The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-10-27 Work Session Minutes Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 1 of 11 Pages For Recording Stamp Only 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 MONDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2014 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Anthony DeBone and Alan Unger. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; David Doyle and John Laherty, County Counsel; and, for a portion of the meeting, Steve Reinke, 911; Danielle Fegley, Personnel; Wayne Lowry, Finance; Timm Schimke, Solid Waste Department; Judith Ure, Administration; and David Givans, Internal Auditor. No representatives of the media or other citizens were present. Chair Baney opened the meeting at 1:35 p.m. ___________________________ 1. Tax/Finance Update. Wayne Lowry said the portfolio is on track and the basis points are increasing. They have complied with statute regarding the pool balance, at $32 million at this point. Revenue from property taxes is starting to come in, and about $240 million in the next few weeks is expected, much of which will be disbursed to the taxing districts on a weekly basis. They eliminated the ‘pay as you bank’ option, with brochures provided to the banks to give to their customers. This will also help to show how many people are actually using this option. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 2 of 11 Pages There are 50.5 positions vacant at this time, many of which that are at 911 and the Sheriff’s Office. The rural area values have gone up over 2%. The cities have gone up more. ___________________________ About 32% of the projected Community Development revenue has come in during 25% of the time. Mr. Anderson said that it is healthy and seems more sustainable now. The City of Bend is still at a break-neck pace which is worrisome. ___________________________ Solid Waste shows a 12% increase above what was experienced last year. 911’s beginning balance was higher than estimated. The local option levy is the only one affected by compression. The schools experience this more than any other entity. Increased market value should correct this over time. ___________________________ The Health Benefits Trust Fund has a strong bottom line, based on the twelve- month rolling level of claims. They could be about $2 million under estimated costs. They may draw this down. Mr. Anderson stated the County would meet with consultants to discuss this further. Danielle Fegley said this might start happening as early as next week. Chair Baney explained that there needs to be a clear policy about this to alleviate misperceptions of how the fund should be used. Mr. Lowry stated that the County has done some things to hold down wide swings in this account. Commissioner Unger stated that Deschutes County spends a lot less per employee than most other places in the country. ___________________________ Regarding the Early Learning Hub, Commissioner Unger asked when this revenue will come in. Mr. Lowry stated they have gotten some grants for this, but there are also general fund transfers. He assumes payments will come in quarterly from the State. Chair Baney said that some of the funding will go from the State to WEBCO and then disbursed. ___________________________ In regard to capital projects, there is funding available to pay the jail contractor, but it is closing out. There was a shortage, which the Sheriff is covering. North County projects list the Unger building, the Design Center and the Antler building in the same fund. The Unger building is being remodeled and Justice Court will go into the Evergreen building once the City of Redmond has completed that project. The projects will show up in a budget adjustment . Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 3 of 11 Pages Chair Baney asked that the Redmond projects costs be watched carefully. The Design Center is now on the market. The Sister Health Clinic has about $90,000 left to pay out. ___________________________ PERS rates have come out, and the increase will cost the County about $750,000 more, or an 8% rate increase. The rates are generated by actuarial evaluation each year in October, effective in July. The new rates affect 2015- 16. What is unknown is what PERS think will happen in the future. PERS has had a couple of good earnings years. Benefits were decreased by legislative session but those are being litigated now. The unfunded balance a few years ago was $44 million, and now it is more like $9 million. Earnings have everything to do with it. They assume 7.75% earnings, but it came in at about 12%. ___________________________ Regarding the business loan fund, Mr. Anderson said the next request will deplete the fund. The Board needs to decide whether to replenish it or do something else. Mr. Lowry said this would take a budget adjustment. Mr. Lowry stated they could appropriate the funds from the general fund, which has a higher balance than anticipated. It would be good for a one-time adjustment. There also is a project development fund that is not designated for a particular use, but is a reserve fund in anticipation of a future unknown situation. Part of this is being used for the Unger building. Funds could be sent to the business loan fund instead of this fund. Judith Ure said that EDCO supposedly has some funding ideas in the works but nothing has developed much thus far. Mr. Anderson asked the Commissioners if they want to replenish the fund. It could also be funded out of lottery allocations in the future. Either option could be appropriate for a one-time action. Commissioner DeBone supports $100,000 replenishing the fund but this is not something that should continue indefinitely into the future. Chair Baney said they should reflect on this and the need at some point. Commissioner Unger feels this is an important tool for economic development and the discussion should include others. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 4 of 11 Pages Mr. Anderson stated he can discuss this with Mr. Lowry and come with a Resolution to make the appropriate transfer. ___________________________ Regarding the Finance/Human Resources system, he has been working on this for some time. What is proposed is a project with a timeline and cost for Finance and Human Resources. They budgeted $230,000 in Finance to begin the project, as built up over time in reserves for this project. He expects it to cost more than this. The City of Bend is doing something similar that is much more complicated and a lot more expensive, at over $2 million. Mr. Lowry said it could cost up to $1.2 million for the County. The real link between the two departments is payroll. He details the RFP process and the goals and objectives. He has been through this again, and it involves business practices changes, not necessarily just technology. Ms. Fegley has also been through this and it is to incorporate best practices and having people get used to utilizing it. Mr. Anderson stated that the departments seem supportive because of the potential time savings and efficiencies. Mr. Lowry confirmed that the departments are ready to get into this. Chair Baney asked if the workforce investment piece can handle the training and time needed. Mr. Lowry said that training is a big piece of this, and the key is keep everyone involved in the process. Ms. Fegley stated that the RFP will include details of what kind of training is needed, as well as an idea of time and resources needed. Mr. Lowry stated that there are various teams building to represent departments and projects. This will have a lot to do with its success. They expect this to be implemented by December 2016. Under project organization, he is dedicating staff resources and will have a project manager. Teri Maerki will head this up, as she is very knowledgeable about budget and interacts with the departments. She wants to retire, so they will create a temporary position at her current pay for this project, four days a week. Part of their internal cost will be this committed resource. They are recruiting for her old position of budget manager. Mr. Anderson stated that the initial cost of the project will be paid out of a fund that has been built up and not charged back to the departments. The cost of the system will be more than this ultimately, so they will have to figure out how to charge the departments in the future, or allocate general funds towards it. They need to keep this in mind for when the system is ready to go. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 5 of 11 Pages Chair Baney asked if they have done a cost-benefit analysis on more automated systems like this one. Mr. Lowry stated they anticipate a large savings, but does not have exact figures. It is like going from very old technology to the newest. In terms of efficiencies, accuracy and access to information, it will be miles ahead of what is being used now. It is possible that FTE’s can change, or those people might be doing different work, perhaps more in the core functions of the departments. It may result in the same number of FTE’s but fewer indirect charges. Mr. Lowry said that Human Resources is not nearly as automated as it should be. They are very reliant on paper. There are many potential changes that can be made there for efficiency. He said that part of the RFP is asking what people and resources will be needed. They will not be able to hire all the staff needed but the manager will be able to help allocate who can do what in each department. 2. Solid Waste Update. Tom Anderson said that the Juniper Ridge cleanup and homeless situation there has resulted in a meeting of various agencies. They cleaned up about 16 tons of trash. The immediate issue is the cost to dispose of this trash, which was mostly done by work crews, the Sheriff’s Office and some city staff and volunteers. A break in disposal fees to the city might be appropriate, at perhaps 50%. This might be a model for the future in working with other agencies to address a community problem. Mr. Schimke stated that it cost $986. He said they waive the fee for the roadside cleanup efforts, done by the County, cities or volunteers, and it comes in the yellow bags so they know what it is. They also waive fees for individuals who try to keep their neighborhoods clean. The Juniper Ridge issue was much larger than they usually see. He would like to see some effort towards keeping this under control all time so it does not get like this again. He feels the cities and County and other groups can come up with some kind of policy for this problem. Commissioner Unger supports the 50/50 split, but he is not sure who is paying for the work crew. Mr. Anderson said the Sheriff did not charge the city for the crew’s work. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 6 of 11 Pages Commissioner Unger said the bigger problem is where the people will end up. Chair Baney stated that they cannot all be housed and there are some other big underlying issues. The Board supports splitting the cost with the City of Bend. ___________________________ Mr. Schimke presented a spreadsheet regarding revenue and expenditures. There needs to be a discussion about adding back services or increasing some offerings. Contributions into the reserve funds were eliminated, and they closed on Sundays. This got them through some hard times. They had $14 million in the fund at one point, and this needs to be replenished. He expects that the next cell will be needed in fiscal year 2019/20. It will cost between $4-5 million. He assumes a 3% annual cost increase, a 1% interest earnings and a 6% annual waste flow increase. He is not entirely comfortable with the 6% figure, as this is based primarily on population growth. Chair Baney asked about the Waste to Energy and Jefferson County projects. Mr. Schimke stated that these are not included. Jefferson County disposes of about 10,000 tons, which is about 10% of that of Deschutes County. Waste to Energy’s success is yet to be known. Theoretically, there are no real world examples of how this will go, so he has not calculated it. If they do not raise rates, funds can be set aside to build the next sale. There is a payout from the Sheriff’s Office due as well. If they go back to seven days a week and expand hours of operation on a daily basis, the cost will be about $400,000. Small businesses seem to want longer hours during the day. This will impact the capital reserve fund and the landfill closure fund. Mr. Schimke stated that per an engineer’s estimate, it costs about $130,000 per acre. Therefore, there should be $600,000 per year set aside for this. It is desirable to be able to use the landfill for twenty years after it is closed for various purposes. There are closure requirements once they are no longer using the site. The next example eliminates the transfer to the Road Department. The fourth example includes this, plus the tipping fee would be increased. This is where they need to be but does require a rate increase. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 7 of 11 Pages Chair Baney asked about franchise fee increases. Mr. Schimke said the growth being experienced is keeping the franchisees healthy. If there is an increase, they may pass this on to their customers. Mr. Schimke asked if the Board wants to see services increased or restored. Commissioner Unger asked if longer days are more cost-effective than adding Sundays. Mr. Schimke said they eliminated 4 FTE’s when they eliminated Sundays. They would need to add three positions back for the expanded hours. He said even just having Knott Landfill open on Sundays is the most expensive way. Commissioner Unger asked if there could be a surcharge on Sundays. Mr. Schimke stated that the surcharge would have to be huge, per visit instead of per ton. Chair Baney stated that there is a fine balance between providing a service and being an enterprise fund. It needs to be more than for the business person, since it is the peoples’ landfill. Commissioner Unger asked if some kind of outreach could be done to determine the need. Chair Baney said they need to generate revenue so when they get to the end, they are ready. She asked where the service aspect comes in. Mr. Schimke said that the primary reason to raise rates is to rebuild the reserve funds. They need to build cells and have to be ready. Rates will need to be adjusted at some point in the near future. Commissioner Unger feels the transfer to Road could be discontinued. He supports raising rates at some time as well. Change needs to be gradual and predictable. Commissioner DeBone would like to keep the Road transfer intact until its funding is more stable. He is also concerned about overhead at the landfills. He wants to know who is asking for what. Mr. Schimke said that the Board had asked about restoring some services. Some adjustment to the revenue side would have to be done to do this. Growth could be higher but no one knows. Mr. Anderson feels that the Board should hear from the Road Department before deciding to eliminate the Road transfer. Mr. Schimke stated that this would be easier to the public instead of a rate increase. Chair Baney asked about the equipment portion of post-closure. Mr. Schimke stated that it will take about $3.5 million at the time of closure. He divided this up by the fifteen years expected. