1992-24259-Minutes for Meeting June 29,1992 Recorded 7/15/199292-242s9 0118-1213
MINUTES
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS x°,•
June 29, 1992 ;lj; v ° u• J$
Ll
Chairman Maudlin called the meeting to order at 10 a.m. Board `' rr
members in attendance were: Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and Nancy
Pope Schlangen. Also present were: Rick Isham, County Counsel;
Mike Maier, County Administrator; Bruce White, Assistant Legal
Counsel; Darrell Davidson, Sheriff; and George Read, Planning
Director.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: EFFECT OF PROPOSED LEVY ON OTHER LOCAL
Before the Board was public hearing concerning the effect of
the proposed increase in Deschutes County's current tax levy
authority on other units of local government. The levy
involved was the proposed levy to bring the Sheriff's
Department back to a 40 -hour workweek.
Susan Mayea passed out a Combined Tax Rate Comparison sheet
for government/non-school taxing entities. This year the
total rate for non -school was 6.2225. The proposed serial
levy was $909,292 per year. Based on a $5 billion valuation
for Deschutes County, that would mean a first year rate of
.1818 cents per thousand valuation for a total county tax rate
1.5889 or a $.10 increase in this year's County tax rate.
This would not place the combined tax over the $10 limit. If
the levy passed, the City of Bend area would have a tax rate
of $6.3387, and Redmond would have the highest government rate
of $8.2038.
Chairman Maudlin opened the public hearing for testimony.
Joshua Marquis, Chief Deputy District Attorney for Deschutes
County, said he wanted to speak in support of the Sheriff's
levy. He said it was critical that it be passed, however he
was disappointed that the amount of the levy did not include
money to return the District Attorney's office to a 40 -hour
workweek. It would only take another 2.3 cents per thousand
valuation for a total of $90,000 a year, and the total request
would still be under $1 million per year. If that was not
possible and the levy passed, every other part of the criminal
justice system would be operating at 100% and the District
Attorney's Office, which was in the middle, would not.
Maryann Houser Christman testified that it was "ridiculous"
for the Commissioners to equalize the importance of all County
services, when the allocation of funds should be based upon
the priority of the County's needs. She felt funding the
HVD
PAGE 1 MINUTES: 6-29-92
0118-1214
libraries was optional and not a necessity. She also
questioned spending over $400,000 promoting tourism when there
was inadequate funding of the District Attorney's Office. She
used an analogy of homeowners who used their money to paint
their house when it needed new electrical wiring. The house
looked great on the surface but wasn't safe. Today was the
fifth anniversary of her parents' murder. They were fortunate
to receive the "best justice they could have hoped for."
Others in her position might not be afforded the same service.
She urged the Board to provide the District Attorney's Office
with the additional funding requested.
Don Anderson said that when he came to Bend many of his
friends laughed at him because he locked his car doors,
however eight years later, they were no longer laughing and
were locking their doors too. He was glad to hear that the
County was asking voters for more money for the Sheriff's
Department, however for 2 or 3 cents more, the District
Attorney's office could be funded also. He worked for eight
month on the grand jury and was familiar with what the
District Attorney's Office and the Sheriff's Office had to do.
He felt the whole system would "jam" if the District
Attorney's office wasn't returned to full work hours also.
Alan Bruckner, representing the Bend City Commission and the
County residents within the Bend City limits, testified that
the City of Bend residents were "short changed" by the County
because they paid County taxes equal to all other County
residents, but did not receive equal delivery of services.
Specifically, he was referring to the Sheriff's Department
Patrol Services. They had no complaint about the Sheriff's
Department. Ben City Police had an excellent relationship
with them and acknowledged the many services that the Sheriff
did deliver to city residents equally, i.e. the jail.
However, the County Sheriff's Department would not patrol
within the Cities of Deschutes County even though one-third of
the County's residents lived within and over one-half of the
County's tax collections came from the cities. City residents
taxed themselves heavily for police services which provided a
great benefit for rural residents who worked and shopped in
the cities while paying nothing for those police services.
