Loading...
2009-1357-Minutes for Meeting May 27,2009 Recorded 6/30/2009COUNTY NANCYUBLANKENSHIP,F000NTY CLERKDS CJ 7009.1351 11jilCOMMISSIONERS' u ~iuiiiM 06/30/2009 04:46:53 PM Do not remove this page from original document. Deschutes County Clerk Certificate Page If this instrument is being re-recorded, please complete the following statement, in accordance with ORS 205.244: Re-recorded to correct [give reason] previously recorded in Book or as Fee Number and Page Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 4:00 P.M., WEDNESDAY, MAY 27, 2009 Allen Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Dennis R. Luke and Alan Unger. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel. Commissioner Unger commented on a pending House Bill 2227, pertaining to destination resorts, which he recommended the Board oppose. There was consensus on the proposal. Commissioner Baney began the discussion concerning the transfer of management of Parole & Probation to the Sheriff. She had requested that Dave Kanner and Mark Pilliod prepare a written list of Board expectations in a draft form, which had been reduced from an earlier form of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). She indicated this list prepared by Dave was based upon what he had heard in earlier discussions about the P&P move. The list was distributed to Board members earlier today. Commissioner Luke inquired as to what discussions Commissioner Baney was referring. He indicated that he had never insisted on particular outcomes or expectations, except for discrete budget items. Commissioner Baney responded that she had spoken with the Sheriff but had not discussed the list with the Sheriff or represent that she was speaking on behalf of the Board. She said she had discussed with the Sheriff the intent to have an MOU for the benefit of the commissioners and future sheriffs. She had planned on first discussing with the Board a list of expectations in advance of referring anything to the Sheriff. Mark Pilliod explained his understanding of the origin of the MOU, in particular that the information was obtained from the Board through Dave Kanner. He added that Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 27, 2009 Page 1 of 5 Pages unless the Board was prepared to authorize Commissioner Baney to discuss such a list of expectations with the Sheriff, she would not be authorized to do so. There was a general discussion about individual Board member meetings that were held last week, while Commissioner Unger was absent. Commissioner Luke indicated that he had expected the Board to discuss the Sheriff's written proposal. Commissioner Unger commented that he supported an email message from Dave Kanner to the Sheriff identifying particular information that Mr. Kanner felt was necessary to prepare an effective transition plan. In Commissioner Unger's view despite the Sheriff's comment, he did not find the message disrespectful. Commissioner Baney commented on her telephone conversation with the Sheriff in which he indicated that he was not interviewing for a job. She expressed concern with perceptions and that Ken Hales might otherwise not be working for Parole & Probation. She mentioned that the earlier version of the MOU was more formal and rigid than the written list of expectations that was distributed to the Board. Commissioner Luke commented that when Parole & Probation was previously shifted from the Sheriff's Office to a separate department, the details were worked out after the transfer was authorized. Commissioner Unger commented that he was uncomfortable with how this matter was handled. He expressed concern that the Sheriff as an elected official doesn't answer to the Board, except through the budget process. Commissioner Baney noted that the discussion over the split of SB 1145 funding (from the Department of Corrections) happens each year as part of the budget process and that this was her third year engaged in such discussions. She felt that the parole officers were generally more aligned with the Sheriff, than with the Juvenile Department. She expressed the opinion that this transfer was not so much a matter of financial savings, but rather with a closer alignment to jail operations. Commissioner Luke noted that he had never supported the previous move away from the Sheriff's Office, that Commissioner Baney was aware of his opinion and that he had not attempted to persuade Commissioner Baney to join him in making this switch. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 27, 2009 Page 2 of 5 Pages Commissioner Luke commented that he felt this was a case in which the Administrator had not adequately carried out the direction of the Board. Dave Kanner responded that he had done what the Board had asked him to do. At the May 13th work session, the Board asked him to prepare a transition plan to move Parole and Probation to the Sheriffs Office and an agreement the Board could enter into with the Sheriff under which the Board would not relinquish its authority over Parole'and Probation. On May 14th he contacted Sheriff Blanton and Ken Hales to inform them of the Board's request for a transition plan and scheduled a meeting with them to discuss that plan on May 26th. Kanner said it was not until after he sent his May 20th e-mail to the Sheriff and Hales that he learned that the Sheriff was already working on a transition plan without him. When he received the Sheriffs transition plan on May 21 st and it was determined to be satisfactory to the Board, he cancelled the meeting scheduled for May 26th and did no further work on a transition plan. He continued to work with Mark Pilliod on an agreement that the Board could discuss, per the direction he had received at the May 13th work session, and the bullet list of talking points was a result of that work. Kanner said he had not intended any disrespect for the Sheriff, that he felt he was fulfilling the Board's direction to prepare an agreement between the Board and the Sheriff, and that he had already taken steps with the personnel and finance departments to facilitate the transition. Commissioner Luke commented that in reading Dave Kanner's email to the Sheriff, he felt it was not so much a matter of what was asked, but how it was asked. Commissioner Unger commented he was supportive of Dave Kanner's request for information and he took issue with the Sheriff's reaction. Commissioner Baney commented that she appreciates Dave Kanner's skill set and that he needed to give the relationship with the Sheriff a rest. The perception from the Sheriff's point of view is that anything coming from administration is perceived as negative. Commissioner Unger agreed, noting that elected officials may give other elected officials more respect than they will non-elected officials and department heads. The relationship between the Sheriff and the administration is a two-way street and that the parties involved need to work on making things better. There followed discussion over differences in philosophy. Some probation officers have the attitude of police officers in that they carry badges, are authorized to carry guns and make arrests. Another school of thought is that probation officers act in a Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 27, 2009 Page 3 of 5 Pages manner of social workers and psychologists, attempting to rehabilitate those they supervise. Commissioner Baney noted that the LPSCC input on the community correction plan offered an opportunity for different factions to give direction to the Parole & Probation Department. She noted that Ken Hales has a different philosophical or leadership style than those involved from a law enforcement perspective. She noted that she could not have made a shift from a separate department to management by the Sheriff under the previous Sheriff. She noted that Sheriff Blanton supports more drug and alcohol programs and other alternatives to incarceration. There followed a discussion about whether or not the Sheriff in withdrawing his acceptance of the transfer would change his mind. In response to a question from Commissioner Luke, Mark Pilliod expressed his views of how the matter had reached this point in terms of the preparation of the MOU, its legal effect, the lack of a formal meeting at which a decision on the transfer had been reached, and the different philosophical viewpoints about how Parole & Probation might operate. Mr. Pilliod noted that it might have been helpful if in distributing the draft list of expectations to the Board in advance of this meeting, that the Board be advised that the material had not been shared with the Sheriff, and that the purpose of the meeting was to determine what, if any, portions of the list would be shared with the Sheriff later on. Commissioner Luke agreed that a note indicating that members should not first speak with the Sheriff might have been helpful. There was a general discussion about public meetings and records laws. Commissioner Baney commented that she was supportive of what Dave Kanner had done on behalf of the Board. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 27, 2009 Page 4 of 5 Pages Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 5:15 P. M. DATED this day of 2009 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. ATTEST: Recording Secretary D-X~- Tammy Baney, Chair Dennis R. Luke, Vice Chair atl'c~ Alan Unger, Commissioner Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 5 Pages Wednesday, May 27, 2009