Delay requested for reservoir, water infrastructure vote

It looks like there won't be any special measures on the November ballot for West Linn. A special task force has asked the city to delay a vote for $20 million in water system improvements.

The West Linn City Council heard the recommendation from the Water System Improvement Task Force during its July 2 work session.

The city is battling an aging and insufficient water system with rusting pipes, frequent water main breaks and a reservoir that has outlived its intended use.

This year, one of the city council's goals is to create a plan to get additional funding to address these issues. It formed the Water System Improvement Task Force to explore options for ballot measures to replace the Bolton reservoir at $10 million and to replace other water infrastructure at another $10 million.

The city has been exploring two options to fund the projects; both would require a vote.

The city could issue general obligation bonds, which are assessed against property owners. The GO bonds would provide a constant revenue stream regardless of water usage and would be based on property values. Once the GO bonds are paid for, that tax would be terminated and property taxes would drop.

Or, the city could use revenue bonds, for which those who use the water pay for the system's improvements through increased water rates. A benefit to revenue bonds is that the city could change the rate classifications so both the city and the school district would also help pay for the bonds.

The city's charter currently limits utility rate increases to 5 percent a year, unless a higher rate is approved by voters. The city attempted to raise rates in 2010, but the measure failed.

The task force met six times and discussed the survey, the finances of the water fund, a campaign process and the Lake Oswego-Tigard water treatment plant's potential to affect a West Linn ballot measure.

"Following these discussions, on June 7 the WSITF determined that 2012 was not the appropriate time to pursue a water measure," stated a memo to the city council. "The WSITF would encourage the council to look toward 2013."

Members of the task force included some of their thoughts as to the direction the city should go. There was general consensus that, with a good communication plan, the public would support replacing the Bolton reservoir and pipe replacement.

Task force members also recommended that the city look into changing the charter's 5 percent restriction, developing a communication strategy and considering changing how the city charges for infrastructure maintenance.

The task force recommended the council use the rest of 2012 to create and implement a communication and education plan.

"I think having a really good education strategy ... is really critical," City Councilor Jody Carson said.

Other councilors agreed.

"When you think about water infrastructure and pipes, it's not a glamorous subject," Council President Jenni Tan said. "It's underground; you don't think about it."

The city's Utility Advisory Board has also had multiple discussions on how to address the water master plan.

According to a June 18 memorandum from the UAB, "The UAB strongly recommends that the city council should give its highest priority to the replacement and funding of the Bolton reservoir."

The UAB believes the current condition of the reservoir endangers citizens and, if the city continues to neglect it, costs to replace it will only increase. The reservoir was built in 1913 and has exceeded its design life, according to the city. Every water master plan since at least 1982 has identified the reservoir as a high priority for replacement.

The pipes were given second preference.

"While the city's water pipes are in dire condition, their failure does not jeopardize the health and safety of West Linn's citizens in the same scale as the condition of the Bolton reservoir," the memo stated. "Given the costs and risks arising from the condition of the Bolton reservoir and many of the city's water pipes, the UAB does not believe the city council should give a higher priority to any other city program."

If the council wants a May 2013 vote, the council must pass a resolution as early as December to set the election date, and then a resolution must be approved in February to place any measures on the ballot.