Octob2001x

Dear McNulty Association Member,

For years, McNulty Water Association has been pleased to provide the best quality water. As an association, we don’t make a profit, and all of our members are part owners of the system.

But as areas are annexed into the City of St. Helens Many of you could be forced to pay for part of St. Helens’s water system, even if you don’t drink their water. Even people who don’t get annexed would see a large increase in the water rates because the association will loose members.

This does not benefit anyone. Here’s why –

McNulty’s water comes from deep wells, and is exceptionally high quality.

St. Helens chlorinates its water. McNulty water does not require chlorination.

You could be forced to pay new hookup fees to St. Helens. You might get no credit for hookup fees you already paid to McNulty. These fees could be thousands of dollars.

Even those who aren’t annexed would see a rate increase because we would have a smaller number of members sharing the fixed costs of running the system.

You can still act to keep the good water and service you have now. The McNulty board negotiated in good faith to keep providing water service after the area was annexed. It was a fair agreement, but at the last minute the City Council changed its mind and will not sign this agreement. You can tell the City that you want them to sign the agreement for continued McNulty water service within the Urban Growth Area.
Ask the County for help

The County is currently changing its Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The new plan requires cities to do a better job of planning for service in the Urban Growth Area. But the new plan doesn’t protect rural residents from getting "stuck with the bill" when the City limits get expanded. We agree that the comprehensive plan should provide for more efficient Urban services, but not at the expense of rural residents. We plan to offer constructive suggestions that would encourage city planners to consider the impact on rural residents when considering annexation or new development in the Urban Growth Area.
What You Can Do

Attached is a letter that we are asking you to send to Columbia County. It says you support the constructive suggestions offered by the McNulty Water Board. The County’s address is printed on the back. Please sign it, add a stamp and mail it. Of course, writing your own is even better!

The Columbia County Commission hearing on this plan is Wednesday, October 24 at 10:00 AM. If you can make it, please go to the hearing and tell them you support the Board’s suggestions.

The St. Helens City Council will have its hearing on November 7 at 7:00 PM. If you can, please go and tell the City Council that their plan to "take" part of the McNulty system is inefficient, unfair to people outside the city, and doesn’t even make financial sense for people inside the Urban Growth Area. Encourage them to sign the agreement that the Water Board negotiated with the City Planner.

If you can’t get to the hearing, call the Mayor’s office at 397-6272 and state your support for the agreement that McNulty negotiated with the City Planner.

We know this is short notice, but if you help, you’ll keep the lower rates and better water that you’ve always had as a McNulty member. The letter will also be on the Columbia Technology Center’s website. Thanks!

October 19, 2001

Columbia County Commissioners

Columbia County Courthouse

244 Strand St.

St. Helens, OR 97051

Dear Commissioners,

We recently received notice of the proposed amendments to the county’ Comprehensive Land Use Plan. We understand that the proposed amendments would establish a better process for planning services like water and sewer when land in the Urban Growth Area (UGA) is annexed into the city.

We support the idea of better planning for these services, but we think there is an unintended consequence that the Commission should address. The proposed amendment promotes efficient development when land in the UGA is annexed, but it does not consider the impact on rural residents outside the UGA.

As members of the McNulty Association, we are concerned about the City of St. Helens’ planned annexation within the UGA. As described on page 18 of the Staff Report on this proposed amendment, there were negotiations between McNulty and the City, and there was a draft agreement that would have enabled McNulty to retain its current members within the UGA, with no harm to the City. As you know, the City did not accept the agreement.

The proposed amendment does not consider the fact that, if the City "takes" part of the McNulty system, the remaining members will be harmed because they will have to pay an increased share of fixed costs of running the system. Homeowners within the UGA whose property is annexed will be harmed even more because they may have to pay new System Development Charges, even though there’s already a perfectly functional system in place. This is not consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 11, which requires an efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development.

Your own staff acknowledges that the agreement between McNulty and the City was a "*** desired outcome***", and recommended that the amendment refer to an agreement if and when it is reached.

We appreciate the staff recommendation but we think the County could do more for its rural residents.

On behalf of its members, the McNulty Board will suggest language requiring that impact on the cost of services in rural areas be considered when annexation or development is proposed. We support the language offered by McNulty and we hope you will consider it in the spirit in which it is offerred.

Thank you for considering our views as homeowners in this matter.

Sincerely,