HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-03-06 Business Meeting Minutes
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 1 of 8
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 BUSINESS MEETING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6, 2013
_____________________________
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
__________________________
Present were Commissioners Alan Unger, Tammy Baney and Anthony DeBone.
Also present were Tom Anderson, Interim County Administrator; Erik Kropp,
Deputy County Administrator; Susan Ross, Property & Facilities; Nancy
Blankenship and Jeff Sageser, Clerk’s Office; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel;
Sheriff Larry Blanton; and four other citizens.
Chair Unger opened the meeting at 10:03 a.m.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. CITIZEN INPUT
Larry Fulkerson shared his concerns about the 9-1-1 levy proposal. He read a
statement at this time (a copy of which is attached). He feels that the reserves
are too high already and is opposed to the Measure as written. He feels the levy
should not remain as high as it has been.
Chair Unger said that he hopes they are able to bring some understanding of
this levy to citizens. Commissioner Baney said this covers two years. They
don’t have to levy the entire amount, but this is sometimes confusing to the
public. This gives the agency parameters and can be adjusted, similar to what
the Sheriff has done. It is a buffer.
Mr. Fulkerson stated that the people are starting to trust the government a bit
more because of the Sheriff’s efforts and him not charging the full amount. He
does not know why the reserves have to be as high now that the new 9-1-1
center is there.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 2 of 8
Commissioner Baney stated that the 9-1-1 Board oversees what needs to be
done. They have some equipment upgrades that will be required in the near
future, and that can be expensive.
Sheriff Blanton commented it is their job to explain to people what the levy is
for. It is their duty to be transparent. However, they just hired a firm to look at
all of the radio system issues. It is time to look at this infrastructure so they can
combine all the repeater sites to accommodate federal requirements.
This could cost upwards of $10 million. They are not finished. The technology
part is challenging. He feels the majority of the contingency will go towards
infrastructure improvements. They struggled with being understaffed for many
years, which ran up the reserves, so much of this amount is misleading, and
temporary now that they are properly staffed. They will have to tap into
contingency funds if this levy does not pass, and it will not last long.
Mr. Fulkerson stated that in regard to user fees, this is one of two counties in
the state that don’t have them. He feels user fees are not appropriate and 9-1-1
is run well.
Sheriff Blanton said that if the levy does not pass, the contingency model
includes user fees. It would cost his department $2 million, since they are the
biggest user of 9-1-1. Other entities may not be able to afford the necessary
kind of staffing.
Laurie Craghead stated they cannot amend the levy request at this point. Mr.
Fulkerson stated he thinks they have up to March 22 to do so.
3. Before the Board was Consideration of First and Second Readings and
Adoption, by Emergency, of Ordinance No. 2013-011, Amending Code,
Authorizing the County Clerk to Not Refund Overpayment of Recoding
Fees for $10 or Less.
Tom Anderson gave a brief overview of the Ordinance. The reason this is
specific for the Clerk’s Office is that payment is often received in advance
there. The cost to the County of handling a refund is about $30. Rather than
refusing to issue a refund, often the customer will be asked if they want the
check back so they can return with the proper amount. That may not be
possible or practical at all times.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 3 of 8
Commissioner Baney stated that this amounts to about $1,500 a year. She is
sensitive to the fact that even a few dollars may be important to someone. Mr.
Anderson said they can hand the check back or void the transaction if possible
at the beginning. But once it is in the system, it is costly for the County to
handle this kind of transaction. Many of the Clerk’s customers, for instance
title companies, use pre-printed checks. He is not sure how often this occurs.
Ms. Craghead added that it is generally title companies , and some of them are
located out of state. Most of the Clerk’s transactions are time sensitive, like
recording liens against real property. Sending a check back to replace it with
another is often not a viable option.
Chair Unger said this is not changing much, but now they deal with debit cards
and electronic transactions as well as checks. Ms. Craghead stated that there
are maybe a half-dozen counties that are doing electronic recordings. Out of
necessity, things are done quickly, so there is not much opportunity to change
the process.
Nancy Blankenship and Jeff Sageser came before the Board. Chair Unger
asked if the emergency clause is needed, as the Board is sensitive to this. Ms.
Blankenship said they hoped to have it in place by July 1, 2013. It was brought
to the Board previously to consider as well.
Ms. Craghead said it costs the County money if you add another 100 plus days.
