remain on the IWB. December 31, 1997 the term of
the At Large position (Scheiderich) expired. The bylaws and the IGA do not address how
the fifth member of the Board is selected other than that position is appointed by the other
members. In 1994 when the IWB was organized applications were taken for the At Large
position and candidates were selected. Mr. Wegner stated that if the Board wishes they
could re-appoint Mr. Scheiderich for another term. Commission Froude proposed that
the Board would address this issue of appointment of the Member At Large and election Iwo
of new officers at the March meeting.
7. Adjournment
The meeting of the IWB was adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
Intergovernmental Water Board Meeting -January 14, 1998
Page 4
I
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Bill Monahan, City Manager
FROM: Cd Wegner
DATE: March 10, 1998
SUBJECT: Correspondence City of Wilsonville/WWSA
Included with this memo are letters dated February 27, 1998 from the City of Wilsonville and a letter
dated March 9, 1998 from Jesse Lowman regarding an expected response within the next couple of
weeks.
I would like to discuss this issue this evening and cover the following points to prepare for Tigard and
Tualatin Valley Water Districts response:
• Follow the Department of Corrections Agreement.
• Creation of an ORS 190 Agreement for the purpose of building a water treatment facility on the
Willamette River.
• Participation in a public relations plan.
• Investigation of alternate sites for a treatment plant that more appropriately meet the needs of the
WWSA.
• Financial impact for early and late participation.
� r
C
TualatinValley
Water District
1850 SW 170th Ave.•P.O.Box 745•Beaverton,Oregon 97075.503/642-1511 •FAX:503/649-2733
March 9, 1998
Arlene Loble, City Manager
City of Wilsonville
30000 SW Town Center Loop E
Wilsonville, OR 97070
Re: February 27th letter regarding property
Dear Arlene,
Thank you for your letter dated February 27th, 1998, extending the
opportunity of property under consideration to the Willamette
Water Supply Agency (WWSA).
I have spoken with Bill Monahan of the City of Tigard and we
both have agreed to present this offer to our respective Board and
Council; Tigard, during the week of March 9th, 1998 and Tualatin
Valley Water District the week of March 16th, 1998.
We still convey to you the dissatisfaction of the price of the
property, and that we have, as earlier indicated, authorized Mike
Ragsdale to pursue additional opportunities of alternate sites.
We expect response within the next couple of weeks and we shall
keep you informed of any pending decisions based on the
information gathered.
)Ge
,)
o man
% l Manager
cc: Bill Monahan, City of Tigard
Mike Ragsdale
JL/pr
Loble Property March 9, 1998/jesse/pattyr/3/9/98
WOTCD - not fn he fnLcn fnr nrnntc i
03/02/98 11.:15 $'503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD [A 002:'009
30000 9W bm Center Loop E
Wdsor vie. Oregon 97070
C4 of 003)652-1011
WILSONVILLE (503)682-1015 Fax
in OREWN (503)682-0843 TDD
February 27, 1998
itMAR i? 2 1993
Jesse Lowman,General Manager
Tualatin Valley Water District
1850 5W 170th Avenue
PO Box 745
Beaverton,OR 971775
William A.Monahan,City Manager
City of Tigard
1312:5 SW Hall Blvd_
Tigard,OR 97223
Re: Proposed Agreement Between WWSA and the City of Wilsonville
Gentlemen:
This letter is to ieconfum the City of Wilsonville's commitment to finalize our agreement to
jointly fund and cooperatively plan for the development and operation of a water treatment
plant on the Willamette. Under the teams of our agrectrimt with. the Department of
Corrections,the City of Wilsonville and the WWSA are required to finalize negotiations by
the and of March, 199$_
As you know,the City of Wilsonville has an option to purchase the river front property than
we agreed would be a suitable site for a water treatment plant_ Prior to the formation of the
WWSA,the City of Wilsonville offered TVWD the opportunity to join us in the acquisition
and use of the property. That offer is now extended to the WWSA.
Since August of 1996,the City of Wilsonville has had Montgoucry Watson under contract
to prepare preliminary design concepts and cost estimates_ Much of their work has been
used as the basis for our prior negotiations and discussions. It is my understanding that the
City of Tigard has also developed a scope of work and is prepared to proceed with
preliminary design. In order to avoid any unnecessary duplication of effort and cost, I have
suspended Mor►tgornery Watson's contract until such time as we are able to coordinate The
responsibilities of our consultants.
As an alternative to the conventional practice of separately designing, bidding, constructing
and then operating a treatment plant, the City of Wilsonville would lice the WWSA to
seriously consider the design, build, operate alwrrixive that has been used so Successfully
by the City of Seattle. If only a portion of the 40% savings touted by the City of Scattle
could be achieved here, it would certainly be an attractive selling point with all of our rate
payers. I recognize that time is of the essence and that is why I am raising the issue now
before we are locked in to following the traditional low bid procurement process.
R.� $wvng The CammuniP Mt7 Prim-
03/02.98 11:16 U503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD [A 003/009
Jesse Lowman,General Manager,TVWD
William A_Monahan.City Manager,Tigard
February 27, 1997
Page 2
Although the Wilsonville City Council has yet to mare a decision to use the Willamette
River as our future source of water, the City remains committed w working cooperatively
with the WWSA throughout the planning process.
Sincerely,
Arne Uble
City Manager
al:dp
enclosure
cc: Wilsonville Mayor and City Council
WWSA Mernbers
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honarable Mayor and City Council
Bill Monahan, City Manager
FROM: Ed
DATE: March 10, 1998
SUBJECT: Letter- Oregon Department of Land Conservation&Development/Wilsonville
Attached you will find a letter from the Director of the Department of Land Conservation and
Development, State of Oregon addressed to the Mayor of the City of Wilsonville. The letter reviews
the City of Wilsonville's proposed program to correct the water moratorium. The interesting item is
the fifth paragraph on page 2 ... "Wilsonville's correction program can reasonably conclude now to
develop the Willamette River source..."
I believe this has a lot of significance because this is the first written comment, from a State agency to
proceed with the Willamette River. I do not know if this is from the Department of Corrections
influence or other State agencies in assisting in a regional facility or if the State finally is believing the
treatment reports. Wilsonville is still evaluating the three alternatives addressed in the letter.
