The URL can be used to link to this page

2018-11-Minutes for Meeting October 07,2015 Recorded 1/4/2018Recorded in Deschutes County CJ2018-11 Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk Commissioners' ,journal 01/04/2018 4:06:38 PM 1101111111111111111111111111111 D Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2015 Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; David Doyle, County Counsel; and, for a portion of the meeting, Nick Lelack and Peter Russell, Community Development Department and a media representatives of Bend Bulletin. Chair DeBone opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. 1. Overview of Planning Commission's Recommendations for Goal 11 Exception for Southern Deschutes County: Present for this portion of the agenda were Peter Russell, Community Development Department Senior transportation planner, Eric Nigg and Robert Baggett of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, and Jon Jinings of Department of Land Conservations and Development. Mr. Russell reported on the Planning Commission recommendation to the BOCC. The Planning Commission held public hearings in July and August recommending the Goal 11 approval with one modification to include all of the recommendations from the 2013 steering committee. The major topics in the Planning Commission deliberation included concerns on imminent health hazards. OAR 660-011-0060 references that a health hazard must be significant and imminent for a Goal 11 exception to be approved. Another item of concern is if there is evidence to demonstrate a health hazard. The Planning Commission has also reviewed the process of the goal exception if there is no imminent health hazard, the rationale in the size of the proposed area, real estate values and the option of sanitary districts. Eric Nigg of ODEQ noted a documented health threat in south Deschutes County. He assured the BOCC they have met the burden of proof. DEQ does not want to wait for a health hazard, as the risk to public health is imminent. He pointed out the DEQ steering committee unanimously supports a Goal 11 Exception. The exception request meets the criteria set by ORS 660-011-0060. Jon Jinings of DLCD brought forward a unanimous recommendation to plan for the future rather than react, as this is an inevitable situation that can be avoided if acting now. The rule or proposal would offer relief and would serve this community well. The next step is for the BOCC public hearing that will be held at 6:00 p.rn. on October 28 at the SHARC in Sunriver. Discussion held on the options following that hearing in receiving additional testimony. Also reviewed were the recommendations from the steering committee. 2. CDD Fee Study and Performance Management Report Nick Lelack, Community Development Director presented to the Board a draft CDD Comprehensive User Fee Study and Operating Plan. He has taken the draft to the building and planning community to review the building and planning fees and performance measures. The study was completed by Capital Accounting Partners, LLC. The scope of the project was to calculate the full cost of department services and to develop a performance management structure by developing a five-year financial plan. The analysis looked at cost from an operational level. Staff cost and time relative to application or fee title was reviewed by position. Discussion held on building the reserve fund. Dave Givans, Internal Auditor, will be involved in reviewing that process for the fee schedule. 3. Other Items • Chris Doty, Public Works Director, reported that there are upcoming utilities improvements on China Hat and the traffic will be impacted because of the installation of a water line. Discussion held on the best way to do the improvements. The neighborhood association is aware of the project. BOCC Work Session Wednesday, October 7, 2015 Page 2 of 4 4. Discretionary Grant Review — 2nd Quarter Judith Ure, Management Analyst, reported on the 2nd Quarter Grant Applications. • Boys and Girls Club submitted a fundraising application. They are asking for $1500 for a Civil War Rally & Auction. This is possibly a joint fundraiser with EDCO. Commissioners Support the application but Ms. Ure will clarify the connection with EDCO. • Central Oregon Council on Aging - requesting $600 for a direct mail fund raising event. Commissioners expressed Support. • Family Access Network- requesting $2500 for the fundraising luncheon scheduled for April. Commissioners expressed Support. • Hospice of Redmond — requesting $2500 for the Festival of Trees event. Commissioners expressed Support • Leadership Redmond - requesting $1,200 discretionary grant for Leadership class of 15/16. Commissioners expressed Support at $400 each • Bend Spay and Neuter Proiect- requesting $1,000 discretionary grant for the Free Rabies Outreach clinics. Commissioners expressed Support • Latino Community Association — asking for support for events during the 2015 — 2016 year. This is not a typical grant application and request that they resubmit in the proper process and specify the event requesting funding. • Other: Commissioner Baney reported she had purchased a bus ticket for $195.50 to Denver for a member of the homeless community. She has the receipt and there was an additional charge of $18 because the ticket was not for herself and there was an additional service fee of $2.50. Discussion was to cover the expense from discretionary grant funds and submit as reimbursement. Commissioner Baney will submit the proper paperwork to Judith Ure. 5. OTHER: • Deputy County Administrator Erik Kropp explained there was an incident at the Southwest Transfer Station where a visitor was carrying a gun and created concern for the employee working there at the time. There is no signage of a weapons policy. A question was raised to the Commissioners if signage should be installed. • Discussion was held on the recent shootings at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon. Discussion was held on supporting the safety of our employees and the best approach for the community. Take Care / Be Aware safety training may be considered for employees as an effective solution to this type of situation. BOCC Work Session Wednesday, October 7, 2015 Page 3 of 4 • Discussion was held on the upcoming events on the calendar. Being no other items discussed, the meeting was adjourned at 4:14 p.m. `` g DATED this Or--- Day of ail..e.///dAtt-- Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. ecording Secretary 2015 for the Anthony DeBone, Chair Alan Unger, Vice Chair Tammy Baney, Comissioner BOCC Work Session Wednesday, October 7, 2015 Page 4 of 4 -T ur Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org WORK SESSION AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1:30 P.M., WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2015 1. Overview of Planning Commission's Recommendations for Goal 11 Exception for Southern Deschutes County — Peter Russell 2. CDD Fee Study and Performance Management Report — Nick Lelack 3. Discretionary Grant Review — 2nd Quarter — Judith Ure 4. Other Items PLEASE NOTE: At any time during this meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2) (e), real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2) (h), litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor negotiations; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues; or other issues under ORS 192.660(2), executive session. Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board of Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572. Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. To request this information in an alternate format please call (541) 330-4640, or email anna.iohnsonedeschutes.oro. Work Session 0) 0 .0 4- "4 L T % CT' (:) sr) \'m co z W o 0 J ( Please return to BOCC Secretary. Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005 (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner DATE: October 7, 2015 SUBJECT: Work session on amending the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan to add an exception to Goal 11 (Public Facilities and Services) to allow for sewers in unincorporated lands in southern Deschutes County; amend language to Newberry Country Plan to prevent upzoning; and add a Goal 11 map indicating affected tax lots (File 247 -000308 -PA) BACKGROUND The proposed amendments to the Deschutes County's Comprehensive Plan are to allow rural sewers in unincorporated lands in southern Deschutes County. The exception would allow the option of sewers at varying scales, but would not require them. Additionally, the proposed amendment would amend Newberry Country: A Plan for Southern Deschutes County to add Policy 9.1(a) to prohibit upzoning based on a successful Goal 11 Exception. The amendment would also update a section in the Newberry Country plan which had referenced a then -impending Steering Committee recommendation to instead identify the Steering Committee's recommendation to pursue a Goal 11 exception. Finally, a Goal 11 map would be added to the Comprehensive Plan which indicates the affected tax lots. The Planning Commission (PC) held public hearings on July 23 at 2 and 5:30 p.m. in La Pine and on August 13 in Bend. The PC deliberated on Sept. 10 and recommended 7-0 that the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approve the Goal 11 Exception with one modification. The PC recommended the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan be amended to include the Department of Environmental Quality Steering Committee recommendations in the July 2013 "South Deschutes/North Klamath County Groundwater Protection: Report and Recommendations." Those recommendations are provided verbatim at the end of this memo. MAJOR TOPICS IN PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATIONS The PC deliberated for roughly an hour and discussed the following items at length. The PC requested staff to relay the PC's concerns to the Board. The concerns are presented in no particular order of importance. 1. What is meant by "imminent" health hazard? OAR 660-011-0060 references that a health hazard must be significant and imminent for a Goal 11 Exception to be approved. The PC debated how the term imminent did or did not Quality Services Performed zvitli! Pride apply to the pollution of groundwater and whether time should be considered based on a geologic scale or more of the typical timeframe. 2. Can a Goal Exception be approved without an imminent health hazard? The PC during the discussion of defining imminent also debated whether a health hazard was even necessary for a Goal 11 Exception. OAR 660-011-0060(9) states in relevant part: "Appropriate reasons and facts for an exception for Goal 11 include but are not limited to the following: (emphasis added) (a) The new system, or extension of an existing system, is necessary to avoid an imminent and significant health hazard... (b) The extension of an existing system will serve land, that by operation of federal laws, is not subject to Statewide Planning Goal 11... Essentially, the issue is whether the highlighted text is inclusive or exclusive as it pertains to (a) and (b). In other words, do either (a) or (b) need to be present or is a Goal 11 exception possible if neither (a) nor (b) is present. 3. What is the rationale behind the size of the area proposed for the Goal 11 Exception? A few members of the PC expressed concern that the proposed area was fairly Targe. They felt there either needed to be more discussion justifying the size of the area or that the area could be shrunk to align more with the areas experiencing or expected to experience groundwater issues. 4. Is there enough scientific evidence in the record to demonstrate a health hazard? The PC mulled the amount of research placed in the record with some debating whether the USGS reports are accurate and others desiring additional groundwater modeling and/or monitoring of wells. 5. Relationship between Goal 11 and real estate values. Although not an approval criteria, some members of the PC stated their concerns about how the Goal 11 process might lead to falling prices for undeveloped lands. This was tied to a larger concern about the publicity of the groundwater issues in South County adversely affecting development in the subbasin. 6. Compulsion to join a sanitary district or authority The PC requested that the Board consider adopting language in the Comp Plan text or findings addressing public concerns over property owners being forced to joined sanitary districts, as legally allowed. -2- NEXT STEPS The Board will hold a public hearing on Oct. 28 at 6 p.m. in the Sunriver Homeowners and Aquatic Recreation Center (SHARC) to accept testimony on the Goal 11 exception. DEQ 2013 Steering Committee Recommendations: Goal 11 Exception (Unanimously Approved 1/9/13) • Provide a Goal 11 exception for the at -risk areas in South Deschutes and North Klamath counties for the following reasons: o Lots were platted prior to statewide goals requiring 10 acre rural lots (in Deschutes County. South Deschutes County currently of 10271 non -sewer lots: • 6174 (60%) are 1 acre or less • 8737 (85%) are 2 acres or less o North Klamath County currently of 4181 lots • 2177 (52%) are 1 acre or less • 3140 (75%) are 2 acre or less o Provide better treatment opportunities than individual on site systems for the protection of groundwater, both in reducing nitrates and better treatment of other contaminants • This exception will allow the extension of sewers into the area • This exception will allow groups of citizens to implement public sewage treatment systems, such as cluster systems. These decentralized cluster systems would not require huge infrastructure expense • These centralized systems will allow better treatment of contaminants beyond nitrates and better treatment than ATT onsite systems. • This Goal 11 exception would not mandate a system be installed. Groundwater Monitoring (Unanimously Approved 3/5/13) • Request that DEQ design a testing program to determine whether there is a groundwater contamination problem, and if so, where it might be located. o Tests first water o Start with highest risk sections (neighborhoods) identified by (existing well test data, density, well depth). See MonitorCriteria.xlsx for simple ranking. o Uses representative samples of the neighborhoods o Do 10% — 20% of neighborhoods each year • If sample results from the first water test warrant it, increase the number of wells tested to possibly include additional first water wells and drinking water wells in the neighborhood. Alternatively, provide an on -demand targeted testing approach that tests source, receptor, and transport. • What should be tested for? o Nitrates cheap test — 10 minute sample for nitrate testing only. Flush take sample. o Retest wells with highest nitrate detection levels for other contaminants (such as pharmaceuticals...) • Monitoring managed by a sanitation authority with DEQ doing the monitoring until a sanitation authority is established. • Use this monitoring program in addition to the real estate transaction data • The DEQ should pursue all sustainable funding opportunities to support groundwater -3- monitoring in the area. Governance (Unanimously Approved 4/2/13) Form a Sanitation Authority to protect the groundwater in the affected area spanning South Deschutes and North Klamath counties. • The Authority will manage groundwater monitoring. • The Authority will help with neighborhood implementation of community waste water systems (allowed under the Goal 11 exception). • The Authority can assist in establishing Local Improvement District (LID), a special district or similar entity to finance community waste water systems for areas within the Authority where they are necessary. • Authority will explore financing options that may include: grants, loans and taxes • Provide required maintenance and management for community waste water systems within the Authority • Ensure individual systems are maintained (pumped and serviced as necessary) • Manage the overall basin nitrate load and risk to groundwater • Monitor performance based standards for alternative solutions (see green solutions) Livestock (Unanimously Approved 1/9/13) • In Deschutes County (Klamath has an ordinance) institute an ordinance that limits the number of livestock per acre to reduce risk to groundwater contamination. For instance Klamath ordinance is: R2 zone allows two large animals (horse, etc.) and 24 small animals (chickens, etc. not dogs or cats) PER ACRE. • Provide education about how best to manage livestock to reduce risk to groundwater o How to treat waste o How to dispose of deceased livestock Point Sources (Unanimously Approved 1/9/13) • Point Sources (nurseries, golf courses) o Investigate establishing a permitting/groundwater monitoring program for all golf courses, nurseries and other point sources • Commercial RV and Manufactured/mobile Horne Parks. o Require equivalent treatment as residential (ensure equal regulations and treatment for residence and commercial). o Require a Water Pollution Control Facilities Permit for new and existing properties. ATT Moratorium (Approved 7-1 on 6/4/13) • The moratorium will have an end date with specific community actions to include a Goal 11 exception, a monitoring program and a governance entity or substantial progress toward its creation must have been made. Five years seems reasonable. An extension might be necessary, based on progress made toward the above goals. • When the Governance Entity is created, it will work with DEQ and the counties to determine what happens at the moratorium end date. South Deschutes/North Klamath Groundwater Protection Project Steering Committee State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality 7 • During the moratorium, property owners that have to do a major repair have the option of installing an ATT or repairing or replacing