It is not refunded if someone paid by check, but if it is through a clearinghouse,
since a refund is easier. Mr. Sageser said there are talks about a refund
ordinance at the state level since this impacts other agencies also.
Chair Unger feels that it should move forward now.. Commissioner Baney said
that it seems inconsistent if the payment protocols are different for different
situations.
DEBONE: Move first and second readings of Ordinance No. 2013-011.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
Chair Unger conducted the first and second readings by title only, declaring an
emergency.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 4 of 8
DEBONE: Move adoption of Ordinance No. 2013-011, by emergency.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
4. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Document No. 2013-
085, a Contract with the Humane Society of Central Oregon regarding
Impounded and Stray Animal Boarding Services.
Erik Kropp gave an overview of this contract , as well as the one with the
Humane Society of Redmond, which is similar.
Licensing fees are shared with the shelters and the cities, with a small amount
going to the County. Two main types of payments are made to the shelters.
One is boarding fees per day for impounded dogs. Another portion of the
payment is a portion of the licensing fees for their operations budgets.
The fee per dog per day would go from $26 per day to $40. This is thought to
be more consistent to the actual cost of service. The fee has not increased since
2006. However, a change in the contract would decrease the amount of the
licensing fees that goes to the shelters.
Ms. Craghead indicated both agencies have signed, but they are waiting for
insurance documentation.
BANEY: Move approval.
DEBONE: Second.
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
5. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Document No. 2013-
086, a Contract with the Humane Society of Redmond regarding
Impounded and Stray Animal Boarding Services.
BANEY: Move approval.
DEBONE: Second.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 5 of 8
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
6. Before the Board was Consideration of Board Signature of Document Nos.
2013-065 and 2013-066, Amending Design and Construction Contracts
related to the Adult Jail Project.
Susan Ross said that the County entered into agreements with two contractors a
few years ago regarding work on the jail remodel, work which was delayed.
The work has since been reduced in scope, so agreements are needed to reflect
these changes.
There is a contract with Kirby Nagelhout for pre-construction services, for
which there will be no charge. They would want a fee of just over $8,000 if the
project is canceled, however. The guaranteed maximum price amount will
come before the Board later.
Chair Unger said it appears that costs are being kept down while the project is
staying on track. Commissioner Baney stated that there were not that many
bids at the time because it is a complicated project. Ms. Ross added that they
would have limited this to those companies with similar experience. Local
subcontractors will have the ability to bid on the work.
BANEY: Move approval of both agreements.
DEBONE: Second.
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda.
DEBONE: Move approval of the Consent Agenda.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 6 of 8
Consent Agenda Items
7. Signature of Document No. 2013-087, an Acceptance Deed for a Temporary
Construction Easement on Skyliners Road (61579 Boulder LLC)
8. Chair Signature of Document No. 2013-096, the Oregon Early Learning
Council Document Confirming Budget Allocations and Funded Activities for
the Deschutes County Children & Families Commission
9. Signature of Order No. 2013-007, Declaring Certain Deschutes County
Personal Property Surplus and Authorizing Donation
10. Signature of Letters Reappointing Patrick Griffiths, Matt Shinderman and
Darek Staab to the Deschutes River Mitigation and Enhancement Committee,
through February 28, 2016
11. Signature of a Letter Appointing John Stephenson to the Weed Advisory Board,
through December 31, 2014
12. Signature of Letters Appointing Lori Patterson, Kathy Walsh and Dr. Peter
Boehm to the Deschutes County Behavioral Health Advisory Board, through
December 31, 2016
13. Signature of a Letter Accepting the Resignation of Stephanie Ely from the Lazy
River Special Road District Board, and Thanking her for her Service
14. Signature of a Letter Appointing Ron Pugh to the Board of the Lazy River
Special Road District, through December 31, 2015
15. Approval of Minutes:
Work Session of February 25, 2013
Business Meeting of February 25, 2013
Public Hearing on the South County Plan, held on February 26, 2013
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY
SERVICE DISTRICT
16. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District in the Amount of
$83,758.86 for Two Weeks.
DEBONE: Move approval, subject to review.
BANEY: Second.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 7 of 8
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION AND 4-H
COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
17. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-H County Service District in the
Amount of $13,123.62 for Two Weeks.
DEBONE: Move approval, subject to review.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
18. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of $925,302.53 for
Two Weeks.