Also included is the response from the City of Wilsonville to the Department of Land Conservation and
Development stating that they will be continuing with their study to pursue the three options; 1)
Troutdale aquifer, 2)Bull Run source, 3)Willamette River.
it� 1
R
March 2, 1998 DEPARTMENT OF
LAND
CONSERVATION
Charlotte Lehan, Mayor AND
City of Wilsonville DEVELOPMENT
30000 SW Town Center Loop E
Wilsonville, OR 97070
SUBJECT: Water Moratorium Correction Program
Mayor Lean and Members
Of the City Council:
Staff of the Department of Land Conservation and Development has reviewed the city's
proposed program to correct the water moratorium enacted by the city on January 5, 1998
pursuant to ORS 197.505-540. We understand the statutes to mean that the "program to
correct" the conditions cited in the moratorium should be as substantively definitive as
conditions in each situation allow. This understanding is reinforced by the general intent
of the moratorium statutes to limit the duration and neighboring impacts of a moratorium.
With this in mind, I offer the following comments.
1. The city anticipated and planned for this occasion in the early 1970s when it secured a
municipal water right to the Willamette River in the amount of 30 cubic feet per second.
(See page 1 of the February 23, 1998 Memorandum to Eldon Johansen attached to
Resolution No. 1441.) This Memorandum also concludes that the Willamette River is
"one of the very few options which is capable of meeting Wilsonville's longkerm water
supply needs. It is...least dependent on decisions/actions of other agencies...." (Page 5,
Memorandum to E. Johansen)
The city built on its earlier acquisition of water rights by participating since 1989 in a $4
million ($368,000 city expenditure) effort to secure a sustainable long-term water supply
as outlined in the November 7, 1997 Memorandum to Mike Kohlhoff.
The city moved for several years toward a replacement water system under an order from
John -, K::z;,.,.-
the State Water Resources Department to replace the current groundwater source. During,
this time Willamette River water was tested with these results: most "chemicals were
detected (even at trace levels)" and those revealed were "removed when processed
through the pilot purification plant." (Page 4. Memorandum to E. Johansen)
1173 Court Street NE
Salem,OR 97310-0590
(503)373-0050
FAX(503)362-6703
R
An option on land for a Willamette River water intake and treatment facility is available
to the city.
The alternative of relying upon Bull Run for a reliable long-term supply is highly
speculative. It provides little reasonable promise during the lifetime of this moratorium to
provide a solution.
The Troutdale Acquifer is fraught with local, proprietary interests that seriously
compromise its availability to Wilsonville.
Several other municipalities, special service districts and state agencies are ready or near
ready to cooperate in developing a water system on the Willamette River.
For these reasons, Wilsonville's correction program can reasonably conclude now to
develop the Willamette River source, and to schedule action steps necessary to build the
facilities in an expeditious manner. This approach can reasonably be expected to
produce a long-term water system within or shortly after the maximum time allowed in
statutes for a moratorium. An early conclusion to the water supply uncertainty will
benefit both present and prospective constituents of the city.
2. Though not dealt with at length, the correction program documents address funding by
increased systems development charges and a city election. The systems charge increases
are scheduled for adoption prior to selection of the long range water supply solution. We
wonder about the reasons for this order. Normally charges would be predicated on
known or detailed estimates of project costs, which cannot be determined in this case
until after the water supply source has been selected.
Please enter this letter into the record of the city council's hearing on March , 1998.
And thank you for giving consideration to our comments.
Regards,
<Richa d P. Benner
rect r
03/10/1998 15:04 5036492733 TVIJC PAGE 02
30000 SW Town CenW Loop E
-` IMkcavd e,Otogm 97070
` March 4. 1998
gay d =' 4503)6412.-1011
WILS ON V ILLE 0011682-10 15 FQx
In tOcaorr (503)6LW
Richard Benner.Director *D
Dept.of Land Conservation&Development1y
1175 Court St. NE ��TT
Salem.OR 97310-0590
Dear Mr.Benner.
I arra responding to your letter of March 2. 1998, which was entemd into the public record at
Monday's City Council public hearing on the water moratorium correction program. if I
read the essence of your letter correctly, it is your opinion that the City should proceed as
expeditiously as possible to build a water treatment plant on the Willamette River without
giving further consideration to either the Bull Run or the Troutdale aquifer as alternatives to
solving A ilsonville's water problem. As expeditious as your approach may be. I think it is
simplistic and offers little deference to the local elected officials' undeManding or what our
constituents are ready to support. If the City were to dismiss the Troutdale aquifer and the
Bull Run alternatives out of hand, we would have to spend the rest of the moratorium period
(however short or long that may turn out to be)defending why the City Council made such
a precipitous decision without adequately considering what many continue to believe to be
viable Alternatives.
Let me assure you that we share a common goal and that is to solve our water supply
uncertainty and end the moratorium dust as quickly as possible. The City spent duce years
and many hundreds of thousands of dollars to analyze every conceivable alternative before
concluding Iate last fall that the Willamette River is the only viable and environmentally
sound (aailieit expensive) alternative for the City. To that end. we hired consultants to
p preliminary plans and cost estimates for construction of a treauncnt plant. Yam
el�menaons an option on land for a Willarneur River intim and treatment facility that is
.'available to the City." In fats. it is the City's option, purchased at a dear price to
guarantee that there would be riverftont property of sufficient size to serve not only our
needs but those of alta: region as well. Furthcrtnore, we have offered to share the property
with the TVWD and the newly-formed Willamette Water Supply Agency. Wilsonville has
mn,
taland continues to take, every respornsibic action n to be prepared to move
forward with construction of a water ft=tment plantan necessary
should the City
Council decide that that is our best course of action.
We were s sed at moratonum public he mg in January when the Troutdale aquifer
idea was ent iuthe siastically embraced by everyone from the Home Builders Association to
Willamette protagonists as being the cute-all that the City had somehow overlooked. In
fact,we had considered it earlier but concluded that "misting" water from outside our own
aquifer, particularly on EFU land. raze counter to responsible land use and water planning.
However,in subsequent meetings with your staff and Statue Water resources %" were taken
aback when no one was willing to take a definidve stand. Instead. there was gencrtlred
discussion about the importance of balancing statewide goals and the proceduvd aspects of
making such an application. The same thing happened when the City approached
Clackamas and Manon Counties. The discussions became mired in the minutia of permit
processing and possible time delays. Quite f wWy, your letter is the clearest statenzUt we
have seen to date although it doesn't even really deal with the statewide planning principles
that may be at stake hare. Without something definitive coming from either the store or the
_''a Servng ir)e Ccammur ity Mh P►icie
..03!10{1998 15:04 5035492733 T's/14D PAGE 03
Richard Benner
March 4, 1998
Page 2of2
county level.we could not preclude the Troutdale aquifer from further consideration and an
engineering analysis of the merits and costs is now underway.