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 8 of 11 Pages The critical one is the next cell and the next cell closure. They are not in dire straits, but waiting can end up costing more. He favors a higher service level but wants to be reasonable, and be able to keep those services intact. There will be a down cycle at some point. Mr. Anderson stated that they could wait to see how the arrangement with Jefferson County goes, and get a better idea of revenue. Chair Baney supports this, and they could analyze transfers during the budget process. Mr. Lowry said the biggest concern he has is contributing to reserves. At some point they have to deal with this property, long after it closes. They need to plan this prudently to reduce liability. The only revenue source is rates. Chair Baney is not opposed to an increase within five years. There are a lot of variables that may or may not be successful. Commissioner Unger noted that increases are in partnership with haulers and separately with citizens. Mr. Schimke stated that the last time they increased rates to the haulers, it amounted to about 50 cents on the average bill. It would add about $1 for the self-haulers. Mr. Anderson said they also would have to evaluate the recycling part of this as well. Mr. Schimke stated the recyclers get small fees for some items and sell a product to others. He does not know how going back to seven days a week would impact them. Chair Baney asked if they could offer being open one Sunday a month, to see how popular it is. Mr. Schimke stated that they would need to have all areas open at that time. 3. 911 Staffing Discussion. Steve Reinke reviewed his staff memo and the need for additional staffing to keep systems up to date. They are recruiting also for another critical position that was just vacated. He is in the process of identifying long-term needs but these positions should not wait. This is a pared-down request from the last analysis, which shows a need for 9,000 additional hours. This request is for a little over 3,000 hours. The projects do equate to more maintenance and there is no question in his mind that the additional staffing will be required into the future for this and for normal work. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 9 of 11 Pages Commissioner DeBone asked if the technology support staff has indicated this need in the past. Mr. Reinke stated there were studies done years ago that identified a need for two more FTE’s. This is not a new concern. The project itself will take at least three years. Most is related to I.T. and CAD, with some towards radio systems changes. Mr. Anderson said that 911 staffing concerns have been apparent for some time. One technical person was always included in this. A decision was put off until the new director was in place and familiar with the department. The strategic planning process for 911 has been in the works for a long time. This request is for the current needs of the department. Sustainability has been an issue and will be dealt with as part of strategic planning. Chair Baney said they do not want to burn out current staff and a shortfall is sustainable for only a brief time. The Board is supportive. ___________________________ Mr. Reinke presented an agreement between the Sheriff’s Office and 911 that clarifies 911’s role of handling teletypes for the Sheriff’s Office after hours. As the Governing Body of the 911 County Service District: DEBONE: Move approval of the 911 Director’s signature of Document No. 2014-569. UNGER: Second. VOTE: DEBONE: Yes. UNGER: Yes. BANEY: Chair votes yes. 4. Discussion of Potential Adoption of a Hybrid Entity Status for HIPAA Purposes. John Laherty spoke about a hybrid entity status for HIPAA purposes. HIPAA applies to healthcare providers and insurers, and the County is both. Historically the entirety of the County government has bee n the covered entity for HIPAA purposes. As a result, every employee has to be trained and must follow the requirements. Anyone in the County could ask for information on another person under these guidelines. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, October 27, 2014 Page 10 of 11 Pages As a practical issue, the County does not treat protected information in that way. A hybrid entity means there are the health care components and the non health care components. Behavioral Health or Corrections would be health care components. The County would have to compile those departmen ts that are covered and those that are not. Those that share information have to be trained accordingly. The others would not have to be trained but could not access protected information, either. There is a definite trend towards hybrid entity status in various government agencies. He spoke with Jane Smilie and she favors this. Multnomah County has gone this direction. Many departments would fall in the non health care category. Some are concerned about health information being in files in their departments that should not be shared. Mr. Anderson asked if there is some kind of training available for the non health care category departments. For instance, some people may apply for a hardship dwelling permit fee waiver at Community Development. It would be good for staff to know what to talk about and what to keep private. Commissioner Unger said that HIPAA can keep some people from doing their job adequately. They may not be able to stay safe or offer proper services. Mr. Laherty said that the Sheriff’s Office feels that the only department that should be included is Corrections. Other situations, such as law enforcement activities, are covered under exceptions. Chair Baney suggested that department heads be asked if they see any problems with this scenario in case some situations are not being considered. Mr. Anderson stated that there is a department head meeting next week where this can be addressed. 5. Other Items. Commissioner Unger stated that the various federal agencies are trying to address the issue of smoke when prescribed burns are done. They seem to be struggling with this. It may take getting some legislators involved. ___________________________ Mr. Anderson stated that the Sisters City Council wants to talk about the Connect V grant and the EDCO manager at next week's joint meeting with them. They may also like an update on the newly opened health clinic. Erik Kropp asked about enhancing security for the Barnes/Sawyer Rooms. The Sheriff offered to do training to administrative staff and those who operate the AlV equipment. Cascade Mediation Services has suggested that the County go out for an RFP for mediation services. Behavioral Health provides some of these services through Circuit Court. Jeff Hall of the Court suggested that the Presiding Judge be asked if a change is appropriate or needed. Dave Doyle said that this is not mediation per se, but a parenting class. There is certain criterion that has to be met. The Court's rules show that they are to utilize Deschutes County, so it is not that simple. Mr. Kropp will suggest that Cascade Mediation contact the Court Administrator. Being no further items discussed, the meeting adjourned at 4:05 p.m. DATED this ,r1!; Day of ~~ 2014 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Tam~ Anthony DeBone, Vice Chair ATTEST: Alan Unger, Commissioner Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, October 27,2014 Page 11 of 11 Pages ______________________________________ 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. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation poss ible, please call (541) 388-6571, or send an e-mail to bonnie.baker@deschutes.org. _________ ______________________________________ 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., MONDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2014 ___________________________ 1. Tax/Finance Update – Wayne Lowry 2. Solid Waste Update – Timm Schimke 3. 911 Staffing Discussion – Steve Reinke 4. Discussion of Potential Adoption of a Hybrid Entity Status for HIPAA Purposes – John Laherty 5. Other Items Monthly Meeting with Board of Commissioners Finance Director/Treasurer AGENDA October 27, 2014 (1) Monthly Investment Report -September 2014 (2) September 2014 Financials (3) Financial/Human Resources System Upgrade/Replacement ry;ayne & Danielle) Investments By County Function General $117,912 ,272 $ Investment Income Fiscal Year 2014-15 Sep-14 I I Y-T-D 71,990 $ 215,725 -- Total Investments $117,912,272 Total Investment Income Less Fee: 5% of Invest. Income Investment Income -Net $ 71,990 (3,600) 68,391 215,725 (10,786) $ 204,939 Municipal Debt Corporate Notes Time Certificates U. S. Treasuries Federal Agencies LGIP/BOTC $ 4,670,000 29,374,000 4,820,000 7,000,000 35,497,000 36,551,272 3.96% 24.91% 4.09% 5.94% 30.10% 31.00% Total Investments $ 117.912.272 100.00% Total Portfolio: By Investment Types Municipal Debt 4 .0% Corporate Notes 24 .9% LGIP/B01 Time 31.0% Certificates 4.1% u. s. Treasuries 5.9% Category Maximums: U.S. Treasuries 100% LGIP 100% Federal Agencies 75% Banker's Acceptances 25% Time Certificates 50% Municipal Debt 25% Corporate Debt 25% Yield Percentages -~.~BOTe I LGIP ~ 0.54% 0.54% Investments ~ 0.81% 0.80% Average ~ 0.74% 0.73% Comoarat 24 Month Treas. ~ 0.58% L GIP Rate ~ 0.54% 36 Month Treasu ~ 1.05% Federal Agencies 30.1% Term Minimums 0-30 days 10% Under 1 Year 25% Under 5 Years 100% Months to Maturity o to 30 Days 31.00% Under 1 Year 39.92% Under 5 Years 100.00% I ----- -- Deschutes County Inv:estments -Portfolio Management Portfolio Details -Investments September 30. 2014 4001174329 Columbia State Bank CO __ ---.2.215/2013 1215/2014 65 0.210 --''-;;..3 ' .;.."".:..0 ___ 40;.:-=-''--_---'--.:..:0.0 -=-1 - 0 .2 '--'___40 .0 ;,.:0 ''-'-=-.000 '4 ''-;,.:00-'-_-----1 1-894 ' 7484 54 __ -"O___ 7/~/2 ~_1 3___1/~I.-"---"=-______.::.:.20 =--_O.2:.:-=-_ 2.0 :..:.0:..:0 . 2.000.000 2.000.000_______ S=-t_er-'-li~ng"--S.::..a.:..v_in-"g"'s-=B-=-a~nk C_=_-'-___-----'-_'I_5 __ 92 0 _=_.:..0 o.:.:03 --=::..:..00-,-,0-,_ _ ~ __--'-.c.:me...'-Fed.::.:-=IB :::."'CO 2//20'3 1/31/2015 122 0.-=00 0.203 140.000 140 .000 140.000H0.:...c.:..:-=-era:...:::..:ank..:"''-----_______-=--"=__..:.2..:. 1_4-=-00-"-'--1,:...:...:..::..:..:9'-----_---=-:.:.=~n!<.s:D_ ~_________ 3/30/2015 180 __.1 50 0_.1_5_2_ _ I OO_____----'--____----'._ ____-l5430C.::.:ol=um bi=a-=S:c::ta~~4" /2013 0_ ____ _._OO_O 'oo .ooo 'oo.oooc 273-150017-5 South Valley Ban k CO 5/20/2013 5/2012015 231 0.748 0.758 200.000 200.000 I 200.000 -__ c:-U"'M:-:P_9~-72c"'00::__25-70 U:_m -ua-B an k _ ___ 61712014 61712015 249 0.400 0.406 "'.000 240 .000 =--------'pq'------240.00.:..0'---_--'2;;..4 0.:..;~ 3692G5F7 General Electric -Corporate N ST___ _ _ _ _ _ 6_0120 ':"-----AA + AI 2.375 0865 :...:;..;;_---'--,4 2;;;.;44 =-_ .;...5.:..;38 1CA__LE 911 7/20 '3 _ /3__,5 272 ',400.000 ''''-=2.:..:.--'2 ';.:..4 '...;:.6...;:-=--____ 36962G5F7 General Electric -Corporate N ~S~I(~/2014 6/30/2015 272 AA+ _ ---,-___~_~54.:..0-,-",-,-_---,,-:...:3 :...:3:...:6 ____,-=--=-'--_ -_ _ --IA1 ~~2.__ 5:..:00 55 ,-,.7 _55 2.:.:5.:..96 SYS10316 Umpqua Bank 7/9/2013 7/912 0_....;15 _-----'-28...;.0.500 0.507 2.0 :...:.;..:...:;..;;_-=.000 00 =------'"":..::..::.:..;-=-0 t-'-""1 .;...00 .000 2"'..;;..::.:..::..:..0 2.000 .00.::..____ 1 94985H5F7 Wells Fargo Corporate Note CASTLE 9/30/2013 7/20/2015 292 AA-_ AA3 ~-,-_,-----,-5 ...;.1 ",-,-.:..;..:..,-_-'-00.::..3 .-'-'------".:..;75c O 0.-=-41,-----,-.000 .0:...:00 '."-"''5::..:0 .00"'-'-';.:.6.::.6.:...7"-____ 1 91159HGX2 US Ban corp CASTLE 41212014 7127 /2015 299 A,--__A1 2 .450 0 .5 0...;._ '''180 .000 ' ""99 .::....::2=-.II---_.1.c.:9-=-2..:.I+ _-,-___=-,----'"'"'' _ '.-'--:..:''-::..:-=_---'-.,.::."'.94 l"'8.:..;.8-=4 .:..;1____ 91159HGX2 _ U ..:::..:a n:...:_-=0~-'-0:...:"--____-=A=~~=-_3 1.;;;=-20 '4'------'--=7/2-''---'-__29 -'---'+ __'A :::..4 :..:0..::.00 .5..:.3;.:-"-=-__'..::..::..:9 .5 '-'1;.:9''''00_=_S'-'B -'-k -C-=-rp--'N te C:...:S.T LE =-261.;;;=-'-'7/2-'---=015 =:..:9 A__ ..:.'=--_---=2 .:..:50_---''5.::..'--__"-'-'7.::..000 '''59 ''-:..:84_---'-.5.::.8.-=-''----'-____I 1~_35 G 0;..;.P R 8 _e e.c.:I .:..:at:...:na;,.:c,t"'g-'-.As-"'"---__-=A.=..10/9/2013 10/9/2015 373 AA+ Aaa _ _ .::.4.::..'------=.4 50__ .::..00 .0 c::.:..._---":..:.'--_ .000..3073' -'-'-=--'---'___F ::..:d:..:ra.:..N_=_io:.::=1M .:.:sn C;,.:STLE 0.--'80 0-'---=--=-I"'.0 =-="-::..:00 ooo.=..=-.'::0=-80 I"'10/9/2014 064159BA3 -----=-=-nk .::.:f---'.:..:..:.a S.::.::.:t-=C A STLE 41312014 '0_____ 3.:.:A_a2 0.750 0.621 540.000 541.62q, :...4;,:.7.:..___Ba'-'--'-o Nov.;;;-=co ia'----------=-___....::::.~/9/2 0 '5 --=-73=..-'-.+_---'-Ac;:c _....:5 °'-'1..:.° - 1 3134G4 HZ4 Federal Hom e Lo an Mtg Cop C __TLE 10/28/2013 10/~1~1 ~ 39 2 AA + Aaa 0.50 0 0.500 2.000.000 2.000.540 2.000.000 10/2 8/2014___AS ___ _ _ _ 36962G4T8 General Electric -..:-=-rporat e .:..;Cc..ST-=-=--......:..:-=-4/2:::.c.----'1I..:/2;,:'5 404 AA+ __' 2.250 0.500 2'-_--'.00 __ __.2 oo 2 .'---38--'..5 1 4 -Co",:.;",:.;,,:.N'-----_..::A;,:-=-LE 7/2..::-=-01.:.:4 1..::9;,:0-'-A__.0 00 __0 2--'..035_'______~0_ ______-j 7427180S5 ______________121 612013 11115/201 5 _____AA_ '.___ __ .4__ '_'___.__'___.000 1 .__---'-,0 50 ______".0'5.293Proct_e_r&_G_a_m-"bl e CASTLE 4'_0_AA-___3 _~_800 0_. 3_0 ~_.000 _~______'0 1 5 ___ ~8 Royal Bank of Canada VINISP 3/27/2014 12115/2015 440,AA-Aa3 2625 0.600 1.500.000 1.535.505 1.536.371 ~N82 ,Eli Lilly & Co. CASTLE 3/2~/~Q ~~~.