Bend council OKs $63 million in water bonds

Wednesday night’s Bend City Council meeting was one of farewells and thanks, from three departing councilors and toward City Manager Eric King, who got a solid review and a 5 percent “merit raise.” But it also was one where councilors voted 5-2 to authorize $63 million to fund the city’s disputed water system improvements.

The city council has spent years facing off with critics and each other over both a legally challenged pipeline replacement to Bridge Creek and which of two options to follow for a required water treatment plant.

The pipe work was put mostly on hold for over a year by a federal judge’s ruling, but a recent ruling on a revised Forest Service permit gave the city the green light to proceed — unless foes including Central Oregon Landwatch file an appeal to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the next 60 days.

Coincidentally, the bond issue also has a 60-day timeframe during which anyone could gather the signatures of 5 percent of Bend voters and send the bonds to a public vote in 2015.

Land-use attorney Paul Dewey, the executive Ddrector of LandWatch, didn’t make an appearance at Wednesday night’s council meeting.

He told NewsChannel 21 on Wednesday the group will be considering its options into the new year.

“I don’t know if we’ll do that (gather petition signatures), but it’s an option,” Dewey. “Another would be to wait to see what the new City Council does,” when Casey Roats, Nathan Boddie and Barb Campbell take the seats of Jodie Barram, Mark Capell and Scott Ramsay.

Earlier Wednesday, Campbell said she was not given any indication that the council would table the discussion until the new members took over next year.

“For the next four years, we’re going to have to decide if ($63 million) was too much, or not enough,” said Campbell. “It’s only two weeks away, so maybe we should be the ones who make that decision?”

City staff argued that every day counts. Finance Director Sharon Wojda said the city’s water fund is down to just $1 million, having spent $32 million on the projects and with another $41 million approved and under contract.

“Our financial advisers recommended that we put this on the agenda as soon as possible,” Wojda told councilors before the vote. “We need to start that 60-day public notice clock.”

That clock now ticking for LandWatch and any other voters who might see the bond measure as another crack at halting the projects some see as wasteful or too costly as Bend water sewer bills already have risen notably in recent years.

Dewey says he’s not sure what path his group will take on either avenue. But before that decision, he’s calling on the new council members to more numbers to back up their plans.

“I think (the new council) should demand for the city staff to show us the numbers,” Dewey said.

Councilors Doug Knight and Jim Clinton, long-time critics of the city’s water path, voted against the bond issuance Wednesday night.

But it was Ramsay, one of the departing members, who cast the lone no vote when councilors approve changes to the water and sewer rate structures. It’s a complicated matter, but the goals have been to end flat-rate pricing and make rates more fair — use more water (or have more impact on the sewer system) and you pay more.

Ramsay said that as the city continues to try to lure new business and urge others to stay and expand, the long-range picture could hurt those efforts by sending water and sewer bills higher for medium- to large-sized businesses.

But Capell said for many, rates should be going down dramatically, while Councilor Sally Russell said, “I think we’ve arrived at a pretty fair middle ground” that boosts fairness while also encouraging conservation.

It was a full night, as councilors talked transit and affordable housing in their work session, in the latter getting a full report from the recent Bend 2030 project. King said the city Planning Commission plans a hearing Dec. 22 on a proposed “cottage code” and “density bonus,” two of the tools create more in-fill development and meet a housing need. He said “concerns about compatibility” have prompted city staff to put another possible tool — new rules on “accessory dwelling units” into the whole urban growth boundary discussion.

Clinton pointed out that contrary to many people’s expectations, the city can’t control or guide growth to a large degree if builders and developers aren’t part of the process.

“We don’t supply room and board for anybody,” the mayor said. “The private sector makes decisions on what makes sense. We can do a lot of stuff, but if we’re not in close communication with the people who build these things, not a lot is going to happen.”