You described the Bull Run alternative to the Willamette River as being "highly
speculative." Nonetheless, the City cannot afford to dismiss the City of Portland's
admittedly belated offer out of hand However enthusiastic the local cotnr Wnity was about
the possibilities of the Troutdale aquifer,it pales in comparison to the hope that Wilsonville
could drink the pristine Bull Run water just like everyone else in the region. In fact, at
Monday's public hearing local developers testified that this was the answer to shortening
the moratorium. The Home Builders suggested that with the promise of Bull Run m hand
the City could do away with the moratorium altogether. The Meaupolitan Horne Builders
Association has already filed an appeal of the water moratorium with LUBA claiming we
did not adequately consider the mems of the Troutdale aquifer. We have actually had some
local developers and home builders intervene on the City's side, and both parties have now
agreed to mediation. The appeal is. therefore, on hold, but I am sure you will agree that it
would not be prudent to ignore their objections.
Your concern for the timing of systems development charge increases was shared by the
Home Builders and others who testified. Our intent here was to give the voters the
assurance that the development community would be paying its "fair share" before asking
them to double their water rates. Your point is well taken. and we will reconsider the tuning
aspects of both water rate and SDC increases.
Finally,contrary to popular belief,the City has never used the water moratorium as a ploy to
avoid or delay the construction of a prison in Wilsonville. We have agreements with the
Department of Corrections and the Tualatin Valley Water District to supply water to the
prison, and the City is further committed to building at City expense a 52,000,000 water
reservoir which is critical to making the Bull Run connection to serve the prison. The fact
of the nutter is that the City now invites the Departmot of Corrections into Wilsonville, if
only they will agree to construct the prison on the alternative site in the industrial area
northwest of Wilsonville. In this new location, the City will actually embrace the prison.
We continue to hope that the Governor will agree because the alternative site could actually
showcase the principles that I know the Governor holds so dear.
• local self determination appropriate economic development
• good land use planning community-based solutions to complex problems
If only we can get the Deparmnent of Corrections to look beyond their immediate self
interests. they could become the catalyst for positive change providing the infrastructure
necessary to create a whole new industrial area. Meanwhile. the Dammasch Area Master
Pian could move forward as originally envisioned and supported by your department.
S, Y, �.
i
i
Charlotte I.ehan
Mayor
Enclosurm, Arlene Loble letter to WWSA dated Feb.27, 1998
Wilsonville Industrial Site briefing packet
al:lb
CCBenner 314198
Davis , & Hibbitts, Inc.
Market and Public Opinion Research
921 S.W. Morrison, Suite 424, Portland, OR 97205
Phone (503) 220-0575, FAX 220-0576
e-mail: davishib®fta.com
November 26, 1997
TO: Rockey Bowler Public Relations
FROM: Davis & Hibbitts,Inc.
RE: WWSA Focus Groups
I. INTRODUCTION ;
On November 18 h and 19`h, 1997, two focus groups were conducted for the Willamette
Water Service Agency (WWSA) to assess metropolitan area residents' attitudes about
developing a high quality water supply system from the Willamette River. The research
was conducted to assist with development of a communications plan for WWSA.
A total of 20 participants attended the two groups. All participants were screened to
eliminate strongly pro-economic development and strongly pro-environmental people and
to be representative of residents in the Tigard, Tualatin, and Sherwood areas in terms of
length of residence in the metropolitan area, age, occupation,household income,
education level, and gender. See Appendix A. The participants received a$50
honorarium for two hours of their time.
Statement of Limitations
This study was designed to qualitatively explore the range of prevailing attitudes of a
designated population and to gain insight into the motivations underlying these attitudes.
It was not in the scope of a study of this kind to quantitatively measure the attitudes of the
populations from which the participants were drawn, or to correlate any attitudes with
demographic or behavioral variables. However, in addition to gathering qualitative
information to supplement and possibly help validate other primary and secondary
research, the information reported below is the result of multiple discussions and group-
to-group validation which makes the information helpful in establishing quantitative
boundaries.
Organization of Report
This report is organized in the order of the topics covered in the discussion groups.
Under each topic are comments regarding that topic, followed by a section that
summarizes the most important points for consideration as WWSA pursues this project.
In addition to participating in group discussions, participants completed a series of
written exercises. Both written and oral comments were considered in this report.
Readers of this summary report are strongly encouraged to view the video tapes of the
two group discussions.
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbilts, Inc. I
P'
H. WATER SUPPLY IMAGERY r
Geography Awareness
t_.
Participants were asked to draw a map of the Portland area showing the Willamette and
Columbia Rivers, their community, Portland, and Oregon City. They were also
instructed to indicate the directional flow of the rivers. The following are the results:
Tuesday Q oup
Five maps were drawn correctly with the accurate flow of the waters and
locations of communities. The only mistake made by the other four maps was the
direction of the Willamette which they had running south, otherwise, the
placement of communities and rivers were accurate.
Wednesday roup
Only one map was drawn incorrectly with the same mistake seen in the previous
group—showing the Willamette flowing southward. The other ten maps were
drawn correctly.
Interestingly, those incorrect maps had everything illustrated correctly except the flow of
the Willamette. These participants may have believed that the river, and possibly all the
pollutants, flowed from Portland to their communities.
Source of Current Water Supply
During the discussions, a general sense of uncertainty about their community's water
source was evident in the participants. Six participants did not know the source of their
water, half named Bull Run, and four gave other sources. See Appendix B.