~6 457 AA -A2 6.570 0.500 '.408.000 _ ..005-..56-----'..- --------1053842647507AB-G ____ "-'----' 31 '----7'05 '5'4-'..2'-0 Berkshire Hathaway Inc CASTLE 3/3/2014 211112016 498 AA Aa2 0.800 0.500 1.000.000 1.004.058 17275RAC6 Cisco Systems Inc CASTLE 2127/2014 ___ _ _5 .5<J.g_______87---'00_0 '.9 9_5-'-..6_2_3_~_ ___-j212212°26 509 AA-A'____O.550 1'----._4.'---__--'._2.,---00_2--'.._21_2 06406HCG20 Bank of New York Mellon Corp CASTLE 4/4/2014 3/4/2016 520 A+ AI 0.700 0.681 1.000.000 1.000.390 1.000.268 2/3/20 16 3133734F6 Federal Home Loan Bank -----c:<iSTL E 5/2/2014 4115/2016 56 2 AA+ Aaa 0.772 0 600 650 .000 650,488 65 1.711 478160AYO IJohnson & Johnson -----1171 2014 5i15r2016 -::5.9 A:;...::...:....--'A ::-:a ..",=-:0 0=--=.-=-.5 ~_------,.56 1.L:.56~'2 --1,CiiSTLE -:::20--,-:AA "'a =---_...;2::-: '5 :---::6:2=O-_...;1",0-:2:--::9-,-:'000 1 ~-=-7='.6.::;2;-:3'-----'6:.;:.6-==-------- 949746QU8Welis Fargo Corporate Note 'VINISP 2/20/2014 611512016 623 A+ A2 3.676 0.750 1.000.000 1.045,480 1.049.377 686053CF4 Oregon School Boards Assoc CASTLE 3/7/2014 6/30/2016 638 A+ Aa 2 0~.~000 .9-=99 ~0:;0:;:0-':.0:;:0-=0--:c ~----~--=0'-;:;~---,:3 . 2.c:'93;::2?-.;::29:;0:---:2-':.9O::;4-=8C::.3~72 ---1 912828QX1 U.S. Treasury 'MBS 6/19/2014 7/31/2016 669 AA-Aaa 1.500 0.548 1,O.00"';:-000 .0:-:',-::7'-:.7,-::7_::_0-I._::_0':-:7;--'-.3:-:0:--::9--:---:-:::---::-:::-::-:-c:-i.. "':-::---_...;I-'-;----:--' 3134G56B6 Federal Ho me Loan Mt g Corp MBS 717120J4 1 8/26/2016 695 AA+ Aaa 0.580 0.629 2.000.000_ 1.990.320 1.998.129 11/26/2014 31359YLS4 Federal Nationa l Mtg Assn PJ 3/5/2014 9115/2016 7 5--'-,.:;,:-A::::=-"'=:-:7,-:_ .8 1:-::6.:,;?_::_=-=----~6",. 1-=7 66 1",.6 ':-: =:-:1,-::AA+_--'-c'aa __--:O.7 8 0C""~2:-__.".--::72 000 6:--::1 ,-,6-:--~-=-~::-:'--_ 3133EAZ76 Fede ral Fann Cred~ Bank CASTLE 51 23/2014 :--:''-::6--'---__::7,;2'=-6---':AA +A'''''-----';-:--~~~~ ~.9c::6.~~=_----:3"',OO 0O.;!2;::4 -==::7:"9/~260'1;~20 ~-____'__'aa 0 .:::;6'=-90 0 .6 86---'3?_.00O.;0?'.OO:OO"=----_::2-':9 7 1 00 =::-::5;:;I 1-=3"'13-=-'A '..::C'''O'''8::__-''''Fed ra::..I:.:om e .Loan Bank CASTLE 7/17/2014 9/28/2016 728 AA+ A.a a 1.125 0.728 2.000.000 2.011 .560 2.014.313 9/28/2015'''=-''''= e'--'H.::;c.:.::.. 3134G4HK7 Federal Home Loan Mtg Co.'£.. CASTLE 3/27/2014 10124/2016 7-:;-:-----':"--;--_ A-=-=--__0-:-'.-=5oo::-::---_ 1-':;9 _---'3 ;;.:15:'-;:-::-::---_ 3:.;:15 42 :-----:3:,:.°:-::1,-::5-,-:.3:::::3_::_5----,--, 5.4 AA +--'--:aa -::';-,:1-=;-'-.0 :-:.0 00 --:-.°-::-=-,.--;-:0:2 10",12=--4",/2",0,--,1---,---41 912828RM4 U.S. Treasury CASTLE 12/27/2013 10/3112()_1§ 761 AA+ Aaa "--"---_ .::0"'.7=-2.:,.7_ ""0 _ ------'00 '------".L:.00:.::--=-5:=.60-=-81""."'000 1"'.0::.:0:.:;:0.c:;.0:.:;:0.::1.c::=--7'--'-.,:-1,:.::0 =-------,----,-=c=-c--:-l 3134G4K98 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp CASTLE 2120/2014 111712016 768 AA+ Aaa 0.800 0.800 2.000.000 1.996.500 2.000.000 111712014 06050TLR1 Bank of America-Corporate CASTLE 5/13/2014 11/14/201 6 775 A A2 1.125 1.050 1 1,900,000 ',894,946 1,90~2:s.9:;:6~1__-__---l 3133EC WV 2 Federal Farm Credit Bank CASTLE 1211712 013 1217/2016 798 AA+Aaa 0.8 75 0.722 2,100.000 2':10~2 :107 .235 0641590Al Bank of Nova Scotia CAS TLE 6/9/2014 12113/2016 804 A+ Aa 2 1.100 0.910 1.800 .000 1.803.006 1.80 7.41 2 1 -:;-~:;;-'P:e:Fe d,,e::..:000 ____"_9-":94 88:-.:0 _ ------'::.::.=...-.5:c'' -r'-19 12 1--'--jr.3",36 G ,,"X~9'-----_-,=:-=-rao;-l iII ational Mtg Ass n PJ 3/6/2014 17)1 9/2016 810 AA+ Aaa 0.800 0.788 2.oo.Q~-=--~__ I .c:-'-l!-:.__ 2"-'.000 4-'-'1::,/.:.:"'::.:0-.:4 06406HCA5 I Bank of New York Mellon Corp CASTLE 4/23/2014 1/1712017 839 --'A:-'-+,.-_."Ac.;I __--::2.:-:.4'=00-=-_ ;I,c.O:--6.:.c7_ 2.000.000 2.054.180 2.060.103 112118/2016 r.9;-,:1.::-28c-;2;-,:8,;:S,;:C;:,;-5__-----;;:su ,---=-CASTLE 1/16/2014 ~A"..=_-_0~._=8=:75 0.:.;.8"'4-.=;.4----'2?-.000=c-:.000=_-=-U;c;.S";-.--'.T:.-;re7'a:,-;c,ry 1/31/2=:0'"'I--=7 __-'.08-;:-53 AA"--'--'+--:.;-aa =_~2c::.00-;:-32.-::-760~-,2.oo1.440 1 0641590Z6 Bank of Nova Scotia CASTLE 51112014 3117/2017 898 A+ Aa2 0.800 0.906 1.000.000 997.640 997,434 1 3/17/2016 912828SS0 U.S. TreasuryWF 1/17/2014 4/30/2017 942 AAA Aaa 0 .875 0.950 2.000.000 1.997.960 1!996 .1~~ f-'0",3-=:-:3A ,,=--__..:,;-----::::fASTLE 6/24/2014 5/512 017 947 AA+ Aal 1.050 1057 2.000 .000 1.993.200 1 999.638 780-:3",",M2 AeP.le Inc 89236TBH7 ToyotaMtrCred -CorpN CASTLE 7/29/2014 5/16/2017 958 AA-AA3 1.125 1.150 2 .125 .000 2.116 .861 2.123.604 ~t=PYB7 Federal National Mtg Assn VINI SP 2/7/2014 5/23/2017 965 flA+ Aaa 2.050 0.885 1,460.000 1.493.945 1.504 .217 31359MEL3 Federal National MtgAssn I CASTLE 12123/2013 6/112017 974 AA+ Aa a 1.061 1.115 l .ooo.ooo~._--:--::-::-:7:-,-.5 7-::-2_::_=-------t96;;.:1:-:0:----------;-----:9:--:-" ,=84 31359MEL37 Federal National Mtg Assn CASTLE 1/2412014 611/2017 974 AA-Aaa 1.081 1.136 1.050.ooo"--_ '-'.'.-:.01.:.:5"'.8:O,8"'6'-----------'-I ...-.0"""'9.c::2"'86=---___---t 29270CYZ2 Bonneville Power Adm lni stralio ;CASTLE 4/24/2014 ; 711/2017 1.004 AA-Aal 1.1 97 1.171--6-iO:OOo 668.734 670.480 1 84247PHS3 SouthemCAPublicPowerAutho ICASTLE 6/17/2014 711/2017 1.004 AA-1.145 1.18 0 1.000.000 992 .620 999.050 1 - 3134G5FK6 Federal Home Loan MIg Corp --cASTLE-----a/21t2014 8/211201 7 1.0 55 AA+ Aaa 1.2 50 1.250 2.000.000 1.996.160 2,000.000 t""i1 /21/2014 912828TM2 US Treasury CASTLE 911012014 8131/2017 1.065 AAA Aaa 0.625 1.061 1.000.000 986.800 987 .512 ~-'-~~~_ ~:...:~ra-'-om .:..:::.::.:a n B .:..k c..:...:~S _---'~2 6/2 0 1-'-9/27120~ AA + A a a '_000 '.-'-_____.000 ~______9 94--'.~______ ________--I~B 8 __'Fede-=-I:...:H.::.:~e Lo -'-~::..:a n:...:____V IN 1 ::.:P I21 ~~~~3~1.09~~2;~~___~______ ______250 ' '_____.000 __.1 40 9_92---,._72_0 3136GOC74 Federal National MtgAssn VINIS P 213/2014 9127/2017 1.09~AA_+__A_a_a_ 1.000 0.943 1.050 .000 1.051,460 1.051 .754 9/27/2015 3130A lZK7 Federal Home Loan Bank MBS 5/28/2014 11128/2017 1.154 AA+ Aaa 0.750 _ -;:-_ 99;;.:7 =-:60;----------;-.000 '::=---:--:=-:::=-:-:=-10.750 .--;1-'-;.00=0----:.00,-::0 -:---="..1 :-::''-:c:7.0001~3c:-30 0""N =-e.:.:1 Home Loan Bank VINISP 41212014 1130/2018 (21i ~+ Aaa -2:00ci--u-iO' . 5cO~6,,,--.7,:,0.,.1:=,5'-'.13"'. ___----:'.:.:/3"'0:,:/2:.:::0-'-'5'"-1,-=--=--=7 ,"-----=-Fe::.:d:.:ra:::.--1.500.000 __I",,.5,--------,-.::96"'5 3136G1AU3 Federal National Mtg Assn VINIS P 1212 31201 3 1/3012018 1.217 AA+--'-=-"-0.700 1.420 1,000 ,000 981 .500 989.163 10/30/2014 3135GOVU4 Federal Na tional Mtg Assn VINISP 11 24/2014 4/3/201 8 1.280 AA+ Aaa 1.125 1.540 --:',OO~-----: 989""'40.,,98 ?950;-..,~3/;-;:2-;:-0:o-,15:1",!OOO=.C:",O ~~.~0----:-"':;;5 "'~41_= 3130A25R3 IFederal Ho me Loan Bank MBS 6119/2014 6119/2018 1.357 AA+ Aaa 1.000 1.026 2.000 .000 1.989 .120 1.998 .142 12/19/2014 1-'3..:.1.::.::.:GI 6B.::.__'----'::.:de.:.::::,I .:.:="'na:..:.::tg As.::."---__--=-IN.::oc'-----_~2 -'--'20 '---'I.:o-=7/2.::.18 '-'-;;...,;.~aa °750 1.8~Q _ _ -=--___ _--'..8 20 97_4.'---8_93 1212 712 0 '4--136=--=--=O Fe :.:ra Nat io:.:..=1M"'-=-co sn V-"-l SP 1I.:o I/.:o-=--'4--'--'2/2-'--=0 -'---=---_'.5 48 AA '-'-,00:...:.:.:0'__'.0_00 98 3 ______________ SYS 10078 Loca l Govt Investment Pool __ 0540 0 .540 32:-:-:5:::75 32 -=--=-:,-'7 :-:2-':;8.'---:75 1~.1:-::8,""7",-=-__-,---",.158 -:-:75;----_3----:.1:-;:5-=-7'=;;;-____ SY S10084 ~~LtheCas~d ~s _ ____~______-'-"--__________________--'.0~.54() __ .~~4~."'39~2~.4~9~7~.~~4~.3~9~2~,4-;:-97~.~4~.3~9~2~.4~9~7+-J __________~540 1 -------; _ ._ ._ __. ___________ ______ I :-'-'--'-"""'7.:o 1-'-::.:56c>.:3 ------'-+1_______ ----=-17 .9-=-1 2.2:.:.2----:.'8:c,.2 :..:.3:.:;:8oc 1-'-18:2..3"-'7--=3...-.64"'=8_1 Memorandum Date: October 13,2014 To: Board of County Commissioners Tom Anderson, County Administrator From: Wayne Lowry, Finance Director RE: Monthly Financial Reports Attached please find September 2014 financial reports for the following funds: General (001), Community Justice -Juvenile (230), Sheriff's (255, 701, 702), Public Health (259), Behavioral Health (275), Community Development (295), Road (325), Community Justice -Adult (355), Commission on Children &Families (370), Solid Waste (610), Insurance Fund (670). 9-1-1 (705), Health Benefits Trust (675). Fair & Expo Center (618). and Justice Court (123). The projected information has been reviewed and updated, where appropriate, by the respective departments. Cc: All Department Heads GENERAL FUND Statement of Financial Operating Data July 1, 2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY 2014 FY2015 I %of Actual Actual Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance Revenues Property Taxes -Current 21,906,239 -0% a) Property Taxes -Prior 704,120 228,599 40% Other General Revenues 2,116,386 1,147,409 51% b) Assessor 875,381 216,613 25% County Clerk 1,276,019 344,811 29% BOPTA 16,097 3,712 23% District Attorney 226,973 22,754 12% Tax Office 236,278 69,967 31% Veterans 80,787 5,931 6% Property Management 91,900 6,000 24% Grant Projects 2,000 -nfa Total Revenues 27,532,179 2,045,795 7% Expenditures Assessor 3,559,750 908,067 24% County Clerk 1,293,531 294,593 19% BOPTA 59,895 17,841 25% District Attorney 5,382,874 1,289,881 23% Tax Office 796,232 223,467 25% Veterans 292,672 79,025 22% Property Management 248,054 63,873 25% Grant Projects 130,054 -nfa Non-Departmental 1,432,177 202,018 18% 22.736,401 576,500 2,247,299 876,137 1,181,190 16,117 182,612 222,199 101,986 25,000 28,165,441 3,793,770 1,536,210 70,777 5,712,168 877,907 354,989 258,569 1,139,696 22,736,401 576,500 2,247,299 876,137 1,181,190 16,117 182,612 222,199 101,986 25,000 28,165,441 3,793,770 1,536,210 70,777 5,712,168 877,907 354,989 258,569 1,139,696 Total Expenditures Transfers Out Total Exp &Transfers Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance $ 13,195,239 16,327,584 29,522,823 (1,990,644) 10,371,843 8,381,199 3,078,765 4,144,032 7,222,796 (5,177,001) 8,381,199 $ 3,204,198 22% 29% 26% 109% $ 13,744,086 14,076,394 27,820,480 344,961 7,692,433 8,037,394 13,744,086 14,076,394 27,820,480 344,961 8,381,199 $ 8,726,160 $ 688,766 688,766 a) Current year taxes received beginning in October b} PIL T received in July -$500,941 Page 1 COMM JUSTICE-JUVENILE Statement of Financial Operating Data Revenues OVA Basic &Diversion State Grant Inmate/Prisoner Housing Jail Funding HB #2712 Food Subsidy Interfund Grant -Gen Fund Interest on Investments Leases SB #1 065-Court Assess. Contract Payments Discovery Fee Case Supervision Fee Federal Grants CFC Interfund Grant Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditures Personnel Services Materials and Services Capital Outlay Transfers Out Total Expenditures Revenues less Expenditures Transfers In-General Fund Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance a) Payments received quarterly July 1, 2014 through September 30, 2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY 2014 I % of Actual BudgetActual -0% a) - 322.574 -0% a) 38.700 97% b) 36,311 47.550 9,057 25% a) 23,988 -0% c) 20,000 -0% a) 7,611 2,203 31% d) 5,200 2,400 n/a e) 17,335 5,948 99% f) 7,415 1,844 41% 1,870 -0% g) -1,012 n/a h) 9,434 1,205 n/a i) 125,429 -n/a 909 200 20% 625,626 62,569 11% 1,255,943 24% 1,035,701 4.887,572 234,728 23% --0% 3,660 915 25% 5,926,933 1,491,586 24% (5,301,306) (1,429,017) 5,368,346 1,342,086 25% 67,040 (86,931 ) 1,177,566 1,244,605 100% $ 1,244,605 $ 1,157,674 FY 2015 Budget I Projection I $ Variance 359,149 359.149 91,379 91,379 40,000 75,000 35,000 36,568 36,568 24,000 24,000 20,000 20,000 7,000 8,000 1,000 7,200 7,200 6,000 20,000 14,000 4,500 4,500 3,800 (3,800) 4,500 4,500 1,205 1,205 1,025 1,025 593,421 652,526 59,105 5,146,491 5,146,491 1,021,392 1,021,392 1,100 1,100 3,660 3,660 6,172,643 6,171,543 1,100 (5,579,222) (5,519,017) 60,205 5,368,346 5,368,346 (210.876) (150.671 ) 60,205 1.250,000 1.244,605 (5,395} $1,039,124 $1,093,935 $ 54,811 b) Increase in projection due to out-of-County detention revenue c) Undergoing scheduled audit. Payment for Jul-Oct expected in December and then 60 days after service rendered beginning November d) Projection based on annualizing year to date e) Sub-lease of space to Rimrock not included in FY 2015 budget f) State payment will exceed the amount estimated for FY 2015 budget g) Agreement with District Attorney's Office no longer in effect h) Policy, requiring supervision fees. not antiCipated at the time the FY 2015 budget was prepared. Projection based on annualizing year to date i) Increased projection due to receipt of FY 2014 funds in FY 2015 Page 2 SHERIFF -Consolidated Statement of Financial Operating Data FY 2014 Actual Revenues (Funds 701 & 702) Law Enf Dist Countywide 20,624.082 Law Enf Dist Rural 12,526,331 Total Revenues 33,150,413 Expenditures (Fund 255) Sheriffs Services 2,308,182 Civil/Special Units 1,132,029 Automotive/Com m u nications 1,701,586 Investigations/Evidence 1,418,744 Patrol 8,247,222 Records 761,260 Adult Jail 14,277,113 Court Security 294,563 Emergency Services 194,888 Special Services 1,352,528 Training 506.938 Other Law Enforcement Svcs 801,895 Non-Departmental 81,701 Total Expenditures 33,078,650 Revenues less Expenditures 71,763 DC Comm Syst Reserve 200,000 Transfer to Reserve Funds 200,000 Change in Fund Balance (328,237) Beginning Fund Balance 9,553,793 Ending Fund Balance $ 9,225,556 July 1,2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY2015 Actual 1% of Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance 508.594 2% 20.365,842 20,753,405 387.563 1,348.133 11% 12,751,766 12,748.796 (2,970) 1,856,727 6% 33,117,608 33,502,201 384,593 620,234 25% 2,467.673 2,467,673 292,052 24% 1,192.980 1,192,880 100 537,477 28% 1,886.365 1,886,265 100 405,882 25% 1,627,803 1,627.703 100 2,007,472 23% 8,705,700 8.705,700 172,285 22% 798,805 798.705 100 3,644,043 24% a} 15,144.157 15,135,157 9,000 77,153 25% 302,867 302,767 100 39,508 22% b) 177,852 385,315 (207,463) 359,240 22% 1.655,424 1.655,424 108,422 20% 551,318 551.218 100 197,401 24% 806,044 806,044 18,201 25% 72,813 72,813 8,479,370 24% 35,389,801 35,587,664 (197,863) (6,622,642) (2,272,193) (2,085,463) 186,730 - - 0% 0% 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 (6,622,642) (2.672.193) (2,485,463) 186,730 9,225,556 120% 7,658,937 9,225,556 1,566,619 2,602,914 $ 4,986,744 $ 6,740,093 $1,753,349$ a) Due to unfilled positions, personnel expenses will be less than planned. Savings will be used for additional jail expansion and jail maintenance expenses not included in the budget b} Homeland Security Grant for Communications