Loading...
1995-14974-Minutes for Meeting May 16,1984 Recorded 5/31/198495-14974 vtt DESCHUTES COUNTY BUDGET COMMITTEE MINUTES MAY 16, 1984 53 j�'E �AUt 21"� � JUPa 1' 1984 Maq�r su CO, CLEF Chairman Ron MacKenzie called the meeting to orde ' ' IY44'!Y.M. Other committee members present were: Commissioner Abe Young, Commissioner Larry Tuttle, Commissioner Lois Prante, Eileen Donaldson and Jack Tate. Data Processing Dave Petersen, Data Processing manager, was Budget present. Commissioner Tuttle briefly explained the line items. Page 10, line 5, contract services, is for a short term contract to assist with program- ming needs. Another Budget Officer recommendation that does not appear in the budget document is the addition of a senior programmer position to help meet the expanding needs in the department. Mr. Petersen had developed a priority list of projects for this department for the next year. Mike Maier has also been working on this process as well, the objective being in each case to improve efficiency to offset the need for additional personnel. Mr. Maier gave the committee members some background information on the recent purchase of the Microdata computer from Clackamas County. It is not expected that this computer will satisfy all the county's needs and potential needs, but it will give the capacity to have additional growth with the current system. The county may sell the old system to Jefferson County, or use one of the old systems in the Sheriff's department or the D. A.'s office. There was some further discussion regarding the addition of the senior programmer. The estimated cost is $33,000 salary and benefits.They are currently advertising this nationally. They advertised locally with no qualified applicants. In order to begin implementation of programs for various departments, they will be working on an accelerarated plan for the next two years within which the plan can be completed, and then they will work in a maintenance mode. MOTION: PRANTE moved to include a new line item for a senior programmer in the amount of $33,000. / YOUNG: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. KEY HEC f 91995 • , VOL 53 ?AcE 218 BUDGET NOTE: Add a line item under the personnel services category of the Data Processing budget for a Senior Programmer at a line item amount of $33,000.00. It was noted that the Revenue Sharing budget has $150,000 budgeted for the purchase of computer equipment. Mr. Petersen outlined the expanded uses of the equipment to be obtained for expansion of the system and how that would apply to functions they now need. $86,233.00 is needed for the lease purchase so the remainder of the $150,000 will be used for expansion purposes. Central Oregon Commissioner Tuttle briefly explained his recommen- Economic Devel- dation on this budget request. The amount re- opment quested is $15,000. The Budget Officer makes no recommendation for any funding for COED. As they announced at the first part of the deliberations, the County is not adding programs, COED is not in the current budget and county employees will remain on a four-day week. There is also the possiblity of further limits on funding if ballot measure 3 is successful. Deschutes County has already made a total contribution of about $49,000 to COED over the last two years. The need for economic development is understood, but Deschutes County is making a major contribution in that field through its revolving loan program to local businesses. $300,000 worth of loans have already been made in the community, with another $500,000 for loan purposes available soon. There is a possiblity that an additional $300,000 will be available, pending grant approval. Commissioner Tuttle stated his personal reservations about public agencies making substantial contributions to economic development programs as they are aimed at development kinds of activities which he sees as speculative. Commissioner Tuttle suggested that if the Budget Committee were to favor funding COED, that the fund only $5,000 as a reimbursement line for the 1984 Westcom trade show in LA, to be paid only as receipts are presented; and an additional $1,000 to offset the printing category in the COED budget and have it also on a direct reimbursement policy. He recommended that if they do fund a portion of the COED request, that it be in this reimbursement fashion and not a direct $6,000 grant. Chairman MacKenzie then called for COED's presentation. Ron Fox, President of COED for 1984, gave some background information about COED. COED represents five cities and three counties. The vol. 53 ?An 219 Board of Directors is made up of representatives of all five entities, each city having two represent- atives. He felt COED's purpose was very important and that they had done a good job so far. He stated that they receive financial support from all of the communities and governmental entities in the area. He then introduced Don Bacon, COED's executive director. Mr. Bacon spoke about what COED had been doing and their plans for the future. He stated that COED has determined that it is a marketing entity that is trying to sell Central Oregon. They feel that it is the individual city's responsibility to sell their own city, COED sells Central Oregon. Last year they had a retreat to see what could be done to make COED effective. They also entertained four visitors interested in Central Oregon. They were also able to determine that they needed to improve their relationship with the State so they will be participating in some meetings being set up by the State Economic Development Department on May 31. Mr. Bacon said that this is one of their major successes, establishing a dialogue with the State. He went over their marketing plan. Although the are primarily targeting manufacturing business to bring to the area, they are also beginning to try to help existing local businesses with expansion or through vocational training at COCC. They hope to be entertaining another business owner soon. They have also used the ambassador program to save money, which is where a local businessman traveling will take COED information to possible prospects in the area he will be traveling to. Basically, COED only wants to identify prospects and then turn