Bend city residents paid five times as much per capita for
public safety than suburban and rural residents. This was not
a new issue. He had written a letter to the editor of the
Bulletin in February 1990, and later that year, he forwarded
an Oregonian editorial which outlined how each of the Portland
area counties recognized and were dealing with this issue of
fair taxation for police services. The city was asked to drop
the issue until after the Sheriff's levy; at the tax
coordination meeting in December, they were asked to drop the
issue until after the tax base vote in May, so they felt it
was now time to address this issue. If Bend residents
PAGE 2 MINUTES: 6-29-92
0118-1215
shouldn't have to pay property taxes for Redmond police
services, then why should they pay for police patrols for
LaPine, Terrebonne and other rural areas; unless those areas
also paid for Bend patrols. Because of this inequity, this
Bend City Commission unanimously endorsed that he attend the
hearing and express their displeasure with the County -wide
Sheriff's levy. They requested that the levy apply only to
those persons who directly benefitted from those services
through the formation of a Sheriff's Patrol District which
excluded the incorporated cities.
Commissioner Throop said he did not think that the City of
Bend proposal was what was happening in the urban counties
which Mr. Bruckner had referred to and were in the Oregonian
editorial. In those particular counties, all citizens of the
County paid for a minimum level of service (1 deputy per
thousand population) and then areas outside of the cities
where they wished to enhance their law enforcement services,
they paid for the extra. In Deschutes County there were
approximately .64 deputies per thousand population. He felt
what Mr. Bruckner was proposing was being done nowhere else in
the state. He asked Mr. Bruckner to clarify the inequity.
Mr. Bruckner said each county in the Portland area used a
totally different method for determining equity, however they
all recognized that the present situation was inequitable. He
felt the specific levels of sheriff's protection within the
counties were irrelevant. Those people who were getting
enhanced services should pay for that enhanced service. They
had no objection to funding the city police department and to
expanding it as areas were annexed, but did not feel that City
residents should also pay for Sheriff's patrols from which
they received no service.
Commissioner Throop said he felt there was a "deep division"
between the City and the County on this issue. The County
believed that it was in all County citizens best interest to
have a minimum level of Sheriff service which everybody would
pay for. If some areas wanted additional services, then
special districts could be formed for the enhancement. He
understood this was not an issue for the Cities of Redmond and
Sisters, and the Chiefs of Police for Bend, Redmond and
Sisters all supported the current system. He suggested a
counter proposal. Since there were four governments in
Deschutes County which were involved with police services and
duplicated services and staff (i.e. dispatch, administrative
staff, clerical staff), he suggested putting together a "blue
ribbon citizens committee" to analyze the four law enforcement
agencies for possible consolidation into a single law
enforcement agency with higher quality service for less cost
to the taxpayer. He asked if the City would be interested in
doing that?
PAGE 3 MINUTES: 6-29-92
0118-1216
Mr. Bruckner said he would certainly take that suggestion back
to the City Commission, however he didn't see why the tax
fairness issue could not be addressed now.
Chairman Maudlin said he had discussed this issue with Mayor
Bruckner before, and he felt one of the problems was how to
get the voters to approve this kind of a "fairness" proposal.
If the issue was addressed for City of Bend residents, it
would also have to be addressed for the Cities of Redmond and
Sisters. These city residents totaled about 30,000 voters and
there were approximately 50,000 voters living outside the
city. The people living outside of the cities would be asked
to vote to increase their taxes and lower the taxes of those
living inside the cities because it was more fair. He didn't
feel that issue would pass. He also pointed out that the
Sheriff's Department and the cities worked on a partnership
basis, and road maintenance sometimes overlapped boundaries,
however he felt the parties were trying to work these problems
out. He understood these concerns because when he was on the
City Commission, they decided not to pay for libraries twice.
Concerning the testimony about increasing the 'District
Attorney's office to full time, he said the Board had not been
approached about this issue until this hearing, although one
call had been received by Commissioner Schlangen. Changing
the levy now would require that the whole process start over
from the beginning. He hoped that the levy would be helpful
to other general funds departments in some ways, since they
would be transferring only those general funds dollars which
were in this year's budget for the next two years with no
increase to the Sheriff's Department.
Darrell Davidson commented that all they were trying to do
with this levy was survive. He felt the point the City of
Bend was missing was that if the Sheriff's patrols were not
working on the "bad guys" outside the cities, the cities would
have a bigger problem. He also didn't think the City of Bend
was paying one-half of the Sheriff's Department budget; it was
more like one-third. Commissioner Schlangen asked the Sheriff
if the District Attorney had talked with him about trying for
a joint levy. Sheriff Davidson said the District Attorney had
mentioned it to him three or four weeks ago. Sheriff Davidson
said he felt he had better take care of his own office.
Commissioner Throop said this was the first he had heard
directly about a request from the District Attorney to be a
part of the Sheriff's levy. He felt he should have come
forward sooner.
Chairman Maudlin closed the public hearing.