equipment was awarded in September. Expenses offset by grant revenue forecast in Fund 701 Page 3-A SHERIFF -Fund 255 Statement of Financial Operating Data FY 2014 Actual Revenues (Fund 255) Law Enf Dist Countywide 20,817,324 Law Enf Dist Rural 12,278,716 Total Revenues 33,096,040 Expenditures (Fund 255) Sheriffs Services 2,308,182 Civil/Special Units 1,132,029 Automotive/Com munications 1,701,586 Investigations/Evidence 1,418,744 Patrol 8,247,222 Records 761,260 Adult Jail 14,277,113 Court Security 294,563 Emergency Services 194,888 Special Services 1,352,528 Training 506,938 Other Law Enforcement Svcs 801,895 Non~Departmental 81,701 Total Expenditures 33,078,650 Revenues less Expenditures $ 17,390 July 1, 2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) Actual I Budget FY 2015 Budget I Projection I $ Variance 5,369,141 21% 25,428,019 22,412,116 (3,015,903) 3,110,229 21% 14,948,526 13,175,548 (1,772,978) 8,479,370 21% 40,376,545 35,587,664 (4,788,881) 620,234 25% 2,467,673 2,467,673 292,052 24% 1,192,980 1,192,880 100 537,477 28% 1,886,365 1,886,265 100 405,882 25% 1,627,803 1,627,703 100 2,007,472 23% 8,705,700 8,705,700 172,285 22% 798,805 798,705 100 3,644,043 24% a) 15,144,157 15,135,157 9,000 77,153 25% 302,867 302,767 100 39,508 22% b) 177,852 385,315 (207,463) 359,240 22% 1,655,424 1,655,424 108,422 20% 551,318 551,218 100 197,401 24% 806,044 806,044 18,201 25% 72,813 72,813 8,479,370 24% 35,389,801 35,587,664 (197,863) -$4,986,744 $ $'4,986,744~ a) Due to unfilled positions, personnel expenses will be less than planned. Savings will be used for additional jail expansion and jail maintenance expenses not included in the budget b) Homeland Security Grant for Communications equipment was awarded in September. Expenses offset by grant revenue forecast in Fund 701 Page 3-B SHERIFF -Expenditure Detail Statement of Financial Operating Data FY 2014 Actual Expenditures Sheriffs Services Personnel 1,342,795 Materials & Services 965,387 Capital Outlay - Total Sheriff's Services 2,308,182 Civil/Special Units Personnel 1,027,640 Materials & Services 104,389 Capital Outlay - Total Civil/Special Units 1,132,029 Automotive/Communications Personnel 400,169 Materials & Services 1,265,667 Capital Outlay 35,750 Total Automotive/Communications 1,701,586 Investigations/Evidence Personnel 1,277,983 Materials & Services 140,761 Capital Outlay - Total Investigations/Evidence 1,418,744 Patrol Personnel 7,450,178 Materials & Services 547,770 Capital Outlay 249,274 Total Patrol 8,247,222 Records Personnel 659,297 Materials & Services 101,963 Capital Outlay - Total Records 761,260 Adult Jail Personnel 11,899,534 Materials & Services 2,069,651 Capital Outlay 63,176 Transfer Out -Jail (D/S & Cap Proj) 244,752 Total Adult Jail 14,277,113 Court Security Personnel 284,173 Materials & Services 10,390 Capital Outlay - Total Court Security 294,563 Emergency Services Personnel 169,170 Materials & Services 25,718 Capital Outlay - Total Emergency Services 194,888 Special Services Personnel 1,152,258 Materials & Services 183,769 Capital Outlay 16,500 Total Special Services 1,352,528 Training Personnel 385,634 Materials & Services 121,303 Capital Outlay - Total Training 506,938 Other Law Enforcement Services Personnel 731,122 Materials & Services 70,773 Capital Outlay - Total Other Law Enforcement SVC5 801,895 Non-Departmental Materials & Services 81,701 Total Non-Departmental 81,701 Total Expenditures $ 33,078,650 July 1, 2014 through September 30, 2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY 2015 Actual I % of Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance 337,406 24% 1,431,828 1,431,828 282,828 28% 1,020,745 1,020,745 -0% 15,100 15,100 620,234 25% 2,467,673 2,467,673 274,967 26% 1,073,870 1,073,870 17,085 14% 119,010 119,010 -0% 100 100 292,052 24% 1,192,980 1,192,880 100 98,598 25% 399,334 399,334 438,879 30% 1,486,931 1,486,931 -0% 100 100 537,477 28% 1,886,365 1,886,265 100 352,172 24% 1,470,106 1,470,106 53,711 34% 157,597 157,597 -0% 100 100 405,882 25% 1,627,803 1,627,703 100 1,847,562 24% 7,728,332 7,728,332 144,845 23% 636,868 636,868 15,065 4% 340,500 340,500 2,007,472 23% 8,705,700 8,705,700 163,225 24% 692,244 692,244 9,061 9% 106,461 106,461 -0% 100 100 172,285 22% 798,805 798,705 100 3,052,808 24% 12,675,178 12,563,178 112,000 455,234 22% 2,039,314 2,047,314 (8,000) -0% 20,900 47,900 (27,000) 136,000 33% 408,765 476,765 (68,000) 3,644,043 24% 15,144,157 15,135,157 9,000 72,700 25% 292,715 292,715 4,453 44% 10,052 10,052 -0% 100 100 77,153 25% 302,867 302,767 100 35,480 24% 147,942 147,942 4,028 14% 29,810 237,373 (207,563) -0% 100 100 39,508 22% 177,852 385,315 (207,463) 317,511 25% 1,273,721 1,273,721 38,769 17% 223,703 223,703 2,959 2% 158,000 158,000 359,240 22% 1,655,424 1,655,424 102,900 25% 416,955 416,955 5,521 4% 134,263 134,263 -0% 100 100 108,422 20% 551,318 551,218 100 159,975 22% 717,594 717,594 30,578 38% 81,310 81,310 6,849 96% 7,140 7,140 197,401 24% 806,044 806,044 18,201 25% 72,813 72,813 18,201 25% 72,813 72,813 $ 8,479,370 24% $35,389,801 $ 35,587,664 $ {197,863~ Pag 4 LED #1 -Countywide Statement of Financial Operating Data FY2014 Actual Revenues Tax Revenues -Current 16,698,208 Tax Revenues· Prior 532,040 SB 1145 1,630,823 Sheriff Fees 365,577 Concealed Handgun License Jail Funding HB 3194 107,806 Jail Funding HB 2712 36,311 State Grant 85,781 Prisoner Housing 329,918 Inmate Telephone Fee 83,297 Federal Grants 20,897 Work Center Work Crews 69,723 Contracts with Des County 475,815 Inmate Commissary Fees 32,480 Interest 50,563 Donations·"Shop with a Cop" 38,361 Miscellaneous 66,441 Total Operating Revenues 20,624,082 EXPENDITURES & TRANSFE RS DC Sheriff's Office 20,817,324 DC Comm Systems Reserve 80,000 Transfer to Reserve Fund 100,000 Total Expenditures 20,997,283 Change in Fund Balance (373,200) Beginning Fund Balance 6,507,110 Ending Fund Balance $ 6,133,909 July 1, 2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) Actual 1% of Budget -0% a) 164,440 46% -0% b) 92,716 44% c) 41,696 28% 107,805 100% 9,057 20% -0% d) -0% e) 8,555 11% . 0% 13,006 26% 19,734 33% 5,064 20% 6,703 17% 29,968 46% 9,850 15% FY2015 Budget I Projection I $ Variance 17,292,244 17,292,244 360,700 360,700 1,628,947 1,628,947 210,000 250,000 40,000 150,000 150,000 107,806 107,806 46,143 46,143 85,370 292,933 207,563 80,000 220,000 140,000 80,000 80,000 20,000 20,000 50,000 50,000 60,632 60,632 25,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 65,000 65,000 64,000 64,000 $ a) Current year taxes received beginning in October b) 1st Qtr payment expected in October 508,594 2% 20,365,842 20,753,405 387,563 5,369,141 - - 21% 0% 0% 25,428,019 80,000 100,000 22,412,116 80,000 100,000 3,015,903 5,369,141 21% 25,608,019 22,592,116 3,015,903 (4,860,547) (5,242,177) (1 ,838,711 ) 3,403,466 6,133,909 117% 5,242,177 6,133,909 891 ,732 1,273,362 $ $ 4,295,199 $4,295,199 c) Fees from distressed property sales and civil papers projected to exceed budget due to continued higher volume d) Homeland Security Grant for communications equipment awarded in September e) SB 395 1 st Qtr revenue of $66,125 will be received in October and actual is prOjected to exceed budget for the year Page 5 lED #2 -Rural 702 Statement of Financial Operating Data FY2015 Budget I Projection I $ Variance Revenues Tax Revenues -Current Tax Revenues -Prior Des Cty Transient Room Tax City of Sisters Marine Board License Fee State Grant Court Fines &Fees Contracts with Des County US Forest Service School Districts Federal Grants Bureau of Reclamation Interest SB #1065 Court Assessment Federal Grants-BlM Donations &Grants -Private Miscellaneous July 1,2014 through September 30,2014 (25% FY 2014 of Fiscal Year) Actual Actual 1% of Budget 7,988,657 -0% a) 8,272,852 8,272,852 262,227 79,805 47% 169,000 169,000 2,838,797 1,050,549 36% 2,920,654 2,920,654 486,678 130,752 25% 523,010 523,010 155,221 -0% b) 169,000 169,000 -0% b) 130,600 130,600124,246 31,170 24% 130,000 130,000135,023 30,142 25% 121,650 121,650119,984 101,375 -0% b) 76,500 76,500 -0% b) 55,000 55,00065,088 2,861 7% 42,000 42,00084,285 -0% b) 27,000 27,00024,023 21,715 4,019 19% 21,000 21,000 17,435 5,948 40% 15,000 15,000 16,213 -0% c) 10,000 (10,000) 12,030 7,030 n/a 7,030 7.030 5,857 9% 68,500 68,50073,333 Total Revenues 12,526,331 1,348,133 11% 12,751,766 12,748,796 (2,970) EXPENDITURES &TRANSFER DC Sheriffs Office DC Comm Systems Reserve Transfer to Reserve Fund S 12,278,716 120,000 100,000 3,110,229 - - 21% 0% 0% 14,948,526 120,000 100,000 13,175,548 120,000 100,000 1,772,978 Total Expenditures Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance $ 12,498,716 27,614 3,046,683 3,074,297 3,110,229 (1,762,096) 3,074,297 $ 1,312,202 21% 127% 15,168,526 (2,416,760) 2,416,760 $ 13,395,548 (646,752) 3,074,297 $2,427,545 1,772,978 1,770,008 657,537 $2,427,545 a) Current year taxes received beginning in October b) Billing in arrears, payment for 1st Qtr services will be received in 2nd Qtr c) BlM notified DCSO that contract would not be renewed after FY 2015 Budget was adopted Page 6 PUBLIC HEALTH Statement of Financial Operating Data Revenues State Grant Environmental Health-Lic Fac OMAP Family Planning Exp Proj Interfund Grants &Contract Grants (Intergvt, Pvt, &Local) Patient Insurance Fees State Miscellaneous Federal Payments Vital Records-Death Health Dept/Patient Fees Contract Payments Vital Records-Birth Child Dev &Rehab Center Interest on Investments Grants &Donations Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditures Personnel Services Materials and Services Capital Outlay Transfers Out Total Expenditures Revenues less Expenditures Transfers In-General Fund Transfers In-PH Res Fund Transfers In-Gen. Fund Other Total Transfers In Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance FY 2014 July 1,2014 through September 30, 2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) Actual Actual I %of Budget 2,878,140 687,686 21% 767,248 55,677 7% 812,441 180,010 27% 400,900 45,940 8% 95,011 260,273 211% 139,171 6,496 2% 232,968 27,575 14% 229,520 -0% 161,576 61,406 60% 100,535 32,495 32% 80,653 13,577 17% 92,637 3,438 5% 36,655 8,560 21% 52,433 -0% 9,077 3,271 55% 38,192 49,637 3309% 10,135 6,137,293 10,271 367% 1,446,311 23% 6,457,193 1,665,300 24% 2,043,710 480,337 23% -20,000 99% 157,320 8,658,223 (2,520,930) 41,160 25% 2,206,798 24% (760,487) 2,701,475 675,369 25% 33,000 -nfa 65,100 2,799,575 278,645 16,275 25% 691,644 25% (68,843) $ 1,273,934 1,552,578 1,552,578 99% $ 1,483,736 a) Grants and contracts projected at amended contract amounts b) M &S increased to reflect amended grants and contracts FY2015 Budget 1 Projection I$ Variance a) a) a) a) a) a) 3,202,798 3,370,141 167,343 779,450 779,450 655,250 625,250 (30,000) 550,000 550,000 123,618 363,024 239,406 269,678 216,775 (52,903) 196,400 196,400 162,352 120,336 (42,016) 101,585 213,507 111,922 100,000 100,000 80,216 80,216 69,291 3,438 (65,853) 41,000 41,000 39,609 39,609 6,000 13,000 7,000 1,500 50,629 49,129 2,800 10,271 7,471 6,381,547 6,773,046 391,499 6,945,993 6,945,515 478 b) 2,090,131 2,421,670 (331,539) 20,200 20,000 200 164,640 164,640 9,220,964 9,551,825 (330,861) (2,839,417) 2,701,475 (2,778,779) 2,701,475 60,638 65,100 65,100 2,766,575 2,766,575 (72,842) (12,204) 60,638 1,570,821 1,552,578 (18,243~ $ 1,497,979 $ 1,540,374 $ 42,395 Page 7 BEHAVIORAL HEALTH Statement of Financial Operating Data Revenues Administrative Fee State Grants OHP Capitation Federal Grants Patient Fees Title 19 Liquor Revenue Divorce Filing Fees Interfund Contract-Gen Fund School Districts Federal Grant (ARRA) Interest on Investments Rentals Marriage Licenses Local Grants Claims Reimbursement State Miscellaneous Justice Reinvestment HB3194 Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditures Personnel Services Materials and Services Capital Outlay Transfers Out Total Expenditures Revenues less Expenditures Transfers In-General Fund Transfers In-Acute Care Svcs Total Transfers In Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance July 1, 2014 through September 30, 2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) I FY2014 %of Actual -::> 8,260,932 2,802,693 25% 7,801,239 1,795,429 19% 469,069 -0% 184,980 -0% 219,846 51,659 26% 246,484 75,318 42% 142,665 12,812 8% 129,788 32,119 23% 127,000 -0% 6,952 -0% 63,750 -0% 21,190 7,559 39% 16,000 750 4% 6,540 2,805 43% 52,891 329,450 n/a 12,918 -n/a 31,820 9,100 n/a 120,000 -n/a 28,157 1,430 27% 17,942,221 5,121,124 23% 3,457,921 23% 6,738,744 12,415,866 1,285,846 14% -0% 204,900 - 51,225 25% 19,359,510 4,794,993 20% (1,417,289) 326,131 344,325 25% 293,593 1,377,302 46,898 25% 1,670,895 391,223 25% 253,606 717,355 2,671,137 2,924,742 88% $2,924,742 $3,642,097 FY2015 Budget I Projection I $ Variance 11,210,767 11,210,767 a) 9,491,085 9,420,999 (70,086) 390,000 436,046 46,046 204,849 201,879 (2,970) 201,610 201,610 180,300 180,300 151,000 151,000 140,600 140,600 127,000 127,000 65,000 SO,OOO (15,000) 34,000 34,000 19,500 19,500 18,800 18,800 6,500 6,SOO b) 329,450 329,450 9,100 9,100 5,318 5,318 22,246,329 22,542,869 296,540 c) 15,362,724 8,910,438 100 204,900 15,092,976 9,087,733 204,900 269,748 (177,295) 100 24,478,162 24,385,609 92,553 (2,231,833) {1,842,740} 389,093 1,377,302 187,594 1,377,302 187,594 1,564,896 1,564,896 (666,937) (277,844) 389,093 3,313,248 2,924,742 {388,506} $ 2,646,311 $2,646,898 $ 587 a) Oregon Health Authority grant projected at amended contract amount b) Grants payments received in FY 2014 will be reported as FY 2015 c) M & S increase related to Oregon Health Authority amended contract Page 8 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Statement of Financial Operating Data FY2014 Actual Revenues Admin-Operations 40,102 Admin-GIS 2,944 Admin-Code Enforcement 261,188 Building Safety 1,748,911 Electrical 408,194 Contract Services 264,039 Env Health-On Site Prog 448,367 Planning-Current 917,674 Planning-Long Range 440,222 Total Revenues 4,531,641 Expenditures Admin-Operations 1,587,119 Admin-GIS 123,751 Admin-Code Enforcement 275,521 Building Safety 688,035 Electrical 217,271 Contract Services 220,779 Env Health-On Site Pgm 181,831 Planning-Current 666,180 Planning-Long Range 425,323 Transfers Out (DIS Fund) 179,035 Total Expenditures 4,564,845 Revenues less Expenditures (33,204) Transfers In/Out In: General Fund -LlR Planning 495,360 Out: COO Reserve Funds 3,660 Total Transfers InlOut 491,700 Change in Fund Balance 458,496 Beginning Fund