existing systems without an upgrade. This is done with the understanding that if progress is not made toward program goals (listed above in paragraph 1), they will have to upgrade. The moratorium would extend to undeveloped lots that already have existing systems in place. -4- • The moratorium would apply to new development. Disadvantaged Community Financing Solutions (Approved 7 - 1 on 6/4/13) • DEQ shall research how other states have established financial aid for sewage treatment solutions and propose an approach to use in Oregon. Outreach and Community Education (Unanimously Approved 6/4/13) • With the delivery of these recommendations the Citizen Advisory Committee has completed our charter and will disband • Prior to disbanding initial outreach materials will be developed • To ensure ongoing community involvement with groundwater protection an outreach committee should be formed that will o Identify and outreach opportunities o Coordinate outreach delivery. Members from the current committee may be called on to participate in or lead the outreach events o Maintain and improve outreach materials • This committee should be made up of people with marketing/outreach interest and experience, and should be a small team of no more than 5 people with support from DEQ and the counties. • This committee should have access to enough funding to make outreach successful Alternative "Green" Solutions (Unanimously Approved 6/4/13) Disposing of human waste is a worldwide problem. There are many innovating approaches being developed. People in the affected areas must be able to use new approaches to treat human effluent. In order to use current and future new technologies the DEQ must develop performance standards for treatment and any system that provides the necessary performance level should be acceptable if effective safeguards are in place to ensure the new systems are properly used and maintained. With the advent of Oregon grey water permitting a composting toilet solution should be acceptable. To ensure the toilets are used effectively: • Inspection of composting systems could be added to or included in current grey water permit language; an additional fee for that inspection of the composting component might need to be considered. • Language and parameters for disposal of the composted material is already established. • The cost of permits for composting toilets should remain affordable. -5- Wednesday, October 7, 2015 Chair and commissioners. Thank you for having us here today. For the record my name is Eric Nigg and I'm a water quality manager with the Department of Environmental Quality Iocated here in Bend. I've come here to discuss the proposal before you for an exception to statewide planning goal 11 for a portion of Southern Deschutes County. 1 Situation Summary • There is a documented health threat in South Deschutes County • A Goal 11 exception provides solutions and is not a mandate • The exception request meets state criteria and should be approved by the Board of Commissioners Shta 1O Department of Environmental aWmty DEQ has concluded from the preponderance of studies, available evidence and local cases that the risk to public health from continued and increasing discharge of partially treated wastewater into shallow groundwater will increase over time and become a significant feature of the area. DEQ's sole interest in the goal 11 exception is providing the greatest number of options to homeowners in the area under challenging conditions. DEQ's authority is not enhanced by a goal 11 exception. DEQ does have the ability to provide low interest loans to sewer districts for construction of sewer facilities; this does not have to be for a large facility to be competitive for loans Our justification for the exception is based on existing rules and we are assured that we have met the burden of proof. 2 Goal 11 Exception Criteria • Sought under OAR 660-011-0060 (9) •This says that "appropriate reasons and facts for an exception for Goal 11 include but are not limited to the following: (a) "The new system, or extension of the system, is necessary to avoid an imminent and significant health hazard..." saw u V,az>, Department of Environmental Quality We responded to existing rule rather than pursuing a legislative solution. DLCDs reading of its own rules assures us that this rule is not exclusive of other "reasons or facts for an exception" and that responding to a growing risk of a "significant health hazard" is entirely reasonable. 3 Prior discussion and considerations • Imminence of health concern • Other solutions/alternatives • Adequate science • Region -wide nature of the exception area While the above issues are important and have been debated by the public and Planning Commission, they are all justified and consistent with the Goal 11 criteria under Section 9. We have stated that the increasing risk to public health is not imminent, but is inevitable. There is ample evidence that the risk will increase and that the public health threat will be imminent at some reasonably foreseeable time and a delayed response will be too late to control the risk. Other solutions are both unpopular and insufficient. Currently approved individual onsite systems do not fully safeguard drinking water, but there will be no other choice should the exception not be adopted. We do continue to support the remaining recommendations of the steering committee that advised DEQ. Multiple lines of evidence, including a basin -wide mathematical model of pollutant loading and area -wide well sampling support the conclusion that groundwater contamination has increased and will continue to increase with continued use and ongoing development. The entire area is subject to the same conditions: relatively dense lot spacing; shallow groundwater; porous and rapidly draining soils; slow moving groundwater. These lead to a vulnerable shallow aquifer throughout the area. 4 DEQ Perspective • We should not wait for a health hazard to occur before acting • The DEQ Steering Committee unanimously supported a Goal 11 Exception • The exception offers the community other solutions to address the issue • The exception request meets the criteria set by OAR 660-011-0060 If we wait, we will wish we had done this, but will have lost the advantage of time. ...as did the Planning Commission DEQ has no special relationship with any of the local WWTP service providers. It will be up to these entities and nearby communities/neighborhoods to determine whether there are common interests and benefits of combining services. Again DEQ will be in a position to assist with funding under some circumstances. This concludes my comments on the proposed rule exception and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. 5 MEMORANDUM Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005 (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ DATE: October 7, 2015 TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Nick Lelack, Community Development Director RE: Community Development Department Comprehensive User Fee Study & Operating Plan The purpose of this work session is to present and discuss the draft Community Development Department (CDD) Comprehensive User Fee Study and Operating Plan, and to share input received from stakeholders. Prior to the Board work session, CDD will conduct two stakeholder meetings — one focused on building fees and performance measures and the other on planning fees and performance measures. Quality Services Performed with Pride Capital Accounting Partners, LLC October 2015 Deschutes County October 2015 CONTENTS Introduction And Scope 3 Summary of Costing Methodologies 3 Driver Based Costing Models 3 Summary Results for Community Development — Current Cost Structure 7 Analysis of the Planning Division 8 Current Planning 8 Advanced Planning 8 Analysis of the Building Division 8 Analysis of the Environmental Soils Division 9 Coordinated Services Division 9 Five Year Financial Plan 9 Reserves 9 Why Reserves? 10 Balanced Scorecard — Managing Long -Term Performance 10 Managing Organizational Performance 14 Comparison Review 17 Selecting benchmark counties and cities 17 The following table summarizes Comparison findings 18 Observations and Recommendations 19 General Observations 19 Adjusting the Fee Schedule 19 Reserves 19 Definition 19 Managing Reserves 19 Managing and Reporting on the Balanced Scorecard 20 Ongoing Scorecard Development 21 Appendices 21 Building Fee Table 21 Planning Fee Table 21 Environment Soils Fee Table 21 Balance Scorecard Detail & Sample Reports 21 Capital Accounting Partners 2 Deschutes County t c t her 2015 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE As part of its effort to manage its financial resources wisely, the Deschutes County engaged Capital Accounting Partners to prepare a detailed cost analysis of its Community Development Department fees. There were three primary objectives for the study: 1) Ensure that the County is fully accounting for all of its costs and recovering adequate revenues to reimburse the County for its expenses. Specific fees included planning, building, and environmental soils: 2) Develop a long term financial plan that will allow Departmental leadership the ability to project staffing needs, impact on costs, and plan for future programs and services; 3) Create a Balanced Scorecard that will assist the Department in two areas: a. Managing daily operations; and b. Communicating to the public the performance of the Department. The process used for collecting and analyzing the data required active participation by the County's management and staff. We want to take this opportunity to recognize their participation, time, and effort to collect the data and discuss the analysis, results, and recommendations. SUMMARY OF COSTING METHODOLOGIES DRIVER BASED COSTING MODELS Developing driver based costing models is a detailed and robust method of calculating the cost of a specific service. It is based on the principles of activity based costing so it seeks to understand cost at an operational level. The value of this approach means that we calculate cost as each staff position contributes time, effort, and energy toward the service. Graphically, the following figure illustrates this methodology. Capital Accounting Partners 3 Desclute bei- 2015 Hypothetical Illustration of a Driver Based Costing Model Contributing Staff Planning Tech Process Steps Fee Planner II Planning Director Site Plan Review Step 1: Collect Data — This first step involves discussions with staff to identify those positions within each department that provide and support direct services. It also involves collecting departmental budget and expenditure data, identifying the salary and benefits for each position, and identifying non - personnel expenditures, as well as any departmental and Countywide overhead. Specifically, the steps involve the following: • Identifying staff positions — This includes identifying both position titles and names. • Calculating the number of productive hours — For each position, vacation time, sick leave, paid holidays, professional development (training), routine staff meetings, and daily work breaks are deducted from the standard 2,080 annual hours. The result is a range of hours available for each position on an annual basis. This range is typically 1,250 to 1,600 hours. Factors that influence this range are length of service with the jurisdiction and local policies for holiday and personal leave time. • Identifying and allocating non -personnel costs — Costs for materials and supplies are allocated to the salary and benefits for each position. • Assigning any other expenses that are budgeted in other areas — There are often expenses that should be included with the total cost of services. Examples of such costs might include amortized capital expenses for vehicles and technology. • Identifying core business processes or activities —This step also involves discussions with staff to understand, at an operational level, the work of the operating unit. Core business processes used to provide services are identified and then defined by the tasks that are involved. Processes are also organized by direct and indirect categories: Capital Accounting Partners 4 Deschutes County October 2615 • Direct processes and activities — Those processes that directly contribute to the processing of an application or permit are first identified. Examples of a direct activity are electrical building inspection, application intake, and pre -application review. • Indirect processes and activities — Those processes that support, but do not directly apply to the processing of a specific application or permit. An example of an indirect activity is customer service or staff training to maintain certifications. Most jurisdictions highly value customer service, but it is difficult to assign a specific cost or unit of time to an individual service. Step 2: Building cost structures —This second step involves significant interaction with staff and the development of time estimates for both direct and indirect processes in each department. Specifically, this step is at the core of the analysis. There are three processes that comprise this step: • Gathering time estimates for direct processes — By interviewing staff in individual and group meetings, an estimate of time was assigned to each service by the process that is indicated. For example, in processing planning fees the following specific steps are involved in the processing of these fees: • Application intake; • Application review for completeness; • Review application for conformance with approval criteria; • Prepare administrative decision on application or staff report for hearings body. In this analysis, staff time is estimated and assigned to each step. The sum of all the process steps is the total time that is required to provide that specific service. • Assigning indirect and annual process time —An annual time estimate is gathered from staff for those indirect or support processes in which they are involved. Some of these costs are assigned to the direct cost of a service on an allocated basis. Some might not be assigned at all. For example, in the case of planning fees, the costs associated with advanced planning have been identified but not allocated to the fees. Advanced planning has its own fee category, consistent with the current fee structure. • Calculating fully loaded hourly rates and the cost of service — Once the total time for each direct and indirect service is estimated, the cost of service is calculated by using the fully loaded hourly rates for each staff member or position that is involved with the service. The fully loaded hourly rate for each employee is based on the employee's salary and benefit costs plus a share of non - personnel and County overhead costs divided by the employee's available work hours (i.e. 2,080 hours minus all leave hours). Thus, the direct and indirect cost by activity also includes departmental and county -wide overhead as well as non -labor costs. For this study, fiscal 2014-2015 budget expenses were used in all of the calculations. • Gathering activity or volume data — A critical element in the analysis is the number of times a given service is provided on an annual basis. This is critical data for three reasons: • It allows a calculated projection of current revenue based on current prices. This is compared with actual revenue to see if there is a close match as the data should match. • It allows for a calculated projection of revenue at full cost. This is compared to actual expenditures to see if there is a close match as the data should match. • It allows for a calculation of total hours consumed. Hours consumed must closely match actual hours available. Capital Accounting Partners 5 Desckn tc s County October 2015 If any of the three calculations do not approximate actual numbers, then time estimates and/or volume data need to be re-evaluated. These are critical quality checks for costing accuracy. Step 3: Calculating the full cost of services — This third step calculates the full cost of service for each direct service in a department. In the previous step, the cost of service was calculated for each direct and indirect service. In this step, the cost layers are brought together to establish the full cost of service for a specific direct service, program, or activity. As previously mentioned the cost of each direct service is calculated. To determine the full cost of service, the cost of indirect services is allocated to each direct service. The indirect services costs are allocated to each direct service based on each direct services proportion of labor spent processing each permit and application. By summing the direct and allocated indirect costs and multiplying that by the activity data, a total cost of service is calculated for both an individual service and the operating unit as a whole. The following chart illustrates an example of these calculations. This same process was used for planning fees, land development/environmental soils fees, and building fees. Hypothetical Illustration of Calculating the Cost of a Single Fee (service) Application or Fee Title Assigning Staff Cest and Time Community Planning Associate Executive Signing Programs (Five or More Signs) Development Totals Manager Planner Assistant Director Pre -submittal meeting 0.5 0.5 1 Land Use Application Intake 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.75 Application Review 1 6.5 7.5 Development Review Committee (DRC) 0.5 2 2.5 Prepare for decision 0.5 1.25 5 1 7.75 Public hearing 0.33 0.33 2 0.33 2.99 Plan Check of accepted plans — post entitlement 1.25 0.5 1.75 (Total Time by Position 0.83 3.83 17.50 2.08 24.24 I Calculated Full Loaded Hourly Rate 2.03.67 183.96 152.38 128.66 Total Direct Cost by Position 169 705 2,667 268 3,808 Total support or indirect costs assigned $ 574 Total Cost Assigned $ 4,382 I Step 4: Set cost recovery policy — Once the full cost of service is calculated for each direct service in a department, the cost of service for that direct service is then compared to the revenue generated by the fee charged for the service. This cost recovery analysis identifies the cost recovery level for that direct service. Depending on County policies and other considerations, the level of cost recovery is a decision that should be made for each type or group of direct services. For example, the County might want to recover the full cost for building related permits, but might only want to recover 80% for planning permits. Step 5: Set fees Based on any new, existing, or revised cost recovery policies, the recommended fees can be established. Capital Accounting Partners 6 Deschutes County October 2015 SUMMARY RESULTS FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - CURRENT COST STRUCTURE We observe that as the County recovers from the recent recession cost structures are changing. In fact, we see this trend from all of our clients. Most municipal agencies cut their budgets "to the bone" during the recession and now costs are moderating upward. This means reserves are being rebuilt, staffing additions are being considered, and administrative support is increasing. We also observe that the County has done a very good job maintaining the appropriate balance between costs and revenues. The following graphic illustrates our findings that while fees need to increase to match expenses, however, we normally see much more dramatic requirements for fee increases. Division Revenue at Full Cost of Services Planning $ Building $ Environmental Soils $ (Advanced planning fee $ (Code compliance fee $ Totals $ Projection of Revenues at Current Fees 1,026,200 $ 3,442,886 $ 561,077 $ 621,953 $ 320,729 $ 5,972,844 I $ 757,550 3,274,157 481,541 410,000 255,000 5,178, 248 I Annual Surplus (subsidy) ($268,650) ($175,593) ($79,536) ($211,953) ($65,729) ($801,460) This graphic illustrates our analysis that the Department is under recovering its costs. The two largest sources of under recovering costs is in the Planning program. Both current and Advanced Planning are not fully recovering costs. From our perspective, this is rather normal. We observe several reasons for this: 1. As our economy is recovering from the recent recession Cities and Counties both avoided any increase in fees. Now these programs are under recovering costs. 