DEBONE: Move approval, subject to review.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
19. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Being no further items addressed, the meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m.
DATED this 2013 for the /~DaYOf IVJVLC'..h.-
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners.
Alan Unger, Chair
Tam~ir
ATTEST:
Anthony DeBone, Commissioner ~~
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 8 of8
Packet Contents
1. Copy of verbal comments to County Commissioners on 3-6-13
2. Detailed comments
3. Copy of Argument in Opposition for Voters Pamphlet
4. Copy of letter to Police and Fire departments
5. Copy of letter to 911 District employees
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest --,-q~/-I-"/---,L-.4t£,.{",jt~'/+Y______ Date J -G:-. -.;2{I13
Name L k#?tzy WE FI4LK-§C,sOA[
Address ;2;2 l}2 I )'//(' A-ROLI5 gP
/3f5).(/J,J all 12f)o:Z
Phone #s If -.5ZlI-<3 [fa-If?/ J
E-mail address LA?-=I(K EL,K ~s/v@) 6' f"74IL; ['or.,
o In Favor D NeutrallUndecided [Jd' Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? [kiYes D No
March 6, 2013
Good morning County Commissioners. I am here today to share my concerns about the 911
temporary levy proposal and to provide each of you with a copy of more detailed comments.
The current 911 temporary local option levy of 23 cents per thousand of assessed value was
passed in May of 2008 in large part to build a new 911 service building and upgrade technology.
The building has been built and the technology upgraded.
During the 2012 fiscal year, the 911 District accumulated a surplus of $1,847,268. When added to
the already existing reserve, this made a new total reserve of $10,739,607. That year the 911
District budget had a 29.5% surplus. In this current fiscal year the budget will only show a surplus
of $1,312,495, or a total reserve of $12,052,102 because of $540,000 spent on technology
improvements. A surplus of this size is Significant given the District is budgeted to only spend
$6,918,999.
A prudent person would think that the County Commissioners would propose a new pennanent
levy that would produce a more reasonable amount of income.
You can imagine my surprise when I discovered the notice of District Measure 9-91 on the County
website this past Friday that clearly showed you wanted to continue the 23 cent temporary levy for
5 more years. I am opposed to the measure as it is currently written. Along with a copy of my
detailed comments that has been provided to you, you will find a copy of my Argument in
Opposition which has been submitted to the County Clerk, and a copy of the letter I am sending to
the County Sheriff and all of the Police and Fire Chiefs in Deschutes County. I support the work of
the 911 District employees and have submitted a letter stating my support. A copy of that letter is
also attached.
I believe a more reasonable approach would be to propose a much smaller permanent levy
smaller than the 39 cent total that the temporary and pennanent levies will produce; and, to explain
to the voters why a $12 million reserve is needed, or, how you will return a considerable portion of
the reserve to the taxpayers. I believe being transparent and open with the voters would go a long
way towards promoting trust between the voters and local officials. Levies often fail because the
public does not trust the government. I request that you amend the levy measure, to improve its
chance of success, and in return you would give voters an opportunity to trust.
Thank you for your time this morning.
Larry W Fulkerson
22321 McArdle Rd
Bend, OR 97702
541-977-8988
Dear Police, Fire Chief or Sheriff
RE: 911 District Lew ProDosal is Excessive
Dear Chief:
Before you or any of your associates begin voicing your support for the new 911 levy
proposal, you might want to take a look at the enclosed information.
In a nutshell, at the end of this fiscal year, the 911 District will have a reserve of
$12,052,102. That figure is growing at the rate of $1.3 -$1.8 million per year. This
information will be spelled out in my Argument in Opposition which will appear in the
Deschutes County voters pamphlet and in local media.
Before you or any of your associates are asked why $12 million in reserves is needed,
and why that balance needs to grow so fast, I would suggest you ask the Deschutes
County Commissioners that question. You may find it uncomfortable to have any of
your people asked embarrassing questions and not know the answer.
If my support for this levy was expected by others, and if I was not given all the
information, I personally would not appreciate being placed in that awkward position.
Your staff and associates may feel the same way.
Sincerely,
Larry W Fulkerson
22321 McArdle Rd
Bend, OR 97702
I
I
f ~
March 6, 2013
TO: Deschutes County 911 District Employees
RE: 911 District Levy And Budget
You will probably hear about opposition by me, or others who feel as I do, about the
new proposed 5 year local option levy.