Balance 1,578,705 Ending Fund Balance $2,037,201 July 1, 2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY 2015 Actual I %of Budget Budget I Projection ~ $ Variance 11,659 23% 51,225 51,225 60 2% 2,500 2,500 88,693 32% 273,000 273,000 593,339 37% 1,616,713 1,616,713 122,967 29% 418,506 418,506 21,474 10% 211,500 211,500 116,463 27% 437,358 437,358 342,056 38% 902,876 902,876 141,398 25% 560,658 560,658 1,438,109 32% 4,474,336 4,474,336 483,780 34% 1,416,868 1,416,868 31,593 24% 129,011 129,011 71,386 24% 297,852 297,852 187,592 23% 822,664 822,664 56,694 24% 234,152 234,152 68,710 24% 281,699 281,699 55,087 20% 274,228 274,228 188,101 27% 706,730 706,730 101,003 18% 553,993 553,993 -0% 173,673 173,673 1,243,946 25% 4,890,870 4,890,870 194,163 (416,534) (416,534) 41,693 25% 166,770 166,770 -0% {861,143} 1861 ,143} 41,693 {694,373} (694,373) 235,855 (1,110,907) (1,110,907) 2,037,201 128% 1,589,113 2,037,201 448,088 $2,273,056 $ 478,206 $ 926,294 $ 448,088 Page 9 ROAD Statement of Financial Operating Data FY 2014 Actual Revenues Motor Vehicle Revenue 11,300,058 Forest Receipts 1,259,367 Federal -PIL T Payment 1 ,064,365 Other Inter-fund Services 850,395 Cities-Bend/Redmond/Sisters 1,097,444 State Miscellaneous 595,804 Sale of Equip & Material 275,086 Assessment Payments (P&I) 15,058 Mineral Lease Royalties 206,097 Interest on Investments 49,562 Miscellaneous 117,069 Total Revenues 16,830,304 Expenditures Personnel Services 5,313,126 Materials and Services 8,051,744 Debt Service - Capital Outlay 121,455 Transfers Out 450,000 Total Expenditures 13,936,325 Revenues less Expenditures 2,893,978 Trans In -Solid Waste 282,148 Trans In -Transp SDC - Trans In-Road Imp Res - Total Transfers In 282,148 Change in Fund Balance 3,176,126 Beginning Fund Balance 6,846,576 Ending Fund Balance $ 10,022,703 a) Payment received annually in February b) PILT payment received July 2014 c} Inter-fund service billed at year end d) Billed and collected upon completion of work e) Payment requested in 3rd quarter July 1,2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY 2015 I "loot Actual Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance 2,707,491 24% 11,220,000 11,220,000 130 0% a) 1,140,950 1,140,950 1,250,809 123% b) 1,020,000 1,250,809 230,809 33,678 3% c} 971,700 971,700 37 0% d) 804,200 804,200 -0% e) 602,629 602,629 798 0% 271,000 271,000 38,681 17% 225,840 225,840 9,321 7% 140,000 140,000 17,634 55% 32,000 32,000 10,088 40% 25,500 25,500 4,068,666 25% 16,453,819 16,684,628 230,809 1,382,585 1,839,576 106,578 928,712 - 25% 17% 91% 10% 0% f) 5,555,695 10,622,604 117,000 8,875,507 600,000 5,555,695 10,622,604 106,578 8,875,507 600,000 10,422 4,257,450 17% 25,770,806 25,760,384 10,422 (188,784) (9,316,987) (9,075,756) 241,231 74,539 - - 25% g} 0% h) 0% h) 298,156 2,000,000 1,000 298,156 2,000,000 ~1,OOOl 74,539 3% 2,299,156 2,298,156 (1,000) (114,245) (7,017,831 ) (6,777,600) 240,231 10,022,703 112% 8,954,332 10,022,703 1,068,371 $ 1,936,501 $ 3,245,102 $1,308,601$ 9,908,458 f) Final payments of two LID loans made in July 2014 g) Transfers made quarterly h} Transfer In-June 2015 Page 10 ADULT PAROLE &PROBATION Statement of Financial Operating Data FY 2014 Actual Revenues SB 1145 3,028,672 DOC Measure 57 220,788 Electronic Monitoring Fee 235,642 Probation Superv. Fees 208,461 Interfund -Sheriff 50,000 Crime Prevention Grant 50,000 CFC-Domestic Violence 70,242 State Subsidy 14,677 Alternate Incarceration 17,725 Interest on Investments 7,807 Probation Work Crew Fees 9,137 State Miscellaneous 4,142 Leases 1,323 Claims Reimbursement 6,997 Justice Reinvest HB3194 458,143 Miscellaneous 671 Total Revenues 4,384,428 Expenditures Personnel Services 3,343,789 Materials and Services 1,107,365 Capital Outlay Total Expenditures 4,451,154 Revenues less Expenditures (66,726) Transfers In-General Fund 451,189 Change in Fund Balance 384,463 Beginning Fund Balance 747,520 Ending Fund Balance $ 1,131,982 July 1, 2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY 2015 I %of Actual Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance 0% a) 3,025,187 3,025,187 217,845 99% b) 220,788 217,845 (2,943) 54,928 25% 220,000 220,000 49,951 26% 190,000 190,000 12,501 25% 50,000 50,000 - -0% c) 50,000 50,000 -0% c) 47,996 47,996 -0% a) 15,158 15,158 -0% d} 15,000 15,000 1,726 28% 6,150 6,150 2,540 51% 4,950 4,950 0% e) 4,301 4,301 -0% 1,500 1,500 -nfa -nfa 168 34% 500 500 339,659 9% 3,851,530 3,848,587 (2,943) 876,349 24% 3,623,526 3,623,526 195,341 17% 1,148,766 1,148,766 -0% 100 100 1,071,690 22% 4,772,392 4,772,292 100 (732,030) (920,862) (923,705) (2,843) 112,797 25% 451,189 451,189 (619,233) (469,673) (472,516) (2,843) 1,131,982 110% 1,030,824 1,131,982 101,158 $ 561,151 $ 659,466 $ 98,315$ 512,749 a) Contract with Dept of Corrections was delayed. Payment, expected in October, includes State Subsidy b) Annual payment received in July c) Payment received quarterly d) Invoiced quarterly e) Annual payment expected in February Page 11 EARLY LEARNING HUB Statement of Financial Operating Data FY2014 Actual Revenues Federal Grants 258,463 Title IV -Family Sup/Pres 21,994 HealthyStart Medicaid 60,561 Youth Investment 124,493 State Grant 55,185 HealthyStart /R-S-G 249,125 OCCF Grant 132,326 Charges for Svcs-Misc 4,138 Program Fees 4,710 Miscellaneous Court Fines &Fees 77,873 Interest on Investments 2,868 Donations 50 Private Grant 130 Sale of Assets 450 Interfund Grants 329,624 Total Revenues 1,321,991 Expenditures Personnel Services 501,770 Materials and Services 1,402,021 Total Expenditures 1,903,791 Revenues less Expenditures (581,800) Transfers In General Fund 278,739 General Fund -Other 89,350 Total Transfers In 368,089 Change in Fund Balance (213,711) Beginning Fund Balance 548,572 Ending Fund Balance $ 334,861 July 1,2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY 2015I% of Actual Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance - - - - - - - - - - 19,272 660 - - - - 0% 0% 0% n/a n/a 0% 0% n/a n/a 0% 25% 26% n/a n/a n/a 0% 157,390 a) 21,994 60,000 a) 254,623 a) 39,499 2,000 77,086 2,500 7,260 157,390 60,000 292,086 37,500 2,000 77,086 2,500 7,260 (21,994) 37,463 (1,999) 19,932 3% 622,352 635,822 13,470 63,493 25% 258,410 258,410 31,972 4% b) 766,142 779,519 {13,377~ 95,465 9% 1,024,552 1,037,929 (13,377) (75,533) (402,200) (402,107) 93 63,072 25% 252,288 252,288 22,338 25% 89,350 89,350 85,410 25% 341,638 341,638 9,877 (60,562) (60,469) 334,861 105% 318,121 334,861 16,740 * $ 257,559 $ 274,392 $ 16,833$ 344,738 a} Grants projected at amended contract amount b} M & S increase related to amended grant contracts Page 12 93 SOLID WASTE Statement of Financial Operating Data Operating Revenues Franchise Disposal Fees Private Disposal Fees Commercial Disp. Fees Franchise 3% Fees Yard Debris Recyclables Special Waste Interest Leases Miscellaneous Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures Personnel Services Materials and Services Debt Service Capital Outlay Total Operating Expenditures Operating Rev less Exp Transfers Out Road SW Capital & Equipment Reserve Total Transfers Out Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance a) Payments due April 15th b) Unpredictable revenue c) Payments made November and May d) Transfer made quarterly e) Transfer made as resources required FY 2014 July 1,2014 through September 30, 2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) Actual Actual I % of Budget 4,209,029 1,227,207 28% 1,518,056 464,528 30% 1,076,538 346,102 32% 210,053 9,452 98,410 36,879 40% 33,345 13,228 29% 40,873 1,844 7% 11,028 4,082 41% 10,801 2,700 25% 21,508 7,229,641 7,095 35% 2,113,116 28% 1,777,663 462,975 24% 3,214,375 565,762 16% 930,157 -0% 25,895 5,948,091 1,281,550 282,148 -0% 1,028,738 16% 1,084,378 74,539 545,000 827,148 454,402 - 74,539 4% 1,009,839 $ 1,224,767 1,679,169 1,679,169 118% $2,689,009 FY 2015 Budget I Projection I $ Variance 4,413,809 4,413,809 1,550,430 1,550,430 1,082,144 1,082,144 5% a) 210,000 210,000 92,000 92,000 45,000 45,000 b) 25,000 25,000 10,000 10,000 10,801 10,801 20,000 20,000 7,459,184 7,459,184 1,936,555 1,936,555 3,435,926 3,435,926 c) 929,794 929,794 227,000 227,000 6,529,275 6,529,275 929,909 929,909 25% d) 0% e) 298,156 298,156 1,525,000 1,525,000 1,823,156 1,823,156 (893,247) (893,247) 1,428,003 1,679,169 251,166 $ 534,756 $ 785,922 $ 251,166 Page 13 RISK MANAGEMENT Statement of Financial Operating Data Revenues Inter-fund Charges: General Liability FY 2014 July 1, 2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) Actual Actual I% of Budget 272,823 94,947 25% 326,526 98,076 25% 164,150 44,388 25% 1,520,352 390,435 25% 318,566 80,502 25% 139,123 6,762 34% 1,400 395 30% 14 -0% 27,540 3,510 15% 15,567 2,786,061 4,993 33% 724,007 25% 268.561 37.078 49.872 638 33.139 2.926 161.994 156.747 4,659 1,493 5,619 - 4,531 528,374 166,668 3,584 202,466 51% 178,556 211,158 377.826 875 830 179,386 72% - 205 19 22.021 666 69,276 92,377 478,204 14,815 15,499 13% 93,747 5,000 - 155,474 103,790 44,261 9,567 52,488 735,427 102,324 1,836,329 - 207,103 35% -0% b) 604,455 39% 324,005 75,066 23% 146,109 2,306,443 33,292 17% 712,814 34% 479,618 11.194 2,631,057 3,110,676 101% $3,110,676 $3,121,869 379,793 379,793 Property Damage 392,304 392,304 Vehicle 177,550 177,550 Workers' Compensation 1,561,804 1,561,804 Unemployment 317,000 317,000 Claims Reimb-Gen Liab/Property 20,000 20.000 Process Fee-EventS/Parades 1,300 1,300 Miscellaneous 110 110 Skid Gar Training 24,000 24,000 Interest on Investments 15,050 15,050 TOTAL REVENUES 2,888,911 2,888,911 Direct Insurance Costs: GENERAL LIABILITY Settlement I Benefit Defense Professional Service Insurance a) Loss Prevention Miscellaneous Repair I Replacement Total General Liability 400,000 450,000 (50,000) PROPERTY DAMAGE Insurance a) Repair I Replacement Total Property Damage 250,000 250,000 VEHICLE Professional Service Insurance Loss Prevention Repair I Replacement Total Vehicle 120,000 120,000 WORKERS' COMPENSATION Settlement I Benefit Professional Service Insurance a) Loss Prevention Miscellaneous Total Workers' Compensation 600,000 600,000 200,000 190,000 10,000 Total Direct Insurance Costs UNEMPLOYMENT -Settlement/Benefits 1.570,000 1,610,000 (40,000) Insurance Administration: Personnel Services 330,406 330,406 Materials & Srvc, Capital Out. & Tranfs. 199,140 199,140 Total Expenditures 2,099,546 2,139,546 {40,000} 789.365 749,365 (40,000) Beginning Fund Balance Change in Fund Balance 3,074,957 3,110,676 35,719 Ending Fund Balance * $ 3,864,322 $ 3,860,041 $ {4,281} FY 2015 Budget I PrOjection I $ Variance a) Annual premiums paid in July b) Payments made quarterly Page 14 DESCHUTES COUNTY 9-1-1 Statement of Financial Operating Data July 1, 2014 through September 30,2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY 2014 FY 2015I%of Actual Budget Budget I Projection I $ VarianceActual Revenues Property Taxes -Current Property Taxes -Prior Federal Grants State Reimbursement Telephone User Tax Data Network Reimb. Jefferson County User Fee Police RMS User Fees Contract Payments Miscellaneous Claims Reimbursement Interest Total Revenues Expenditures Personnel Services Materials and Services Capital Outlay Total Expenditures Revenues less Expenditures Transfers Out -Reserve Fund Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance -0% a) 6,482,0156,258,760 203,163 61,712 45% 138,000 46,514 -0% b) 150,000 9,436 26% 36,00041,813 756,775 -0% c) 750,000 43,943 -0% 30,000 540 2% 30,00029,758 -0% 45,00053,229 236,717 7,096 2% d) 295,788 39,075 -0% 11,000 45,553 4,441 49% 9,000 29,857 -nla 40,303 5,286 17% 30,600 7,825,460 88,512 1% 8,007,403 4,420,333 1,163,499 21% 5,521,419 1,996,805 539,742 26% 2,077,868 66,498 4,384 1% 350,000 6,482,015 138,000 150,000 36,000 750,000 30,000 30,000 45,000 295,788 11,000 9,000 30,600 8,007,403 5,521,419 2,077,868 350,000 6,483,636 1,707,625 21% 7,949,287 7,949,287 1,341,824 (1,619,113) 58,116 58,116 7,800,000 (6,458,176) 10,398,030 $ 3,939,854 $ - (1,619,113) 3,939,854 2,320,741 nla 116% $ 58,116 3,410,000 3,468,116 58,116 3,939,854 $3,997,970 $ 529,854 529,854 a) Current year taxes received beginning in October b) Reimbursement grant. No expenditures made yet in FY 2015 c) Quarterly payments d) Annual billing in December Page 15 Health Benefits Trust Statement of Financial Operating Data Revenues: Internal Premium Charges Part-Time Employee Premium Employee Monthly Co-Pay COIC Retiree I COBRA Co-Pay Prescription Rebates Claims Reimbursements & Misc Interest Total Revenues Expenditures: Personnel Services (all depts) Materials & Services Admin & Well ness Claims Paid-Medical Claims Paid-Prescription Claims Paid-DentalMsion Claims Refunds Stop Loss Insurance Premium State Assessments Administration Fee (EMBS) Preferred Provider Fee Other -Administration Other -Well ness Admin & Wellness Deschutes On-site Clinic Contracted Services Medical Supplies Other Total DOC Deschutes On-site Pharmacy Contracted Services Prescriptions Other Total Pharmacy Total Expenditures Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance $ $ FY 2014 July 1, 2014 through %ofActual September 30, Budget2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) 14,485,502 $ 3,990,070 26% a) 16,955 6,952 35% b) 813.125 214,770 27% b) 1,595.847 447,032 27% b) 1,061,986 266.694 21% b) 154,981 -00/. 