Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-01-23 Work Session Minutes Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 1 of 16 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 MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 23, 2013 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Alan Unger, Tammy Baney and Anthony DeBone. Also present were Tom Anderson, Interim County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; and, for a portion of the meeting, Judith Ure, David Givans and David Inbody, Administration; Rhonda Connor, Personnel; Peter Gutowsky and Nick Lelack, Community Development; Scott Johnson and David Visiko, Health Services; Roger Lee of EDCO; McKibben Womack, City of Sisters; and media representative Scott Hammonds of The Bulletin, and three other citizens. Chair Unger opened the meeting at 2:00 p.m. ___________________________ 1. Discussion of Incentives for the 2013 Health Risk Assessment. David Inbody said that they have offered incentives for the past couple of years, to get more participation and to monitor health benefits expenses. In the past, they offered the assessment, then waiving the employee benefits charge for a month; this year they would offer this also to the spouse. They impact the plan equally. This could have a significant positive impact on costs over time. They started to see impacts immediately when they started doing the HRA’s. The next test was how this carried over to the second year. A $25,000 investment resulted in approximately $200,000 being saved. This was discussed by EBAC and the options are now being presented to the Board. EBAC supported waiving the fee a month for the employee and one for the spouse. Commissioner Baney asked if there is a disparity by offering a family two months as opposed to one month for a single employee. Mr. Inbody said it was discussed by EBAC and was felt to be appropriate. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 2 of 16 Mr. Inbody feels it is important to continue this indefinitely. Commissioner Baney asked if there is data that shows the incentive would be appropriate perhaps every other year. Mr. Inbody did not know. One thought is to raise the bar some and require a little more of the employee. It is part of the evolution of the plan and there may be other things to incentivize at some point. They are in the stage of having people get comfortable with the HRA’s and track the results. Mr. Inbody stated they have not yet set the premium rate for next year. Finance will need to know if it is $65 as last year or do they wait to learn the new premium. BANEY: Move approval of the incentive at the monthly premium as recommended by EBAC. DEBONE: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. 2. Consideration of Tobacco-Free Facilities and Grounds Policy No. GA-7. Mr. Kropp said that several months ago David Visiko brought in representatives of other entities to talk about their tobacco use policy. Most comments came from the public works union, but that has been addressed. There has been a tobacco-free policy in County buildings for some years. The recommendation is to do the same for buildings that are owned or financed by the County. Tobacco -fee areas are noted and would be completely tobacco-free on County grounds. They also want to enhance the tobacco cessation program for employees and their dependents. Mr. Visiko thanked Ms. Connor and others who helped bring about this program. They offer twelve weeks of tobacco cessation program benefits plus coaching as much as employees need. They have also waived the co-pay for appropriate products and services. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 3 of 16 Health policy works to bring about change. Most people who use tobacco would like to quit. The City has done this already, as has the State and other agencies. Some people decide it is too difficult to smoke and give it up. Bend Park and Recreation District started out with a high percentage of employees who smoked, and only one or two do now; and most of them are still employed there. This protects families, customers and other visitors. Commissioner Baney wants to be sure the program is in place to support the team effort. It is sometimes a difficult conversation. Being self-insured, it is in the County’s best interest to pursue this. Commissioners DeBone and Unger also support this and want to help the employees as much as possible. In some instances, it involves self-policing efforts. Rodeos, fairs and other events are hard to monitor. BANEY: Move Interim County Administrator signature of the policy when the documents are ready. DEBONE: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. 3. City of Redmond Buildable Lands Inventory for Large Lot Industrial Sites / Permission to Provide Technical Assistance. Mr. Gutowsky gave an overview of the item and that there is a grant available for technical assistance, to help provide the basis for demonstrating the need for this kind of land. This would involve having a template. Discussion occurred regarding the need for this kind of technical assistance, and how the program would work. BANEY: Move approval of the grant application. DEBONE: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 4 of 16 4. Discussion of Lottery Fund Allocation Alternatives. Councilor McKibben Womack of Sisters joined the discussion. Tom Anderson said La Pine wants an economic model similar to Redmond’s. EDCO’s provides efforts for each city in the County. For La Pine, it had to do with the industrial park funds. If the Board is interested in promoti ng this kind of program, where do the funds come from. They need to discuss how or whether to free up lottery funds for purely economic programs. The discussion today should address things more specifically. David Inbody referred to a table showing where funds originate and how they have been used in the past. Service partners are identified; this includes those are