2. Recovering the cost of Advanced Planning is something most cities and counties struggle with. While many will have some kind of administrative fee for Advanced Planning that is added to Current and/or Building fees, many do not calculate the long term costs. 3. From our experience, Current Planning is a function where costs are consistently under recovered. In our view, the regulatory requirements often outpace any adjustments to fee pricing. These applications are increasing more complex and controversial. This results in more staff time to evaluate and respond to concerns of the public. As complexity goes up, so does staff workloads and fees are slow to catch up. 4. We find that in a tight budget environment, Advanced Planning is a function that is often delayed. Unfortunately, the result is often an uncertain development environment. Capital Accounting Partners 7 Deschutes County ANALYSIS OF THE PLANNING DIVISION CURRENT PLANNING Current Planning is responsible for reviewing land use applications for compliance with Deschutes County Code (DCC) and State law, including zoning, subdivision and development regulations, and facilitating public hearings with hearings officers and the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). Based on our analysis, fees charged to Current Planning customers are insufficient to recover the cost of processing applications. For the reasons detailed above, we generally find that Planning operations generally show the greatest opportunity for cost recovery. This appears to be true with the County. ADVANCED PLANNING Advanced Planning is responsible for planning for the future of Deschutes County, including developing and implementing land use policy with the Board of County Commissioners, Planning Commission, community and partner organizations. It is in charge of updating the County Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations, coordinating with cities and agencies on various planning projects taking place in the region, and coordinating population forecasts with Portland State University and cities. Recovering the costs associated with long range planning is often a challenge. Some municipal agencies prefer for this to be a general fund obligation. Some prefer to make it an obligation tied to current planning fees while some spread it across all development services — planning, building and development engineering. October 2tf15 According to our analysis Advanced Planning cost $621,953 (fiscal 14-15). The revenues to pay for Advanced Planning are derived from administrative fees added to Building permits. This revenue was projected to be $410,000, which means that the Department is under recovering its costs for Long Range Planning. ANALYSIS OF THE BUILDING DIVISION Deschutes County's Building Safety Division interprets and enforces the State -mandated Building Codes for the people of the community through a process of education and a clear and fair application of the Specialty Codes. There are two basic types of Building fees: 1. Fees that are calculated based on project valuation; and 2. Flat fees that are calculations of how much time effort and energy is required to provide the service. Typically these are inspections of mechanical, electrical, and plumbing projects. Valuation based fees tend to maintain revenues because of the automatic inflationary adjustments inherent with development activity. Flat fees are often updated infrequently and therefore more prone to under recovery. From our analysis we see opportunities to adjust flat fees. However, we would not recommend any adjustment to those fees that are calculated based on the value of the project. These appear to be recovering an appropriate level of cost. Capital Accounting Partners 8 Deschutes County ANALYSIS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL SOILS DIVISION The purpose of the Onsite Program is to provide the homeowner with a sewage treatment and dispersal system that is as trouble free as possible and that protects residents from health problems relating to exposure to surfacing sewage and prevent contamination of the water supply. As such, this division plays an important environmental role within the County. October 2015 Cost recovery for this program is currently recovering less than its total cost. COORDINATED SERVICES DIVISION Coordinated Services Division is the main contact for customers visiting or contacting Deschutes County Community Development. Within the division, Permit Technicians serve customers, take phone calls and process related paperwork in support of all the department divisions. In our analysis, we allocated the cost of permit technicians and the "front counter" to Building, Planning, and Environmental Soils on an allocated basis. The majority of this cost was allocated to Building based on the work load demands from processing Building applications. In addition, it overseas the Code Enforcement function for the Department. Code Enforcement is a subset of Coordinated Services. Within the County, Code Enforcement is paid for by an administrative fee attached to Building permits. Based on our analysis, projected fiscal 14-15 revenues were $255,000 while actual costs for Code Enforcement were $320,729. In addition, the Department and the Coordinated Services Division supports an intentional high level of services. This includes satellite offices and partnering with smaller communities such as Sisters and the City of Redmond. While this is not unusual, our observation is that the Department proactivity creates opportunities to service the broader community. FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN From our perspective, the Department is financially on fairly solid ground and improving. There are no major expenses looming on the horizon that will cause fees to go up dramatically. After several years of revenues dropping revenues seem to be rising. In addition, management is taking a very conservative approach to adding expenses such as additional staff. From our observation, they are waiting to add staff and additional cost until it is absolutely mandatory. Furthermore, they are waiting to add additional administrative staff until the final payment on the building has been made in fiscal 2016. RESERVES Building reserves is the one area of long-term concern. During the recent recession reserves were depleted and the Department was dependent upon infusions from the County's general fund. While reserves are gradually being rebuilt, it is our view that this is happening because budgeted positions are being delayed until absolutely necessary. Capital Accounting Partners 9 Deschutes Cita my Oc b r 2015 Furthermore, we see an opportunity to establish meaningful policy regarding reserves. This would include several components: 1. A target such as 9 or 12 months of operating expenses; 2. An upper limit such as 16 months; 3. A lower limit such as 6 months; and 4. Management polices when the upper and lower control limits are exceeded. In our analysis, and in discussion with Department leadership we concluded that a reasonable target for reserves would be 9-12 months of operating expenses to be held in reserves. Furthermore, to target five years as a build up for this amount. WHY RESERVES? Holding financial reserves for a commercial firm allows the firm to weather volatility in their market while maintaining a stable workforce. Furthermore, without adequate reserves the firm cannot invest in new technologies that will allow them to provide higher value products and services to their customers. Readers may ask, why should the Community Development Department target reserves and why 9-12 months of operating expenses? 1) In the same way reserves help commercial firms provide a consistency of service during normal swings in their markets, so reserves for the Department will allow them to provide a consistency of service. 2) There is no general fund support. We find that frequently citizens and development associations feel that the general fund does or should support development services. However, the direction of the Deschutes County Community Development Department is to be fully self -supported. Outside an emergency, the County does not provide general fund support with the exception of Long Range Planning. Revenues from development fees must fully reimburse the Department for its expenses. 3) Technology enhancements. We frequently find municipal clients with no ability to fund technology upgrades. When the department has to go to the County Board of Commissioners for funding a new permitting system or an upgrade to the system, they need to get in line with every other funding request. However, when reserves are present, funding for these upgrades are available. 4) Maintaining institutional knowledge of regulations. Development related services are driven by regulations at the regional, state and even federal levels. Keeping a workforce that knows these regulations is critical for long-term sustainability. BALANCED SCORECARD - MANAGING LONG-TERM PERFORMANCE We are pleased to report that leadership within the Deschutes County Community Development Department has demonstrated a clear intent to being a high performing organization. We have seldom seen this kind of commitment to high performance in the complex world of public service and the Capital Accounting Partners 10 Deschutes County October 2015 tensions of engaging customers with competing demands. Furthermore, we have seldom observed the desire to adopt management tools that are common place in the private sector and apply them in the public sector. While many public agencies are adopting measures as a way of reporting on their performance, few are using these measures either strategically or operationally. From our observation, few agencies use their performance measures to improve their operations or the value of their services to the public. One tool that has enjoyed wide spread application in the private sector is a Balanced Scorecard (BSC). This BSC concept was first developed by Drs. Robert Kaplan and David Norton of the Harvard Business School. The concept is a method of aligning mission critical business process in cause and effect relationships that are aligned with both mission and vision. The result is an organization that understands what is critical to customers and a structure of performance measures that recognizes the complexities of a public agency. A well -crafted Balanced Scored has four "perspectives". In total, these perspectives provides a method of structuring performance reporting that comprehensively assesses total organizational performance. To customize the four perspectives and make them applicable to the Department, we made the following modifications Traditional "Perspective" Title Customer 1 Internal Process 1 Organizational assets 1 Financial Modified Title viding Quality Customer Service Managing Regulatory Processes 1 Organizational Assets and Capabilities Building Financial Sustainability In the process of creating a Balanced Scorecard for the Department we spent considerable time with staff in interactive group engagements. One of the most important changes to a traditional BSC is the realization that there are two, often opposing, perspectives inherent with the Department. However, both perspectives are valid and need to be recognized. We identified the potential for inherent conflict within the customer perspective and the regulatory perspective. While customers want fast, efficient, and expected outcomes, the regulatory process often requires something different and not always what the customer wants to hear. However, both perspectives need to be addressed and respected. We feel this scorecard does exactly this. These engagements resulted in two broad outcomes: 1) Specific objectives for each of the perspectives above; and 2) Decision points to manage critical business processes. Capital Accounting Partners 11 Deschutes C rnty October 2016 Capital Accounting Partners 12 CONSISTENT COUNTER S CRVICE O N vi 0 'n ai V i— b0 2 yC 11.1 u 51 j3 a W U E N o O D U V V V o 2 kg v O CC VI a a, — a. i) t) th c cc ¢ O al Q 'e 0 '6 ,_ 0 QIj a E O N O 41 O dl $ i 0'Q, '' n ,i 4$m In Li s °Gc-o 04'Oc `o y o u CU th Zig Q v 9 = o$ .} N o u e V o i ro a) C :n '.t Q a LL Q W Cis_ W .Y 2( ,. bA G: 2 2 c a F 2 .0 o o 14 i zoS z3S cn 1__ O in 9.1 OC G v L'm z `1 2 U q m 16 L :3!{ W n N O 7 v = O th F E ` :i n a GC S2 Y vp Z' o 3. d 0 c 2 LI 9 n 'F,_° n xa y P. y 8 W ti ib z— s a `x D .t. y N W _) t] 1 I ECHNICAL I NNOWkTION Permits submitted electronically Plans submitted dectronically lnspecd ons scheduled electronically Vi 1D t'• J J J UOURTEO to s itt 43113 Aware leadership J 6 Annual fund balances N LL Maintain stable r Capital Accounting Partners Deschutes County I cber 2015 MANAGING ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE The beauty of this Balanced Scorecard is that it provides a clear structure for developing performance measures that are comprehensive — every vital function of the organization is measured. Furthermore, each objective referenced above comes with three measures: 1. Target measure; 2. Upper control limit; and 3. Lower control limit. This structure takes the unusual approach to performance measures and turns data into management tools that can be utilized to affect performance improvement. For example, organizations will often publish performance measures. However, they often lack structure or alignment with mission critical business processes or customer requirements. In addition, they often fail to provide any value to the management of the agency. The structure that the Department has adopted goes significantly further, in three ways: Target Measures — Performance measures without a target is a random number that lacks relevance. For example, when the Building division sets a target of building plan review of 5 days it automatically has established a level of performance that is measurable. Upper Control Limits — Provides a management tool that has value in two ways: 1) If the actual number of five days moves higher than its upper limit of eight days it suggests new staffing or resources (i.e. on-call personnel, partner organizations) are required to meet the demand; and 2) It tells staff that this number is important to the customer. Lower Control Limits — Provides another management tool that has value in two ways: 1) When the actual number goes below the lower limit of 2 days it means that staffing levels are too high relative to demand and adjustments may need to be made to staffing levels or staff need to be resigned; and/or 2) The data can also be a barometer of plan review quality. If plans are being pushed through the system too fast it may indicate review of insufficient detail. The following chart details the objectives established for each perspective within the Balanced Scorecard, the target measure of performance as well as the upper and lower control limits. Capital Accounting Partners 14 Deschutes County CUSTOMER PERSPECTIVE C.1(a) C.1(b) C.2 C.3 (a) C.3 (b) C.4 C.5 C.6 Objective October 2015 INTEGRATED PERFORMANCE MEASURES Consistent turn around for planning applications Consistent turn around for planning applications Consistent turn around for residential plan review Consistent inspection response - residential (non- electrical) Consistent inspection response -electrical Consistent Soils inspection response Timely customer service Professional customer service Internal Processes