2,419 -0% 67.057 20,627 29% 18,197,871 4,946,146 25% 129.509 31,135 21% 11,633,134 2,639,907 21% c) 657.550 150,885 21% c) 1,731,608 411,154 22% c) (182,448) (112,443) nfa 275,052 77,336 19% 67,753 -0% 333,188 94,361 28% 49,712 10,473 16% 42,969 13,354 30% 117,775 44,398 23% 14,726,294 3,329,426 20% 850,209 174,912 19% 54.806 7,415 21% 27,016 4,090 15% 932,031 186,417 19% 314,801 45,929 15% 1,588,726 264,460 16% d) 13,250 3,208 24% 1916,777 313,597 16% 17,704,610 3,860,575 20% 493,261 1,085,571 11,967,822 $ 12,461,082 108% 12,461,082 $ 13,546,653 FY 2015 FY 2015 Budget $15,517,000 20,000 810.000 1,670,000 1,260,000 110,000 50,000 72,000 19,509,000 144,917 12,552,108 709,494 1,868,398 - 400,000 215,000 343,000 57,200 44,642 195,970 16,385,812 943,500 35,000 26.777 1,005,277 306,000 1,696,000 13,321 2,015,321 19,551,327 (42,327) 11.585,710 $11,543,383 FY 2015 Projection $ Variance $15,966,200 $ 449,200 27,809 7,809 859,080 49,080 1,788,127 118,127 1.066,777 (193,223) 110,000 - 50,000 - 80,000 8,000 19,947,993 438,993 144.917 - 11,039,409 1,512,699 593.761 115,733 1,682,223 186,175 (112,443) 112,443 400,000 - 215,000 343,000 - 57,200 - 44,642 - 195,970 - 14,458,762 1,927,050 943,500 - 35.000 26,777 - 1,005,277 - 306,000 1,587.000 109,000 13,321 - 1,906,321 109,000 17.515,277 2.036,050 2,432,716 2,475,043 12,461,082 875,372 $14,893,798 $3,350,415 1% of Exp covered by Revenues 102.80/0 128.1% 99.8% 113.9%1 a) Projection is amount budgeted as Health/Dentallnsurance expenditures in the operating funds. b) Year to Date annualized. c) Average of YTD annualized and 12 month rOiling average. d) Invoice for August 2014 was paid in October -$139,793. If this is a representative amount, FY 2015 projection = $1.587,000 Page 16 FAIR AND EXPO CENTER Statement of Financial Operating Data Through September 30,2014 FY 2015 -Year to Date (25% of YearFY 2014 Actual I % of BudgetActual FY 2015 Budget I Projection I $ Variance Operating Revenues Events Revenues Storage Camping at F & E Horse Stall Rental Food & Beverage Activities, net Concession % -Food Annual County Fair (net) Miscellaneous Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenditures: General F & E Activities Personnel Services Materials and Services Total Operating Expenditures I Results of Operations $ 165,605 35,590 $ 458,147 - 215 52,084 22,866 3,030 3,554 97,917 11,411 205,000 200,000 6,648 5,506 389,320878,251 228,249895,582 164,812657,882 393,0621,553,464 (3,741)(675,213) 26.5% 0.0% 1.3% 5.7% 2.2% 100.0% 100.0% 69.7% 34.7% 24.6% 32.4% 27.4% $ 625,000 $ 625,000 $ 45,000 45,000 16,000 16,000 52,769 52,769 163,589 163,589 11,411 11,411 a) 200,000 245,000 45,000 7,900 7,900 1,121,669 1,166,669 45,000 926,183 926,183 508,386 508,386 1,434,569 1,434,569 (312,900) (267,900) 45,000 Non-Operating Revenues Transfer-General Fund Transfer-Room Tax -(Fund 160) Transfer-Fair & Expo Reserve Interest Grants Rights & Signage Total Non-Operating Revenues Non-Operating Expenditures Debt Service Capital Outlay Total Non-Operating Expenditures TRT -1 % for Marketing Revenues (Fund 170) Less: Expenditures Net TRT 1 % for Marketing Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 374,186 262,900 100,000 409 176,289 72,000 91,251 25.0% 29,361 27.0% -nla 156 nla 280 nla 18,900 23.6% 139,948 25.3%985,784 112,974 -0.0% -0.0%176,289 289,263 -0.0% -0.0%- 12,228 4.2%14,980 (12,228)(14,980) 6,328 123,979 (345) -0.4%(6,673) $ (345) $ 123,634 365,000 108,544 - - - 80,000 553,544 365,000 108,544 - 156 280 80,000 553,980 - -- 156 280 - 436 112,213 100 112,313 112,213 - 112,213 - 100 100 292,333 288,850 3,483 292,333 288,850 3,483 - -- 131,814 177,350 45,536 87,000 {345l (87.345l $ 218,814 $ 177,005 $ {41,8091 a) Revenues and Expenses for the annual fair recorded in a separate fund and the available net income is transferred to the Fair &Expo Center Fund Page 17 JUSTICE COURT Statement of Financial Operating Data FY2014 Actual Revenues Court Fines & Fees 425,632 State Miscellaneous - Interest on Investments 653 Total Revenues 426,285 Expenditures Personnel Services 407,456 Materials and Services 183,148 Total Expenditures 590,605 Revenues less Expenditures (164,319) Transfers In-General Fund 140,819 Change in Fund Balance (23,500) Beginning Fund Balance 153,818 Ending Fund Balance $ 130,317 July 1, 2014 through September 30, 2014 (25% of Fiscal Year) FY 2015 I %of Actual Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance 73,487 16% a) 450,000 443,838 (6,162) -0% 600 600 148 18% 815 815 73,635 16% 451,415 445,253 (6,162) 102,400 54,245 25% 33% b) 416,045 166,093 416,045 140,177 25,916 156,645 27% 582,138 556,222 25,916 (83,010) (130,723) (110,969) 19,754 18,600 25% 74,398 74,398 (64,410) (56,325) (36,571 ) 19,754 130,317 121% 107,621 130,317 22,696 $ 65,907 $ 51,296 $ 93,746 $ 42,450 a) $36,669 was received in Oct for Sept revenue b) $25,000 in software maintenance paid out in July Page 18 -----------------.----.----~-------.---.. ----------~--------------- ~ CAPITAL PROJECTS • Campus Improvement • J ail Project • North County Campus • Sisters Health Clinic Deschutes County Campus Improvement (Fund 463) Inception through September 30,2014 Received and Committed or Expended Projected Total RESOURCES: Transfer in (Note A) $ 796,617 $ $ 796.617 Transfer in -General Fund 150,000 150,000 Transfer in -General County Projects (142) 700,000 700,000 Oregon Judicial Dept Payment 20.000 20,000 Interest Revenue 9,071 400 9,471 Total Resources 1,675,687 400 1,676,087 EXPENDITURES: Basement Jail/Boiler Demolition JB1 168,109 168,109 Basement Public File View JB2 141,862 141,862 1 st Floor Public File View JB3 117,980 117,980 1 st Floor Restrooms/Haslinger Court JB4 401,231 401,231 1 st Floor DeHoog/Bagley Court/Jury Room JB5 81,702 81,702 Accounting Area Open Workspace JB6 40,257 40,257 Courthouse DA Offices JB7 34,348 34,348 Hearing Room Justice Bldg 21Basement Phases 1/2 JB8 331,844 350,556 682,401 "Stone Building" 720 720 Internal Service Fund Charges 7,477 7,477 Total Materials & Services 1,325,531 350,556 1,676,087 Revenues less Expenditures $ 350,156 $ (350,156} Notes: A. Remaining proceeds from the FF&C borrowing for the OSP/911 Building. Completed Projects JRF 1011412014 Deschutes County II' Jail Project (Fund 456) -Phase II'" Beginning July 1, 2012 Through September 30, 2014 Project Budget (Note 1) Actual (Through September 30,2014) Committed Projected Total (Actual + Committed + Projected) Variance Resources Interest $ 26,157 $ 41,174 $ $ 300 $ 42,074 15,917 Transfers In: General County Projects (142) 100,000 240,000 240,000 140,000 General Capital Reserve (143) 1,250,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 General Fund (001) 750,000 750,000 750,000 Sheriffs Office (FY 2015) 136,000 39,697 175,697 175,697 Jamison Acq & Remodel (457) (Note 2) 540,939 540,939 540,939 Bond Issuance, net 8,400,000 8,403,481 8,403,481 3,481 Total Resources 11,067,096 11 ,362,194 39,997 11,402,191 335,095 Expenditures Architect (Note 2) 820,000 930,125 3,300 933,425 (113,425) Engineering 37,654 37,654 (37,654) Environmental 593 593 (593) Surveying 500 500 (500) Consulting 35,000 6,051 4,000 10,051 24,949 Building & Grounds 9,127 9,127 (9,127) Fees & Permits, SDCs (water & sewer) 310,000 337,189 337,189 (27,189) Insurance 40,000 7,938 7,938 32,062 Internal Service Fund Charges 33,700 41,744 41,744 (8,044) Miscellaneous Administrative 30,000 9,925 9,925 20,075 FF & E -Security System 91,103 91,103 (91,103) FF & E -Storage System (4) 25,000 19,942 51,000 70,942 (45,942) Construction -Expansion & Remodel (3) 9,473,396 9,295,055 556,945 9,852,000 (378,604) Construction Contingency 300,000 300,000 Total Expenditures 11,067,096 10,786,946 556,945 58,300 11,402,191 (335,095) °Net $ $ 575,249 $ (556,945) (18,303) ° Note 1: The project includes the Jail expansion and a remodel for the Medical Unit Note 2: Steele: Jail-$699,OOO,Other-$115,400. KMD: Medical-$86,OOO, Housing Study-$21 ,000. Plus expenses. Note 3: Original contract with KNCC-$9,593,276. Change Order #1-$143,482 (Generator-$32,019, Water Closet controls-$91,496 & Bunk Bed Reconfiguation-$19,967) Change Order #2-$115,242 (Addenda 5 & 6-$29,514, Rated Glazing Assemblies-$75,274, Conduitto Expansion-$10,454) Note 4: Projected-Signage $15,000, Furniture $21,000, Misc. $15,000. JRF 10/14/2014 Deschutes County North County -Design Center (Hwy 97). Antler and Unger Inception through September 30,2014 RESOURCES: Loan Proceeds, net of issuance costs Rentals Resources from Fund 142 (FY 2011) Resources from Fund 142 (FY 2011) Resources from Fund 142 (FY 2012) Sale of Design Center/Fund 140 To Be Determined Interest Revenue Total Resources EXPENDITURES: Materials &Services Design Center -Hwy 97 Architect Utilities Other Total Design Center-Hwy 97 Unger Building Architect Engineering Environmental Fees &Permits Furniture,Fixtures &Equipment Relocation Costs Remodel Construction Total Unger Building Antler Building Evergreen School site (Architect Fees) Internal Service Fund Charges Total Materials &Services Debt Service Capital Outlay Land/Building -Design Center Hwy 97 Land/Building -Antler Total Capital Outlay Total Expenditures Net ACTUAL Received 1 Project to II Encumbrances I I Expended &Commitments Date 150,000 150,000 c) 500 500 1.402,013 1,402,013 a) 25,000 25,000 b) 600,000 600,000 721,366 721,366 154,500 154,500 c) 9,382 9,382 2,186,895 875,866 3,062,761 47.092 47,092 b) 24,180 2,844 27,024 d) 3,107 3,107 74,378 2,844 77,222 12,455 20,125 32,580 24,670 24,670 1,605 1,605 20,000 20,000 50,000 50.000 15,000 15,000 e) 600,000 600,000 14,060 729,795 743,855 44,109 44,109 3,803 3,803 33,102 33,102 169,452 732,639 902,091 3,108 154,500 157,608 c) 1,402,013 601,050 2,003,063 2,175,622 887,139 1,402,013 601,050 2,003,063 3,062,761 a) c) 11,273 {11,273} a) The "Design Center" on Hwy 97 was purchased in FY 2011 with resources from General County Projects (Fund 142) -$1,402,013. b) $25,000 was paid to the architect in FY 2011 with resources from General County Projects Fund (Fund 142) c) Antler Building acquired for Cash and Note. The Resources to payoff note to be provided from (1) sale of building on Hwy 97 or (2) from Fund 140/142 d) Commitment is six months of Water &Sewer and Electricity. e) The costs incurred through June 30, 2015 for alternate facilities for Justice Court and Parole &Probation will paid from Fund 462 through June 30, 2015 ... JRF 10/14/2014 1 Deschutes County Sisters Health Clinic (Fund 464) Inception through September 30,2014 ACTUAL Received/Accrued Encumbrances Project to and Expended & Commitments Date RESOURCES: Beginning Net Working Capital Federal Grants Donations (St, Charles & OR Comm Dental) Resources from Fund 142 Transfer in (Fund 142) Transfer in (Fund 270) Interest Revenue Total Resources EXPENDITURES: Materials & Services Architecture/Design Engineering Planning Surveying Interfund Charges Fees, Permits, Insurance & SDCs Miscellaneous Project Costs Miscellaneous Admin Costs Total Materials & Services Capital Outlay New Construction -CS Construction Total Capital Outlay Total Expenditures Net 500,000 23,261 50,381 255,000 50,000 1,020 500,000 a) 23,261 50,381 b) 255,000 c) 21,477 71,477 d) 1,020 879,662 21,477 901,139 67,651 67,651 b) 3,325 3,325 2,029 2,029 3,677 3,677 68,321 300 68,621 16,537 16,537 45 45 161,584 300 161,884 641,939 97,317 739.256 e) 641,939 97,317 739,256 803,523 97,617 901,139 $ 76,140 $ ~76,140) a) Federal Grant Balance received September 10, 2014 b) $50,381 paid in FY 2012 with resources from General County Projects Fund (Fund 142) c) FY 2013 -$100,000; FY 2014 -$155,000 (Resolution No. 2014-023 Feb 26, 2014) d) FY 2014 $50,000 (Resolution No. 2014-024 Feb 26,2014). Resources required to close the project will be proviced by Fund 270. e) Original contract -$552,730, Change Order #1-8 = 180,249.09 .. JRF 10/14/2014 I i I I J i 1 .t Deschutes County, Oregon Financial/Human Resources System Upgrade/Replacement Project Time Line and Work Plan The Finance Department implemented HTE software in 2000. Although the software continues to be supported by HTE and there are relatively few issues with its ability to function and meet the needs of the County, it is outdated and lacks many of the capabilities of modern financial and human resources software packages. These include the ability to search for invoices and other supporting documents online, the ability to easily query the system for information related to past transactions, the ability to automate and track employment and benefit information, the ability to offer real time self services and the ability of managers to use the system on a daily basis. The current software solution results in most County business processes to be extremely reliant on paper documents, manual entry and batch processing of data. The weekly accounts payable process, as an example, results in the production of a stack of documents sometimes two feet high. Those documents are sorted alphabetically by vendor and must be filed in the Finance records room each week. If questions arise in the future regarding a payment to a vendor, the requestor must first determine which check run included the payment before being able to retrieve the documents related to it. A new system will greatly enhance our ability to store data in the system and to easily access it. Payroll is another example. A few departments enter their own time sheets and the balance of time is entered by the payroll specialist in Finance. Monthly entry for all time worked is taken from paper time sheets. Each department's admin staff prepares a time summary document that summarizes all types of time entry for a department for the month. Finance staff check time sheets with the summary to ensure that they balance, enter the time and then again reconcile the time entered report to the corrected payroll summaries. The process is time intensive, paper oriented and does not allow for easy access to payroll data after payroll has been completed. limited human resources functionality was implemented in 2000. All personnel transactions are manually entered, there is no logic between fields, and no connections or interfaces between service providers exist so manual entry is duplicated by Personnel to update the service records again. In order to verify an employee's hire date, Personnel must go to each and every personnel file and pull it. In newer, fully functional human resource applications, records are maintained in a single system as the source of record. This aims to provide a fast, immediate and accurate view of human resource related activities including recruitment, payroll, benefits, performance management, training, compensation, time management and real time analytics. RFP Process for Software Selection The process of procurement will be governed by ORS 279B.060. It will entail a Request for Proposal (RFP). The RFP will briefly describe the functions needed but will not include detailed specifications for each module or functional area. Instead it will identify the various modules or functional areas the County wishes to explore and will include only those essential functions that the County feels are critically important. Proposals will be evaluated by a selection team. The evaluation will include review of the proposals, observations of scripted demonstrations of functionality for each finalist, reference checks and site visits. The final step in the selection process will include the negotiation of a contract for implementation. Desired Functions Finance Human Resources Accounting/Financial Reporting Time and Attendance Budgeting Payroll and Benefits Purchasing Salary Administration Point of Sale/Receivables Employee Performance Mgmt Payables Training Mgmt Recruitment In addition, the County would like to explore a number of self service functions that would allow certain information to be updated by employees and managers. These might include mailing addresses, phone numbers, withholding allowances, and benefit selections. This would also give employees access to historical W-2 information, pay stubs and benefit information. Another important feature is the ability to route documents to authorized approvers electronically to avoid moving paper records around the County for approval. Known as work flow, this feature would greatly streamline many of our business processes and reduce the time and cost from initiation to completion of many transactions. Objectives for New System Implementation 1. Involve key staff from departments to help design best business practices for all financial and human resource functions across the County. 