Nothing in my attempt to stop this ill conceived levy should be interpreted in any way as
an effort to cut your payor benefits, or change work conditions. On the contrary, I
would like to see a permanent levy passed which would give the 911 District adequate
stable funding.
Currently the 911 District is budgeted to have a reserve fund of $12,052,102 by June
30,2013. This reserve fund is growing at a rate of $1.3 -$1.8 million per year. Voters
are probably not going to let this continue.
I believe I am speaking for the majority of Deschutes County voters by voicing my
appreciation for the incredibly professional service you deliver. Due to my experience of
having served 8 years in the US Coast Guard as a Search and Rescue pilot, and also
running Rescue Coordination Centers or working in them, I am aware of the demand
placed on you and your family by the stress you encounter at work. Very few people
could do your job.
Thanks to the great job you do, the 911 Center makes this County a much safer place
to live in or visit.
Respectfully,
Larry W Fulkerson
22321 McArdle Rd
Bend, OR 97702
1 911 DISTRICT LEVY AND BUDGET -DETAILED COMMENTS
March 6,2013
After reading the Bend Bulletin and the KTVZ.com articles on February 13, 2013
concerning the 911 levy renewal vote, I remembered the reason the current 5 year local
option tax was passed in the first place. It was passed in large part to build a new 911
center facility and upgrade technology. (see Bend Bulletin 5-21-08, -Turnout helps 911
Levy to Pass)
A Short History On 911 Funding: The Deschutes County 911 Service District became a
consolidated public safety dispatching agency in 1985. Until 2003 it was funded only by
a permanent levy of 16.18 cents per 1,000 of assessed value on Deschutes County
property. Thi$ assessed value was limited to a 3% annual increase by measure 50 in
1997. Since then the total assessed value of Deschutes County property has risen
every year except one (2011-12 dropped .6%) to an assessed value of over twice what
it was in 1997. The income generated from this 16.8 cent per $1,000 of assessed value
has more than doubled also.
In 2003 a temporary local option levy of 9 cents per 1000 of assessed value was
passed by the voters to fund additional 911 employees to handle the greatly increased
911 calls caused by the fast growing population. As the county grows, more buildings
are built and the tax base and the taxes generated rise proportionately. During times of
rapid growth there is lag time between needing additional personnel and the tax
revenue being generated to pay the additional personnel. This was the main reason for
the 9 centl4 yr local option levy passed in 2003.
Along about 2006-07 the 911 district director realized they needed a new and much
larger facility. A study was done and it was determined that the then current facility was
only about % as big as it needed to be.
The 2003/4 yr local option levy of 9 cents was set to expire in June 2007. A new 5 year
local option levy of 23 cents per 1000 of assessed value was initially voted down in May
2007 but passed the next year to not only sustain the fast growth but to also build a new
911 service center building and upgrade technology.
In August 2010, the new facility was completed and moved into. It is approximately 5
times larger than the old facility and touted as being large enough to accommodate 20
years of growth. It was also stated that of course the operating costs would be less as it
was new and that part of the facility could be used by the Oregon State Police Dept until
that additional space was needed.
The new facility construction was finished under budget with grant funding applied for
to pay for part of the new building and equipment. The 911 Service District budget
reserve as of June 30, 2011 was $8,892,339. This included $1,289,795 in the
equipment reserve fund. (reference: FY 2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report,
1
1
911 DISTRICT LEVY AND BUDGET -DETAILED COMMENTS
March 6, 2013
pages 176-178, http://www.deschutes.org/Finance/Budget-and-Finance/CAFR/CAFR
FY -2011.aspx )
In May 2012 the County tried to get the voters to make the 5 year temporary levy
permanent and they failed. At the end of June 2012, the 911 Service District had a
reserve of $10,739,607. This included $1,800,743 that was set aside in the equipment
reserve fund. This was an increase of $1 ,847,268 in 1 year, or an increase in reserves
of 21%. Another way of stating this is the fiscal year 2012 budget contained a 29.5%
operating budget surplus. This is the difference between the total revenues of
$8,055,110 and total expenditures of $6,218,789. (Reference: FY 2012 Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report, pages 91-92, http://www.deschutes.org/Finance/Budget-and
Finance/CAFR/FY -20 12-Comprehensive-Annual-Financial-Report.aspx )
Now, once again, the 911 District apparently with the County Commissioners and Bend
Bulletin Editorial staff blessings is trying to get the voters to agree to renew the 5
year/23 cent temporary levy. A review of news articles about the levy points out some
interesting (and in my opinion, misleading) facts, plus looking at the district's balance
sheets and budget poses some interesting questions.
