Hi Jeff,
Here is the Letter to the Editor. I have a few concerns with the last 3 paragraphs of her letter. (1) From what I recall from the letter, ODA did not notify the city in writing the actual levels of E.coli tested in Creamery and Bear Creek. From what I recall the notification indicated Colman was required to remove his pile of manure and fence the cattle aware from the headwaters of the Creeks. Her statement that the City of Molalla failed, is false. (2) The quote “We’ve done it this way for fifty years” is a statement I have NOT HEARD anyone say in Molalla. (3) She fails to mention that the manure piles were removed in 2014 and the fences were constructed about month or so ago.
Jennifer Cline, P.E.
City of Molalla
Public Works Director
O: 503.759.0218
F: 503.829.3676
"From: J.W. Ring [mailto:JWRing@ringbenderlaw.com]
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 6:57 AM
To: Dan Huff
Cc: Phillip Bender; Jennifer Cline; Mark Strandberg; Lynn Treat; Sarah Goodling
Subject: Re: Molalla: Summary of Call and Next Steps
She is not an expert on anything. Can you scan and send the article?
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 26, 2015, at 5:08 PM, Dan Huff <dhuff@cityofmolalla.com> wrote:
Thanks Phil.
Susan Hansen is now an expert on e. coli as we have all discovered in our local newspaper today as part of her ramblings about Coleman Ranch.
Dan Huff
City Manager
City of Molalla, Oregon
(503) 829-6855
_______________________________________________________________________________
PUBLIC RECORDS LAW DISCLOSURE
This e-mail is a public record of the City of Molalla and is subject to public disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. This e-mail is subject to State Retention Schedule
From: Phillip Bender [mailto:PBender@ringbenderlaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2015 1:18 PM
To: Dan Huff; Jennifer Cline
Cc: Mark Strandberg; J.W. Ring; Phillip Bender; Lynn Treat; Sarah Goodling
Subject: Molalla: Summary of Call and Next Steps
Dan and Jen:
Following up on our call last week concerning BCR's response to the City's latest settlement proposal, we wanted to outline the next steps we discussed and agreed to. I am following up with BCR's counsel today.
BCR continues to demand that the City sample Bear Creek near the outfall. Given that we have demonstrated to DEQ’s satisfaction that the WWTP connections to the Bear Creek outfall are sealed, and that no wastewater discharge is possible, we will not agree to any sampling in Bear Creek. Given that Bear Creek flows through many livestock fields and near many septic systems any results from such sampling would be of no use regardless. Sampling such as they propose would just produce meaningless data, but BCR would probably attempt to link it to the WWTP.
BCR does not like our proposed language about unfounded reports. Our thought is to propose that we draft a provision allowing the Court to consider and overturn such a determination, each party bearing their own expenses. This would allow the City to start ignoring anyone (Hansen) who the City finds has made unfounded reports, but also require Hansen to fund her own challenge to that decision.
BCR (or their attorneys) are not willing to accept the City's latest $50,000 attorneys fees proposal. We will continue to negotiate within the spending authority of $80,000 granted by the City Council.
BCR wants a longer period for the consent decree since we are unwilling to agree to their language regarding biosolids and I&I in the years following the initial agreement to spend certain sums of money. in response, we will offer a consent decree of 3 years and 6 months duration (42 months total).
I will let you know how things proceed with BCR's counsel.
Phil
Phillip M. Bender
Ring Bender McKown & Castillo LLLP
925 Liberty Ave., 8th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
(412) 770-7721