2. Assess current business practices and refine those practices to gain efficiencies and maintain or enhance internal controls. 3. Work with departments to explore "po int-of-sale" related transaction processing, accounting, banking advances and upgrades to address customer convenience and efficiencies. 4. Enhance staffs ability to easily access financial and human resource information and to see real time results. 5. Train department staff in applicable system functions and ensure that users understand how to transact County business using the new tools. 6. Improve the reporting features so that departments can inquire or produce their own reports customized to their needs. 7. Facilitate the creation of the budget document and the CAFR. 8. Maintain compliance with human resource regulations and government reporting requirements including the ADA, FMLA, FLSA, DOL, IRS and EEOC. 9. Ability to track the life cycle of an employee. 10. Improve automation to personnel and benefit information, including maintenance, updates, and standard built-in reporting capabilities. Project Organization Both Finance and Human Resources will dedicate staff resources to the completion of this project. As part of the cost of the project, the Finance Department will establish a position for the life of the project as the joint Project Manager. In addition, Human Resources will commit additional resources for the term of the project. Any positions created to facilitate the implementation will be temporary and will cease once the project is complete. The project will be organized into four teams. These include the Steering Committee, the RFP/Selection Team, the Implementation Team and a Group of Subject Matter Experts. Each Team's purpose and constitution is described below: Steering Committee The Steering committee is made up of the Human Resources Director, the Finance Director, the Director of IT and the County Administrator. The purpose of the Steering committee is to provide the necessary resources to complete the project, to provide higher level guidance to the project, set the direction and tone of the project and to make decisions as necessary related to key elements of the project. RFP/Selection Team The RFP/Selection Team will be a group of County staff that will be responsible for evaluating the responses to the RFP and any other processes that help to determine which vendor is the best for the County. The Selection team will consist of no more than 8 staff members and should be representative of the various user departments and the various functions, both financial and human resources related, that will be performed with the new system. The participants on the selection team will be appointed by the Steering Committee. Implementation Team The Implementation team will include staff members from Finance, Human Resources, IT and user departments to ensure that all the knowledge, skills and abilities are available to carryout the implementation process. Members of the implementation team will work with each other and with members of the vendors team to move through the implementation phase of the project. Implementation team members will be expected to contribute significant time and effort to the implementation process and must have the approval of their department heads to participate. Implementation team members will be appointed by the steering committee. Subject Matter Experts The Steering committee will appoint certain individuals as subject matter experts to advise the various teams on each applicable functional area as needed. Subject matter experts may also be active on the implementation and the selection team. Implementation • The implementation team will provide support to the vendor and to users throughout the implementation process by providing departmental insights, advice on business process decisions, perform testing and validation and receive and provide training. • Implement a transition plan to move information (data) to the new system. Data scrubbing is essential to ensure the new system's data integrity. This can be a manual, intensive process if data is not available or is unreliable to map to the new system. • Each functional area will be thoroughly tested prior to implementation. • Room in the schedule will be made to provide training to County staff prior to going live to ensure that all users are capable of using the new system efficiently and effectively. • Regular communication with users will be established throughout the implementation process to ensure that issues are addressed as they arise and users are well informed of the progress of the project. • Project status will be regularly communicated to County Administration, Department Heads and the Board of County Commissioners. Proposed Schedule The draft initial implementation schedule is estimated as follows: Initial Work plan developed and approved by County Administration November I, 2014 RFP developed and issued February I, 2015 Proposals reviewed and selection made June I, 2015 Contract with vendor in place June 30, 2015 Implementation completed -all phases December 31, 2016 DESCHUTES COUNTSOLID WASTE PROGRAM REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE FORECASTING MODEL (j) BeB FY 13-14 FY 14-15 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 17-18 FY 18-19 COST OF OPERATIONS: 1 Personnel/Labor 1,867 ,445 1,891,970 1,948,729 2 ,007,191 2,067,4 07 2,129,429 # 2 Materials & Service 3,325,018 3,435,926 3 ,539,004 3,645,174 3 ,754,529 3,867,165 3 Road Department Transfer 282 ,148 298,156 320,290 339 ,507 359,878 381,471 # 4 Debt Service 930 ,157 929 ,794 971,233 971 ,233 971,233 971 ,233 5 Capital Outlay 50,896 227 ,000 70 ,000 72,100 74 ,263 76,491 6 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $ 6 ,455,664 6,782,846 6,849,256 7,035,205 7,227,310 7,425,788 RESERVE FUNDS 7 8 9 10 11 12 CAPIT AL RESERVE FUND Capital Reserve Deposits Interest Earnings Capital Expenditures Subtotal Capital Reserve Activity Caplfal Reserve FunCl Balance 526 ,852 486,000 3,000 -340,023 148 ,977 675 ,829 2,500,000 1,100,000 5 ,000 -3 ,765,981 -160,981 514,84 8 920,302 5,148 -500 ,000 425,450 940,298 1,136,585 9,403 -100,000 1,045,988 1,986,287 1,528,109 19,863 -103 ,000 1,444,972 3,431 ,259 1,841,933 34,31 3 -106,090 1,770 ,156 5,201,415 # 13 CLOSURE FUND Sheriff 1,065,121 1,165,000 1,165,000 14 Closure Fund Deposits 30 ,000 0 0 75,000 75,000 75,000 15 Interest Earnings 7,700 5,000 5 ,617 16,636 16 ,845 17,034 16 Closure Expenditures -21 ,773 -2 ,618 ,700 -68,700 -70 ,761 -72,884 -75,070 17 18 Subtotal Closure Fund Activity Closure Funa Balance 929,348 1,081,048 2,010 ,396 -1,448)00 561,696 1, 101 ,917 1,663,613 20,875 1,684,488 18,961 1,703,449 16,964 1,720,413 19 POST-CLOSURE FUND 20 Post Closure Fund Deposits 0 0 0 0 0 21 Interest Earnings 2,700 5,182 5,234 5,286 5,339 5,392 22 Post-Closure Fund Balance 515 ,486 518,186 523,368 528,602 533,888 539 ,226 544,619 23 EQUIPMENT RESERVE FUND 24 Equipment Reserve Deposits 200 ,000 425,000 100,000 100,000 0 0 25 I nterest Earnings 1,000 1,484 1,499 2,514 3,539 0 26 Egui~ment Ex~enditures -203,092 -425,000 0 0 -250,000 0 27 Subtotal Egui~ment Reserve Activi~ -2,092 1,484 101,499 102,514 -246,461 0 28 Egui~ment Reserve Fund Balance 150,461 148,369 149,853 251 ,351 353 ,865 107,403 107,403 29 30 31 32 REVENUE REQUIREMENTS 7,171,664 8,307,846 7,869 ,558 8,346,791 8,830,419 9,342,721 33 WASTE FLOWS (Tons) 119,263 128,116 135,803 143,951 152,588 161 ,743 PROJECTED REVENUES $ 34 AVERAGE TIP FEE 55 55 55 55 55 55 # 35 FUND BALANCE CARRYFORWARD 1,224 ,767 1,428,003 579,338 600,000 600,000 600,000 36 TIP FEE REVENUE 6 ,808,100 7,046,380 7,469 ,163 7,917,313 8,392,351 8,895,892 37 OTHER 426 ,801 412,801 421 ,057 429,478 438 ,068 446,829 38 39 TOTAL REVENUES GENERATED REVENUE REQUIREMENTS (from above) 8,459,668 7 ,171 ,664 8,887 ,184 8,307 ,846 8,469,558 7,869 ,558 8,946 ,791 8,346,791 9,430,419 8,830,419 9,942 ,721 9,342,721 40 NET OPERATING REVENUE 222 ,883 579,338 1,520,302 1,736,585 2,128,109 2,441,933 41 CONTINGENCY 1,288,004 579 ,338 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 3% Assumed Annual Cost Increase 1 % Assumed Interest Earnings 6% Assumed Annual Waste Flow Growth DESCHUTES COUNTSOLID WASTE PROGRAM REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE FORECASTING MODEL (!J BCB FY 13-14 FY 14-15 FY15-16 FY 16-11 FY 11-18 FY 18-19 COST OF OPERATIONS: 1 Personnel/Labor 1,867,445 1,891,970 2,348 ,72 9 2,419,191 2,491,767 2,566 ,520 # 2 Materials & Service 3,325,018 3,435,926 3,539,004 3,645,174 3,754,529 3,867,165 3 Road Department Transfer 282,148 298,156 320,290 339,507 359,878 381,471 # 4 Debt Service 930 ,157 929,794 971,233 971,233 971,233 971 ,2 33 5 Capital Outlay 50,896 227,000 70 ,000 72,100 74,263 76,491 6 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $ 6,455,664 6,782,846 7,249 ,256 7,447,205 7,651,670 7,862,879 RESERVE FUNDS 7 8 9 10 11 12 CAPITAL RESERVE FUND 526,852 486 ,000 3,000 -340,023 148 ,977 675,829 2,500,000 1,100,000 5,000 -3,765 ,981 -160,981 514 ,848 520,302 5,148 -500,000 25,450 540,298 699 ,585 5,403 -100,000 604 ,988 1,145,287 1,078,749 11,453 -103,000 987,202 2,132,489 1,379,842 21,325 -106,090 1,295,077 3,427,566 # 13 CLOSURE FUND Sheriff 1,065,121 1,165,000 1,165,000 14 Closure Fund Deposits 30,000 0 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 15 Interest Earnings 7,7 00 5,000 5,617 16,636 17,095 17,537 16 Closure Expenditures -21,773 -2,618,700 -68,700 -70,761 -72,884 -75 ,070 17 18 Subtotal Closure Fund Activity Closure Funa Balance 929,348 1,081,048 2 ,010,396 -1,448,700 561 ,696 1,101,917 1,663,613 45,875 1,709,488 44,211 1,753,699 42,467 1,7 96 ,166 19 POST-CLOSURE FUND 20 Post Closure Fund Deposits 0 0 0 0 0 21 Interest Earnings 2,700 5 ,182 5,234 5,286 5,339 5,392 22 Post-Closure Fund Balance 515,486 518 ,186 523,368 528,602 533 ,888 539,226 544,619 23 24 25 26 27 28 EQUIPMENT RESERVE FUND Equipment Reserve Deposits Interest Earnings Eguiement Exeenditures Subtotal Eguiement Reserve Activi!y Eguiement Reserve Fund Balance 150,461 200,000 1,000 -203,092 -2,092 148,369 425,000 1,484 -425,000 1,484 149,853 100,000 1,499 0 101,499 251,351 100,000 2,514 0 102,514 353 ,865 0 3,539 -250,000 -246,461 107,403 0 1,074 1,074 108,477 29 30 31 32 REVENUE REQUIREMENTS 7,171,664 8,307,846 7,869,558 8,346,791 8,830,419 9,342,721 33 WASTE FLOWS (Tons) 119,263 128,116 135,803 143,951 152,588 161,743 34 35 36 37 38 39 PROJECTED REVENUES $ AVERAGE TIP FEE FUND BALANCE CARRYFORWARD TIP FEE REVENUE OTHER TOTAL REVENUES GENERATED REVENUE REQUIREMENTS (from above) 55 1,2 24,767 6,808,100 426,801 8,459,668 7,171,664 55 1,428,003 7,046,380 412 ,801 8,887,184 8,307,846 55 579 ,3 38 7,469,163 421,057 8,469 ,558 7,869,558 55 600,000 7,917 ,313 429,478 8,946,791 8 ,346,791 55 600,000 8,392,351 438,068 9,430,419 8,830,419 55 600,000 8,895,892 446,829 9,942 ,72 1 9,342,721 # 40 NET OPERATING REVENUE 222 ,8 83 579 ,338 1,120,302 1,299,585 1,678,749 1,979,842 41 CONTINGENCY 1,288,004 579,338 600 ,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 3% Assumed Annual Cost Increase 1% Assumed Interest Earnings 6% Assumed Annual Waste Flow Growth DESCHUTES COUNTSOLID WASTE PROGRAM REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE FORECASTING MODEL BCB FY 13-14 FY 14-15 COST OF OPERATIONS: 1 Personnel/Labor 1,867,445 1,891,970 2 Materials & Service 3,325,018 3,435 ,926 3 Road Department Transfer 282,148 298,156 4 Debt Service 930,157 929,794 5 Capital Outlay 50,896 227,000 6 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $ 6,455,664 6,782,846 RESERVE FUNDS 7 CAPITAL RESERVE FUND 2,500,000 8 Capital Reserve Deposits 486,000 1,100,000 9 Interest Earnings 3,000 5,000 10 Capital Expenditures -340 ,023 -3 ,765,981 FY 15-16 2,348,729 3,539,004 0 971,233 70,000 6,928,966 840,592 5,148 -500,000 FY 16-17 2,419,191 3,645,174 0 971,233 72 ,100 7,107,698 1,039,093 8,606 -100,000 FY 17-18 2,491,767 3,754 ,529 0 971,233 74 ,263 7,291,792 1,438,627 18,083 -103,000 FY18-19 2,566,520 # 3,867,165 0 # 971,233 76,491 7,481,409 1,761,313 31,620 -106,090 (}) 11 Subtotal Capital Reserve Activity 148,977 -160,981 345,740 947,699 1,353,710 1,686,843 12 Caplfal Reserve FunCl Balance 526,852 675 ,829 514,848 860 ,588 1,808,287 3,161,997 4,848,840 # 13 CLOSURE FUND Sheriff 1,065,121 1,165,000 1,165,000 14 Closure Fund Deposits 30,000 0 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 15 Interest Earnings 7,700 5,000 5,617 16,636 17,095 17,537 16 Closure Ex~enditures -21,773 -2,618,700 -68,700 -70,761 -72,884 -75,070 17 18 Subtotal Closure Fund Activity Closure FunCl Balance 929,348 1,081 ,048 2,010,396 -1,448,700 561,696 1,101,917 1,663,613 45,875 1,709,488 44,211 1,753,699 42,467 1,796,166 19 POST-CLOSURE FUND 20 Post Closure Fund Deposits 0 ° 0 0 0 21 Interest Earnings 2,700 5,182 5,234 5,286 5,339 5,392 22 Post-Closure Fund Balance 515,486 518,186 523,368 528,602 533,888 539 ,226 544,619 23 EQUIPMENT RESERVE FUND 24 Equipment Reserve Deposits 200,000 425 ,000 100,000 100,000 0 0 25 Interest Earnings 1,000 1,484 1,499 2,514 3,539 1,074 26 EguiQment EXQenditures -203,092 -425,000 0 ° -250 ,000 27 Subtotal Egui~ment Reserve Activi~ -2,092 1,484 101,499 102,514 -246,461 1,074 28 Egui~ment Reserve Fund Balance 150,461 148,369 149,853 251,351 353 ,865 107,403 108,477 29 30 31 32 REVENUE REQUIREMENTS 33 WASTE FLOWS (Tons) PROJECTED REVENUES $ 34 AVERAGE TIP FEE 35 FUND BALANCE CARRYFORWARD 36 TIP FEE REVENUE 37 OTHER 