The Deschutes County 911 schedule of revenue expenditures and changes in fund
balance show an actual remaining fund balance of $8,938,864 in the 911 fund, plus an
actual balance of $1 ,800,743 in the 911 equipment reserve fund at the end ofthe fiscal
year 2012. The Deschutes County approved budget of 2013 fiscal year for the 911
district shows an approved beginning net working capital of $8,000,000. Where did the
other $938,864 left over from fiscal year 2012 go?
If the unaccounted for $938,864 is added to the FY 2013 budget, the total reserves will
be $9,742,102 in the 911 budget plus $2,310,000 in the equipment reserve fund on
June 30, 2013 for a total reserve of $12,052,102. (Reference: FY 2013 Adopted Budget,
Line Item, pages 474-485 http://www.deschutes.org/Finance/Budget-and
Finance/Budgets/FY -2013-Line-ltem-Budget-Book.aspx)
In the Bend Bulletin article dated 2-13-2013, County Commissioner Tony DeBone was
quoted as saying the 911 District has funds available because its new facility came in
under budget. This is rather misleading. The original 911 building budget was $8.5
million. The bid for construction was $6.1 M, or a $2.4M savings, of which half was to be
paid by the 911 District. The $1.2M savings is almost exactly 10% of the 2013 Fiscal
year end reserves.
Rob Poirier, the 911 District Director, is quoted in the Bend Bulletin article of 2-14-2013
as saying, "If this levy fails we would have to seek alternative funding sources. That
would mean asking law enforcement and fire agencies to pay user fees or hire their own
2
911 DISTRICT LEVY AND BUDGET -DETAILED COMMENTS
March 6, 2013
dispatchers". In this same article, Commissioner DeBone talked about lowering the tax
rate. Commissioner Unger was quoted as saying, "It was important to keep the tax rate
steady to allow the District to maintain its contingency fund", and said, "Cutting a penny
per $1,000 wouldn't have much effect on a tax bill". Commissioner Baney said she
supported the tax levy, and said 'When you call 911 you want someone to answer the
phone". In this same article Mr Poirier stated the 911 District does have some
contingency funds but it also needs to update some equipment. I suppose you could
characterize a $12M reserve as "some contingency funds". Mr. Poirier should also be
aware that on June 30, 2013, at the end of FY 2013, the 911 Equipment Reserve Fund
will hold $2,310,000 in reserves.
The 911 district should indeed have a temporary local option levy passed or a new
permanent levy, but unless they plan on building a new 911 service center every few
years, it certainly does not need to be 23 cents per $1000 of assessed value. If the
current 23 cents per $1000 of assessed value levy were totally cancelled, the 911
District could operate at its current capacity for approximately 4-5 years with the
permanent 16.18 cents levy and additional funding increasing at the measure 50
mandated 3% per year. Any increases in call volume and the associated increased
personnel requirements could be paid for by the growing tax base due to new
construction. This could all be done with no additional user fees. This of course would
deplete the county's 911 reserve funds.
The 23 cent temporary levy could be reduced to 15 cents and produce $2,505,620 per
year and increasing at 3% per year. This would maintain the districts 12 million reserve
and provide reasonable sustainable funding.
Deschutes County population of July 1999 was 106,820. The assessed value of
Deschutes County property was $8,090,858,786. Twelve years later the population had
increased 50% to 160,338 by July 2011. By July 2011 the assessed value had risen
119% to 17,740,724,079. Any entity receiving income based on a fixed cent per
thousand of assessed value that rose by 119% while the population they serve rose by
50% should not have any problems balancing their budget. There should be plenty of
tax dollars for the various Deschutes county agencies to share.
The bottom line is Deschutes County officials are not being transparent with the voting
public. They are trying to get the temporary levy with a largely temporary need renewed
for another 5 years. It will again fail. A realistic request backed up with honest and
verifiable numbers should pass. A little responsible government would go a long ways
and would reduce the 911 budget by the $45,000 spent each time they bring this levy
up for a vote, which this May will be the second time since it passed in May of 2008.