Wednesday's group was more aware of their water source as 8 out of 11 people
mentioned Bull Run compared with only 2 from the group on Tuesday. The results are as
follows:
Tuesday Group (9) Wednesday Group (11)
Bull Run 2 Bull Run 8
Tualatin 2 Don't know 3
Tigard 1
Portland 1
Don't know 3
Future Water Supply Problem
Thirteen of the total 20 participants believed their future water supply was a somewhat to
a very serious problem in their community. See Appendix C. Four people said that it
was not a very serious problem, with one participant saying, "It rains a lot, how can we
be short of water?" Participants who were unsure whether their community had a water
problem leaned toward saying it was a problem rather than not.
a
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts,Inc. 2
Participants felt that due to widespread growth and pollution, sources of water were being
depleted: "The growth we are experiencing is incredible." and "I worry about ... waste in
the Willamette." People mentioned more of what they saw around them as indicators of
population growth and possible future water problems, such as new housing
developments, overcrowded schools, and traffic in their neighborhoods, more so than
what they heard or read. One participant wrote that he"never heard of issues relating to
[water problems]" so he assumed there weren't any.
Even though participants expressed concerns about growth, there was no firm support for
a growth moratorium. Some participants may have not preferred growth in their
communities and the Portland area, but they realized a growth moratorium was not
realistic. Participants noted that growth was an outcome of a healthy economy, and a
healthy economy benefited everyone.
Everyone in the discussion groups, had at one time or another, experienced the
consequences of a water shortage in their community. One participant remembered back
to the late 70's when watering the lawn was allowed only on specific days. Others
related with similar experiences and all participants agreed that a water shortage would
have a negative impact on the economy as well as their quality of life. Some common
mentions were the effects on the agricultural and electric utility industries (resulting in
increased prices to consumers), not being able to wash their cars, water their lawns, and
flush their toilets as often.
Summary
• A majority of participants accurately illustrated the Portland area with the Willamette
and Columbia Rivers. The one common mistake was the Willamette flowing
southward.
• Six out of 20 participants did not know their community's water source.
• A majority felt that there was a future water supply problem and the main causes
were growth and pollution in general. Participants felt that a water shortage
negatively impacted the economy and their overall quality of life.
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts,Inc. 3
M. GENERAL WILLAMETTE RIVER IMAGERY
Possible Future Water Supply Sources _
i
The following table outlines the responses gathered from participant's written exercises
on future water sources. See Appendix D.
Table 1
Possible Future Water Sources for Your Community
Water Source Number of Mentions
Bull Run 9 .
Willamette River—specific mention S
Wells/underground supply 8
Tualatin River 6
Rain 5
Columbia River 4 --
Reservoirs/holding tanks 4
Lakes—general mention 3 '
Rivers—general mention 3
Pacific Ocean 3
Treatments plants 2
Others(bottled water,dams,Clackamas
River,conservation,dew,buy from other 1
states)
Source: Appendix D
Attitudes About Willamette River
Eight participants mentioned the Willamette River as a possible water source. Half of
them added comments which were all negative in nature - such as "pollution," "awful,"
"not sure of cleanliness." Surprisingly, no one wrote of deformed fish from the
Willamette and only one mention of this matter was noted in the discussion (Wednesday).
The common concern about the Willamette was the pollution level of the water. Many
participants associated the river with sewage overflow and not being able to swim or
water ski during the summer.
Attitudes About Water Conservation
In the written exercises, only one person suggested conservation as a possible source of
water for their community. Even though all participants saw the value of conservation,
both groups believed conservation alone would not solve future water supply problems.
One participant expressed that"conservation is not a discussed topic" and that measures
should be taken to encourage conservation.
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbius, Inc. 4
Summary
• About half of the participants specifically mentioned the Willamette River as a
possible source of water for their community in the future. Fourteen people named
other rivers or rivers in general.
• The Willamette River is associated with sewage overflow and pollution in general.
• Conservation as a future water source was noted by only one individual. Even though
others believed conservation would help solve a water supply problem, no one
believed conservation alone would do the job.
a
R�
i
5
i
J
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 5
IV. WILLAMETTE RIVER SUPPLY SYSTEM
Project Support Levels
We read participants the following project description:
Facing a near-term need for a new, cost-effective and high quality water source,
a group of southwest suburban municipalities are aggressively researching
options. One option under consideration is construction of a system to use
treated Willamette River water. It would consist of an intake pipe, a state-of-the-
art water treatment plant and transmission lines to serve one or more of these
municipalities.
We then asked them to rate their support level for this project. See Appendix E. After a
30 minute discussion on water supply issues, we again asked them to rate their support
level. See Appendix F. Following are results of the rating exercises:
First Rating Second Rating
General support 10 15
Neutral 8 3
General oppose 2 2
After reading the description of the project, we initially had five participants in the
Tuesday group and three from Wednesday in a neutral position. At the end of the
discussion, all but three of the neutrals had shifted to a more supportive stance. Their
main reason for the move was the "state-of-the-art" treatment plant.
Reasons to Support Project
The two participants who opposed the project in the first rating were both skeptical about
the ability to "properly prepare [the Willamette] for consumption and use." However,
they later shifted their opinions to support the project.
The best argument in support for the project was that growth requires other sources of
water. Another strong argument was that Bull Run alone could no longer support the
growing population. People understood the implications of relying on just one source
and were supportive of a back-up water supply—even the Willamette River. Still, some
participants had doubts about the safety and cleanliness of the Willamette.
Some participants also supported the project because it would allow them to continue to
use water for life style activities like landscaping and gardening.
Reasons to Oppose Project
We had a supporter and a neutral participant in the first rating who changed to oppose the
project. Both participants were concerned about cost issues and the supporter was not
satisfied with using the Willamette as the water source, though she supported the idea of
a treatment plant.
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis &Hibbitts, Inc. 6
i
Arguments against the project included concerns about cost, actual need for a new water
treatment system, location of the plant, impact on neighborhoods, and the ability to keep
up with projected growth. Several participants questioned the ability to filter the
A Willamette River, but they seemed reassured by the idea of a state-of-the-art filtration
system. The more they listened to others discuss filtration and the proposed treatment
plant, the more comfortable they became with the project.
Water Treatment Technology
Most participants came to accept that technology could filter polluted water into a form
safe enough to drink—including the Willamette. However, participants initial knowledge
level of this technology was minimal, so some were hesitant to fully support the project.
One participant commented, "I believe the Willamette is the most logical, ..... the amount
of contaminants concerns me greatly, but technology should be able to take care of this."
Other Water Supply Options
Other options considered were to expand Bull Run, use other rivers like the Tualatin or
Columbia, and search for underground water sources. See Appendix D .
Summary
• Generally, participants believed the project to be a positive move by the
municipalities, but they had reservations about using the Willamette River as the
water source. As noted previously, the Willamette is associated with pollution and
specifically with sewage overflow.