7,171,664 119,263 55 1,224,767 6,808,100 426,801 8,307,846 128,116 55 1,428,003 7,046,380 412 ,801 7,869,558 135,803 55 579,338 7,469,163 421,057 8,346,791 143,951 55 600,000 7,917,313 429,478 8,830,419 152,588 55 600,000 8,392,351 438,068 9,342,721 161,743 55 # 600 ,000 8,895,892 446,829 38 TOTAL REVENUES GENERATED 8,459 ,668 8,887,184 8,469,558 8,946,791 9,430,419 9,942,721 39 REVENUE REQUIREMENTS {from above) 7,171,664 8,307,846 7,869,558 8,346,791 8,830,419 9,342,721 40 NET OPERATING REVENUE 222,883 579,338 1,440,592 1,639,093 2,038,627 2 ,361,313 41 CONTINGENCY 1,288,004 579,338 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 3% Assumed Annual Cost Increase 1 % Assumed Interest Earnings 6% Assumed Annual Waste Flow Growth DESCHUTES COUNTSOLID WASTE PROGRAM (j)REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE FORECASTING MODEL BCB FY 13-14 FY 14-15 FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 17-18 FY 18-19 COST OF OPERATIONS: 1 Personnel/Labor 1,867,445 1,891,970 2,348,729 2,419,191 2,491,767 2,566 ,520 # 2 Materials & Service 3,325,018 3,435 ,926 3,539,004 3,645,174 3,754,529 3,867,165 3 Road Department Transfer 282 ,148 298,156 0 0 0 0 # 4 Debt Service 930,157 929,794 971 ,233 971,233 971,233 971 ,233 5 Capital Outlay 50,896 227,000 70,000 72,100 74 ,263 76,491 6 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $ 6,455,664 6,782,846 6,928,966 7,107,698 7,291,792 7,481,409 RESERVE FUNDS 7 CAPITAL RESERVE FUND 2,500,000 8 Capital Reserve Deposits 486,000 1,100,000 1,2 19,607 958,849 1,301 ,568 1,670 ,030 9 Interest Earnings 3,000 5,000 5,148 12,396 21,106 33,305 10 Capital Expenditures -340,023 -3,765,981 -500 ,000 -100,000 -10 3,000 -106,090 11 Subtotal Capital Reserve Activity 146,977 -160,981 724,755 871,245 1,219,677 1,597 ,246 12 Caplfal Reserve Funa Balance 526,852 675 ,829 514,848 1,239,603 2 ,110,848 3,330,525 4,927 ,770 # 13 CLOSURE FUND Sheriff 1,065,121 1,165,000 1,165,000 14 Closure Fund Deposits 30,000 0 0 600,000 600,000 600,000 # 15 Interest Earnings 7 ,700 5,000 5,617 16,636 22 ,095 27,567 16 Closure Expenditures -21,773 -2,618 ,700 -B8 ,700 -70,761 -72,684 -75,070 17 18 Subtotal Closure Fund Activity Closure Funa Balance 929,348 1,081 ,048 2,010,396 -1 ,448,700 561 ,696 1,101 ,917 1,663,613 545,875 2,209,488 549,211 2 ,758 ,699 552 ,517 3 ,311,216 19 POST-CLOSURE FUND 20 Post Closure Fund Deposits 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 # 21 Interest Earnings 2,700 5,182 5,234 7,286 9 ,359 11,452 22 Post-Closure Fund Balance 515,486 518 ,166 523,368 728,602 935 ,888 1,145,246 1,356,699 23 EQUIPMENT RESERVE FUND 24 Equipment Reserve Deposits 200,000 425,000 200,000 200 ,000 200,000 200,000 # 25 Interest Earnings 1,000 1,484 1,499 3,514 5,549 0 26 Eguif2ment EXf2enditures -203,092 -425,000 0 0 -250,000 27 Subtotal EgUif2ment Reserve Activi!y -2 ,092 1,484 201,499 203,514 -44,451 200,000 28 Equipment Reserve Fund Balance 150,461 ~48,369 149,853 351 ,351 554,865 510 ,413 710,413 REVENUE REQUIREMENTS 7,171 ,664 8,307,846 8,548,573 9,066,546 9,593,360 10,151,439 33 WASTE FLOWS (Tons) 119,263 128,116 135,803 143 ,951 152,586 161,743 PROJECTED REVENUES $ 34 AVERAGE TIP FEE 55 55 60 60 60 60 # 35 FUND BALANCE CARRYFORWARD 1,224 ,767 1,428 ,003 579,338 600,000 600,000 600 ,000 36 TIP FEE REVENUE 6 ,808,100 7,046 ,380 8,148 ,178 6,637,06 6 9,155,292 9,704,610 37 OTHER 426,801 412,801 421,057 429,478 438 ,068 446,629 38 TOTAL REVENUES GENERATED 8,459,668 8,887,184 9,148,573 9 ,666 ,546 10,193,360 10,751,439 39 REVENUE REQUIREMENTS (from above) 7,171,664 8 ,307,846 8,548 ,573 9,066 ,546 9 ,593,360 10,151,439 40 NET OPERATING REVENUE 222,883 579,338 1,819,607 1,558,849 1,901,568 2,270,030 41 CONTINGENCY 1,288,004 579 ,338 600,000 600 ,000 600,000 600,000 3% Assumed Annual Cost Increase 1 % Assumed Interest Earnings 6% Assumed Annual Waste Flow Growth Deschutes County 9-1-1 Service District Staff Report DATE: October 17, 2014 TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Steve Reinke, Director THROUGH: Tom Anderson, County Administrator SUBJECT: Technical Services Workload Analysis / Request for One FTE ISSUE: An increase in a Department’s employee count requires Board approval. BACKGROUND: Early in my tenure with Deschutes 9-1-1, I noted there were a considerable number of stalled and incomplete projects in our Technical Services Division. I asked Technical Services Manager Rick Silbaugh to prepare information detailing his Division’s responsibilities, and to compare them with the staff resources available to respond to internal and external demands for service. DISCUSSION: Rick’s analysis concluded the Division’s two current employees (Rick and Barry Allen) are available for work 3,184 hours a year, yet the Division’s day to day maintenance and operations require 6,561 annual hours. The shortfall is equivalent to two full-time employees. Of note is the shortfall of available staff hours does not address a number of outstanding projects, nor does it accommodate Next Generation (NG) 9-1-1 enhancements nor the planning, design and implementation of a new radio system. Staff intends to utilize an upcoming strategic planning process to identify those needs as well as the District’s other capital and operational requirements as part of a long term strategy. Public Safety Systems Specialist Barry Allen will retire on May 31, 2015. This year’s budget included funding to hire his replacement on July 1, 2014 so there would be several months of overlap to help an orderly transition of duties. The anticipated hire date for the position is late November, 2014. This request for this new position is being made now due to the immediate need for assistance with critical infrastructure maintenance. RECOMMENDATION: Using the current recruitment, hire one Public Safety Systems Specialist in addition to hiring Barry’s replacement. ACTION REQUESTED: Consider authorizing an increase from 49.5 to 50.5 FTEs for the Deschutes County 9-1-1 Service District. Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (54!) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT For Board BBsiass8 Aleetiftg of October 21, 2014 waR f( (esSl()N DATE: 10/16/14 FROM: John Lah~ Legal Department (541) 330-4645 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Discussion of County's potential adoption of hybrid entity statuts for HP AA purposes. PUBLIC HEARING ON TmS DATE? No BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Currently, the entirety ofDeschutes County government is a HIP AA "Covered Entity." This means that all County employees, whether they regularly use protected health information or not, must be HIPAA trained and must comply with HIP AA privacy and security rules. In order to reduce the number of County employees that are subject to HIP AA privacy and security rules, County's Legal Dept. recommends that the County adopt "Hybrid Entity" status under HIPAA. Ifthe County becomes a Hybrid Entity, only those County departments/divisions that regularly use protected health information (i.e., Health Services, Community Justice, Legal, etc.) would be subject to HIP AA privacy and security rules. Other departments (i.e., Road Dept., Solid Waste, Community Development, etc.) would not be subject to those rules. It is anticipated that adopting Hybrid Entity status would make it easier for the County to (a) comply with HIPAA training requirements, (b) satisfy HIPAA rules relating to the privacy and security of protected health information, and (c) reduce the possibility of HIP AA breaches by County employees who do not regularly use protected health information and are, therefore, not familiar with HIPAA rules governing that information. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: It is anticipated that adoption ofHybrid Entity status would reduce the County's HIP AA training costs. RECOMMENDATION & ACfION REQUESTED: Advise the Legal Dept. whether to move forward in process of adopting Hybrid Entity status - specifically, by briefing affected department heads and drafting necessary documents. ATTENDANCE: John Laherty DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS: BOCC; Administration. DESCHUTES COUNTY LEGAL COUNSEL ~ JOHN E. LAHERTY Assistant Legal Counsel tl541-330-4645 TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: October 16, 2014 RE: County Adoption of Hybrid Entity Status for HIPAA Purposes This memo addresses the possibility of Deschutes County adopting "hybrid entity" status for HIP AA purposes. I. What is "Hybrid Entity" Status Under HIPAA and Why Should Deschutes County Consider Adopting It? Over the past twenty-five years, many health-care providers and insurance companies have adopted a system of storing, maintaining and sharing patients' protected health information ("PHI") in an electronic format. As this practice has increased, so have concerns over patient privacy. In response to these concerns, Congress enacted the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIP AA") in 1996. "Covered entities" --consisting ofhealth plans, health care providers, and other entities (i.e., medical billing services) that transmit PHI electronically, must comply with HIPAA's provisions. HIP AA places restrictions on how, and under what circumstances, a Covered Entity may disclose a person's PHI, and establishes standards for how Covered Entities must store, maintain and access PHI. Ordinarily, if any part of an entity qualifies for Covered Entity status, then the entire entity is considered a Covered Entity for HIP AA purposes. By way of example, because certain Deschutes County departments (i.e., the Health Department) provide health-care services and transmit PHI electronically, the entire County government is likely a Covered Entity. Therefore, any County employee who comes into possession of PHI must comply with HIP AA rules, regardless of whether he or she performs any health-care related function. Board of County Commissioners Re: Hybrid Entity for HIP AA Purposes October 16, 2014, Page 2 In order to avoid the entire County government -and all County employees --being subject to HIPAA, the law allows the County to adopt "Hybrid Entity" status. A Hybrid Entity is one in which certain agencies or departments are designated as "Health Care Components" and others as "Non-Health Care Components." In a Hybrid Entity, only the Health Care Components must comply with HIPAA's provisions--Non-Health Care Components are exempt from the law's requirements. As a practical matter, the County's adoption of Hybrid Entity status would reduce the number of County departments and employees subject to HIP AA. This in tum would likely reduce the chance ofHIPAA violations within County government. In particular, adoption of Hybrid Entity status would insulate the County from HIP AA liability for the actions of County employees who do not perform health-care related services i.e., the employees least likely to be familiar with HIP AA' s requirements and, therefore, the most likely to inadvertently violate HIP AA. Adoption of Hybrid Entity status would also reduce employee training, since only those County employees working for a "Health Care Component" would need to be HIPAA-trained. II. How Would Deschutes County Adopt Hybrid Entity Status? Adoption of Hybrid Entity Status would involve several steps. Specifically: (1) The Board of County Commissioners would need to adopt a resolution declaring the County a Hybrid Entity and designating each department (or other subdivision) of County government as either a Health Care Component or a Non-Health Care Component; (2) The County would need to appoint a "security official" responsible for developing and implementing HIP AA-compliant policies and procedures regarding the Health-Care Components' handling, storage and maintenance of PHI; (3) The County would need to appoint a "privacy official" responsible for developing and implementing HIP AA-compliant policies and procedures regarding the Health-Care Component's disclosure of PHI; (4) The County would need to adopt HIP AA-compliant security and privacy policies; and (5) The County would need to provide HIPAA training to County employees working for a Health-Care Component. It should be noted that if the County does not adopt Hybrid Entity status, HIP AA still requires the County to perform items 2 through 5, above (with the required policies, procedures and training applicable to all of County government, rather than just the Health-Care Components). So, these items do not impose any additional burden on the County as a result of electing Hybrid Entity status. Board of County Commissioners Re: Hybrid Entity for HIP AA Purposes October 16,2014, Page 3 III. What Are the Possible Drawbacks to Adopting Hybrid Entity Status? Aside from the resources involved in performing the necessary steps to become a valid Hybrid Entity, the main issue is how Hybrid Entity status will affect the County's ability to share PHI internally. Currently, because the Covered Entity consists of all of County government, separate departments can share PHI openly. For instance, if the County personnel department requests an individual's medical records from the County health department, the health department can provide that PHI without any HIP AA issues being raised. However, if the County were to adopt Hybrid Entity status, Health Care Components of County government would only be able to share information with Non-Health Care Components in accordance with HIPAA restrictions and requirements (in most circumstances, upon a court order, execution of a Business Associate Agreement or with the patient's consent). This could reduce the efficiency of County operations in those situations where a Non-Health Care Component needs to access PHI in order to perform a function. This drawback could be significantly reduced, if not entirely eliminated, by making the Health Care Component designation broad enough to encompass any County department that may reasonably be expected to handle PHI in the future. Of course, the broader the Health-Care Component designation, the more County employees that are subject to HIP AA, and the weaker the benefits of electing Hybrid Entity status become. For this reason, it is important that the designation of a County department as a Health Care Component or Non-Health Care Components be performed after careful consideration of the frequency in which the department may need to access PHI.