1
I 3
I
911 DISTRICT LEVY AND BUDGET -DETAILED COMMENTS
March 6, 2013
My suggestion would be to modify the current permanent rate of 16.18 cents by
increasing it to 31 cents per $1,000 of assessed value. Along with this new permanent
rate would be a commitment by County Commissioners to reduce the funds held in
reserve down to a reasonable level. This could be done by calling the bonds issued for
construction, if they are callable; or, not implementing the full 31 cent tax until the
budget reserves were brought down to a reasonable level. If the County
Commissioners do not accomplish this they could be voted out of office. The new rate
would initially lower the District income down to what is actually needed, with annual
increases of 3% (in accordance with Measure 50), plus the rate of County growth.
There are many different approaches that can be taken to solve the 911 budget/levy
problem. The option of not being transparent with the voters should be taken off the
table. A permanent levy proposal of 31 cents per $1000 of assessed value to replace
the 16.18 cents levy along with a summary statement containing the following info
would go a long way to towards promoting the public's confidence in County
government.
Suggested information to include in a measure summary statement: This permanent
rate limitation of 31 cents per $1000 assessed value would reduce the rate 8 cents per
1000 below current rates, and would provide stable funding. The temporary 5 year local
option levy of 23 cents was in large part to fund the new 911 building and improve
technology. The current 911 District budget has $1.3 Million annual surplus plus more
than needed reserve funds. The unneeded reserves will be returned to the taxpayers
by temporarily reducing the levy below the 31 cent cents, or by paying off the bonds
used to build the new 911 building.
Currently, a lot of voters routinely vote no on budget proposals because they do not
trust their government officials. I believe that the above mentioned approach would help
voters to again start trusting local government and possibly make worthwhile local
measures easier to pass in the future.
Sincerely,
Larry W Fulkerson
22321 McArdle Rd
Bend, OR 97702
541-977-8988
4
ARGUMENT STATEMENT FOR COUNTY VOTERS' PAMPHLET (2013)
Ballot Title Caption: Five-year Local Option Tax for 911 Operations
Measure Number: 9-91 Word Total (325 Maximum): _3o_6______
I[] Argument in Favor 111 Argument in Opposition
(Argument Statement Shall Be Typed)
"SEE ATTACHED"
I Person responsible for the content of the Argument Statement: I (Typed) Larry W. Fulkerson
!
I (Signed)X_.... _____/':....-~4?t_._r._H_c.;...,I~~_v_JI....:3~____$~=~~~/.:...-_tv:_'----"';.2t0~_~~~
N/A
j Name of the Organization the person represents, if any.
J
Attachment to Argument in Opposition:
Why does the Deschutes County 911 District need a $12 million reserve that grows by $1.3 to $1.8
million per year?
The current 911 temporary local option levy of 23 cents per thousand of assessed value was
passed in May 2008 in large part to build a new 911 service building and upgrade technology. The
building has been built and the technology upgraded.
(Reference: Bend Bulletin 5-21-08 -Turnout helps 911 Levy to Pass)
During the 2012 fiscal year, the 911 District accumulated a surplus of $1,847,268. When added to
the already existing reserve, this made a new total reserve of $10,739,607. That year the 911
District budget had a 29.5% surplus.
(Reference: http://www.deschutes.org/Finance/Budget-and-Finance/CAFR/FY-2012
Comprehensive-Annual-Financial-Report.aspx page 91-92)
In fiscal year 2013, the annual budget surplus is reduced by $540K due to technology
improvements, which leaves $1,312,495; or, a total reserve of $12,052,102. A surplus ofthis size
is significant since the District is budgeted to only spend $6,918,999.
(Reference: http://www .deschutes.org/Finance/Budget-and-Finance/Budgets/FY -20 13-Line-ltem
Budget-Book.aspx pages 474-485)
A prudent person would expect that the County Commissioners would propose a new permanent
levy that would produce a more reasonable amount of income. This is not the case. A more
reasonable approach would be to propose a much smaller permanent levy -smaller than the 39
cent total that the current 23 cent temporary levy plus the 16 cent permanent levies will produce.
Commissioners should explain to voters why a $12 million reserve is needed; or, how a
considerable portion of the reserve will be returned to taxpayers.
Transparency by government officials and being forthcoming with information to taxpayers would
promote voter's trust.
If you are conSidering voting to pass this levy, please call your County Commissioners before
voting and ask them for a detailed explanation about why the 911 District needs a $12 million
reserve that grows by $1.3 to $1.8 million per year.