• The main reasons to support the project were widespread growth and the need to
diversify from having just one water source.
• The main reasons to oppose the project were cost issues and not being able to safely
filter the Willamette River.
J
}
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis 8c Hibbitts, Inc. 7
V. Communications
Sources of Information
The major source of information about water supply issues were monthly mailers from
their municipalities. Participants also cited their own experiences with water shortages.
No one mentioned using the computer to obtain information.
Participants suggested that a variety of methods be used to reach the public, since
everyone receives information in different ways. They mentioned getting information out
through the schools, employers, community newsletters, and neighborhood meetings.
Questions About Project
Cost
How much will this cost?
Who will pay for it?
Technology
Is the technology good enough to make the Willamette safe to drink?
What are you going to do with the waste after filtration?
The Need
Is this really necessary? Are there better alternatives?
Will it withstand future growth? How come this wasn't brought up years ago?
Location
Where will it be built? I don't want it in my backyard.
Impacts
How is this going to impact my community?
Will the treatment plant make noise? Will it smell? What will it look like?
Is there going to be power lines around the plant and in my neighborhood?
How will it impact the wildlife in the river?
Summary
• Participants mentioned community newsletters as their main source of information
about water issues.
• In addition to the newsletters, suggestions for how to communicate with the public
were through the schools, employers, and neighborhood meetings.
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 8
VI. Final Message for WWSA
Project Related Comments
Finally, participants were asked to write a final message to government officials about
planning for their community's future water supply. See Appendix G.
Comments about the project were mainly positive. But concerns were expressed that
once the treatment plant is completed, it may not support the projected growth for the
future. One participant wrote that public officials should"have enough foresight that the
project will not be outdated by our growth."
Participants also wanted to be assured that the treatment plant would safely filter the
Willamette and they were made aware of all facts associated with the project.
Other Comments
Other messages included comments on trust, communication methods, suggestions on
controlling growth, and planning better for population growth. Please refer to Appendix
G for more details.
a
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 9
APPENDIX A: Demographics
Participants Gender Age Education Household Occupation Length of City
(Tuesday Income Residence in
Group) (before taxes in City
thousands
P1 Female 28 College $40-50 Homemaker 1.5 years Sherwood
graduate
P2 Female 34 College $30-40 Cooking 1.5 years Tigard
graduate consultant
P3 Female 44 Some $50-60 Admin @ 21 years Tualatin
colle a church
P4 Female 50 Some <$30 Machinist 21 +years Tigard
college
P5 Female 74 High <$30 (retired) 1 year Tualatin
school Care giver
graduate &part-time
retail
P6 Male 19 Some high $30-40 Auto lot 7months Tigard
school attendant
P7 Male 33 College $50-60 Law 4 years Tigard
graduate consultant
P8 Male 41 College $60-70 Admin 8 years Tigard
graduate assistant
P9 Male 56 College $3040 Retired NA Tigard
graduate Grocer
Source: Davis&Hibbitts,Inc.
Participants Gender Age Education Household Occupation Length of City
(Wednesday Income Residence in
Group) (before taxes in City
thousands
P1 Female 27 Some $40-50 Childcare 9 years Sherwood
college provider
P2 Femaler44
College $70+ Human 11 years Tigard
graduate resources
P3 FemaleSome $70+ Legal 13 years Tigard
college assistant
P4 FemaleSome $70+ Homemaker 25 years Tigard
college
P5 Female 54 Some $70+ Accounting 14 years Tualatin
colle e
P6 Female 74 High $40-50 (retired) 5 years Tualatin
school grad Care giver
P7 Male 28 Some $30-40 Assistant 28 years Tualatin
college grocery mgr.
P8 Male 35 College $60-70 Director of 11 years Tualatin
graduate purchasing
P9 Male 45 Post $50-60 Sales 8 years Tigard
college director
P10 Male 55 Some $70+ Materials 25 years Tigard
college broker
PH Male 73 Some high $40-50 Retired 67 years Tigard
school truck driver
Source: Davis&Hibbitts,Inc.
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 10
A PPENDI K B
Where does your community get its water?
Tuesday Group
PI Not sure.
P2 Not sure,Tigard.
P3 Tualatin gets water from Bull Run.
P4 My water is Tualatin.
P5 Not sure.
P6 Not sure.
P7 Water—Tigard—Bull Run.
P8 Not sure. Tualatin Water Shed?
P9 Tigard gets water from Portland. Also Oregon City.
Wednesday Group
Pi Bull Run or well in Sherwood. I know last year they were working on hooking up Sherwood to
Bull Run.
P2 Not sure. I know it's not Bull Run.
P3 Bull Run. Lack of fluoride.
P4 I believe we get it from Bull Run. I know we are losing those water rights.
P5 Bull Run. Pure,concern about watershed.
P6 Not sure.
P7 Not sure. It is the nastiest water I've ever had.
P8 Bull Run.
P9 Bull Run. Fluoridation.
P10 Bull Run reservoir.
PI1 Bull Run and well.
. a
n
' 1
r�
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 11
APPENDIX C
Overall, how serious a problem is future water supply in your community: not at all serious, not very
serious, somewhat serious, or very serious? Record any comments.
Tuesday Group
P1 Not very serious. Rapid development in neighborhoods might make a future problem.
P2 Somewhat serious. The growth we are experiencing is incredible. Water seems
plentiful,especially during flood times;but people aren't conservative and sources are abused and
polluted more as population increases.
P3 Somewhat serious. Fast growing—increasing demand on supply.
P4 Very serious. Dirty,garbage,need to be filtered now.
P5 Not very serious.
P6 Somewhat serious.
P7 Not very serious. Rains a lot! How can we be short of water?
P8 Somewhat serious. Urban growth increasing.
P9 Somewhat serious.
Summary: Not at all serious—0
Not very serious—3
Somewhat serious—5
Very serious— 1
Wednesday Group
Pi Not sure.
P2 Somewhat serious.
P3 Very serious. I worry about the accidental release of waste in the Willamette.
P4 Very serious. It's my understanding that Tigard is losing it's water rights.
P5 Very serious. Concerned about watershed and logging.
P6 Don't know. Perhaps somewhat serious.
P7 Somewhat serious.
P8 Not very serious.
P9 Don't know. Never heard of issues relating to this. Guess somewhat serious. Development of
new homes and businesses tax current system.
Pl0 Somewhat serious.