Perspective - Meeting Reg Objective Residential building inspections Residential building plan review R.1 R.2 R.3 Soils process control R.4 Code Enforcement R.5 Code Enforcement R.6 Consistent Accella updates R.7 Consistent planning processes Measures Turnaround time for processing administrative determinations (no prior notice) planning applications Turnaround time for processing administrative determinations (with prior notice) planning applications Turnaround time for Building plan review _% of building inspections done within 1 day _% of building inspections done within 72 hours _% Of Pre -Cover inspections done when requested Average wait Permit Tech services Survey - Department customer service ulatory Requirements Measures Average # stops/day Average # plan review / examiner Turn around for new construction permits Achieving voluntary compliance Resolving cases within 12 months Total days to completeness determination (method of Accella updates) Turnaround time for processing administrative determinations (no prior notice) planning applications Targets L. Limit Primary U. Limit 14 Days 21 Days 35 Days 30 days 45 Days 60 Day 2 Days 5 Days 8 Days 90% 95% 100% 90% 95% 100% 1 Day 3 Days 5 Days 3 Min 5 Min 15 Min Targets L. Limit Primary U. Limit 6 Day 2 / Day 5 Days 8 Day 10 Day 3/Day 4 Day 10 Days 15 Day 75% 85% 100% 1 75% 85% 100% 1 20 Days 25 days 14 Days 30 Days 21 Days 35 Days Capital Accounting Partners 15 Deschutes C R.8 Organizational Assets Consistent planning processes Objective L.1 Fact based management L.2 Aware leadership L.3 Soft skills for counter staff Appropriately staffed for workload L.4 L.5 Technical innovation L.6 Technical innovation L.7 Technical innovation Financial Perspective F.1 F.2 F.3 F.4 Objective Reserves Revenues Appropriately staffed for workload Appropriately staffed for workload Objectives: Action statements that clarify how we will implement the strategy. Measures: Track progress toward achieving the objective against expected performance. c ober 2015 Turnaround time for processing administrative determinations (with prior 30 days 45 Days 60 Day notice) or hearings schedule Measures Quarterly review of Balanced Scorecard data 361 Degree annual staff reviews Counter survey tool # Permits issued per tech (counter) Of permits submitted electronically Of plan reviews submitted electronically Of inspections scheduled electronically Measures 9-12 Months operating expenses Revenues exceed expenses # Planning applications per planner Targets L. Limit Primary U. Limit 75% 50% 25% 25% 50% 75% 25% 50% 75% 90% 100% 1 100% Targets L. Limit Primary 6 9 1% 5% 36 Month 28 Month U. Limit 12 7% 48 Month # Building stops per inspector per day 6 Day 8 Day 10 Day Glossary of Terms Targets: Set and communicate the expected performance level for the organization. Initiatives: Articulate the key project or programs that are resourced and managed in order to accomplish the strategy. Capital Accounting Partners 16 Deschutes County Octoher 2 COMPARISON REVIEW As part of this analysis, a survey was conducted of similar Counties as well as the City of Bend. The analysis compared similar fees and projects in an effort to determine trends in cost recovery. To increase value staff identified individual services (fees) that provide a reasonable basis of comparison. We caution the reader about these comparisons. Many communities do not routinely update their fees, and when they do, it might not be based on a thorough analysis of cost. This means the data that follows is the County's cost compared to another County's price. In addition, communities have different policies regarding user fees. Some desire to subsidize their fees while others want to charge full cost. Additional factors that make comparing fees difficult: 1. Comparing cost with price. What we have prepared for Deschutes County is an analysis of cost. This is compared with a price the benchmark agencies are charging which may or may not have a direct relationship to cost. 2. Differences in fee structure. Individual agencies will use different methods for pricing user fees. For example, some cities and counties base building fees on an independent formula for determining value, while others base the fees on construction cost. While the actual fee might be identically the same, how the final fee is calculated can be very different. 3. Differences in funding, and recovery. Some counties and cities will intentionally subsidize development services as a way of encouraging economic development. Others will subsidize it unintentionally because their financial systems are not adequate enough. 4. Service levels can vary. Some counties and cities will adopt the State of Oregon's requirement for processing applications and permits while other want to do better. These will create processes and procedures to meet local demand and expectations. This all impacts cost. SELECTING BENCHMARK COUNTIES AND CITIES In selecting benchmark counties and cities we worked with Departmental leadership to select those communities that have some similarity to Deschutes County. Consequently we chose the City of Bend because of its geographical proximity to the County. We also chose Jackson, Land and Clackamas Counties because of similar size. To create a broad spectrum we also benchmarked two Washington State counties — Whatcom and Clark Counties. We felt that these Counties are somewhat similar but also different enough that they would provide a broader perspective than just Oregon Counties alone. Capital Accounting Partners 17 Deschutes County October 2015 THE FOLLOWING TABLE SUMMARIZES COMPARISON FINDINGS uilding Fees Current Calculated Cost Fee/Deposit / Deposit levels Jackson County lackamas Coun, Lane County atcom County, Klerk County, W, City of Bend Average New Single -Family Home: 2745SF, 500 SF garage, value=$328434 $ 4331 $ 2,331 Electrical SF $ 405 $ 405 ISingle-Family Addition: (635 SF) value = $88,256 $ 505 New Multi -Family: (10 -units, 8,000 Sq. Ft.) value = $813,760 $ 7,440 $ 7,440 New Commercial Office: (30,000 Sq. Ft. Office) value =$3,546,000 $ 32,406 $ 32,406 $ 26,268 Commercial Alteration: $75,000 valuation $ 685 $ 685 $ 872 (Mechanical #Appliances; 1 Furnace up to 100,000btu $ 1 Outdoor condenser (heat pump) $ $ 1,658 $ $ 215 $ $ 1,149 $ $ 5,182 $ 3 Bath fans Range hood Gas dryer vent Gas fire place 'Plumbing rt WC lanning Fees Conditional Use permit Final Plat - 10 Tots Property Line Adjustment Site Plan Review Subdivision Tentative Plat - 25 lots 49 $ 49 $ 61 $ 491$ 49I $ 61 $ 62 ($ 23 $ 19 $ 26 $ 11 $ 7 12.00 38.40 5.50 1,451 $ 2,688 $ 4,194 $ 2,939 $ 2,804 $ 2,580.75 462 $ 286 981 $ 1,106 $ 1 $ 666 $ 425 $ 351.33 959 1 $ 1,601 $ 665 $ 923.06 5,484 $ 5,790 $ 6,254 I $ 11,028 $ 3,753 $ 6,418.64 $ 22,390 $ 22,148 $ 14,7161 $ 30,904 $ 15,310 $ 23,448.87 $ 883 $ 1,009 $ 958 1 $ 2,586 $ 601 $ 1,084.74 I $ 18 $ 46 $ $ 18 $ 61 $ $ 27 $ 36 $ $ 12 $ 40 $ 15 $ 3.70 $ 9 $ 36 $ 27 $ 7.30 $ 18 $ 92 $ 26 $ 18.63 $ 31 $ 48 $ 161$ 66 $ 12J$ 66 $ 10 $ 66 $ 10 I $ 66 $ 10I$ 66 $ 10 I $ 66 $ 10 1 $ Calculated Cost Current / Deposit levels 122 22 $ 32.01 74 $ 41.66 25 $ 37.61 12 $ 27.80 12 $ 26.44 22 $ 39.38 $ 41.62 Fee/Deposit Jackson County lackamas Coun Lane County hatcom County, lark County, W City of Bend Average $ 3,025 $ 2,365 $ 1,700 $ $ 1,891 $ 670 $ 620 $ $ 732 $ 485 $ $ 6,070 $ 3,200 $ 1,193 $ $ 7,801 $ 5,895 $ 3,945 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 2,600 $ 315 $ 390 $ 510 $ 2,600 6,215 $ 9,000 $ 2,300 $ 5,678 $ 500 $ 2,627 $ 1,050 $ 408 $ $ 3,453 $ 5,250 $ 7,773 $ 2,895 $ 1,228 $ 1,024 $ 10,125 $ 9,996 $ 3,163 1,724 560 3,422 6,576 After reviewing the comparative data, our conclusions are that the County's fees, at full cost compare reasonably well with the benchmark communities. We would expect to see valuation based building fees to be pretty consistent with other Oregon Counties. We would also expect to see the flat fees to need upward adjustments. In addition, we observe that planning fees at full cost are still within a reasonable range of the benchmark communities and well within a reasonable range when comparing against the average. Capital Accounting Partners 18 City of Beed, Ori on October 2015 OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL OBSERVATIONS We observe that the management of the Community Development Department has a clear understanding of its role and mission within the community. We also observe that they see this role as more than just enforcing regulatory mandates. They understand their role as providing an important service to the development community including partner organizations, stakeholder groups, and individual citizens. These see each of these groups as their customers. After working with several dozen Community Development Departments, we find this a refreshing and unique set of perspectives. ADJUSTING THE FEE SCHEDULE As a matter of practice we recommend annual adjustments to fees wherever possible. We also recommend a complete review of costs for fee services every three to five years. With the annual update of fees we recommend using a simple CPI type increase that is attached to the County's labor cost. For example, if the labor cost for the County goes up by 2% then adjust each fee by 2%. This is the simplest and most common method of adjusting fees annually. RESERVES Reserves are an important function for the financial sustainability of any organization. The Deschutes County's Community Development Department is no different. In our view, it is important to clearly define reserves and how to manage them. DEFINITION It is common for cities and counties to look at budget surpluses and consider them as reserves. For development related organizations, this might not be true. In our view, a reserve fund is a separate line item marked as reserve for the specific purpose of closing gaps between revenues and expenses during economic contractions. This is different than budget surpluses that are usually pre -funded plan review and inspection work that is going to take place over the next 6-18 months. MANAGING RESERVES It is important to have a policy or at least a plan on managing reserves. Reserves that are too high and the County runs the risk of being out of compliance with the State of Oregon. Too few reserves and it may impact the County's ability to maintain consistent service levels. Therefore, our first recommendation is to publish regular reports on reserve levels. These reports should show both the target and upper and lower control limits. These control limits are decision points. If the target is 12 months of operating expenses, then an upper limit might be 15 months and a lower limit might be 9 months. As long as the actual amount is within these limits then no further action is required. But if the actual amount goes either above or lower than the control limits then a decision needs to be made. It is also our recommendation that once the target has been reached, then managing revenues so they do not continue to escalate is critical. In our view, the easiest way to do this is by annual adjustments to 19 Deschutes sten Co.mtys Oregon Octeber 2G15 fees. If the target has been reached, then skip an annual fee adjustment so the rate of increase will slow down. If the actual level of reserves falls below the target, then maybe it is time to lower expenditures. The following graph illustrates a sample reserve fund report with a hypothetical target of $1,000,000. $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $- Reserve Fund Report Decision Point Decision Point 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Upper Control Limit Actual Reserves Lower Control Limit In addition, we find that those cities and counties that create organizations for long term sustainability do so by setting policies or practices that will provide for a continuity of services through economic contractions. For example, in our view, setting a policy for how Long Range or Advance Planning is funded is one of the most important deliverables for a fee study. Funding Advanced Planning during economic growth might be relatively easy. However, economic contraction does not mean that Advanced Planning activities can be ignored. So policies or practices to fund this activity is critical to the long-term health and sustainability of the County. MANAGING AND REPORTING ON THE BALANCED SCORECARD The Balanced Scorecard will provide leadership the ability to manage its organization with data and facts. Managing by fact is one of the key elements to high performing organizations. As outlined in the body of the report, there are four perspectives to the Scorecard: 1. Providing Quality Customer Service: 2. Managing Regulatory Processes: 3. Organizational Assets and Capabilities: and 4. Building Financial Sustainability. Performance objectives for each of these perspectives have been identified, (please see the detail in the appendix). Automated reports have been created for customer service and managing regulatory processes. Reports for measuring organizational assets & capabilities as well as financial sustainability Capital Accounting Partners, LLC 20 Deschutes Couartty, Oregurt October 2O1 have yet to be created. We understand that data to monitor these objectives come from different data sources. ONGOING SCORECARD DEVELOPMENT No scorecard is set "in stone". It is a dynamic element that is an integral part of a high performing organization. Therefore, we would expect to see this change over time. Objectives that have been identified will be modified. Measures will be modified to reflect data that matures over time. We strongly recommend this understanding would hope that as the Department matures so would its scorecard. APPENDICES BUILDING FEE TABLE PLANNING FEE TABLE ENVIRONMENT SOILS FEE TABLE BALANCE SCORECARD DETAIL & SAMPLE REPORTS Capital Accounting Partners, LLC 21 BUILDING FEE TABLE BidgUnitCosts -14,11,11/1 tRi1"114-141lit, Vlig II 21-Y-1.21 —1 11 Ian • 1 ' in ,r-..,1s,n ' ,''', t :4: 1 12'I0 II I ! I I I i J , 1 1 , ! I 1 ! i in;anan.anifirni intn: inlin4anininainlinin., in ! 9 1 I ; 10„Nl. .; oiN atgJa ,5:1111 " " 1 1 , 1 J 1 i 1 4!,1 7414 74Hr.1,1;;;11 12i4, ! ' ! I Vii.n1,411.11an o) 0)0)0) '41.71 [AU g! ; ! 711;1141T.Ikli22* L r r.4.4 111. ,n1 1 11 I 2ko 1 I 4 I to, 8 5 223 g, ''d , i 2 g. n 6 tir,..21 0 A -g i ==,....,=0. ,.4: '632132-52 --.2 ° 1 =E m2222 t, 434123; - ti 1 41 t, g85,,„ aan En g >, 4 - 8 !, „c11 E E . E 6 0LJ§bc7,g, § g b F g g E a 9, 0 w , ‘1; 0 a, tt a 'e MEEEEEglt E . .24 $2,18-81538E,881> E N 2e 5i -g -F, .ggf, a .2.2.9.9 22.20.200— 0 0 .......E2-....... 634q—E§5EEHti 2LL . . ' EEEEEE "2 -W,WWWWWwMro<F-F-HHHH W 03-0acCWW0i0WWWIC til 1 !:7:1I1F;1 1 8 8 8 —1 or which no fee is specifically indicated ' ! I II 11 1 in an an! ! I I ! t I ! ! , 1 tri!an.;in.,inH BldgUnitCosts Capital Accounting Partners T1'1.'1 V-2 8,818 81`,E1 a 8 8 :8 8.8:aa8 in ,-.1 .-dg; A,'^ -,• . .9 ,V, M,M.:!;:t"-11$ ! . ' . . . • . • . , • . : . . ko 333 oi 44 t o f2+ ; I F. 14 N N N V, N. N FLA i c7! M M Mi N,N 11 6;14 I ! 1 I i I 11 11, I ! I I 1 I I I I I I 1 , , I . r",I8 818 8 -0'181 8v,.., li 8 E!Fli,:_41E. 1'Pli .8. I 1 7-1'H 711;1 2 41471 4741.4 :574 tlitiql[Ci[I?.441 HICAleor'ili, . rell 1 [ ' I [ , , 1 •.-.1 1 [ I ' I N [,, -NI" N N. N IN. NIN .thrth NIN.ININ[,.1./TINVI1N- AA .1J111./1. .0 ., .44. • ,01 0 01 Each additional inspection - electrical Inspections outside normal business hours (2 hr min) Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated (min 1/2 hr/ Electrical master permit (one time fee) , [ , [ I i 1 , ; I [ 1 I 1 NIN to in -IN gi I 4 gi I g.,IiiiZI inII IA 74 I IRI I gi } in CO trcl .._..1 II I I . I I I 1 I . , [ [ 1 I ' [ [ I 1 I : I [ [ I ' . ' . 8 aa 2 8 2 8 26 8 8 aa 2, .8 8 a VI. 0/ [ N. • N N. .1.n. N. N., tn. N. N. N. -4). ' N N.: N: : • : . . . . . , • . . . L , . " • . • . . . • . . . , .. . . . . . . . . 1 1 [ 1 I , I ,7418.k8 i . ! . .. . , 38.1 n,rtn,' 383:8, 1 , , , , ;:,1 . . I I I I i I i I i ; 1 ^1,11 I 1 . i in in. NI in -NI in NH in [iN I .711T.11 1 [ gl' i fg ll, 1 ' I I II [ t g 2 . cY, 1 .. c ' 2 8 2 8 1 g rgr t 5• s 'i7g, tg 5`g (0‘7 a F 2 2 0 , 23 cc 12C c• % c3 mmiocoPE EEEE".-. 3i -S E70,,P,A . "... u_ u. u. u. .,.-. m Mqiigli 21 -13 13 '252,':22@i5. agaglaAA I i Capital Accounting Partners BldgUnitCosts ! ] 7 & & ) / |\ \ 2 f \f\ {{ { - \k«) ) Van 22 tit )i) f!1U gct. g° /\\\/)))){t k!;<:y/!ftƒ§fy : �;� 1 Capital Accounting Partners .1 t i 1.,1 _1! 11.n. 1c4' 1 11 ! ! 1,T2411,:11 1:11! 11. . 1 1 1 : 0 .°,4 -C1171' "g E .. a 1 1 ; I I , 1 1 8 8 '8 fA, .8,8 8'8 8, f2, I 1 ES' . . E E_ . 0E s -,.6 To aa2f, Ef 2 rATE" il .,5 i.5g ,T,2 1281;!:g .s232;'15. '3 tc.aot 11 t,T)ff,g2 0. t's3$ E i!nlE E EP322$2'' 12.gil, 611-WRIT0 ,ths 11111111 gE.,,E-;s4a.-EL8 _9(3188887Ds Ii: ''gc2,9c2ceL2 I , I 1'4,11 ,:11'1"1 1 1 1 I I E E E E1 E 2 L') i Bldg UnitCosts a 0 Lc, a a Capital Accounting Partners 1 8 0 0 rru or 0. ; 8 BldgUnitCosts Capital Accounting Partners 21818,8T'T NN,,WNNININ • 0%1 . . . 1 a ,,%2;'2.41T,1 -1-1g11 --1-1.7,4a1T“1,7,.1 1 • :111 , I z 8algialT*T1TITT, -- -11-11glr.-g.,81g, ‘la ,,,,,12iglp.,-,21g A gll . , g.°Itz.M09,1,7,`,1 4. l -Ll'!nngigll:alA,,-.1,a,rgl i . , N,N Nt,N,N,.-5H-Ptt.n 41. tr, .-11 5 I 4,4'-.,T 4' '..2 '4' '4' '','0'. '1,; J; fli',-=';'81 '8 ‘''; 1',10' <'; ,r8.,;:fl,',:•091,5-,',',11A'`',°, ala,a a a a '5 r7',1,1 0 '0 4:0,01 0 0 ,0 0 '0,04 I12,,I,a14'S;11," , . . 1 . ' . : . . . . , . . : . . N alala0 N. 'rl. E)4 ai,ai4alaal.alla • t5 '6 5, 1 1 -0 Is, E (1 a. CL ix -0 1 6 z 2 S = r'll T1 g ... 9 5 F --c 0 1 13 5 Ti '5 -ogg - 2 2 t 5..E EE EZ n ! i ID d 1 M %At S- CL a 3 3 8 0 2g -5 -EgFA .! -!, ! Il 1 I /1 iill Ili FN t 2a t 270-2 E f2 w ! ”21;,,, 1 UV% :1;r3 lii Zii! e21 -5,2v. 41, 15'52I 8 "5>I6S -=E 88,2;A9R-='5 w-Gl f-11 1, 2 41111:.."5' E iS.b'l.'' (7)di21-65g2?g`C405,-2g.g Ill'Eg§D §A § §n.g..CA;g' .8' 3'2Z2f.-EPTig-25M1'"!.g3LE,Y,f m!,.....qT1_ 01-2=2DTF-.6224,1,s -0 - --'''01-2.8',;-ta_.2.0“,-J0._ ,'5m too0.F_0.1...am000„00 0. c".'