Larry W. Fulkerson Date:
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org
BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
10:00 A.M., WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6,2013
Commissioners' Hearing Room -Administration Building -1300 NW Wall St., Bend
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. CITIZEN INPUT
This is the time provided for individuals wishing to address the Board, at the Board's
discretion, regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Please complete a sign-up
card (provided), and give the card to the Recording Secretary. Use the microphone and
clearly state your name when the Board calls on you to speak.
PLEASE NOTE: Citizen input regarding matters that are or have been the subject ofa public
hearing will NOT be included in the official record ofthat hearing.
3. CONSIDERATION of First and Second Readings and Adoption, by
Emergency, of Ordinance No. 2013-011, Amending Code, Authorizing the
County Clerk to Not Refund Overpayment of Recoding Fees for $10 or Less
Nancy Blankenship and/or JejfSageser, Clerk's Office
Suggested Actions: Conduct First and Second Readings by Title Only; Move
Adoption by Emergency o/Ordinance No. 2013-011
4. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Document No. 2013-085, a Contract with
the Humane Society of Central Oregon regarding Impounded and Stray Animal
Boarding Services -Laurie Craghead, County Counsel
Suggested Action: Move signature 0/Document No. 2013-085.
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 1 of5
5. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Document No. 2013-086, a Contract with
the Humane Society of Redmond regarding Impounded and Stray Animal
Boarding Services -Laurie Craghead, County Counsel
Suggested Action: Move signature ofDocument No. 2013-086.
6. CONSIDERATION of Board Signature of Document Nos. 2013-065 and
2013-066, Amending Design and Construction Contracts related to the Adult
Jail Project -Susan Ross, Property & Facilities
Suggested Actions: Move signature ofDocument Nos. 2013-065 and 2013-066.
CONSENT AGENDA
7. Signature of Document No. 2013-087, an Acceptance Deed for a Temporary
Construction Easement on Skyliners Road (61579 Boulder LLC)
8. Chair Signature of Document No. 2013-096, the Oregon Early Learning
Council Document Confirming Budget Allocations and Funded Activities for
the Deschutes County Children & Families Commission
9. Signature of Order No. 2013-007, Declaring Certain Deschutes County
Personal Property Surplus and Authorizing Donation
10. Signature of Letters Reappointing Patrick Griffiths, Matt Shinderman and
Darek Staab to the Deschutes River Mitigation and Enhancement Committee,
through February 28,2016
11. Signature ofa Letter Appointing John Stephenson to the Weed Advisory
Board, through December 31, 2014
12. Signature of Letters Appointing Lori Patterson, Kathy Walsh and Dr. Peter
Boehm to the Deschutes County Behavioral Health Advisory Board, through
December 31, 2016
13. Signature ofa Letter Accepting the Resignation of Stephanie Ely from the
Lazy River Special Road District Board, and Thanking her for her Service
14. Signature of a Letter Appointing Ron Pugh to the Board of the Lazy River
Special Road District, through December 31, 2015
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 6,2013
Page 20f5
15. Approval of Minutes:
• Work Session of February 25,2013
• Business Meeting of February 25,2013
• Public Hearing on the South County Plan, held on February 26,2013
CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE
DISTRICT
16. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for
the 9-1-1 County Service District
CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION AND 4-H
COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
17. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for
the Extension/4-H County Service District
RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
18. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for
Deschutes County
19. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
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; ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues; or other executive session items.
FUTURE MEETINGS:
(Please note: Meeting dates and times are subject to change. All meetings take place in the Board of
Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend. unless otherwise indicated. Ifyou have questions
regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572.)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Page 3 of5
Wednesday, March 6
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
Tuesday, March 12
6:00 p.m. Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 2013-007, Adopting the Newberry Country Plan
SHARe, Sunriver
Wednesday, March 13
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
Monday, March 18
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
Monday, March 25
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, March 27
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
Monday, April 1
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
3:30p.m. Public Safety Coordinating Council Meeting
Wednesday, April 3
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 6,2013
Page 4 of5
Wednesday, April 10
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
Monday, April 15
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
3:30p.m. Public Safety Coordinating Council Meeting
Monday, April 22
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, April 24
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
Monday, April 29
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, May 1
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session -could include executive session(s)
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; ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues; or other executive session items.
-_...- -------
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 6,2013
Page 5 of5