Pl l Somewhat serious.
Summary: Not at all serious—0
Not very serious—1
Somewhat serious—4
Very serious—3
Don't know—3
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 12
APPENDIX D
Please list the sources of water that come to mind when you think about possible sources of water for your
community in the future. Record any comments.
Tuesday Group
P1 Lakes. Rivers. Underground water supply. Well water—exists on large acreage without local
water supply.
P2 Rain. Lakes. Reservoirs. Rivers and streams. Holding tanks. Bottled water. well water. Water
treatment centers.
P3 New water treatment plants—to treat and to recycle water used. New wells for communities—to
use resources underground. Improved conservation techniques—better education on conservation
and perhaps rewards(e.g.refunds)on water bills.
P4 Willamette—awful. Tualatin—already poor. Mount Hood—run off could be utilized. Bull Run—
already max. Columbia—is being over used.
P5 Rain—seems like we have plenty of rain. Snow—I know they often worry not enough snow in
the mountains. Rivers. Reservoirs.
P6 Lakes—do they take all the bugs out of it? Oceans—I would hope that if they do get water from
the ocean,they take all the salt out of it. Recycled water.
P7 Rainwater—rains a lot in winter. Ocean—plant to take out salt in water. Dew from morning—
extract dew from plants. Animals—humans have 75%of water in body.
P8 Tualatin River—very slow moving river,pretty polluted,lots of farm run off. Bull Run
Watershed—Mount Hood area—would present problems moving water to this side of Willamette.
P9 Dams—expanding Bull Run. Rivers—Willamette. Wells—disadvantage, water level keeps
dropping.
Wednesday Group
P1 Willamette River. Bull Run. Sherwood Well.
P2 Rely on the existing sources—limited option. Purchase from a surrounding state—cost makes us
rely on others.
P3 Bull Run. Haag Reservoir. Bonneville Dam. Detroit Dam. Worried about water purification—
too much toxic release.
P4 Willamette River—as polluted as the Willamette is,we need to explore a water treatment south of
town. Bull Rum—as fast as the Metro has developed,we will deplete this resource. Tualatin
River—this is a far reach.
P5 Bull Run—concern of over population and watershed damage. Ground source wells—concern of
contamination,agriculture,and sewage disposal. Columbia River—concern of over use and
population.
a P6 Tualatin River—if purification is available. Bull Run—if not already.
P7 Rain water—acid rain. Tualatin River—pollution. Willamette River—pollution. Pacific Ocean—
pollution,salt. All of these sources can become sources of water by filtering.
P8 Bull Run—current source,good supply for next 10-20 years. Willamette River—not sure of
cleanliness,ability to clean and filter.
P9 Columbia River—4te choice,question proximity. Coast mountain runoff—best choice,naturally
flows towards Tigard and Tualatin. Tualatin River—2°d choice,chief concern is cleanliness and
ability to properly filter. Willamette River—3`d choice,question ......... Rainfall—5d'choice,
enough to satisfy?
a P10 Columbia River. Willamette River.
n
P11 Bull Run. Well. Clackamas River. Another version of Bull Run.
. 1
_r
3
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 13
APPENDIX E
(Read description of project) Do you strongly oppose, somewhat oppose, neutral,somewhat support, or
strongly support the project? Why?
Tuesday Group
Pi Neutral. Pro—the population growth in the area is going to require more water supply to the
outlying areas. Con—what is the cost on the taxpayer,impact on community?
P2 Strongly support. I have been in a community that uses secondary water. These types of
programs are essential. It may even be used outdoors, irrigation,or for agriculture.
P3 Somewhat support. Who pays for this project? It sounds reasonable.
P4 Somewhat support. Stay away from the sewer plants,then I'd think about it!
P5 Neutral. If this is a great need—I would support this.
P6 Neutral. I really don't know anything about the Willamette River so I couldn't say.
P7 Neutral. Need more facts—who pays,affect who,what community,where do you want plant.
Not in my backyard!
P8 Neutral. If this is really needed I think I could support this system,but I would have a lot of
questions about the ability of this plant to filter the water.
P9 Somewhat approve. Think could expand Bull Run water source and have better water.
Summary: Strongly oppose—0 Neutral—5 Strongly support—1
Somewhat oppose—0 Somewhat support—3
Wednesday
Pi Neutral. I don't know enough about the need of water in our area. If Bull Run isn't adequate,
then I would support Willamette River water.
P2 Somewhat support. Need to have info on cost. Why do we need this option? Is it cost effective?
Will it be controlled by the public or private sector? Proven technology?
P3 Somewhat oppose. Accidental waste being released into the Willamette. Would a treatment plant
purify the Willamette River too, or would the Willamette end up being a dumping source for the
leftover?
P4 Somewhat support. I don't feel I have enough data to give an accurate opinion. However, I feel
the west side will need to develop it's new water source. We extend from the Willamette towards
Banks and are fastly draining the resources of Bull Run.
P5 Neutral. Don't have enough information to make a determination. Construction of transmission
lines would cause a lot of controversy.
P6 Neutral. Because I'm uninformed. However, if it works,I would be strongly supportive.
P7 Somewhat support. Why would they need a`state-of-the-art' treatment plant?
P8 Strongly support. I believe the Willamette is the most logical source for water outside of Bull
Run,mostly because of supply and location. The amount of contaminants concerns me greatly but
technology should be able to take care of this.
P9 Somewhat oppose. Question cleanliness of water and actual ability to properly prepare it for
consumption and use. Media related,driven knowledge.
P10 Somewhat support. Need more information on this. I do remember the year we could not wash
cars and water lawns, '921 think. I always wonder about the water supply with all of the new
houses in Tigard.
Pl l Strongly support. Feel that we should use Clackamas River,feel this is cleaner to start with.
Summary: Strongly oppose—0 Neutral—3 Strongly support—2
Somewhat oppose—2 Somewhat support—4
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 14
APPENDIX F
After having had an opportunity to more fully consider the project, are you more supportive or more
opposed to the project? Record any comments.
Tuesday Group
Pi Neutral. Need more facts—where,how much,community impact? However,I'm more aware of
the water problem and the need for improvements and will take more info for consideration.
P2 More opposed. In support—I still like water treatment as an option,however, specifically the
Willamette I would be more opposed. Other options,cost and treatment vs.cost and expansion of
original water sources.