„c 8g8"8§8 g8Pqmg8iE‘L,;,'E t's 21022115,MO"g8 2'05T506 ,1g1-§t§Vria,§Por-,E.,_groralg•,2-----.882E. 102.7,56=6=p2m8EE2morvzt,-E-dm..?.0..2 .82.0.E...,n w_cop,?,),•‘?7,22(911-4'2.2831'?>>8z5A1',22.121"-cr3 ‹..‹..,- 18, Reinspection fee - mechanical BldgUnitCosts 0_0 2 V 08 000 glr-1 a LO • ]ti 1 ] ] 5 1 2 0 , Capital Accounting Partners 1/1 gag a Bldg UnitCasts Electrical plan review (25% of the electrical fee) Electrical - additional plan review per hour Electrical investigation fee Reinspection fee - electrical Each additional inspection - electrical Inspections outside normal business hours (2 hr min) Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated (min 1/2 hr) Electrical master permit (one time fee) t 5 2t .c 2 1; 2 '5-62. b . . ou. -."-S—g :4 LI' 8 o,,, 80 6-g8 ;§ L -L'7.-§ "=;8 ,t -N cr_ ttfitV 58 5.:.-q2 0-owce .a 13 .c 'Z“-.- EEEE.-?, Lt.'13 £S5 8U =Th, 1748rn LTLT22gg_ t„!,. 33302.0 t.t. 1-1-1-1-2,p752,T 111 000(0o0.28 828888 222112.22 WEgEgittIM 71t1 0000M0qYWW/7'(,)geb.eb.-Sg ?DUE Capital Accounting Partners BldgUnitCosts Page 11 of 14 BldgUnitCosts Page 12 of 14 Capital Accounting Partners 13 ,s,EH g gl 8 la a al , g0 ai LI • `.'",• • ! 1 Irv! Fg !,`:), IN 0 I ;•,,,k4 ! 1 Hok '61 in; tn1in; an' an in r 1 :=1 • Fi ?El' • ,`<l'"f(' 1..n in,..;:in; in; -in !in in, in in1tn in! .ga I 1 ! 1 1 BldgUnitCosts 0 Capital Accounting Partners a rn PLANNING FEE TABLE 12 0 Am oE aw W a p c o 3 0 moa E E 2 Ni m °m o 1° H , n nn dc _ ?° 'y 2 vt y 'o v o c c x> j u �— Pp m — 71: c °c H oo m a c `v..NN .�3 00 .En n oc2 1-o i f` cv E ° o c 'E = '82-s. !II 1111E11 o« iJ .� (J°f'>m`w¢m w¢ c ouE E a ��w_ HAI E `�E::^EOEJ °g.....`5o o> w$Oao °^ o._cv ,N,=ma 'E'EU U� w��t c�EU.zE : aviw¢ iE2o. .o > ° Av2v vv v00- Et;°� v ;: i,: ,�� Z iug! a ca rn ._vvEEE¢ `aA cccS°�o._¢vvvavv a c«— t '9:-Q�°c '',,Te n �° Q � � 7 7 > > j a � 7 � > > li ¢.K a W .'_^ N u '81 � m � � � � � � c c N 21,t2 J -` W c m o ;1.01113 c o c m m c c ;c ;c c o a o ,7'.'Y -q,'8!3 is I '° N .o . Q —m Fi!!!!!!!!ii!!.! 0.9a nnao0occc c0 20 0c 'ov N «E c cmv'-"voa ~~¢¢¢ ¢¢¢000008 UsU o00 0UU UON W W Ii li li S I S L W I Q=¢ Z Q I¢— issic aaa 2 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 0 a a aaa aZ aZ ZONU 2NU-ZNNU ZMNU VN0N2N Z PZ. ZcN0Z 2 Z 2 MMMM Na 224 aa a N0.M0-O040O ZNZ M 0NW ZZZZZZ222 Z ZZZ 0NN)M0-N 0000000000 0 OOOD 0 00000 22222 ZZZZ 22222 UUU UUUUUUUUU 0 0 UUU 8 U UU 0 OOO 0000000 0000 0 000 0 000000 000.0 PlanningUnitCosts Capital Accounting Partners o a g , 3 3 o � -Oa m - t, g„ o n • O 03 013 03 4$ N m ''',-€• Ai '^ $ c 2 c s uE a >.�•>. g w 1E t o v o '.ii .17% s v � rn 'c cmc - m c - > o m- ao��« n cN F£€vd '��°= cava o "9��" aa, wZsn ccw�3 2;pm¢ :? ._ s° -13t.. m_v°�-2'r' 0 8 t'yv°ii o n m` a t o =° o« I c 82.8w a UNuFcAcoW m°t �n a a m ZNa_'w`mm££mo°-i vc c u U w a c q 4 o `�' c° o .n '� U > m we .c as ° 2-2 2'--5""° o a a m c u a VJ v �� i �'�o � C�Ntn «. aoa'��Oo�o �'o yccoHt _mE wo n'^v�uaZ€€�oA ti vQ'Q-vo �mmE£o2 `w ` vU Uv.°aa ��-'EU U'UQQua3 £'9°'a°cc=ma'mc €c.E u a`a `aaaaavm-° ;;' IP PA a ni ii w€ 111117"111111g .tea we v`o aaaa« v m_9? •`-Ur y o o o ._ 'ma .. `v v a v a v i 1 1 1 7 o,,v, L« m 1 � °..� .z a�zz�gzUCa90waaaa��a �tta�¢aa va Q:KR�a'fn N(A 5 NU wQ t�U � ESN N V1NN' mm 0,-NM'Q N 0,0 O .- NM '122L-5203 001-000 00 V N m O.-00 0) �� 8; NM ✓ vvmu11n 1n 1n vi In In MW m m mm mmmmmm�2ZZ Z n 2 ZZmmmmmm mmmm Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z a aaaaaaa a aaa as a a. as aaaaaaaaaa a a a a aaaaaaaa aaaa o.aaa O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0000 O 0000000 0 000 00 0 0 00 0000000000 0 0 U U 00000000 0000 0000 Capital Accounting Partners 1.4 ,\,1 .0.- \ - a J R,r7 o i \@$ § f[ N, 44 tfiWZ' la ))) \\ / ( )\\ - \/ //\ k , : § - : �) \§t#))Et)!§ ) \{ /� El 72 ,/ �\t/!|z! =f°E • VIEW !§:=2Jk�v{k\{/ : ( 7 IE W ---:; -5 32 2`13 PO |,l,��l;,l,1e, « ` F=\Ka; :m em §,3el;=;lz<; 2 \( =�\fes 000 0 000000000 00 0 000 0 000000000 00 0 Plann ngUnitCosts Page 3 of 6 Capital Accounting Partners E'E n Q Q Q not accepted E LL, 0 I m 2_16) v di! C >a C H 0 w o n E N U E`° w np 00. m 5 o> c w n 0 0$ '> '°° Um D3 Q°@�E EESH v h f gi N. F., h d = F.• c m 0 03 03 0 '-<4, H a' $ of m N m v N•0. a s = 588282 25 =2E0 = cgtg cc °o'E'ESmm n n o 0 0 0 0 0 o E 0. 0 0 0 0 0 <<.000000 0500L)00 'M H H ,-Nm N(o N- ! OI .- Z Z 2 Z Z 2 2 Z Z 2 2 Z 00.0 0.00.0.00.000. 000 000000000 U U U U U U U 00 2 0 Z 0 0 _ Z Z Z 000 000 2 0 0 Z 0 U trol v p rn m° o N o c 2 0 ° w ? 1 n U ' N C O 1> V K> U><< 0 N `o E Q m O v0. c 11 2 in = o a ',°-n N N c w v m w E ° w www 0 w m=w nnU WE° Ea__ 4 i c O gv00i.1110111 J ZgNE"d wc c YvvE C 2WWgv x m E a g gig aa0. 0.v c° 0. O O J r x m= ¢ w ::::!::::::::::::: � O Q N i0 t0 m L (n N lt K c c ami m `" v o E w.1 m a oWWLLLLtLSxxc2WM02QZ¢ •JJJ4iJ:IJW JO.°. N N N N 2 Z Z Z 0000 00 0 0 0000 N 2 0 0 00 l0 I� W O) O .- N N N N N M M M Z Z Z Z Z Z Z 0 0000000 0000000 M M Z . Z Z 2 0000 0000 0000 2 0 U 0300 Z Z Z o00 000 2 ZZZZZ mamaa. a 0 0000.0 0 00000 PlanningUnitCosts 0 a Capital Accounting Partners 1 ; 1 al ; I 4 ' ' ; 21 E,1 Rig! al ' .7,41 „ 11 ! 1 I t i 1 ; 1 1 3 3 3 222,7,22.1 zzzzzzzz a aamamma O 0000000 O 0000000 . oral mo . ... .. z ZZZ zz a 00.0 0.0. o 000 00 O 00000_ aava fAd'.g1 atala, Lo,fge-- l 1 1 i TE t .0 lt, • i Ai go ,,T,, ,o4 •§ 1 ..g. i.' -‘7,E ie E . eT, ,F, '-e"g s s! 2 ,!28 "VS 11 g t62E-5 o ? i Z'F275 5t. 121EC c7g1i4c2-A . 5 1 iii Elli ttiint.EW 0,1ilfim tItil til EFI 1 WiigiA:31-ahIE i swag Wi i n-WW,Vgloolitl iillipm.1-A2,,,40-0!Jzigl!!,s... 2,....,82.4.07,2Eggl!„,yne,-,..,,,,(1. 2 IT-,vall2IllitEiitim W)-0 g, 0) 22 .128,;1522, zz zzzzzzzzzz a am mammaaamam O 00 0000000000 O 000000000000 • z z a 0 0 00 a 0 101 f002.7322.12 2%22 2;-,22 zzzzzzzzz zzzz zzzz a mmaammam mama (Lamm O 00000000 0000 0000 O 00000000 0000 0000 PlanningUnitCosts 0 a Capital Accounting Partners 00 d I'I 2E N � N N G 2° a £o w o a h E m a N y O LL .G A as a s o o c a o N 2? '' > > LL g c c Era 0> W v zo.wH°1 j.°sE. x m=. E m a _ o0000OZ`m ma-,ae lGcU �= e'22 a m y >>>> 2 gt Q a j a w m a u u .2° 22.1 Ea:'oamx 2.62221`141. o N V) N t/) 1-g `d J a 7 1 J m C� N p_ u) E z z z Doo (Jou 0) m o 0 0 0 O O O O N z z m z2 z zzzzzzz a aaaaaaaaa O 000000000 0 000000000 a o ro as o 00 0 00 0 PlanningUnitCosts Capital Accounting Partners ENVIRONMENT SOILS FEE TABLE ;& 1/1 \ 8,1 5i , I t){ a 2 2 LI ;,/ \| r % . i { ��` &| ! iITO {f 2k _ _ - - )_{ a,v 47! { k7k7§§ 00 00 0.000\&0 00 00000000u 000 000 ! , f )i 2412/!/ Lin ruffl 00 00 000 000o 000 00 00_002 0000 000_ vironmentalUnitCosts Capital Accounting Partners 0 a) cu Q 1.41 13 -pC E C (a E • c o O O E v ea u u > CU - o C C O • C(13 Oi E O • o fa O v • >cu o cu L f6 bA w C VI 0 -N R v 0 ln a1 c O N O_ c a) o i 0. c N0 u c a1 O 0. c Q � ca • L C C u N N > of '‘7, v, 2 v H C c O V) ? 8 8 Tri °=— .9 -• Ti :� (7 r 'zr. v0 CONSISTENT PLAN REVIEW 55 c CO 0. O O E E -0 v c c O 0 O 0 (a (0 c c Y • C C O C G O C O • G , • 3 *N _ c 0. C c v° 0 ((0 v (a ri V building plan review F o, W laE a) O > W C C U t0 U U p u ? aco W v0 � > W 7 0 Z o a1 W > CC 2 O 2 0 v CONTROLLING No. OF INSPECTIONS PER EXAMINER PER INSPECTOR R.3 Tum round time for construction permits 5) 0. 3 a1 d c 0 0. 2 O Z ax N H a 0 N c 0 0 al 0. c >• 0 o 0 2 a H TECHNICAL INNOVATION COURTEOUS AND PROFESSIONAL COUNTER STAFF FACT BASED AND AWARE MANAGEMENT Permits submitted electronically Plans submitted electronically Inspections scheduled electronically ul W 1— J J Soft skills for counter staff 5• c O ▪ C to o. 2 O 0. -0 0. 0 0 v c O • 3 0 V) 50 a0i 0 VIu co0 v c (0 CCI 0 0 CU 0) a) 0 - � CC v J L.2 Aware leadership MONITORING REVENUES VS. EXPENSES F.2 Annual fund balances Maintain stable reserves kn al f *q' p Ou - . G I.! 0 itt 31) -o a) 0. 31) -o 31) 32 31) (31 CU 34 31) c2. VI a) a) ..c 0 • , 0 .1j (13(13 c: 0 .- 1)31 > E (1.) '4..- 0..0 , CU 0 0.'.0 3_, 0 :3 0 a3 X 0 0 C 3/3 a) 0 0 :.c > a) T..; > 'Tr, a) u a) ,a 00. al 0 Q.) 320 E o 313 o t.• 0 ro (u • . QJ E 0 0 0 bf) OJ r0 0. 1,5 0 . _C. O o co Q.) _C CO 90 (0 _C 0 . u /../1 0 0) -C- U :36 s- 0. :9E -a c z: m Creating Strategic Alignment 0 C3 . -135 032 ' (- 0 3 N 90 4-J Qu 0 0 Q.) 0 Cu 4.) -0 0 0 0.0 Ln .‘.7.2. ° P., a 0.) 01 a)') o :3 Q' (1) 41.9 E 0 z vi •0 '47.; E 312 0 CU F12, 0 13 Q.) - E 0. 4-, 0 v, a, 0 C: ".7.-2 '40 0. p E C3 9 o L) 0 S 0 0, 1 r•-• 0 31.99 ,.) QL) 0.. 0 .0 0 Cu I--0 0. Four Perspectives that Comprehensively Align Operations with Mission and Vision Customer Perspective QJ 32 0. 0) -Q 0 31/ 0. <-) .96 0 0 42 0.) . 0) CU •;94 41 CU 31 /43 /43 31 31 0) (7.11 QJ 0. 31) 0 31 25 Q)0) to 0 v) a :3 00 *47", (1) ,1 1)01 49. 09 a. (3 31) 't QJ Q.1 0. 0.01 0. 0) CU E e3 313- 0)9.9 -0 0 Regulatory Compliance Perspective L.. 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 - 0 0- 0 a) 0) -0 '.9 2 90) QJ QJ 3-12 CU E CU V) (1) /.0 310 -72 Q..) 0 -0 0) (31) `E a.) 0. 0.) 42 Q., 0 QJ 0.0.9 .0 0Qj 0 0 V, QJ 'H,L) 4) 0. -0. 0.32 Q) Cu .6 "Z 0. "'.901 4-, 0 0. • Q.) ," F.: '92-9 Cuv) 0_ -9 ›. 0) 0 u) v) 4.1 00 .0 0) (1.) E (x) 01.9 t:s t Organizational Assets and Capacities Perspective /43 4.) 135 0 0 V, Q) 3... 23 ':5/ 0 .0 r- '3-., 0' • .-- z -0 :90 'Z. C;-) 0-9 ,.... ui a) c a) 41 :9 0 O., ,,., 4-, :, vr 10 u 175 0 0 0 ,0) ',--, //) .92.9 ...1....f 0''''' CU c/) 0 ...S.-.: .9)0 '-'6 ro a _c /40 0 47" 9<.: .90 Z 0 ,... ... 4.-- 0 oL a.) 41) 'e- r" .1...., L'''' 0 '72 1)0/ -9 („, ,?_ 4-. .9-9 :„., <4 4...., a.) o ,,, VI 0) 0.9 Q.) 4-3 0. L._ X 'F:' 0 0 a) ., C....) 5 Cu 0) ,... CU (31 .3.' :33,, tf) • 31 0. D ›- F3 0. .933(3 0 :4-31 .9:0 0i92 . 0 - E u a .0 -- ,L., 0:3 0-0 0 a)... 0 0 1 0 L.,-.., ..c) ° "6 V, -,: "Z 0 C 4? '4 0, 4...i 9031 -9.9 • i;:: > 0 0) Ln 0 acL) ..17-;a) .-_ 3.-. 0 .92133: .... -s:: c _o ,) a) 0 L. v, ,... QJ QJ :30) -0.-Q, a) co Ln a u ---4 a.) Qr,U.. <--9 means clear measures of financial performance are required, and Measurements \ ® m E in in 0 p CO \ f E o 0 a ® & Lower Limit Why This Measure? Objective to Measure This is a measure that addresses 0 0.4 / m Turnaround time for residential Building plan review Percent of building inspections done within 1 day Customer Perspective Percent of building inspections done within 72 hours Cr! u This is a measure for the Soils Division that addresses the CZ Percent of pre -cover inspections done when requested Average wait for Permit Tech services Survey - department customer service u ] u N N o oro C3 0 n O O n 0 0 o c' Lt 0 0 0 M o N N N N n 0 0 LI1 u1 v 0 0 00 m o 00 00 N rV Ct >. N 03 rts 0 n 0 m °ui Lit 0 0 -0 l0 N N. N N 0 Tr OM CYV O 0 N VI N 10 y -c0>` � O Ua —vc o T1. m -O =a)a N `*-U c `" ' m CYa)1-1 ++ y= m—o +=c vN U N Ea°a (Da' eL 0 8 N y 'C Oaicc> o >, o.� a`N V. vC - o Y ra +(I3 v C N m N U° °E 'o 0c s0 v o v va "' (1) c .�c S 0 v CO n c co.''O 3c ' o '' vm N° ° 0 •1•. m N` • NL Eac'� 0) c7 c0fa .,ma m o-� + cao E4:,,,, @ ar a , n EO *' m 0co o • ;,o 0 cusc° c v3 ' Yai NmNs c r fl 0)E uo(• Vw0 OC CO o`)E= c v w —+voa VI v-0 O0)Erc� 0 c +Q C 1 Y La) - m0.NC ° u v 3 0 •) ++ .°uN Ljcry�-O v a,o•Cn' •_65 o v m— o 0a) C Em Y t '7tLpO. Nmmt0 C`H-a) QLv E 2+c' - 4 v C 0. -°N N Nm ,_ U a�EN _N F.:- 0 CT> 'O O ra C;G> ' LQ O mC'rZ C Y0) N CD cm NoY ` N Nm _,o uvC N CO a LN F„,, (t) •m 0 0 Y 3 N N a) N ''u 0 N 21_°a) Nal 0 EN b.N o °Q ` CO 0 a = N O m >ri,ri, u s u flo 3@ ;2 vsN om E v ma aF �+v.ro m 23 6.) Q v*ra YE ammv�ViNO> sm-E s vEV oN Q mvv N ;cm aiEv o 6 u a) E o v .o" mv E o v ' a aO Na Q a) O a r 1) EavN 0 < aj 0.-ra E a.) iw N O cTE O N -p vOLn i Y j - E c a) s> o ) coCr al fl. v0mE sN aaiarQ aQa N N a s o s o a oco a.6 E_v v , t + o00> o vo E- cv ::.Li' o :c i- 3 a,N co 1-- a> a) _a) L j- .0 m .0 4- o E {^ a N m • Average number of stops per day Average number of plan reviews per examiner Turn around for new construction permits Achieving voluntary compliance Response time to system failures Resolving cases within 12 months a) N 5 0 v 0 ar r. L U u N fl > N a b0 N CO m c O0Yv`i OCD N m r ip C C C i -0o _a m o) - 00 a) to a) c u C "0 'N •r•+ •v1 0 0 N 0 N N -r, v C 0 O N ~ m O 8 O C 0..0 a c- ru a 0- L aO ..0v 0a3 E -- 0 0 E= E c ° Fa '<0 ° 0> CO CO v 0 °' ° E .c m m To O v E 4CU , i 4, O V l0 l0 LO cc K K _c m N O N 3 ro p 0O O i a1 .0 m ami .c m m °c ami C E .� m v 3 a> a) E •C V- r L t E c •Y a) ° m = v 3 v nam PP o n t0 m E ate) v°, m a ni c c O m o o fl,G E c a, u v, 6.o m c v w- -° CO w- u 4-+ la > a) O 'O L1a :' c a+ () 'O O a) ° N O N 5 C a v 3 0 aj E CO U O°o m m CV C �a E U Y i y CO a_ m N O E H m° L° E n o°° c o a, aa) o '5 a) c= E �, a) t .- m 3 v= E 4" as c a. m O m O v° o E 0° a) Ga m ECU > i -o v, a1 •-- O a) " 't? 'D O O ° a) i •v,• O C .Um vOLi L a) a a ° L 0 E v- c N a) a) v- O N a)) C L = al L ,� cow' .‘":67"1, F- CT .... 0 a) 4_ _1 a 0 0 a m t— u 3 3 a Quarterly review of Balanced Scorecard data J 361 -degree annual staff reviews J Counter survey tool This is a workload measure for the Lfl to N O N r- n 0 0 0 to LI) Cf. 0 0 O Ln N s-1 m LD N c c 0) C a/ N a+ O O v) as O 0 t L . N _ = U N N C 4 4. u t ° +�' E c E ° au) E c E m .�' s .0 N 3 u> a Y m > a=i o m o o m a) �� 3 i- > v v° �' E_° E E v a u n a N u m m m o v Y o 0) E u° E E L ar o c o a) u x u � +-. L E �.. „, , O c +, 0 w- N Lc m Q) V- d LC CO O0 y al C 't'' m al U m yr C i �• O °- �-+ u�i a �+ O a F+ N a 3° m C L 9 L 0 a) rn L a) 0. a) v .( E u E aa, E 3 E ti to = Y t c= 0. = L O .fl Q) a) a! N 7 c U ...� N '° = rn > U v, L •in v a) C -C711) LL O O c L 'O m ° u + v u Y v ii " a) Y y w m. @ +' t E u C m v to E E ';, 1c@ a) . _@ a) 0 v°c o°• Et m ac cs Et .c § a 0" v L a) n L a) O N L N a N O O N m m 'I..' m '° C C) a• C L = N Y �' a) '�' -° N ++ �'' a) O a v, a +-, m a C 3 N 2 oa) aa).' w H ,O H� O s a F v°- 0 •C c o. u c '' O w u O r'Ji, "6 1— a0 - Number of permits issued per tech (counter) a J Percent of permits submitted electronically U) J Percent of plan reviews submitted electronically Percent of inspections scheduled electronically 1.0 N J J 6-9 months' operating expenses LL N 03 a) C ^ alC 03 C O N to to tta u c -a at a c C O rt3to LL b. i0 O An ar a) H 0 N Q Revenues exceed expenses N LL DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SCORECARD CUSTOMER PERSPECTIVE a+ J J V CO CO Nc','"O� T co Le) O co 0 0 0 CO 0 • '^ 00 >• >• N (0 (0 >. 0 0 0(0 o\° Lt -i tri N d' V1 01 01 (0 (gyp ? >• O o o CO CI ca ‘zr O O O .-i m N al al c-1 N 0 Q 0. (13 a) i bA C 4-, 4) C 'E C ro 6. U C .1 C • O C CU O O Q L • C cv C , C c a C O (0 • 4.5 L {.! I—N CU O CO 0 Q O. rif Turnaround time for Building plan review (0 -0 N a-1 N C C C CU3 3 = CU a) O C C -0 O O C C O O O N CUQ O. O. V) VI C C L by bA O f 5 5 a) N _0 . d 4- 4- i O , J \I \I . p I Q] CCO CO C O. a) (0 WJ 7. N a) C C a) (0 (0 N N i1 n L c j-2 L L 0 VI CU4- C C C C O O 0 2L L y (0 (0 co 0 a) C C c Q L L L (n (0 = • VI 4—, VI ate-+ .0 V a., C i-, C .N +., 'L CD C 0 C 0 C C o W a) }, a) a) a) v N 4-, VI v y (./1 — 'w •— N a) 'N C Q C O. C 'j C O O 0o o 0 (0 V v U Consistent inspection response -electrical Consistent Soils inspection response Average wait Permit Tech services Timely customer service Survey - deptment customer service Professional customer service m m �t In CU CJ U CV CU () U u DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SCORECARD M E J cu OLD ( (O 1- a co m E (13 J !d 0 0 LO N 5 Days 10 Days 15 Day O O 0 0 O O O U1U1 00co O O ul r r - N E L a1 a L c n o C U , w V C E ° o nZ (3 _� E N' - _ 0) n- N At — O E .—' UJ - v 3 0 o c E, > 3 >. -c w ' 0 > ° L 3 LJ: v L +, Z n C O C V) 0 fa 4- 2 44 k O to CLO 0 t N 4t * i N v O C C QC co 3 bA t]A N 'E '> H (o (6 w. L C O a Zr) v L L N W Q Q 1-- < ce Q_ e' cco W CO Z CUD d CL c c 3 CU 0 v 5`1� V L > ._ Q V 00 00 co La a i '5 '5 w _o _o a r0 03 in 0.1 in 0.1 CD A-.. O cc ce Soils process control Code Enforcement Code Enforcement 20 Days 25 days 30 Days 14 Days 21 Days 35 Days 30 days 45 Days 60 Day dA C03. O E b�0 4-4 co 0 as C C C _c E -o a 7 O a (6 0) vLIO 0 0) C U CC +' '; ICI, 'I ° C L QJ UO UO O CU C 03 03 L _° L 44, D. 0. La Q GI L Q. L n (o ° o O E v v- CO 3 o u E E o < *' O +' O 4', LF -o ++ VI Y (n 0 C (0 C C (6 y( >- -O g C O O C 4.7a0) Gl ° E ° E ° 3 -C (u L U (O L 'O in v i +O+ Q L-' CU N (0 , H h 01 0 2 Consistent Accella updates To C L r .-1 N m l!) LID 5 cc cc d drz o: Consistent planning processes N c Consistent planning processes 00 Quarterly review of Balanced Scorecard data Fact based management DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SCORECARD 361 Degree annual staff reviews Aware leadership Counter survey tool Soft skills for counter staff L Ln I N - N e-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lf1 L(1 LIl 0 O O tof Op F A E a` a+ 0 0 0 E L(1 Ln ut 0 N N N O1 J # Permits issued per tech (counter) Appropriately staffed for workload Of permits submitted electronically Technical innovation U (0 • c 01 O n Ln 4-1 Technical innovation Technical innovation N Cr) [t tf, LC, J J J J J 00 'ch Cr) 00 N Month Month # Planning applications per planner # Building stops per inspector per day Financial Perspective > c C1) 0)) 0 a, aN) > O CL CLCL Appropriately staffed for workload Appropriately staffed for workload ci N m - LL LL LL LL c •0 •- a) -6 U 0) C)L 00 Q C O N a) •0 U N (0 a) E .c .^'o 'O i-, L CU CO Q (0 L > U _ O Y a) c a) a) L V) = t= EL +J o E oco v 0 7:5, > 0 (0 i` (0 Q (0 d c v V) ( a vi O LA' E > E 0 W o (137# (o 6 L L 1- Q - Q to aJ C U 1 QJ E 03 S 8 U >. (-) O 4 -'da co t s v 4-) n3 (0 Q 4-) + v c a) a) 4O '0 ++ ,), Q a) ++ a) x 44. ((00 C 01 04 C a) Q .0 O a .1G (13 Q E as N w3 ti ., > a) 3 v ti > (aO O a! CU BALANCE SCORECARD DETAIL & SAMPLE REPORTS W N U^^,,W E ^ Tu > f� W _ O LD r E U E ' 0 o � N c o 2 U a) N c E V N O 0 It N a. Not Meeting Target Close To Meeting Target Meeting Target l6 ▪ N f0 N N C) N N �_ y _ N d D 3 d o U P cri °� er Q E_ a p E_ e O` N O O a Er O) �' <- 8 8a r- a 13a n o c (o a c F- fo a2 VO w VO 00 z~ z~ N d= f0 • t6 N= >` d= a N= o Et .E 0 0 a p aE oo aE o DJ l) 0 DJ CO D•3 -� v - c., (O to • TN (6 (6 rn co m o Q) a) (0 H N co N = f6 • co • N :=> N J J 0 • O J 0 Q J J N Planning Division Days To Process Administrative Determination Applications Without Prior Notice co Days To Process Administrative Determination Applications With Prior Notice Building Division Residential Plan Review Turnaround Time - Number of Days Building Division O O Inspection Request Fullfilled by Inspector On Time / When Requested E J J Environmental Soils Division O O Pre -Cover Inspection Request Fullfilled On Time / When Requested 7/17/2015 8:38:36 AM tIse_ *•%, (f) tn 13 ..0. e z. .... 