requiring services that are required by law and that the County would have to otherwise provide. Community grants, given on an annual basis for other services, are based on specific categories. Some may have been established by the County with assurances the programs will continue. One distinction is the funds originally identified for juvenile crime prevention were combined with community grants. Discretionary funds are granted at the discretion of the Board, throughout the year and can be for many purposes. They can be for a variety of things and are commonly used for emergency purposes. There are examples in the staff memo. Commissioner Baney said the County used to provide transitional housing, which was challenging. Now they provide vouchers and it is overseen by others. Chair Unger said that whether through general funds or lottery funds, these programs need to be supported. Commissioner DeBone asked what is meant by ‘other grants’. Mr. Inbody said the bulk of those were a couple of groups that missed the deadline and the Board granted funding anyway. One was the Boys & Girls Club. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 5 of 16 Commissioner Baney stated that some groups receive funding from more than one program. Chair Unger said that perhaps groups should not be allowed to apply for more than one program. Judith Ure stated that this is one option. The Board could set priorities on an annual basis to review those needs or requests that are topical or recurring. The Commissioners may have individual priorities at the time. One-time events or contributions should be considered, as well as what support might be needed by service partners. The Board could then carve out the discretionary funding part. These could be categorized and the bigger ones funded off the top, such as economic development and larger programs. Regarding community grant programs, categories could be established. Health and human services, special events, economic development and others might be appropriate. They could try to streamline the process and encourage multi - agency applications, and limit applications to one category only. They could also limit discretionary grants to emergency requests only. Another option is to contract with the United Way for a portion of the funds. Most of this would be community grants. The Board might be able to direct United Way to use some of the funds in a certain way, but this is not yet known. They typically only handle basic human services types of needs. Mr. Anderson said that the idea is to start with a clean slate each year, with the Board carving out priorities for the year. They could emphasize one particular aspect for that year. The hard part is saying “no” to worthwhile organizations that have been funded in the past. Chair Unger asked how staff expenses and time could be reduced to have more go to programs. Mr. Inbody stated that the community grant process takes a lot of time. If priorities were established, they could identify where funds are to go and they would only have to deal with what is left over for discretionary grants. Ms. Ure stated they can require additional paperwork from applicants to narrow choices. There are a lot of agencies requesting funds every year. Some ask for more than is reasonable. Targeting the funds should help. Some are recurring requests for discretionary grants, like the La Pine Rodeo. Those should be handled through the community grant process. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 6 of 16 Commissioner Baney said that the legislature has been discussing how these funds are being used. There should be set guidelines. Providing food and shelter for a family does lead to economic development through stability. Other counties use funds differently. This Board can reaffirm why they do what they do. It is difficult to make those decisions when there is a lot of need. It may be wise to enhance economic development for the cities as well. Ms. Ure stated they will have to wait and see if the legislature does something differently. Commissioner DeBone said there used to be more funds available before the economic recession. Video lottery dollars are freely given by the public. He wants to see economic development going towards the trained, professional person on the ground. Then maybe help with food and shelter needs with what remains. Ms. Ure stated there are opportunities to do this. They can fund the larger programs off the top, and then develop broad categories with the rest. Commissioner DeBone said he prefers to support entrepreneurs rather than giving out food. Chair Unger wants to see accountability, and supporting nonprofits. Entrepreneurs are looking for a profit and there is risk attached to this. Commissioner Baney noted that there is an agreement with the State that these are County dollars, held by the State for the benefit of the County. The counties cannot do this locally. Commissioner DeBone stated that the La Pine Industrial Group was terminated, and the City of La Pine wants to hire a half-time person through EDCO, at $20,000 a year for three to five years, to push for economic development in that area. There was talk about combining this position with the City of Sisters, but that will not work. He supports the half-time position for La Pine. Redmond and Bend have their own programs. It is an exciting time for La Pine, which is a growing community, and they need the help there. They need to work on strategic initiatives to make it more business-ready and get the community’s support. It is time to accelerate this for that area. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 7 of 16 Chair Unger said that there are four cities in the county and they need to be treated equitably. He is hearing that there is need for sustainable support and activities. He wants all the cities to grow, but maybe they need an initiative to help them with visioning. The Board needs to be sure this is getting done. Perhaps this type of thing should be done one city at a time. The Board should support visioning and initiative, but equitably. Commissioner DeBone stated that the City of La Pine wants its independence to do what they think is appropriate, but needs some support to do so . He wants to empower them to do things themselves. Chair Unger wants to see an initiative or a plan to show what they hope to accomplish. A small city does not often have the expertise to pull things together. As they get bigger, they can hire someone with more expertise to concentrate on these issues. Commissioner Baney asked if he is thinking of performance measures to justify the County’s funding. Chair Unger said they need to keep the lights on, but an identified single process is needed. Commissioner Baney said that she understands that La Pine will partner with EDCO. She would look to EDCO to help them develop the process. There is a responsibility to others in the unincorporated areas of the County, and they cannot just give money to certain cities and ignore the rest. There need to be outcomes. They cannot provide funding without accountability. Maybe the goal is sustainability for the position in the community within two years. Otherwise, the City may not get around to doing what it should. The City of Sisters is contracting with EDCO for a part-time position. They are asking for funds from County for two years to develop this. They hope to match the funds and work towards a full-time position. It would be $30,000 for two years. Roger Lee stated that economic development on the west coast is regional or local. Some big cities have a lot of organizations doing similar work. They are not insisting communities join EDCO, but EDCO will be a partner if asked. It is effective being a regional organization. Execution comes at the local level. This process has worked well in this area for ten years. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 8 of 16 Discussion has occurred about granting all the funds to EDCO and let them allocate. The cities want their own person who can respond to local issues. Job creation and the economy are the biggest factors now for most people. With a greater investment, communities can reach success. There are a lot of counties that just put the funds into the general fund, and for some small counties it is all used for economic development. Chair Unger said this works best because EDCO is not government. This allows autonomy and a better relationship with businesses. Commissioner DeBone feels that EDCO is the one to help with this. The cities often have their own person on staff. This avoids some politics and personality conflicts. Mr. Lee said that it is less political running the funds through EDCO rather than directly to the cities. It makes sense to have one economic development organization for the region that will represent all cities. It also makes sense to have a person on EDCO who is from that community. Administratively, it is about the same. Mr. Anderson recommended from a staff perspective that these city funds be channeled through EDCO. This avoids competition between cities before the Board. EDCO has to balance requests all the time, but they know where to focus. The Board could be somewhat specific about how the funds are to be used. It may be that Bend and Redmond need to be included. Chair Unger noted that EDCO is traded sector so they are looking at investments. There is a commercial aspect in each community as well. There needs to be good council alignment with EDCO and the County. He is not sure if the cities want traded sector, commercial or industrial. He asked how they get council alignment in this case. Mr. Womack said that Sisters had made some great gains and more clarity with the help of EDCO. Mr. Lee said trader sector is their strongest program, but they do not turn a blind eye to commercial. This will take some of the decision- making from the Commissioners. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 9 of 16 Commissioner Baney asked whom the person would report to, and what happens if things are not getting done. Mr. Womack said they would be hired by EDCO but work with both. Mr. Lee said they handle hiring and oversight consistently. They need to know what the City’s priorities are as well. Advisory boards are usually in place, consisting of local people and recommendations from the city. They would represent broad categories. Commissioner DeBone said that it could be a model that spins off eventually, like REDI. Mr. Lee stated they do not know if the person would be a part-time employee or hired by contract. Mr. Womack said theirs would be full-time because the City would pay for the other half. Chair Unger stated that this action will decimate the partners providing other services, and this is a big concern. Commissioner Baney said that there would be about $120,000 to EDCO in addition to the other amount. She is also thinking this cannot be a forever program. Her intent would be that sustainability is in place within a few years and not support it long -term. At that point, all the cities should be able to sustain it. It would be good to see what they are able to do with this money during that time. That means about a third is going to economic development, and she feels this is a responsible way to go at this time. Mr. Lee gave an overview of how the cities generally handle these kinds of dollars. Mr. Kropp said there are some one-time funds for economic development. This program would be phased out as the one-time funds from foreclosure recordings and similar activates decline. Ms. Ure said that those who have depended on grant funds for a long time need to be advised of changes far in advance so they can adjust and repair any damage. Mr. Anderson stated that starting fresh each year means perhaps in the future EDCO will incorporate that work into additional needs. Looking at one year at a time makes sense. Commissioner Baney feels they need to figure out which should be held harmless from cuts, like public safety. Each year they could set priorities. She believes that families being stable enhances economic development. They do not want to be too willy-nilly because one day this Board will be gone and another Board might have different ideas. Commissioner DeBone said there is a structure for community grants. He is not too worried about that happening. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 10 of 16 Chair Unger stated that some partners rely on these funds. They are able to multiply these dollars tremendously and create economic development opportunities. They find other grants in order to be successful. Commissioner DeBone said that diversifying the economy is more important than chasing more grants for food, housing and similar needs.. Mr. Anderson envisions a two-step process. They need categories to prioritize. They decide which fit under which category. Then they can bring in the dollars for each. Then they could focus on activities that are not purely economic development but can enhance it. Another category could be preserving quality of life, the environment, and other things that are not direct economic development. Ms. Ure said they could establish weights or percentages for the categories, which change as the funding is allocated by the State. Commissioner Baney asked if EDCO would be able to show how the funds have been successfully used. Mr. Lee said that tourism speaks the loudest about economic benefits. There are groups that can provide information on the multipliers. The State is very dependent on personal taxes, so things don’t work well if people don’t have jobs. Chair Unger stated that EDCO has stated in the past the area needs the airport to be successful, along with a good website presence and a four-year university. Lowering taxes also helps. Commissioner DeBone said that Sisters and La Pine having an EDCO person representing them is critically important. Mr. Womack said the City of Sisters hopes to hire someone within the next couple of months. Mr. Lee stated that he understands La Pine wants something sooner. He will put something in writing for the Board to consider. Mr. Lee will draft a document for the Board to consider next week. Ken Wilhelm of United Way said that he sees an endorsement of economic development in a more pure form. There are things that this will enhance. He was struck by the community grant process and the parallel over the years for the County’s process being similar to theirs. This addresses shelter, help for abused or at-risk people, and other human services. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 11 of 16 They are always interested in how to do things better. They can enhance distribution and this has been done in some other places. Betsy Warriner of Volunteer Connect said she supports economic development as well, as they are key to the strength of communities. Research shows that when people are actively engaged with the community, it is better for all. People need to feel hope first. The other thing she feels strongly about is that the system in the U.S. is very different than in other places in the world. Rather than having the government supporting more, there is a partnership between government and nonprofits here. There is always a threat to the partnership when donations are capped and by other factors. At the County level, it is clear there is a partnership. Commissioner said if the County is funding the same things as United Way, perhaps it should go through United Way. But, there are other things critical to the community that are not under the United Way umbrella.. Some don’t fit the criteria, but are noble causes. Chair Unger said these also create community involvement and support. Ms. Warriner said that in the ideal world, someone could study the intersections and what brings the most leverage. Or, maybe some things just serve the mission of one organization or agency. Commissioner Baney said they used to grant significantly to the arts. You start to see a different culture shift when this happens. This does not fit in the United Way list. Natural resources is another that doesn’t fit, as are special events. Ms. Ure stated there are several categories that have gotten grants from the County in the past that don’t fit the United Way criteria. Mr. Wilhelm said he does not want to presume that the County would not provide direction along those lines. This could be done by percentages decided in a priority-setting session. They may be able to respond to some of this. Mr. Wilhelm said he doesn’t have a clear picture of things as they used to be through the Commission on Children & Families. The normal process went away, and the United Way is not in a position to replace it. He had hoped that the regional health assessment would substitute for some of that. If someone is homeless or subject to violence, that is a health risk. There is a void there now. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 12 of 16 He is particularly concerned about adolescents right now, with money being shifted away from those kinds of programs. Commissioner DeBone asked if the County came up with priorities outside of the core programs, could United Way accommodate this. Mr. Wilhelm said that some things are outside of their program and they have to follow a process for those. Commissioner Baney asked if the County wanted to fund two particular groups, whether this can be done. Being a partner in United Way has a lot of value to participating groups. Mr. Wilhelm does not envision them being able to change their partner parameters. They would use the funds as a secondary grant rather than an annual allocation. One issue they have is funding discretionary dollars for agencies that are controversial. They get caught in the middle on some of those. Some of these are gun rights groups, abortion rights groups and