those people over to the cities, they don't consider the follow through work their responsibility. Mr. Bacon stated that he felt they do have value to the community and that they would rather get money from the county in a direct lump sum rather than in line items, so they could use it in other ways if they wish. There was some further discussion on anticipated contributions for this calendar year. Deschutes County is the first on their list for pledges this year, so they did not have much information on anticipated revenues. It did not appear that they were receiving any other direct funding from governmental sources. They do receive funds from private sources and chambers of commerce. They are not receiving any other general fund revenues from any other counties. They have not made a request from the City of Bend at all since Deschutes County V -a 3 .2w was contributing a large enough amount that contributions from the city weren't really necessary. Chairman MacKenzie noted that Deschutes County had provided the lion's share of the seed money necessary to get COED started. He agreed with Commissioner Tuttle's comments in the sense that there is limited money available through the County. Jim Curtis, State Economic Development Dept., stated that COED is now taking on more responsibility than they have in the past. He stated they depend heavily on the support of local government groups. Commissioner Young voiced his objections to funding the program, stating that they have yet to draw anyone or any company into the area with any money of their own. He stated his priority is to restore the five day work week for the County. COED is wooing outsiders while our local businesses are closing up. He stated his support for the revolving loan program rather than COED. Commissioner Tuttle gave a breakdown of the public dollars in COED. If the full $15,000 were to be approved it would make Deschutes County's contribution five to six times as much as all other public bodies combined and 25 times more than any other single body. As long as Deschutes County remains the "easy target" other groups will not have to contribute. Deschutes County to date is the largest single contributor to this program. Because of this, COED should be maintaining a higher level of support to this county. Keith Ericksen said they are talking about protecting the existing economic base which raises the valuation of the county. He also stated that the outlying areas are picking up more than their population might warrant, because the decision is based on reasons other than population. He did not feel that the $15,000 was an outrageous request. MOTION: TATE moved for the $5,000 and $1,000 contribution. TUTTLE: Second. Commissioner Prante suggested that if the $5,000 were not used entirely for the Westcom show that a request could be made to the Board of Commissioners for use of the remaining funds, the Board to make that decision at a later time. • VOL 53 FAsE 221 VOTE: APPROVAL; YOUNG DISSENTING. Other County Other line items in this budget had been gone over Contributions throughout the course of these hearings. MOTION: YOUNG moved that Other County Contribu- tions, Department 45, be approved with the adjustments as noted. DONALDSON: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Revenue Sharing Mr. Maier went through the Revenue Sharing budget and explained items in each line. $300,000 was budgeted for capital improvement. Mr. Maier asked for direction on this category. This could go up $50,000 depending on bids, or it may go down. The annex roof needs to be rebuilt. There are several alternatives for the roof reconstruction. The architect will be consulted on these alternatives. $45,000 will be needed for reglazing all the windows in the annex. There will also be some interior development in this building -- installation of skylights and miscellaneous improvements. It is anticipated that the whole revenue sharing fund will be spent this year. Next year they will continue to work on computer enhancement with revenue sharing funds. Any extra money will be used to increase the cash carry-over or increase contingency. MOTION: TUTTLE moved the acceptance of the recommendation of the proposed revenue sharing distribution. DONALDSON: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Admin/Personnel Mr. Maier briefly outlined the functions of this Budget department as was indicated in the budget narrative. He went through the line items explaining their purpose. The Budget Committee recommended no changes from the Budget Officer's recommendation. MOTION: TUTTLE moved tentative approval of the Administration and Personnel budget and the Building Maintenance Budget. DONALDSON: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Board of Commis- Commissioner Tuttle explained this budget line by sioners Budget line. The major increases were the auto expense line, which reflects payment into the vehicle fund. Board of Equalization expenses were raised after vot 53 ma 222 study of other counties BOE stipend practices. There will be a maximum amount to be paid in the event of very heavy BOE appeal years. Education and Travel was increased based on experience and because there is a legislative year coming up. MOTION: TUTTLE moved tentative approval of the Board of Commissioners budget. YOUNG: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. There was some discussion about how the final approval process should be structured. Commissioner Tuttle recommended that they maintain tentative approval of the Assessor's budget and that the Board could look at the situation (for extra help) after November. Then it could be amended with the addition of the extra help. MOTION: TUTTLE moved to approve the 1984/85 budget based on the discussion they just ad and set a date to reconvene to review the budget document in its final form. YOUNG: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. It was agreed to reconvene the Budget Committee at 9:00 A.M. on Wednesday, May 30 for the final budget hearing. Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:20 P.M. DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ALBERT A. YOUNG, HAIRMA Qi1l/� 4OISSTOW PRANTE, COMMISSIONER LAURENC . TMTLV, COMMISSIONER /ss