P3 More supportive. I feel the same—somewhat supportive. Still need more facts. Like the idea but
must have more info. Who pays,will it stay up with growth,is it really necessary,safe,quality?
P4 Neutral. I want more info. Exactly how this water is being treated. Chemicals are not going to
help people of Oregon. People of Oregon will not go for this.
P5 More supportive.- I still think if it is definitely needed. It probably would be the way to go.
Unless putting in another dam was about the same in cost.
P6 Neutral. I'm still feeling the same way. I'm really not sure what should be done and why.
P7 Opposed. Need more facts. Who says there is a shortage? Too much money and location not
clear. Too many variables.
P8 More supportive. Based on the fact that they have determined that there is a real near-term need.
But I still need to know a lot more about the project!
P9 More supportive. If water purity and cost are less than expansion of Bull Run.
Summary: More opposed—2
Neutral—3
More supportive—4
Wednesday Group
Pi More supportive. But would like more info on cost and how it would effect the community. Also,
exactly how much we really need a new water supply. Water supply vs.estimated growth.
P2 More supportive. Still need more info on the project. How prove, is it in other locations?
P3 More supportive. Realizing technology could be state of the art and the potential of improving the
Willamette instead of further deteriorating it.
P4 More supportive. I still feel there needs to be accountability by the community leaders who have
not foreseen this very serious need. However,the fact remains we need a future water supply
because of the continued demand on Bull Run. We must continue forward.
P5 More supportive. I would be supportive of a state of the art filtration and transmission. If done
well and the education was done up front and lots of attention was given to why, then maybe it
could be passed.
P6 More supportive. Of course if the persons with the technology can be trusted to their
commitments. And greed doesn't step in.
' P7 More supportive.
P8 More supportive. Bull Run is a great source of water but for the Portland Metro area to rely on
only one main source is too short sighted for the amount of growth projected for the area
P9 More supportive. Convinced that many options must be explored and that a few must be
implemented in combination. Continued growth and sustained quality of life required options to
be developed.
i, P10 More supportive. Still supportive. The discussion merely helped confirm my original theories.
` Pl l More supportive. Because of the influx of people we have to find other sources.
Summary: More opposed—0
Neutral—0
More supportive— 11
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 15
APPENDIX G
What one message do you have for government officials about planning for your community's future water
supply?
Tuesday Group
P1 Think about the long-term effects,if any,on the residents in the area. Health hazards,pollution,
etc.
P2 Have enough foresight that by`project' or other improvements by completion time,it will not
already be outdated by our growth.
P3 Please carefully consider all the options. The impact it will have on our lives.
P4 Be honest,up front,no lies,and be correct.
P5 To be sure of the safety in treatment for ones health.
P6 Be sure people understand all of the pros and cons to whatever it is that is going on.
P7 Those who fail to plan,plan to fail.
P8 Make sure you consider every possible alternative or collection of alternative before you build this
thing. Don't waste our money!
P9 Cost to the taxpayer?
Wednesday
Pi Prevent droughts—plan before it happens.
P2 Spend more time planning what our long-term water supply is before they approve more growth
and expand growth boundaries. If we don't have the infrastructure to support growth,why do we
want it?
P3 If you are going to use a resource,find a way to give back to it(i.e.use the water in the Willamette
but improve the quality of the Willamette in general).
P4 My one message to government officials is to address failure in urban growth. I feel as if they
have been caught with their pants down. We need long-term growth plans.
P5 People want to believe they have done their homework and will use the existing funds wisely
before asking for more. Document the facts.
P6 Trust and integrity.
P7 I strongly believe that if we plan better for construction and development of homes in our
community, we will be able to plan better for new locations of water supply for the growth.
P8 Get the message out and seek input from numerous sources. Give incentives to the consumers to
become involved during the planning stages and utilize all options of getting the information out.
P9 Develop awareness NOW. Knowing that without involvement and options,we will have serious
challenges in the very near future.
P10 Do not rely so heavily on Bull Run. Diversify our supply.
Pl l Have meetings that the neighborhoods can attend and have the officials listen.
WWSA Focus Group Project Conducted by Davis&Hibbitts, Inc. 16
CITY OF TIGARD
WATER OPERATIONS PROPOSED BUDGET
1998/99
Prepared by: Ed Wegner, Director of Public Works
Mike Miller, Utility Manager
Narrative
. --
Program Summary: 1998/99 Goals and Objectives:
The Utility Manager is responsible to the Public Continue to develop cooperative agreements for our long term
Works Director. The Water Division has the water supply needs.
responsibility to maintain, repair and expand the
water system, while at the same time providing a Completion of the 3.5 million gallon reservoir at the Menlor
dependable water supply at the highest quality to its property including landscaping.
customers. The Tigard Water Service Area is
comprised of the cities of Durham, King City, two Implement and utilize the Hansen computer software program for
thirds of Tigard and the unincorporated areas of the developing a preventive maintenance program, record keeping
Walnut Island and Bull Mountain (Tigard Water and the replacement of the existing inventory system.
District).
Provide efficient and effective maintenance of the water system.
1997/98 Accomplishments: Continue our commitment to the valve maintenance and line
Completed the cleaning of four reservoirs utilizing flushing program.
hard-hat divers while the reservoirs remained in
operation. Develop a cooperative working relationship with Engineering, so
as to have better coordination with projects.
Awarded bid to construct a 3.5 MG reservoir at the
Menlor property. Construction started late summer Continue cross-training of personnel within Utility Division
and is scheduled for completion in October 1998.
Continue to expand the opportunities for volunteer involvement in
Completed relocation of 170 feet of 8-inch water the Water Division.
main on SW 113th Avenue south of SW Durham
Road. This project was in coordination with a Program Highlights:
Washington County Street Improvement project. Reorganization of Public Works with the elimination of the
Operations Manager position and reallocation of that FTE to
The valve maintenance and line flushing program create a new Water Quality/Conservation Coordinator position.
began this summer and has flushed 10 miles of pipe
line. Reservoir cleaning program utilizing divers to clean the reservoirs
while they remain in operation.
Upgraded the old pump station at the original High
Tor reservoir from 3hp and 5hp pumps to two 25hp Continue the meter replacement program consisting of replacing
pumps. This will increase our ability to provide all meters 1 1/2" and larger with meters capable of capturing
additional fire flows to the surrounding area due to additional revenues.
the tremendous growth at the summit of Bull
Mountain.