similar organizations. Mr. Anderson stated that they could decide on percentages, concentrating on economic development, things that are close to economic development, and others beyond that. This might help with building consensus. Step 2 would be establishing the exact dollar amounts, and more specific proposals on how that funding could be spent. New things might come up in another year that need more support. Chair Unger stated that there should be another category, such as Ready-Set-Go and Healthy Start that don’t fit into the other categories. Ms. Said that some, like Volunteer Connect, don’t provide direct services, but help other groups with their missions and organizational capacity. Commissioner Baney wondered about an economic recovery fund or community resiliency fund. This could get to the jobs piece. Some families get behind and remain vulnerable for a while. Companies want to see a viable workforce. Chair Unger said that this helps with the others. Childcare and the Boys & Girls Club is a good example. Also, if kids are out there with nothing to do, it costs the community through law enforcement efforts. Commissioner Baney said that they would like to know how well 2-1-1 is working, and whether there is a savings to the County with that program. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 13 of 16 Mr. Wilhelm talked about the economic impacts of the arts, like the Sisters Quilt Show and the High Desert Museum. Commissioner Baney said that there are lots of events that affect the economy in a positive way. Commissioner DeBone said that businesses might also want to invest in these activities. Mr. Anderson stated they could use 20% for discretionary funds and figure out what to cover each year. Commissioner DeBone does not want a big fund set up for discretionary use, however; in his opinion, most should go to economic development. Chair Unger hopes they can define these better. Ms. Ure stated that many of the applicants for discretionary funds are also getting or seeking community grant funds, so this would reduce the impact of the requests. Some are already being funded in part directly by County departments. Chair Unger said that although Commissioner DeBone wants these funds to be for economic development, to him it needs to be more than that. Commissioner DeBone asked again about the requested $10,000 funds for La Pine, needed now. Ms. Ure said if this is a priority, there will not be much for the rest of the year for anything else. Commissioner DeBone said he told the La Pine Rodeo folks not to request funds last year but he now wants to support them in the amount of $3,000 to $5,000. Those are the only things he is concerned about at this time. Frontier Days and the Park District may also ask for funding. He used to be a board member on some of these and know they need funding. The expense for the federal lands project for the Parks District is $36,000, and for the City of La Pine it is $85,000 for the land acquisition. Ms. Ure said there are two quarters left for the grant funds. They already have applications for some of this. There is a little bit of savings from sal aries and some carry-over from the others, but some was earmarked for the spay/neuter grant program. Commissioner DeBone stated that La Pine feels the money from LIGI was taken away from them, and this is a give and take, to help out the City. Commissioner Baney stated the City wants $10,000 to hire someone. If this happens, this goes against what they just discussed with EDCO. EDCO can hire the person. Commissioner DeBone said they want to hire someone right away. It is more about him wanting to support La Pine. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 14 of 16 Ms. Ure said they did just allocate a $5,000 match to La Pine for transportation. Commissioner Baney suggested that they can probably find $10,000 to shore up La Pine, and ask them to work with EDCO now and hire through the criteria they just set up. She asked if the $10,000 is in addition to the $20,000 already requested. Commissioner DeBone said yes, this is a parting gift, in part because of what happened with the LIGI funds. Commissioner Baney stated this is government, not a marriage. Maybe $5,000 would be more appropriate. Chair Unger said that the process on the federal land has not been completed. Frontier Days should be able to stand on its own after all these years. Commissioner Baney said that the $241,000 from the LIGI fund has been committed for La Pine to work on the intersection project, even though it could be used anyplace in the County. Chair Unger said he supports this. Commissioner DeBone said they could agree to fund at less than $10,000. Commissioner Baney stated they could give them $10,000 for all. Commissioner DeBone stated this $10,000 would be strictly for starting the hiring process, and maybe the money could be sent to EDCO. Commissioner Baney said they should send the whole $20,000 to EDCO. Mr. Kropp stated that if there is a multi-year commitment, what does that look like. He hears continually about the Sisters recycling depot. The Board can’t bind future Boards to this decision. Commissioner DeBone wants a parting gift to La Pine in lieu of the LIGI issue. He lives there and has to hear about it often. It will help a new and growing City with economic development. Ms. Ure said that this could also come from the business loan fund. It is not much different from funding venture capitalists. Commissioner Baney said that $5,000 to a small nonprofit can be significant. She is wearing thin, and feels the City needs to stand on its own. The County has helped with Little Deschutes Lodge, the Senior Center, and the signal at First Street. She wants to be mindful of other needs, not just in La Pine but also in all other parts of the County. UNGER: Move grant of $5,000 towards the City of La Pine for economic development purposes. BANEY: Second. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 23, 2013 Page 15 of 16 VOTE: UNGER: Chair votes yes. BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Yes. 5. Other Items. The Board discussed a letter of support for a feasibility study grant application for several groups regarding biomass solutions. DEBONE: Move letter of support. BANEY: Second. VOTE: DEBONE: Yes. BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. ___________________________ There was a request from EDCO for the County to participate in an upcoming business summit for support organizations. Commissioners Unger and DeBone indicated they are interested. ___________________________ Mr. Anderson stated that the previously planned County Administrator position search opens this week. He plans to notify employees and put out a press release so all are aware of this. ___________________________ At this time, the Board went into Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(h), pending or threatened litigation. Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 4:35. DA TED this I W-Day of _~ _ A ~'----2013 for the 1-'_ )/JA/1 _ ----t/ Deschutes County Board of Commissio:;;;:~ Alan Unger, Chair Ta~ ATTEST: Anthony DeBone, C&l1Hl1issioner ~~ Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, February 23,2013 Page 16 of 16 I~ ~ednesday.January Work Session 23,2013 • ---t ~ ­(Please Prin!2 • ---+­ Name Agency ¥a_~ling Addre~~ City _~ip Phone /1 ---1 e-mail address -~~~~~ .~ ~',)-'D \) I ~~\'<o PC t­ 'DC ­~~~- + -+I _ ~~t:) ~VA-JvS -~ t B()[{~{lrJ 1"~t'~~£L U3£ G-OCO (~1" OC~H--='~tr j 0'" f\$ 0 f\ -+-­+ 4lt'l/{11 w £lld~ Ofy ..1 ~I$~r.s . N;: rJo~1117'-''WC' • LJo~ ~ --::? n 00-V->"\ 11 e;r Co VI VI ec:A . _ ~ \('yw~_::,:4f (;Va-~_ ,pO'1'>-f C;q6~ ft~ + .. I I I --r­ Pa2"e # of Pa2"es [ Tl 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 2:00 P.M., WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 23, 2013 1. Discussion of Incentives for the 2013 Health Risk Assessment -Dave Inbody 2. Consideration of Tobacco-Free Facilities and Grounds Policy No. GA-7 -Erik Kropp, David VisUw 3. City of Redmond Buildable Lands Inventory for Large Lot Industrial Sites I Permission to Provide Technical Assistance -Peter Gutowsky 4. Discussion of Lottery Fund Allocation Alternatives -Judith Ure 5. Other Items Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(h), pending or threatened litigation 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. Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board ofCommissioners' meeting roams at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. Ifyou have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6571. Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled. dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TrY. Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. TO: BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FROM: DAVE INBODY & RONDA CONNOR SUBJECT: HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENTS DATE: 111812013 CC: TOM ANDERSON, ERIK KROPP Background In January 2011, Deschutes County offered health risk assessments to anyone on the health benefits plan over the age of 18 at no cost. The health risk assessment included the following: • Online Questionnaire -Each participant completed a series of questions regarding a variety of health-related topics such as nutrition, exercise, tobacco use, safety, hygiene, stress, etc ... • Biometrics -Height, weight and blood pressure was measured for each participant • Fasting Blood Work -Blood was drawn from each participant and the cholesterol, triglycerides and glucose levels were tested In January 2012, in an effort to increase participation, employees were given a one-month health insurance premium holiday ($65 value) for taking a health risk assessment. This had a significant impact on participation among employee. Spouse and dependent participation was about the same as 20 II. Chart 1: Participation by Year and Participant Type Employees Spouses Dependents (18-26) Total 2011 Participants 320 48 9 377 Elildble 1,018 716 176 1,910 % Participating 31% 7% 5% 20% 2012 Participants 525 50 7 582 Eli2ible 1,002 697 245 1,944 % Participating 52% 7% 3% 30% 2013 Health Risk Assessment In both 2011 and 2012, the health risk assessments were primarily offered through events held at six work locations. Deschutes County paid Healthstat, the operator of the Deschutes Onsite Clinic (DOC), $40 per participant to conduct these events. In 2013, the DOC, operated by Medcor, will take a different approach. During the period from January I-March 31, eligible members of the health benefits plan will schedule an appointment at the DOC for their health risk assessment at a cost of $25 per participant. In early March, an assessment will be made regarding participation and, if necessary, events will be planned for the end of March. 2013 Incentive Options In order for an incentive to be received, the participant will be required to complete the online questionnaire, the blood draw, biometric readings and a follow-up visit at the DOC to review the results. The addition of an incentive in 2012 significantly improved participation among employees. For 2013, the recommendation is that an incentive be offered not only for the employee, but also for participation from the spouse. Currently, there are 1,035 employees and 727 spouses covered by the health benefits plan. There are several options for providing an incentive. Here are three such options. • Option #1: Health Benefits Premium Holiday -Similar to last year's method, all employees who complete all the requirements for the health risk assessment would receive a health benefits premium holiday for the month of July 2013. If a spouse completes the health risk assessment, a premium holiday will be provided in August 2013. This option would be pre-tax. Last year indicated that such an incentive is effective, however, due to the extended period for employees to participate and providing three months for