PAGE 4 MINUTES: 6-29-92
2.
0
4.
0118-1217
RESOLUTION 92-049 MAKING BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS
Before the Board was signature of Resolution 92-049 making
appropriations of the Deschutes County Budget for fiscal year
1992-93. The County had received an extension from the
Assessor for the adoption of the Deschutes County 1992-93
fiscal year budget and ad valorem tax levies until
September 23, 1992, and after the proposed election on the
serial levy for law enforcement. Therefore, to begin the
fiscal year in July, the County had to make appropriations for
all County Departments in the areas of Personnel Services,
Materials and Services, Capital Outlay, and Interfund Revenue
Transfer which were taken from the budget the Board had
reviewed the previous Monday. If the Sheriff's levy passed,
the Sheriff's budget appropriation would be increased by
$681,000 the first year, and then the budget would be adopted.
If it did not pass, the adopted budget would be in line with
this appropriations resolution.
SCHLANGEN: Move signature of Resolution 92-049 making
Deschutes County budget appropriations.
THROOP: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
ORDER 92-066 CANCELING UNCOLLECTIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES
Before the Board was signature of Order 92-066 canceling
uncollectible personal property taxes in the amount of
$65,805.23.
THROOP: I'll move signature of Order 92-066.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE VOUCHERS
Before the Board was approval of Accounts Payable Vouchers in
the amount of $150,542.16.
SCHLANGEN: Move approval upon review.
THROOP: Second the motion.
PAGE 5 MINUTES: 6-29-92
5.
6.
7.
0118-1218
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
TAX REFUND ORDER 92-067
Before the Board was signature of Order 92-067 refunding taxes
in the amount of $286.44.
SCHLANGEN: Move signature of Order 92-067.
THROOP: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
ORDER 92-068 DISTRIBUTING MONEY FROM LAND SALES FUND
Before the Board was signature of Order 92-068 transferring
and distributing money in the amount of $92,500 from the Land
Sales Fund of which $19,002.92 would go to the Deschutes
County General Funds for expenses incurred in the supervision
and maintenance of lands, $62,123.52 would go to the taxing
districts within the County in accordance with the formula
established by statute, and $16,402.72 would go to pay off the
Bancroft and Road Assessments on the tax foreclosed
properties.
SCHLANGEN: Move signature of Order 92-068.
THROOP: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
ORDINANCE 92-049 AMENDING PL -1 CONCERNING MEMBERSHIP ON THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Before the Board was signature of Ordinance 92-049 amending
Section 9, Limitation on Number of Terms, and adding a new
Section 18, Limited Reappointments, to Ordinance No. PL -1.
This would allow Ken Johnson to remain on the Planning
Commission until the Farm Study was completed. Bruce White
said on July 30, Ken Johnson would have completed two terms on
the Planning Commission and under PL -1, he was not entitled to
a reappointment. However since he was the Planning
Commission's representative on the Farm Study Committee, it
was important to keep him on the Commission at least until
such time as the Planning Commission made a recommendation to
the Board of County Commissioners on the new farm zones. The
PAGE 6 MINUTES: 6-29-92
ordinance allowed for a limited reappointment k1§tr1?JP
narrow circumstances for a maximum of six month. He
recommended that when the Board reappointed Ken Johnson, he be
appointed for a term not to exceed six months or whenever the
Planning Commission recommended the farm study package to the
Board, whichever came first.
MAUDLIN: I would entertain a motion for Ordinance 92-049,
first and second reading by title only.
THROOP: I'll make the motion.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
Chairman Maudlin performed the first and second readings of
Ordinance 92-049.
THROOP: Move adoption.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
MAUDLIN: I would entertain a motion for appointment of Ken
Johnson for a period not to exceed six months or
until the farm study review is completed.
SCHLANGEN: So moved.
MAUDLIN: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
DATED this /.9M day of , 1992, by the Board of
Commissioners of Deschutes Co ty, re on.
AE T:
ZL�
'Recording Secretary
PAGE 7 MINUTES: 6-29-92
C
Nancy Pope SOhlangen, Commis4ioner
zz 4 � �,// a 2 �-e � �1- -
ick M dlin, Ch irman
CDwwty C
W m m (D [�'!
fi'0.0 a
ma � H
m z
(fl 01N.P 0
W� WL7'
rWLJ•W
rrWr Z
w r r r H
0owo
O O O
VI 1-4 Ul to
0%D.(" .