Reduced our summer peak factor to 1.0 for the hour
and 1.01 for the day from City of Portland. This has
resulted in an 14% rate reduction from Portland for
FY 1998-99.
Page 1
Narrative
...: ::......
..... ...................................
� :.. LIt
:.:::..::..:.................:::::::::.....:::::.::...::::::::: ::: :.:::..:::...............
..:..
Performance Measurements
1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99
Miles of water mains 207 210 214 216
Reservoirs 12 12 13 13
Fire Hydrants 1,580 1,620 1,660 1,700
Pump Stations 6 6 6 6
Meters and Services 13,325 13,900 14,250 14,700
Pressure Reducing Stations 14 14 15 16
Wells 4 4 4 4
Full Time Equivalent Positions
1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99
Utility Manager 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.50
Operations Manager 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Water Operations Supervisor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Sr. Utility Worker 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
Water Works Inspector 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Water Quality Program Coordinator 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00
Utility Worker II 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00
PW Tech 1.00
Total Positions 15.00 13.501 14.50 14.50
Service Level Standards
Emergency situations (i.e. water main break, wind/winter storm, storm water incident, sewer surcharge, etc.) that occur
within normal working hours, will be responded to by City staff within fifteen minutes of notification. Emergency
situations that occur after normal working hours will be responded to within forty-five minutes after notification.
Respond to citizens inquires within twenty-four hours.
Read one half of the meters within the Water Service Area monthly.
Water meters will be installed within seven working days of purchase.
Water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer lines to be located within forty-eight hours of notification.
{Assist in designed community events in a manner that promotes good will between the City and the Community.
Page 2
1998/99 Budget City of Tigard, Oregon Printed: 3/10/98
Department: PW-Water Dept. Budget Unit: 2170
................... ..................:...::.....................::
.. .............. :::.::::.:::::::..:::::::::::::::.:
Total FTE 17.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
500.000 Merit Pool 11,154 - - -
501.000 Salaries- Management 133,414 - - -
502.000 Salaries- General 510,572 - - -
503.000 Salaries- Police -
504.000 Regular- Part Time - - - -
505.000 Temporary- Part Time 18,932 - - -
520.000 Overtime 23,200 - - -
530.000 Education - - - -
531.000 Longevity - - -
Sub-Total Wages 697,272 - - -
550.000 Unemployment 2,789 - - -
551.000 Worker's Comp 13,615 - - -
552.000 FICA/Medicare 53,341 - - -
553.000 Tri-Met Tax 4,306 - - -
560.000 Retirement 72,482 - - -
565.000 Life Insurance 1,549 - - -
566.000 Salary Continuation 2,591 - - -
567.000 Medical Insurance 62,222 - - -
568.000 Dental Insurance 10,524 - - -
569.000 Vision Insurance _ 2,139 - - -
Sub-Total Benefits 225,559 - - -
Total Wages & Benefits = 922,831 - -
600000 Water Costs 2,143,040 - - -
605000 Water Costs- Electricity 107,000 - - -
606000 Water Costs- Sampling 14,000 - - -
Sub-Total 2,264,040 - - -
601000 Professional Services 131,152 - - -
602000 Contractual Services 34,353 - - -
Sub-Total 165,505 - - -
RECAP Page 1
1998/99 Budget City of Tigard, Oregon Printed: 3/1.0/98
Department: PW- Water Dept. Budget Unit: 2170
:::::::::::.:::::::::...::.:v.._::.:..::.:....:......................................:.:..v..v.:. .
+ �1} >�
f]Crr4�:K::iT:•i**-'<:y:`:C: .i: ::%::``{{.;2{{ `..�}<: v.;<_;`.}; `iii:}i+:rr'iii:tt':}viii::. i`Y.t i::i v:.....?:is
:::.�:::::::nw:.w::::.�..w, ...........v•v.................• ;i•:Ji?iii:;;L::v{v}v:;i;:i•i•
610000 Rep &Main - Facilities 1,000 - - -
610001 Rep & Main - Lines Etc. 15,000 - - -
610002 Rep & Main - Valves 4,500 - - -
610003 Rep & Main - Reservoir 15,100 - - -
610004 Rep & Main - Grounds 3,000 - - -
610005 Rep & Main - Pump Station 15,840 - - -
610006 Rep & Main - Emergency Gen - - -
610007 Rep & Main - SCADA 1 25,000 - - -
610008 Rep & Main - Buildings - - - -
610009 Rep & Main - SM Equip/Tools - - - -
610010 Rep & Main - Meters 1 7,500 - - -
610011 Rep & Main - Serv. Lines 20,600 - - -
610012 Rep & Main - Regulators 25,000 - - -
610013 Rep & Main - Fire Service - - - -
610014 Rep & Main - Backflow Dev. 200 - - -
610015 Rep & Main - Fire Hydrant 2,500 - - -
610016 Rep& Main - Sample Stat. 300 - - -
611000 Rep & Main - Vehicles 30,360 - - -
611002 Small Tools 4,500 - - -
612000 Rep & Main - Office Equipment 1,000 - - -
Sub-Total 171,400 - - -
613000 Special Dept. Expense 6,265 - - -
620000 Office Supplies & Expenses 3,000 - - -
621000 Advertising & Publicity 1,650 - - -
621001 Conservation Expenses 17,000 - - -
Sub-Total 18,650 - - -
622000 Fees & Licenses 1,373 - - -
623000 Dues & Subscriptions 5,086 - - -
Sub-Total 6,459 - - -
624000 Travel, Food & Lodging 5,500 - - -
625000 Education & Training_ 6,500 - - -
Sub-Total - 12,000 -
-------- -------- ----- -
626000 Fuel Expenses 18,500 - - -
630000 Rents& Leases 2,600 - - -
:T__4
631000 Utilities 4,090 - - -
RECAP Page 2
1998/99 Budget City of Tigard, Oregon Printed: 3/10/98
Department: IPW- Water Dept. Budget Unit: 2170
632000 Insurance
633000 Property Damage 1,000
Sub-Total 1,000
Total Materials & Services 2,673,509
701000 Land & Improvements 82,620 - _ --
702000 Building & Improvements _
703000 Vehicles 80,000
704000 Office Furniture & Equipment 900
705000 Computer Equipment 7,500
706000 Operation Equipment 26,050
Total Capital Outlay 197,070
..... ........
RECAP Page 3