them to schedule a follow-up appointment, the incentive is not timely. • Option #2: Direct Payout Once a participant completes all the requirements for the health risk assessment, a $50 check will be generated for that participant. This option is timelier than option # 1, however it could not be provided pre-tax; therefore, employees would be taxed on it. • Option #3: Premium Adjustment -If an employee and spouse complete all the requirements for the health risk assessment, their monthly health benefits insurance premium will be discounted $5. This option is not timely, but it is pre-tax. It would require both employee and spouse to participate, which could impact participation. As an incentive, it would extend throughout the year. Chart 2: Comparing Incentive Costs Optiou #1 Option #2 Option #3 Cost per Employee $65 $50 $60 Cost per Spouse $65 $50 $0 Total Cost $57,265 $44,050 $31,050 ..These calculatlons assume a monthly prelTI1um of $65 and 50% partIClpatIOn Why do Health Risk Assessments Matter? The pwpose for providing health risk assessments for health benefits participants is to encourage a pro­ active, preventive approach to health care. The participant is provided a snapshot of their health condition and risk factors can be minimized before the onset of a chronic condition. For Deschutes County, a healthier population results in lower health benefits costs. 1. Most Expenses with Few Participants -In the last 12 months, 31% of health benefits expenses were as a result of37 participants out of a total population of 2,920. Chart 3: 2012 Health Benefits Cost Distribution # Participants % Participants Expense % Total Expense $0 101 4% $0 0% $1· $1,000 987 34% $486,092 4% $1,001 -$2,000 622 21% $920,591 7% $2,001 -$5,000 761 26% $2,371,034 18% 55,001· 510,000 237 8% $1,621,859 12% 510,001·525,000 130 4% $2,065,977 16% 525,001-$50,000 45 2% $1,615,566 12% 550,001+ 37 1% $4,044,939 31% 2 2. lIRA Participation Leads to Cost Savings. Many high-value claims are for behavioral-driven I I I I conditions. For example, among the 50 most expensive participants, 15 are diagnosed with heart disease and 10 are diagnosed with diabetes. The risk for both of these conditions can be tracked through the testing provided as part of the health risk assessment, such as blood pressure, cholesterol, triglycerides and glucose. In comparing the HRA results among those who participated in both 2011 and 2012, the following were identified: • 24% reduced their number of risk factors • 83% identified with high blood pressure reduced it to normal range • 56% identified with high glucose level reduced it to normal • 76% identified with high triglycerides reduced it to normal • 40% of tobacco users quit Each ofthese changes results in cost savings. Those who took the health risk assessment in 2011 averaged $3,832 in claims over the next 12 months compared to those who did not take the health risk assessment who averaged $4,972. This was also reflected in health service claims for specific services. The following chart illustrates the difference: Chart 4: Comparison of Claims for Specific Services by BRA Participation Change from 2010 to 2011 Visits lIRA Cost lIRA Visits Non-lIRA Cost Non-lIRA ER Visits -15% +$1,293 -25% -$2,378 Office Visits +6% -$44,295 +15% +$89,481 Inpatient Hospital -40% -$65,499 +29% +820 Outpatient Hospital and Ambulatory Surgical Care -20% +$81,192 -3% +$81,812 Other Places of Service -27% -$9,660 -5% -$4,252 TOTAL -104Yo -$36,969 +4% $165,483 3 From: Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator Re: Draft Tobacco Free Policy At your January 23, 2013 work session staffwill present a draft tobacco free facilities and grounds policy. As background, several months ago Tobacco Cessation Coordinator David Visiko presented a proposal to the Board to adopt a tobacco free policy for County facilities and grounds. At this work session, representatives from the Bend Parks and Recreation District, St. Charles Medical Center, and Telecare discussed their respective organization's experience with going tobacco free. The Board directed staff to develop a policy for consideration. Attached is the draft tobacco free facilities and grounds policy. This policy only applies to Deschutes County owned property and facilities. It does not apply to the public rights of way or private property. This draft policy was sent to Deschutes County employee unions and associations for review. Date: January 16,2013 I fTo: Board of County Commissioners I I Deschutes County Administrative Policy No. GA-' Effective Date: TBD TOBACCO-FREE FACILITIES AND GROUNDS STATEMENT OF POLICY It is the policy of Deschutes County to ensure a tobacco-free environment through positive and educational messaging that promotes the long-term health and safety of Deschutes County employees and the public. Smoking and the use of other tobacco products is the number one cause of preventable death in the United States. Secondhand smoke exposure is also a major health risk. In addition to the direct health risks of smoke inhalation, smoking is estimated to be the number one cause of fire­ related death and injury in the United States, and is a major cause of wildland fires. The environmental impact of smoking is also large as toxic cigarette filters are the most frequently littered item in the United States, and have negative impacts on the environment and wildlife. APPLICABILITY This policy applies to all Deschutes County employees, volunteers, clients, visitors, and vendors. It is not the intent of this policy to shift tobacco use to neighboring private property without the owner's consent. DEFINITIONS For the purposes of this policy, unless otherwise specified, the following definitions shall apply: • Tobacco-free: Tobacco is neither smoked, ingested, nor used in any manner. • Tobacco: Cigarettes, cigars, pipes, and any other smoking product; dip, chew, snuff, snus, and any other smokeless tobacco product; and nicotine delivery devices, such as electronic cigarettes, excluding FDA-approved nicotine replacement therapy products for the purpose of tobacco cessation. POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1. Tobacco-Free Facilities and Grounds -the use of all tobacco products is not permitted at any time within any interior space of facilities owned or occupied by Deschutes County; on all outdoor property or grounds owned or occupied by Deschutes County, including parking areas; in private vehicles while on Deschutes County property; and in vehicles owned by Deschutes County. 