By Emily Bonsant • Of the News-Register • 

Dayton asks Lafayette for access to water transition line

Only current online subscribers may access this article and/or our N-R e-editions.

One-day subscriptions available for just $3.

For all subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please

Comments

tagup

So now every nearby community wants to piggyback on the Mac watershed, that was developed and paid for by city rate payers?
I’m sure it sounds selfish, but these communities should develop their own systems and not rely on McMinnville‘a resource to sustain their growth ambitions. There’s a reason water is plentiful and rates are low in Mac( even with a questionable “service charge”) and McMinnville leaders need to protect the residents future interests.

Ron

Just curious if Lafayette and Dayton contributed to raising McGuire dam in the coast range years ago for more water storage. I would have to guess they did not contribute. Maybe the water and light department should tack on all the fees to Dayton & Lafayette.that they’re ripping off from McMinnville customers.

Angela Flood

Ron
Mac W & L is definitely making Lafayette residents pay for it all. No worries.

It's funny, though. No one can seem to find any of the documents on the funding used for the original projects when the dam was built.

tagup

According to W&L history , McMinnville sold a $90,000 bond (in 1916)for construction of Haskins Creek Dam & the pipeline connecting to McMinnville. I assume When Maguire Dam was built in the 60’s it was financed in a similar fashion.
It doesn’t seem likely that LaFayette citizens (or Carlton or Dayton) contributed to the costs as they were not included in the service.
Easements & ownership of the projects are public information, although it’s not surprising that a retired bond from 1916 may not be easily available.

Deroyam

McM Water & Light raised McGuire with borrowed funds from the Light Dept. paying the going rate of interest. W/L has not had to borrow money for any of its projects for decades. The board declared a surplus of water and hence the agreement with Lafayette was made. Lafayette pays a premium for the McM Water.

tagup

Good info Deroyam- thanks!
I’m sure Mac does have a surplus, but allowing access to other communities is giving them a disincentive to develop their own systems. What happens when they become dependent on Mac water, haven’t expanded their own water sources sufficiently , & Mac outgrows its current surplus?
I feel like closing the valve will be much more difficult than opening it.

Ron

That’s great information to know.Thanks everyone.

Angela Flood

If the reservoir was built with bonds in 1916, there is no one alive now that paid for it, yet Mac residents still benefit from it.

Lafayette residents paid, and are paying, for the infrastructure plus some. In addition, we pay Mac base rates + an add on amount for all water pulled.

I find it ironic that Lafayette has no room to allow Dayton to have the conversation to also pull water from the system, since Dayton is the reason Lafayette had water access for so long prior to the Mac agreement.

There is an end date. Lafayette will not be allowed to continue past 21 years from the initial contract date. The contract is reviewed every year ish for adjustments and is set for 7 year increments. Lafayette is required to pull a minimum amount. So, even if we don't need it, we still get billed for it.

If folks are frustrated by this, they should take it up with Mac W &L.

tagup

No doubt, Mac residents benefit from the legacy of some impressive long term planning by W&L leadership. Just because no one is living when the water system was originally developed, doesn’t make it any less of an asset specifically for McMinnville citizens. Mac rate payers have covered the cost of infrastructure improvements & maintenance over the years, although the timber holdings on the watershed help offset some of those costs as intended by the original planners.
I am happy to know that the agreement with Lafayette has limits as it should. I just hope other communities are willing to take steps to expand their own facilities rather than depending on MAC’s resources for the population growth that is inevitable. Future entitlement should not be attached to the current agreement.

  • Most viewed
  • Most commented
Web Design and Web Development by Buildable