(n N OLq O
w E tr O
rr tlw O
rrWr t+i
wrrr ti
o P. r 1--
0or-O
000
0
to O
H 011
H O
M r
w
CA
-T
NrOAr0%
-4 ODt0r W
0m0%D�1
ODOWVN
WOtInNO
.PF+OODW
H hi[ WNW
O r r rx O
M rtrm:3
n m ►c
m 0
:3
J r W O O r
W Nlob .PN0
w Or.Pwv
T OJ.PP.r
J
.P N -1 i-+ O
4%-1NNw
0 -4 (7% v1
OOO1t00.
0ODWrW
O .P r r Ot
O
hO- Mr -X0
H
(r'( m Nrt0
m
0
(D
a�
m
o
�1
0
�
r .p o o a•�
i�
.0b0i-A0401.
N
WF-UINOD
W
W OD Ot 01 -1
O
-1 N t0 OD 0-
-T
NrOAr0%
-4 ODt0r W
0m0%D�1
ODOWVN
WOtInNO
.PF+OODW
H hi[ WNW
O r r rx O
M rtrm:3
n m ►c
m 0
:3
J r W O O r
W Nlob .PN0
w Or.Pwv
T OJ.PP.r
J
.P N -1 i-+ O
4%-1NNw
0 -4 (7% v1
OOO1t00.
0ODWrW
O .P r r Ot
r rn
rN.pOtr01
0-4 wrw
NODW W -1N
.P In .P to N O
.P Ot Ot O OD W
O PI0- ((DDFW• M 0
Cr - 9 m �
mmw0. r-�
r O
OD OOOW OOr
0
6iA6+rnr6�,
N 0w00.-PN0
N O� t0 O t0 .P cn v
O W r OJ &.P I-
1-1
r J
rNmJr0
0W0%NN W
O%WO%NONUl
N .p O► ON 10 0.
.0 Gt W W N w
.P-1OANNOA
0118-1220
WO
zi
C7 O
I-
0-3
o nwm�k0
H Or tl O r cr 0
:j o
0
O+ oowoor
N N t0 W r 0 .0
N .PN-1(nNOD
N W OD %D ON ON -1
U1 t0 N W to OD 0-
1-1 w
P
rw rn
O�ODrnrrn
OI-jtorw
a• Gt W -1 N
0wUlW0
A- (J1 O OD W
H otowwwo
O KNm1-x0
H Cr ti o r cr 0
O
hO- Mr -X0
��
mro oR~m
0
w�
Prt )
ma
0 F' '1 o
w O
�1
OOOu100r
.1
0i-&.p�a.r00.
J
0ODWP"(""OD
.P
Mt0N00%Otd
U1
W N t0 1-& t0 OD A.
r rn
rN.pOtr01
0-4 wrw
NODW W -1N
.P In .P to N O
.P Ot Ot O OD W
O PI0- ((DDFW• M 0
Cr - 9 m �
mmw0. r-�
r O
OD OOOW OOr
0
6iA6+rnr6�,
N 0w00.-PN0
N O� t0 O t0 .P cn v
O W r OJ &.P I-
1-1
r J
rNmJr0
0W0%NN W
O%WO%NONUl
N .p O► ON 10 0.
.0 Gt W W N w
.P-1OANNOA
0118-1220
WO
zi
C7 O
I-
0-3
o nwm�k0
H Or tl O r cr 0
:j o
0
O+ oowoor
N N t0 W r 0 .0
N .PN-1(nNOD
N W OD %D ON ON -1
U1 t0 N W to OD 0-
1-1 w
P
rw rn
O�ODrnrrn
OI-jtorw
a• Gt W -1 N
0wUlW0
A- (J1 O OD W
H otowwwo
O KNm1-x0
H Cr ti o r cr 0
O1 Orw0Or
r r0Obro&
to 00-10.N0
Ot N0 -1&M-3
to cn o cn .p .p r
r .P J
Jw�1r0
O.PN N W
W Ot r 0% (fl
0ONwr W
0wrrOt
0
t1i
0
O
0
C:
H
M
O
O
O
z
H
►C
O
w
H
C=i
d
H
H
ti
0
H
O
N
l0
r
N
r
mk
��
0
o
'a
O1 Orw0Or
r r0Obro&
to 00-10.N0
Ot N0 -1&M-3
to cn o cn .p .p r
r .P J
Jw�1r0
O.PN N W
W Ot r 0% (fl
0ONwr W
0wrrOt
0
t1i
0
O
0
C:
H
M
O
O
O
z
H
►C
O
w
H
C=i
d
H
H
ti
0
H
O
N
l0
r
N