0 0 0 .s..... .0 0 0 c. t to to in 0 e .c. . ..,-....0 0 ,.0 '2"• -0 4 s- 0 7 tf) ..,-..- c. (1) t % ‘.6. 0 .5 0 0 0.e 1 ...• 0) 65i P •• co -°-.) ' 0 7 --0 6) 3 0 CP •.** 0 tp tij I''''' e c. a 15. -.„..„... To. ts) ..4...„ 0 ,... in 0 •, .t.... 0 •--to t........ 0,0 0 .d. 9- p., i%. ca tv, . ,..,) --_,:e... <- 1/4..." .s,.. 1 -..t, 0. ., .... 0 .0 3 0 , 0 0 .0 0 ,f) tn to e„) CS -0 to a tP ' s b w6 0 0 0) b' e, 0 • .---- (k) C • to 0 0- 0 ‘ti (f) tn 1... tg; 0 -0 0 VI S ) a) '-- r c. ei di ....0 0 -ii,• ct) i:, 9 0 t, ,..........5.... Lc)(J. sa .C. c. 0 0 ,,, ........ (9 .,.......... 0 LI 't c A 65 0.1, 9, --,) 0. od t,, ....•„ 0 0 ,... cs) 0 0 0 ..,°) o .-. ra Z ..... ea 0 to o —13. tp c2- 0 0 a) a Is T. 'n -7• 0 tr) 0 ....• '7 tfl c• .% ---Ei ..2,...,) (-4 00) 0V ., 0) 0 0 0 S. c...,, ..C..- •,,,,, -., ea r:31 tn ,. '.3 r'll • (1) .0,0, ...69., tts 0 c) 0) 3 % 3 ct'4- ,... (1) 0 00-0 .. ..s p 3 rn 0 -• t 3 % :6:- 3 t.n s•-• t)- ol e T,;• 1 0 -tn.-- d) a . 0 `0 0 16 c a) o mo)._ :.= o }, o ? �c U d N co o Q. Ti U E 4--1 N -0u) 0 C z c �, ICU 2 U N W c -20.2 Q O ^� -c N O Ca. a) L 0) ) O 4-, p _O E c0 Q' `6 t6 /� = cn W\ O U p "O /4-1 a) O t 2 /1� VI rn C U VJ N = O o 'O U EE too 0'3- ,E (n�a) U C U .0 I— -a� 0)N p C L c CU '5 iip O E�.� 5 Nci_ U • Nf6 0 O N O N i —2 co-6co ^U , f0co to. V \W N N N / N o. t6 ▪ O N .7J .� p O U m0p'� V N EN 12a3 �. a) 0 0 00 E V) i •5o a.asin" ai a� v a� a) " o▪ Co p�,-C rn 0 cI)) ca .N U 2 >. 43C V) cm .5 ° `6a o Q V `3 C • IIU. o Vc • m • iv �- a) C d o C > ' N o trz a' •2 C > .N -=N � + NOm '. 2 Q' 00ED'.Sa 2015 To June 30, 2015 Inspection Request Fullfilled By Inspector On Time / When Requested -0- 0 J J0 @ I 1 I c O0) 04°0 0O6 OCD a co 0 ..a• a . (.0 -0 c. •,-- '7 tn a a) its' c; 0 co o 0 cos.e. 0 2. a ..-, • -C) C" 15 woo' 0 1/1/2015 To 6/30/2015 Not Meeting Target Close To Meeting Target Meeting Target U an d 0 0 a m N O> CO O Ea W r d > s o a U Q � J 0 0 O O O O D J a 0i >, > N (11 N = N N = @ d E CI d 0 tr,En 0 CO 71) CO at es- 00 00 es- - • M F O 3 E J Code Enforcement O 0 N- N- N- 0 0 O g E O c O :c � 3 y _7 H O (a > U c • c c c 3 3 °_' o :c yr • a) a E 3 J Building Division >_ > n= >, co 3E 0 3E m 0J o ▪ f 0 (O N (0 Residential Building Inspections - Number of Stops Per Day Building Division Residential Plan Review - Average Number of Plan Reviews Per Examiner Per Day Environmental Soils Division New System Permit Process Control - Turn Around Time in Days 7/16/2015 9:08:50 AM 0 0 0 0) C0 o) % n0 to , ul 15... c. — S. 0 U C' C. )....• 'a'. 0 0 1.11 ... . . 0 (1) 0'• 0 % 3 ...--, v,„ c.,__ • ,i, P up .%) ...... u, r ii i (8 ..„.• .-- 7 t, ...% (1) (1) ,g. e .1-p.,... 7 in a) o 6 C) ce. (?)-% *e c,t• e - (0 a) c) 0 0 0 15 t) e ..."' C• t ----0 r, 0) (.... • --) C• %V) ) 1"-- s.o 0 (3 ID , 0 „ ..0, -,-,8 —1;157 u 1.% ',... 16 00 tp • 0 c. r: 4%2- ......... 0- 4) tn ..." 0 .0 0 0 0 0 4) 6 o) o --6-r- tn S (1) o Aej a) Z' t.) 1— 231 sO t 1-6 0 ca 0 1.0• 0) (...) - ..---: 'rel.) '43) .3 13) "Wc, A-) 1...0,1 s..- 7^ Ca (a 0 .6 0 0. iv .p 0 o 0 0 16 0 C. N Y #a)4- % ( c e t- i5) 0 co c ID cao O o Oc4 c°5 N co O 0-`� O c, U 7` CP 7 r +3.) 0' N N O +ice Q LP G CO 0, 5O LP t!S a V O op 0- N 04 N � k 3 N C. a' N • m -0 a) -- so Z N 'Co to 0� a) .7 O O v N k-03 ti) 0 k ƒ ka% �tl) t ke% 0) °° k k k �$ a) C. 6� \ ©-c> ®9\%v ^� a r f)0 cs t%co cs \�tn \2 ', -1), .T1 ?O? q to 0 0 � o � '� g7 0 c. S ^ ° # , .).0�/& $o Q N 0 soj ff16 Ia kff ta « ® 2 : 6 _ k �k° ca ? g # �e / I •Sa• c. \ « \at � f0a a0& a%_ ® o \ \ Q ® %t. \o. o- 7 tkk O ‘a. 0 /�.. ,., ,....._� °$ ,..... k k2©� � g�� t � � A �0/(i) , 8-) o g Z co 2 co -o 1_< o., LL. 111 , .5 flIE_L m--_, D . L_ c 0') c c 1 L- ° Tc • cry (i) 8 : U) 0 a) s - .N to „, 0 co cc 0 4 a)') • E a) c as c '0 c _c z _c W +..- 0 0 10 C •••• L• -.. M CO U) 1— 1— 1— Q 0 0 ..-1 W W 0 ('.1C) 00000000000 R RRRR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 ?) 0). 0 in 0 0 0 te t," Nt I— Ea 69- 49 V* 49 cr) 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c00000roococo.coo .F., 8 0s 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 69 69 69 -0 c in = N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 --1; o C) 0 CD C::,[ CI 0 0 0 0 0/ CD C9 0 0 0 0 0 0 c; 0 c; ci o ci 1 CP C 0 0 CO 0 LO 0 0 69 0 69 ID .0 0 . , 0 toc- 69 CO CI '0 0. = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [ • CD CD 0 0 0 CI 0 C? 0 40 0, [ CO ),) O 6 0 6 ci 0 c> co d c; c) c ey 69 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 69; ' 0 O 0 LO ta <-- co .cr co tc c 69 0 6/3- 413 69 to co co u CO t. 0. < 00 00 0 0 00 00 0 t 0. 0 o o c> 0 0 o 0 CI) 0 - 0 <6 ci. c; 6 6 0 cs; cci d 1 2 Lo to cs to o so co co so CI 0 CI i CCI • . i I 00 IR CR 0 0 00 ' 0:0 , . . 00 co czsC 69 T 00 00 ci c3 U 0 co : co : Ito c : . o : o co 000 000 000 0 0 0 0 C: 0 E . 4.3 .4'0 0 0 coocococococr000poo 0 [ O 60060c5000trici.cOcCtOcici, O Lf") 010000001.(1000000: V) • 0 0 'ct0 LO LO ICY LO 1.0 C9 Cst LO 0 0 LO 0 0 69 69 6/3 69 69 69 69 0 0 69 Er) Er) 1‘) T .... N CD 0 0 0 'C) v.- • .6-• ;,--; -4-; .c.- '''' ''- II- "["" `-- '`-' 0 c, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >"' CO 66 6-.6 cs) esj .___OV N csi cos.) 04 0,1 N N N N N N N LLr-- cae) • >_ >- >- >- >- Z >- Z >- LI. fl eq. :t5 co b - c .0 15 0 2 ..c o c - a) c o 8 +.- o c C‘ e.,) 0 'E.3 Li- '(•;-; • .m • •a 4„0 lb: 2 0 0) 0 — 0 C5 0 0 < _. ,..6 <() 10, c 0 CL o (I) c 2 ,.. LI- cv 0 0 ..2 0 -,-.• ..o G) - ° E ' o c !=c8c7'-co-P- o ccocuo,t.D,c a) L,,' Ct o 2 • rc g o a) 2. .2 c 11.) Lo E 03 -F_, 43 ,z ..., .8 a co z E 0 co c (a co I >, 1 -C 0 ...... c 0 D 0.W 6.) ...J 0 0 0 1 0 < CO 0 1-• -J CO 0 C) --I 0 0 --I ; 1 1 co c 13. c a, O 5' c 0 8 a' 0 0 0 Zi = z 0 0) g; 2 >) o a. r2 - 'E- a) a) co O CO L.L. Deschutes County Discretionary Grant Program Status as of 9/30/2015 0 0 0 0 0'.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0"0 o000 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ln tr.) u1 to tri c-1 ri m -1 c' v1- c.) aA c a) o ra a • o m Li. Q tc.aci c cQ c L ea O ri N M d a) N Cl Cr C7 Cf !— OC 00 0 00 0 0 0 O, O O 0 0 0 0 o O to t r) u1 O r -i a0 LA"1 c1 O cI ' rl Commissioner DeBone O ca v Q v.) O ri N M d N Cf C C7 0 O 0 O O O O O o O O O O O O O u1 O ci fa L aJ Q 0) V iy/1 O c ra its E O m ._ to � c-! N M 0' C7 0' Cf I- cc 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o O o o • 0 0 0 0 0 t0 00 • u7 Mao M c d -3,150.00 Total Spent i/) $11,850.00 Remaining Balance 2015-16 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners Discretionary Grant Program Application Summary Fundraising Event Board Meeting Date: October 8, 2015 Organization: Central Oregon Council on Aging Project Name: COCOA Direct Mail Campaign Project Period: 10/01/2015 —12/31 /2015 Amount of Request: $600 Previous Grants: 11/1/1999 $1,500.00 "Senior Day" sponsorship 4/12/2001 $750.00 2/10/2003 $500.00 Sponsorship of booth at Senior Fair and Health Expo 1/24/2005 $1,000.00 Senior Fair & Health Expo 3/2/2006 $1,000.00 Senior Fair and Expo 4/7/2014 $1,200.00 Donor Management System 7/9/2014 $500.00 Direct Mail Fundraising Campaign 1/26/2015 $1141.00 ID Badge Printer System Approved: Declined: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners PO Box 6005, Bend, OR 97701-6005 1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 200, Bend, OR Telephone: 541-388-6571 Fax: 541-385-3202 Website: www.deschutes.ore DESCHUTES COUNTY DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION Today's Date: (.29,10.,y1:20 /5 ( Project Name: I C OC'0/4 Ci l !'r'cl! _/�/�:, ()0/11/'0/./:,' • Project Beginning Date: I /G`, U //)/,/5 ( Project End Date: la f3/ ,<'(�/3 Amount Requested: I 606-0 Date Funds Needed: I "j"/( -7f 716 Name of Applicant Organization:)( /1717(4_. C)i', (206(1? Address:) : j'' A YC 61 cDgt_ �' v ,J i2 G,(_ City & Zip Code: l ,''t �_. ±) 7 76 Contact Name(s):1 (y �{ �: /� /6 s, iL. i Fax #: I,S:// / - 263 g3 I Email Address: I 'L'/6 - Tax ID#: j C? :C,/22: -J Telephone #:,_.54 /-;:z----5-',2,24)//4.6- /e7,/,••••:,6-2/&(...0-2(i7.61//(2f•••“7-2,/,,:, . -"�' I (l On a separate sheet(s), please briefly answer the following questions: 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will positively impact the community. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. 6. Describe how grant funds will be used and include the source and amounts of matching funds or in-kind contributions, if any. Itemize anticipated expenditures*. 7. If the grant will support an ongoing activity, explain how it will be funded in the future. Attach: Proof of the applicant organization's non-profit status. * Applicant may be contacted during the review process and asked to provide a complete line item budget. 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. The Central Oregon Council on Aging (COCOA) seeks to prevent hunger, improve health, and promote well-being, security, and independence among Central Oregon's most vulnerable seniors. Incorporated as a non-profit in 1975, and designated the Area Agency on Aging for Central Oregon under the Older Americans Act, COCOA is the only organization in Deschutes County providing services such as Meals on Wheels to seniors in need. In addition to Meals on Wheels, COCOA provides congregate dining through Bend's Community Center, Bend Senior Center, Redmond Senior Center, La Pine Senior Center, and Sisters Community Church, and conducts case management and nutrition education with clients. COCOA also offers caregiver support including respite care; provides no -cost legal aid and health insurance advising (the latter through SHIBA, the Senior Health Insurance Benefits Assistance program); and provides information and referral to seniors as well as disabled adults through its Aging and Disability Resource Connection (ADRC). COCOA's Executive Officer, with direction from COCOA's eight -member board and Advisory Council, leads the organization in implementing activities, and in realizing goals and objectives, as articulated in COCOA's strategic plan. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. COCOA respectfully requests $600 to defray expenses related to its Holiday Direct Mail Appeal. With support last year from the Board of County Commissioners, COCOA's appeal raised over $25,000. COCOA conducts two direct mail campaigns each year which together raise up to $30,000 in donor support. For FY 2016, COCOA will send its Holiday Appeal in November 2014, tying it to the Thanksgiving holiday and connecting both the idea of meals and thanksgiving to COCOA's work in providing seniors with nutritious meals delivered by a cadre of volunteer drivers. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. • September — Write copy for Holiday Appeal; engage designer to create the appeal letter, donation form, envelope and return envelope. • October — Finalize mailing list of over 1,000 COCOA donors and potential donors. • Late October — Generate letters and mailing labels; stuff mailing and deliver to the post office. • Early November — Donors receive Holiday Appeal. • November through end of December 2015 — COCOA receives and processes Holiday Appeal donations; COCOA sends thank you letters to donors. • January 2016 — COCOA closes out Holiday Appeal; staff review appeal for funds raised, new donors engaged, and average size gift. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will positively impact the community. COCOA's direct mail appeals are one of the main ways in which COCOA engages new donors while maintaining relationships with existing donors. And due to the generosity of these donors, COCOA is able to sustain programs and services of great value to Deschutes County seniors, including Meals on Wheels. Each year, COCOA delivers approximately 65,000 Meals on Wheels and provides about 27,000 congregate meals, for a total of 92,000 meals for Deschutes County seniors. At a cost of $3.50 per meal, this represents $322,000 of meals made available to Deschutes County's homebound, low-income, and high-risk seniors. Harder to value, but equally beneficial to the community, are the friendly visits by Deschutes County Board of Commissioners Discretionary Grant Program Application Summary Fundraising Event Board Meeting Date: October 8, 2015 Organization: Family Access Network Project Name: Family Access Network Luncheon for Children Project Period: 4/19/2016 Amount of Request: $2500 Previous Grants: 9/26/2002 $1,500.00 Fundraising event 1/24/2007 $2,000.00 Breakfast Fundraiser 2/11/2008 $3,000.00 7/7/2008 $1,375.00 Golf Tournament Fundraiser 2/2/2009 $3,000.00 Luncheon Fundraiser 2/8/2010 $1,500.00 Luncheon Fundraiser 12/6/2010 $1,575.00 Luncheon Fundraiser 10/12/2011 $2,500.00 Luncheon Fundraiser 12/12/2012 $1,500.00 Luncheon for Children Fundraiser 1/29/2014 $2,500.00 Luncheon for Children Fundraiser 10/6/2014 $2,500.00 Luncheon for Children Fundraiser Approved: Declined: Today's Date: ( 9-14-15 Project Beginning Date: Amount of Request: Applicant/Organization: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners PO Box 6005, Bend OR 97701-6005 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR Telephone: 541-388-6570 Fax 541-385-3202 Website: www.deschutes.org DESCHUTES COUNTY DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION 1 Project Name: April 19, 2016 $2,500 Family Access Network Luncheon for Children Project End Date: Date Funds Needed: Family Access Network Foundation Address: 12125 NE Daggett Lane City & Zip Code: ( Bend, 97701 Tax ID #: 1 20-3534560 Contact Name(s):Julie N. Lyche 1 Telephone #: I (541) 693-5677 April 19, 2016 January 1, 2016 Fax #:1 (541) 693-5651 Email Address: julie.lyche@hdesd.org On a separate sheet(s), please briefly answer the following questions: 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will impact the community's economic health. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. 6. Describe how grant funds will be used and include the source and amounts of matching funds or in- kind contributions, if any. Itemize anticipated expenditures*. 7. If the grant will support an ongoing activity, explain how it will be funded in the future. Attach: Proof of the applicant organization's non-profit status. *Applicant may be contacted during the review process and asked to provide a complete line item budget. Family Access Network DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION Submitted September 14, 2015 1, Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and The Family Access Network (FAN) has been serving local disadvantaged families since 1993. Currently, FAN has 23 advocates in 46 public school sites and three early childhood sites.FAN is unique to Deschutes County in two ways. FirstFAN created a network of health and social service providers, schools, businesses, community organizations and individuals who collaborate to ensure children receive the services they need most. Second, FAN provides advocates in all Deschutes County public schools and three early childhood sites. FAN advocates are hired by the schools as service brokers who link children and families to critical social supports in the community. Working through one dedicated advocate, a child or parent is referred for dental work, job opportunities, clothing, rent assistance, childcare support, health insurance and more. The High Desert ESD manages the countywide FAN program with a director and one support staff positiori, working closety with FAN advocates. The FAN Foundation was established in September zoo5'toensuno5scaistabiUtyand|onS'termsupporto[F4N.Theexpens/onnf6ANtu(ndudetho FAN Foundation has enabled the organization to increase the number of homeless and disadvantaged children served through FAN advocates. FAN has seen a 22% increase in clients served over the last five years. The Foundation has allocated $185,123 for FAN advocate salaries and $31,75o for client emergency funds to Deschutes County schools this fiscal year and will continue to boost support as fundraising increases. The FAN Foundation is working hard to support the two new schools in Bend -La Pine School District this year and preparing for a new school in Redmond next year. The Foundation has also been able to maintain funding of our Early Childhood advocate services for chitdren ages 0-5 in Bend, La Pine and Redmond. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. The FAN Foundation is conductirig its tenth anrival fundraiser in April of 2016 at our luncheon. The goal of this event is to raise enough money to serve 58o children with FAN services during the school year. Through community sponsorship and individual donations, the target is $58,500. Due in large part to this event, FAN acquired six new business partners Last year and 51 new individual donors. Sponsorship funds provided through the Deschutes County Discretionary Grant ProgramwU|beusnd for direct support along with other Iocal sponsors and event contributors. 3, Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or FAN 2016 Luncheon FundraiserTirneline August 2015 Begin recruitment of community sponsors - in process September 2015 Deve(op written materials for event - in process November 2015 Confirm location and date for FAN tuncheon fundraiser January 2016 Recruit table captains for individual attendees February 2016 Finalize speakers, incluci!ng FAN advocate, youth and family March 2016 Complete guest list K4anch2o16 Finalize community sponsorships April 2016 Conduct event 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will impact the community. The Family Access Network works with families in dire need within Deschutes County. These are often the working poor. Nearly 50% of families only needed help once from FAN during the year, with over 8o% of families seeking assistance three or fewer times based on life transition due to a job change, domestic violence, a medical issue, or another life occurrence. With assistance, these families are able to continue to support themselves and avoid the long-term cycle of poverty. FAN works with many families who have never needed help in the past. Families who have become homeless due to foreclosure, bankruptcy or employment lay-offs are walking through the doors of our FAN offices. Many of these families have been donors to FAN in the past. FAN advocates are working to help these families navigate a social service system they have never been in need of prior to their current struggles. Through support of the FAN luncheon fundraiser, the Discretionary Grant Program will assist in building upon the current successes of our FAN advocates. By helping families move to the next level, out of poverty and into a self-supporting family situation, our work impacts the economic health of our community. The FAN Foundation is dedicated to pursuing sustainable funding for this very important piece of our social service network. Through FAN, we are able to help break the cycle of poverty, assist families in improving their living situation and ensure children are healthy and in school. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. During the 2014-15 school year, FAN improved the lives of more than 9,600 children and family members by connecting them to these services: o clothed 4,663 children and family members o linked families to food assistance over 3,371 times o connected families with improved housing options 2,236 times o provided 2,606 referrals to heating assistance o assisted with health coverage or health care 2,302 times Many of these families are struggling to make ends meet. The group benefiting from this request is one of our most fragile populations — children in poverty. A 2015 study, Poverty Affects Children's Brains, included neuroscientists from Children's Hospital Los Angeles and Columbia University Medical Center and 9 other academic institutions. They found that unfortunately, by the time they are 8 years old, many children — especially those living in low-income families — have not met the development milestones that are essential for future success in school and in life. This gap often starts early as a result of health problems at birth, contributing to lags in language and social -emotional skill development in early childhood. Low-income children are also more likely to miss out on high-quality early learning experiences, which can help mitigate these delays. Once they reach the early grades, children in economically fragile families often attend schools that lack high-quality teaching and learning environments. They also face family -related stressors, such as parental job loss and housing insecurity, which contribute to chronic absence from school. 6. Describe how grant funds will be used and include the source and amounts of matching funds or in-kind contributions, if any. Itemize anticipated expenditures*. Grant funds received will be used as community sponsorship of the FAN luncheon fundraiser. The goal is to raise over $58,000 in corporate/community sponsorship and individual donations at the event. Sponsorships will be used to leverage and challenge individual contributors to attain the goal of 58o children served through the event. Listed below are the event expenses, pending and committed sponsorship contributions and the funding goal. Proiect Expenses Fundraiser food costs for 200 guests (Discounted) Printing costs Shuttle Services (Discounted or donated) Total 2,800 300 50 $3,150 Below is a partial list of previous sponsors from whom we intend to request sponsorships again this year. Corporate Contributions St. Charles Medical Center Northwest Health Foundation Deschutes Brewery Bi -Mart Corporation Columbia Bank Les Schwab (title sponsor) Bank of the Cascades Big Foot Beverages Kendall Auto of Bend Bend Memorial Clinic Director's Mortgage Fincham Financial OnPoint Community Credit Union American Family Insurance Black Butte Ranch Bend Premier Real Estate Bend Radiant Heating ICarlson Sign Consumer Cellular High Desert Insurance Stereo Planet Total 1 FAN Fundraiser Goal: $58,500 (over 58o children) 720 2,500 1,500 500 500 5,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 $24,720 Pending — in kind space Pending Pending Pending Pending 1 Past sponsor 1 Past sponsor 1 Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor Past sponsor 7. If the grant will support an ongoing activity, explain how it will be funded in the future. This grant and the event are one component of the larger sustainability plan developed for the Family Access Network. There is no obligation to support an ongoing activity through the proposal. Local sponsorship will be secured on a year by year basis. Attached: proof of non-profit status. FAN Luncheon Sponsorship Opportunities Annual Luncheon April 12, 2016 Support FAN and make a difference in the life of a child! Family Access Network r o u•• A! l o U ❖ Sustaining Circle — Luncheon Title Sponsor $5,000 • business banner placement at event • business name and logo featured on FAN website for 6 months • business support recognized and logo displayed in monthly FAN e -newsletter ■ business support announced via Facebook • marketing booth in entry area of event • sponsor name and support acknowledged during the event • business name in annual FAN newsletter ■ pre -event logo/name recognition on screen ❖ Champion for FAN $2,500+ • business name and logo featured on FAN website for 4 months • business support recognized and logo displayed in monthly FAN e -newsletter • business support announced via Facebook • marketing booth in entry area of event ■ sponsor name acknowledged during the event • business name in annual FAN newsletter • table topper identifying business support • pre -event logo/name recognition on screen ❖ Partners for FAN $1,000 + • business name listed on FAN website for 3 months • business name announced in FAN e -newsletter and via Facebook • marketing booth in entry area of event • sponsor name acknowledged during the event • business name in annual FAN newsletter • table topper identifying business support • pre -event logo/name recognition on screen ❖ Friends of FAN — Table Sponsor $500+ • sponsor name acknowledged during the event • business name in annual FAN newsletter • table topper identifying business support • pre -event name recognition on screen For more info and to discuss customized giving, contact Nancy Childers at: 541.693.5733. FAN's mission is to improve lives by ensuring all children in Deschutes County have access to basic -need services. FAN is committed to building a healthy community by alleviating the suffering of children in need. 2125 NE Daggett Lane I Bend, OR 97701 1 541.693.5675 I www.familvaccessnetwork.org Deschutes County Board of Commissioners Discretionary Grant Program Application Summary Fundraising Event Board Meeting Date: October 8, 2015 Organization: Hospice of Redmond Project Name: 2015 Festival of Trees Project Period: 12/5/2015 — 11/1/2015 Amount of Request: $2500 Previous Grants: 2/28/2000 $680.00 11/1/2000 $680.00 11/6/2001 $800.00 Sponsorship of table 3/4/2002 $1,000.00 Inpatient care facility 8/22/2012 $2,000.00 2012 Festival of Trees 10/2/2013 $3,000.00 2013 Festival of Trees 10/6/2014 $2,500.00 2014 Festival of Trees Approved: Declined: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners PO Box 6005, Bend, OR 97701-6005 1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 200, Bend, OR Telephone: 541-388-6571 Fax: 541-385-3202 Website: www.deschutes.ora DESCHUTES COUNTY DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION Today's Date: I ?/a yea a is- I Project Name: I &'1 S Fe , i t.'ez f of Trees Project Beginning Date: I /„2/67/5 - Amount Requested: I ,S--0() I Project End Date: Date Funds Needed: I Name of Applicant Organization:I lic5o16e C f' ifejdyieend Address:I 73 6to g3 rcI 5{':<" eef City & Zip Code: I I'c P t tear . (`'i? 67-775-6, I Tax ID #: ((73_08.0E-743 f_ Contact Name(s): I eh Ylbt! 12 keGG1 SJ r ; Telephone #: 1741- 514 F'-7 ✓� Fax #: 5411 -5 -/8 -- Email Address:( ftlArktht7GC�hcf$i Cy2T C', MC'►'7r'�, On a separate sheet(s), please briefly answer the following questions: 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will positively impact the community. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit, 6. Describe how grant funds will be used and include the source and amounts of matching funds or in-kind contributions, if any. Itemize anticipated expenditures*. 7. If the grant will support an ongoing activity, explain how it will be funded in the future. Attach: Proof of the applicant organization's non-profit status. * Applicant may be contacted during the review process and asked to provide a complete line item budget. c�J 2015 Deschutes County Discretionary Grant Program Application 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. Hospice of Redmond provides quality end -of -life care for Central Oregon residents with terminal illnesses. The organization was established in 1981 to provide services to residents throughout Deschutes, Jefferson and Crook counties. Hospice of Redmond is an independent, Medicare - certified, non-profit organization that provides services through direct end -of -life care and services as well as bereavement counseling to patients' families and the community at large. We often work with very low- to moderate -income individuals and families, many of whom live in isolated rural areas of Central Oregon. Our team impacts the lives of terminally ill patients by assisting them and their families with their own unique physical, emotional and spiritual needs. Hospice doctors, registered nurses, social workers, hospice aides, spiritual and bereavement counselors, therapists, and trained volunteers provide services aimed at allowing the patient to remain in their homes and as active and in control of their lives as possible. Hospice of Redmond is a 501(c) 3 organization that is comprised of an eleven -member volunteer Board of Directors, an executive director and 19 full -and part-time employees. Over the years, Hospice has enjoyed strong community support. During 2013-14, approximately 200 volunteers contributed as much as 7,000 hours to Hospice programs and events. Our core services are funded through Medicare, private insurance, and donations; however, our services are provided at no charge regardless of a patient's ability to pay. Hospice also provides a number of programs and services such as bereavement counseling, Transitions services for adults with life -limiting illnesses, community healthcare -related education, volunteer programs and training, complementary therapies (e.g. massage, acupuncture, foot care, pet therapy), caregiver support, and Camp Sunrise (a grief camp for children ages 7-14) that require other funding sources such as our signature fundraising event, the annual Festival of Trees. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. The Festival of Trees is Hospice of Redmond's major annual fundraiser. The Festival's proceeds are used to support Hospice programs that are not supported by Medicare or private insurance. The fundraising portion of the event brings together community members who donate time and funds to decorate beautiful Christmas trees which are, in turn, auctioned to attendee bidders. A variety of other activities generally take place including raffles and a silent auction. The day time activities are family-oriented and free to the public. Our day time activities including visits with Santa, refreshments, viewing the trees, and live entertainment by local choirs, dancers and musicians, do not generally bring in funding; instead, they are intended to share the joy of the holiday season with our friends and neighbors in Central Oregon communities. Annually, approximately 2,500 people from all over Central Oregon, along with their guests from around Oregon, attend the Festival of Trees. This year's Festival, scheduled for December 5, 2015 at the Deschutes County Fairgrounds & Expo Center will be our 32"d year of the event. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. The planning and preparation for the Festival of Trees is an ongoing project over the course of the year. The bulk of the event preparation takes place from approximately September through the Festival which is held the first Saturday in December. The event is concluded on Sunday with the delivery of the purchased trees and the room cleanup. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will positively impact the community. The Festival of Trees is a significant economic undertaking each year. Many local businesses are involved through the purchase of services such as printing, advertising, trees and their decorations, sound and lighting services, auctioneering, facilities rental, and catering. The Festival proceeds, in turn, support programs and services aimed at addressing the physical, spiritual and social needs of people with terminal and life -limiting illnesses in our communities. These services are offered through contracts with local providers and are offered at no cost to the patient and their family. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. Hospice of Redmond serves all of Central Oregon including the residents of Bend, Redmond, Sisters, Powell Butte, Prineville, Crooked River Ranch, Terrebonne and Madras. Specific groups that benefit are: • Families of deceased community members who participate in our bereavement programs including Camp Sunrise, an annual grief camp for children ages 7-14 offered at no charge, • Individuals and families who do not have insurance or the ability to pay for end -of -life care services, including our pediatric program and indigent veteran services, • Grief counseling and support for children in the community such as our Grief In Schools offered upon request by school counselors, and • Community members with life -limiting illnesses who are not yet ready for hospice care but who benefit from our Transitions program services as well as the volunteer program that supports those services. 6. Describe how grant funds will be used. Grant funds requested will be used to help offset the cost of the Deschutes County Fairgrounds & Expo Center rental and beverage services. Additional matching funds have been secured from event sponsorships to date as follows. Cash Fred Meyer (Pending) Bank of the Cascades Central Oregon Radiology OnPoint Community Credit Union (Pending) Weston Technology Solutions High Country Disposal Pacific Power High Country Disposal Cascade Natural Gas Hooker Creek $4,500 $2,500 $1,500 $1,000 $750 $500 $500 $500 $500 $600 In-Kind/Match NORCO (tree delivery) Horizon Broadcasting The Printing Post KOHD Impact Graphix & Sign Combined Communications KTVZ 21 Also supporting this event are up to 30 teams of tree decorators whose donated trees and gifts last year, averaged $1,000 a tree. To date, 26 tree decorator teams have been confirmed. The following estimated budget isbased onlast year's actual expenses and current estimates. Fairground rental Beverages/Bar incl. Gratuity Food incJ. Gratuity Advertising Printing & Mailing Sound & Lighting Auctioneer - Stokes Auction Group Contract Person Hospitality Table/Food Pins/Heads or Tails Bracelets Heads or Tails Prizes Golf Carts Truck Rental/Storage Trailer Rentai Visa Machines Music/Entertainment Tree Wrap Linens Bistro Tables Kids' Corner & Sleigh Peopie's Choice Trophy & Ribbon Room Decorations Miscellaneous Total Expenses | Est, Budge 3,000.00 2,200.00 10,000.00 5,500.00 3,450.00 6,800.00 3,000.00 2,007.00 500.00 400.00 250.00 275.00 500.00 1,200.00 300.00 150.00 300.00 80.00 700.00 250.00 500.00 3,238.00 44,600.00 1 7. Supporting an on-going activity As we have for the pas32 years, we anticipate funding future Festival ofTrees through generous Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners Discretionary Grant Program Board Meeting Date: October 8, 2015 Organization: Leadership Redmond Project Name: Leadership Redmond Class of 2015-16 Project Period: September 17, 2015 — May 19, 2016 Amount of Request: $1,200 Previous Grants: 8/22/2012 $600.00 Annual Event 1/22/2013 $600,00 Leadership Redmond Class 9/3/2014 $1,20.0. Leadership Redmond Class of 2014-15 Approved: Declined: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org DESCHUTES COUNTY DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION Direct Application to: Commissioner Tammy Baney Commissioner Tony Debone Date: 1 7/29/2015 1 Project Name: 1 Commissioner Alan Unger All Three Commissioners x Leadership Redmond Class of 241-4-2944 2. b 1 s _ 21j 1 (o Project Beginning Date: 1 September 17, 2015 Amount of Request: 11,200 Applicant/Organization: Address: 446 SW 7th Street Contact Name(s): Leadership Redmond Eric Sande 1 Project End Date: 1 Date Funds Needed: 1 Tax ID #: City & Zip: May. 19 2016 Between Sept 2015- May 2016 20-3111760 Redmond, 97756 Telephone: ( 541-923-5191 Fax: ( 541-923-6442 1 Alternate Phone:1 541-548-5191 1 Email:) ericavisitredmondoreeon.com On a separate sheet, please briefly answer the following questions: 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will impact the community's economic health. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. 6. Itemize anticipated expenditures*. Describe how grant funds will be used and include the source and amounts of matching funds or in-kind contributions, if any. If the grant will support an ongoing activity, explain how it will be funded in the future. Attach: Proof of the applicant organization's non-profit status. * Applicant may be contacted during the review process and asked to provide a complete line item budget. Tammy Baney: Dennis Luke: Alan Unger: Amount: Amount: Amount: Signature: Signature: Signature: On a separate sheet, please briefly answer the following questions: 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will impact the community's economic health. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. 6. Itemize anticipated expenditures*. Describe how grant funds will be used and include the source and amounts of matching funds or in-kind contributions, if any. If the grant will support an ongoing activity, explain how it will be funded in the future. 1. Leadership Redmond is a private not-for-profit 509 (a) (1) organization that is made up of the Redmond Chamber of Commerce & CVB and the Redmond Executive Association (REA). The Board of Directors consists of 3 Chamber appointed member, 3 REA appointed members and 3 class presidents from previous year's classes. Leadership Redmond is designed to expose the participants to the leaders in the community and to make them aware of what it takes to run a community. 2. The grant will be used to help fund 1, Day Sponsorship and one scholarship, for the class of 2015-2016. As a Day Sponsor, Deschutes County will be given the opportunity to welcome the class the day we cover the topic "Government & Legislative" scheduled for March 18, 2016. 3. The Leadership Redmond program will run from September 17, 2015 to May 19, 2016. Our Government & Legislative day will be held on March 17, 2015 and we would hope to meet with the commissioners on that day. 4. This program will help build a broader understanding and awareness of how Redmond and other communities function. It will give participants exposure to the economic forces that are at play and the need for balance and leadership in all aspects of the community. Without qualified and competent leaders, economic development would not be possible. 5. This program is designed to educate, enhance, develop and train future leaders to participate in key decision-making positions on community boards and/or commissions upon completion of this program and will serve the Redmond and other Central Oregon Communities. 6. Leadership Redmond Class of 2015-2016 Day Sponsorship and Scholarships Day Sponsor "Government & Legislative Day" March 17, 2016 $ 600 Scholarship 600 $ 1,200 Leadership Redmond budget Based on 20 participants Day Sponsors $600 x 10 $ 6,000 Class tuition $600 x 18 $10,800 Scholarships $600 x 2 $ 1,200 $18,000 Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners Discretionary Grant Program Board Meeting Date: October 8, 2015 Organization: Boys & Girls Club (Bend) Project Name: Civil War Rally & Auction Project Period: 8/1/2015 — 11/4/2015 Amount of Request: $1,500 Previous Grants: Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Giris Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Giris Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club Boys and Girls Club Boys and Girls Club Boys and Girls Club Boys and Girls Club Boys and Girls Club Boys and Girls Club of Bend Boys and Girls Club of Bend Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Boys and Girls Club of Central Oregon Approved: Declined: 8/1/1999 $188.00 12/1/1999 $210.00 12/1/1999 $2,500.00 12/10/1999 $188.00 6/1/2000 $1,000.00 4/1/2001 $1,000.00 11/27/2001 $2,000.00 12/20/2001 $2,400.00 4/17/2002 $1,000.00 10/9/2002 $11,800.00 11/7/2002 $3,250.00 10/13/2003 $3,250,00 6/3/2004 $3,900.00 8/5/2004 $3,559.63 1/24/2005 $1,420.00 9/20/2005 $6,500.00 2/6/2006 $2,000.00 4/18/2006 $2,000.00 4/17/2007 $2,000.00 2/8/2010 $1,500.00 4/7/2014 $5,000.00 7/9/2014 $1,200.00 11/12/2014 $1,500.00 Landfill sign (Carlson Sign Company) Area lights (Midstate Electric Cooperative) Permits and costs of moving building (Carlson Signs) July 4th expenses Parking lot improvements in Terrebonne Sponsorship of four corporate tables After-school activities for youth Club activities Accounting software Building and land use permit fees Terrebonne Expansion Membership Services Coordinator Technology Grant Server Upgrade Operational expenses Annual Be Great Fundraising Luncheon Community Appreciation Luncheon Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 ,.., DESCHUTES COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION Direct Application to: Commissioner Tammy Baney Commissioner Anthony DeBone I Date: l//,/f 5 Project Name: Project Beginning Date: I ,,,// // Amount of Request: 1 /r/,500 Applicant/Organization: v' 1 Commissioner Alan Unger 1 All Three Commissioners C)v;z /V4g / Jttv54Oc(TCYV I Project End Date: 1 11/y// 1 Date Funds Needed: 1 ASA P boys fr 6//'Ls CL -03 Address: „©0 NA/ `1/4i (.97-7 Contact Name(s): 1701,1 C Fax: Tax ID#. 1 13 //R .75-3d I City & Zip: N11r077 73 Telephone:I6W 70T--7/37 I 4 I Alternate Phone: Imo / 3/igI' D 1 Emai1:I4LL 5 61 sr,Vi...t0,67 On a separate sheet, please briefly answer the following questions: 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will impact the community's economic health. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. 6. Itemize anticipated expenditures*. Describe how grant funds will be used and include the source and amounts of matching funds or in-kind contributions, if any. If the grant will support an ongoing activity, explain how it will be funded in the future. Attach: Proof of the applicant organization's non-profit status. * Applicant may be contacted during the review process and asked to provide a complete line item budget. Tammy Baney: Anthony DeBone: Alan Unger: Amount: Amount: Amount: Signature: Signature: Signature: Deschutes County Economic Development Grant Application Answer to Questions 1. The Boys & Girls Club's Mission is to enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens. To that end, we provide a safe, away -from -school, environment for the youth of our community to grow and learn. We also assure working families that their children will be professionally cared for while family adults are on the job and not at home. 2. The proposed activity is a "Civil War Rally & Auction" event to be held at the Riverhouse on November 4, 2015. The "Civil War" term refers to the annual football game between the University of Oregon and Oregon State. This event is modeled after a similar, successful event in Salem that has been a community staple for 13 years. The Bend event will be hosted through a unique partnership with EDCO and the Boys & Girls Club, and will include supporters of both organizations. 3. As described above, the event will be held on November 4. Sponsors are currently being procured; the Riverhouse is actively participating in the sponsorship by discounting their fees. Erin Reilly of EDCO is driving the event. 4. The event will be the annual flagship fundraising event for the Boys & Girls Club as well as for EDCO. While the Boys & Girls Club has a number of fundraising and revenue-producing mechanisms, this will be our only event that is solely aimed at generating funds to assure our financial sustainability. 5. The Boys & Girls Club of Bend supports the community of Bend. EDCO meanwhile, supports the three -county area of Central Oregon. 6. Anticipated expenditures include facility rental, hiring of an event coordinator, associated food and beverage costs, and marketing & fundraising expenses. This grant will help provide a portion of the necessary fundraising expenditures. It is anticipated/hoped that in future years, a similar grant will be requested and awarded. If this doesn't happen, fundraising expenses will be deducted from the profits of the event. Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners Discretionary Grant Program Board Meeting Date: October 8, 2015 Organization: Bend Spay & Neuter Project Project Name: Free Rabies Outreach Clinics Project Period: November 2, 2015 — May 31, 2016 Amount of Request: $1,000 Previous Grants: 8/21/2006 $6,100,00 Improvements 9/19/2007 $5,500.00 7/13/2005 $4,000.00 Capital Projects 10/25/2005 $3,000,00 Facilities Improvements 7/23/2008 $2,500.00 Educational Campaign and Technology Project 1/1/2009 $1,300.00 Spay and Neuter Grant 7/9/2014 $1,000.00 Free Rabies Vaccine Clinic 7/9/2014 $1,000.00 Free Rabies Vaccine Clinic Approved: Declined: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners PO Box 6005, Bend, OR 97701-6005 1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 200, Bend, OR Telephone: 541-388-6571 Fax: 541-385-3202 Website: www.deschutes.ora DESCHUTES COUNTY DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION Today's Date: I G II 17 115 Project Beginning Date: Amount Requested: 4) 000 Project Name: 'Fahs Ocdreath 14, Noy, 07/ri flgject End Date: Mal)- ) Date Funds Needed: I Noir. ffrcp20/5 Name of Applicant Organization:I pfid., Spicy iNact2.4.Prwect. Address: gio SE 1411-0n 13 I City & Zip Code: I (47761— Tax ID #: 71-01775qg Contact Name(s): filerietr, 6retypi Telephone #: 157-1/-791S- go g5 Fax #: 52/1--612-1107 Email Address: meyttiikka) On a separate sheet(s), please briefly answer the following questions: 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project Or activity. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will positively impact the community. 5, Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. 6. Describe how grant funds will he used and include the source and amounts of matching funds or in-kind contributions, if any. Itemize anticipated expenditures*. 7. If the grant will support an ongoing activity, explain how it will be funded in the future, Attach: Proof of the applicant organization's non-profit status. • Applicant rtiay be contacted during the review process and asked to provide a complete Line item budget, 404/4 i<t? BEND 17Y+ rti. 1. PROJECT 4" Deschutes County Discretionary Grant Application 2015 Bend Spay and Neuter Project 1. Bend Spay and Neuter Project provides affordable, preventative veterinary care for cats and dogs at risk of suffering in Central Oregon in order to create a more humane community. All of our programs are geared towards keeping pets out of our local shelters and in loving homes. BSNP provides affordable and free sterilization for owned animals, trap, neuter, return (TNR) for Community Cats (feral and stray cats), affordable weekly Wellness Clinics, and we operate the HOPE pet food bank in conjunction with Bend Pet Express. BSNP has provided services to over 45,000 cats and dogs in Central Oregon since 2004. BSNP is governed by a Board of Directors, and daily operations are led by the Executive Director, Megan Wellinghoff, and Medical Director, Dr. Katie Bahr DVM, 2. Bend Spay and Neuter Project is proposing holding two annual free clinics where free rabies vaccinations would be provided for dogs and cats. Clinics would be held at the Bend Community Center and in LaPine at a location yet to be determined. Rabies clinics would be available to anyone on a first come, first served basis. 3. The timeline for the project would be to hold one clinic in November of 2015 and one clinic in May of 2016. Each clinic would be held on a Saturday for 4 hours. 4. Free Rabies Vaccine Clinics would benefit our community in three ways. First and foremost, by helping to ensure that all pets in our area receive at least one rabies vaccine in their lifetime. Although rabies is not very common in this area, approximately 1 in 100 bats in our area do carry the disease. Vaccinating pets against rabies is the first step in reducing the risk that there will be an outbreak of rabies in Deschutes County. By partnering with BSNP on this project, Deschutes County will improve public health for residents in our community. In addition to improved public health, low-income pet owners will have an opportunity to provide their beloved pets with the basic care they need to stay healthy. This clinic would also provide BSNP the opportunity to distribute vouchers for affordable or free (pending funding) vouchers for spay and neuter services to community members most likely to contribute to the pet overpopulation problem, those living at or below the poverty line. Statistically, 85% of dog bites involve intact dogs, by offering both rabies vaccinations and vouchers for spay/neuter services, the partnership between Deschutes County and BSNP could significantly reduce the chances of a rabies outbreak in Deschutes County, while working to decrease the number of dog bites occurring annually. 5. Free Rabies Vaccine Clinics would benefit low-income residents in our community, specifically those living at or below the poverty line. BSNP is prepared to offer as many free rabies vaccinations as we can provide within a 4-5 hour period. In 2014/2015 we provided a total of 336 rabies vaccinations in just two clinics! We anticipate being able to provide at least 175 vaccinations at each clinic. This opportunity also affords BSNP staff a chance to reach the population most likely to have unaltered pets, and encourage them to spay/neuter their pets, improving the lives of the pet, their owner and public safety. 6. Grant funding from Deschutes County would be used to provide medical staff from BSNP to administer the vaccination clinics in the amount of $500 per clinic. Boehringer Ingelheim Medical Supply company will provide rabies vaccinations free of charge for these clinics. Bend Spay and Neuter Project will provide advertising for the event. 7. The clinics held in 2014/2015 were a HUGE success! We not only provided 336 vaccinations, but we aiso provided over 100 vouchers to have pets spayed and neutered for free at BSNP. These are pets that most likely would not have been spayed or neutered otherwise, and would've been very likely to contribute to increasing the number of pets entering our local shelters. We hope to continue doing bi-annual free vaccination clinics as a partnership with Deschutes County to improve public health for people and pets in our community. COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION Board of Directors Evelia Sandoval President Jose Balcazar Vice President Greg Custer Treasurer Margie Gregory Co -Secretary Yolanda Vanderpool Co -Secretary Tony Levison Fabian Clark Michelle Cordova Brad Porterfield Executive Director Whitney Swander Assistant Director Carolina Afre Client Services Coordinator Ana Bueno Client Services Coordinator Trish Minjares Health Insurance Outreach & Enrollment Specialist Oregon Cultural. Trust Tax ID #93-1260288 1130 NW Harriman Bend, OR 97701 541.382.4366 info@latca.org www.latca.org lute Way Community Partner July 10, 2015 Deschutes County Commissioners C/o Judith Ure 1130 NW Wall St. Bend, OR 97701 Re: Discretionary funding support Dear Tammy, Alan and Tony, As requested, I would like to submit to you the following opportunities for Deschutes County to support and sponsor our cultural enrichment and economic development related events during the 2015-16 fiscal year. We are seeking community support for our .. . ® 9th Annual Festival of Cultures (Sept. 26, 2015) Redmond O 6th Annual Empowering Families Luncheon (December 2015) Bend ® 2na Annual Gala de Oro (April 2016) Bend All of these events bring a unique cross-section of our community together to connect in meaningful ways, learn about our work and how to get involved, and, in some cases, to contribute financially or through volunteerism. They are ail community engagement events that celebrate our diversity and nurture better understanding. They also promote economic development by providing unique forums for businesses and organizations to reach Latino families, as well as our broader community, and for Latino - owned small businesses to gain exposure and recognition. Your support makes a significant difference by lending credibility to our efforts, which helps attract people to our events who might not otherwise make the choice to engage with us. We work very hard to leverage every dollar received to increase our visibility and attract additional support. By sponsoring these events, you are helping promote increased equity and inclusion in our region. This is important work to be a part of. We are exceedingly grateful for all the support you have provided over the years and hope you will continue to choose to invest in our work for the good of our county. Please let us know the best way to proceed if there are additional steps required to gain County support. Empowering Latino Families to Thrive! COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION Event Sponsorship Opportunities 2015-2016 Community Partner 2015-16 Overall Event Sponsorship Goal 1eor This will be our 5th year hosting our Empowering Families Fundraiser. We have held a luncheon and two breakfasts that have grown from raising $8,000 in 2010 to $18,000 in 2014. Last year we welcomed right around 130 guests at our breakfast. In 2015, we will host a luncheon event to be held Wednesday, December 3rd. Sponsorship Goal: $7.500 F 1 $27,500 Latino Community Association On Saturday, April 16, 2016, we will host our second annual gala dinner celebration! This is a very special and unique cultural event with appetizers, drinks, a silent auction, guest speaker and live music and dance. We anticipate at least 250 guests will join us. Snonsorshin Goal: $15.000 Fest14cx:t v Cyu ltu res 2015 will mark the 9th year we have hosted the Festival of Cultures in Redmond. What makes our event unique, beyond the inclusivity, rich diversity and international focus, is our official community-based Citizenship Oath Ceremony conducted by U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services. On Saturday, September 26th about 1,750 people will enjoy the cultural booths, eclectic food vendors, cultural performances, Kid's Ar- ea and Passport Challenge educational activity with prizes, formal business vendors, and informal vendors at our International Street Fair. Sponsorship Goal: $5.000 Together We Thrive! 1130 NW Harriman, Bend, Oregon 97701 541-382-4366 www.Iatinocommunityassociation.org