2. Communication of Policy -signs will be used to designate a Deschutes County owned or occupied facility as a "Tobacco-Free Property." Signs bearing this message will be clearly posted at the perimeter of the property, at each vehicular and pedestrian entrance, and at other prominent locations. Each building owned or occupied will also display a decal that states "Tobacco-Free Building" at each entrance or exit. Any additional language on these signs should promote the success of the policy through education and be delivered in a positive tone. The Property and Facilities Department will be responsible for signage. I The tobacco-free policy applies at all facilities and grounds owned or occupied by Deschutes County regardless of whether or not signs are posted. 3. Tobacco Use Cessation Support -Deschutes County is committed to providing tobacco use cessation support to all Deschutes County employees who wish to stop using tobacco products. Tobacco use cessation resource infonnation will be provided to any employee who expresses an interest in seeking help to stop using tobacco products. Deschutes County volunteers, contractors, clients and visitors may be referred to the Oregon Tobacco Quit Line (l-SOO-QUIT-NOW [English] or 1-S77-2NO-FUME [Spanish]), which is a free tobacco cessation resource. 4. Responsibilities -adherence to this policy is the responsibility of all Deschutes County employees. Contractors, clients, students, visitors, and others must also comply with this policy while on Deschutes County-owned property. Employees who do not confonn to this policy may be subject to discipline. Contractors in violation of this policy will be reported to their supervisor at the contracting organization. 5. Supervisory Responsibilities -this policy will be enforced through administrative action by supervisors and managers. In general, supervisors are responsible for ensuring that employees under their direction are aware of the policy and comply with it and for taking appropriate action to correct noncompliance. Supervisors are responsible for ensuring that all employees are notified of the new policy and receive a copy of the policy. Any person who observes violations of the policy may report these violations to the supervisor of the employee in question. 6. Success of Policy -the success of this policy is the shared responsibility of all Deschutes County personnel. Employees are provided with materials to help communicate this policy to co-workers, volunteers, contractors, clients and visitors with courtesy, respect, and diplomacy. This policy is operationalized by providing education and support rather than strict enforcement, especially with the public in areas where there is a limited presence of Deschutes County personnel. Deschutes County's Tobacco Prevention & Education Program Coordinator at the Health Services Department is responsible for providing educational materials, employee training, and technical assistance; addressing policy related questions, feedback, and concerns; and ongoing monitoring of this policy. Approved by the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners on [date]. f ! f \: f Tom Anderson Interim County Administrator t I I Lottery Grant Fund Distribution Options County staff has developed the following options for distributing lottery grant funds in response to the Board of Commissioners request to consider alternatives to the current Service Partner, Community Grant, and Discretionary Grant programs. Any changes approved by the Board would become effective for funding allocated for the 2013-14 fiscal year. This will allow current funds to be expended as committed as well as provide time to address any new restrictions on the use of lottery funds that may be imposed by the Legislature during the upcoming 2013 session. Option 1: Restructure current program to better reflect Board priorities, encourage most effective use of funds, and streamline the distribution process as follows: 1. Board of Commissioners meets annually to establish funding priorities: a. Specific Board interests (examples: Deschutes Water Alliance, Deschutes Economic Alliance). b. One-time initiatives (examples: La Pine economic development program, OSU Campus). c. Service partners. d. Discretionary grant allocation. 2. Deduct amount for Board funding priorities (above) from total available. Amount remaining is allocated to Community Grant Program which can be managed as described in either option 1A or 1B below. Option lA: County staff continues to administer the Community Grant and Discretionary Grant programs with the following modifications: 1. Board of Commissioners establishes funding priorities and amounts as described in steps 1-2 Iabove. 2. Board of Commissioners determines percentage of funds to be assigned to various funding I categories within Community Grant Program such as economic development, natural resources, human services, food and energy assistance, special events, organizational capacity-building and fundraising. 3. Revise Community Grant guidelines: a. Establish minimum grant request amount. I b. Prioritize multi-partner applications. c. Limit applicants to requests within one funding category only. 4. Limit Discretionary Grants to emergency requests only. 5. Allow agencies to apply in only one funding area per year (Community Grant or Service j Partner) with an exception for emergency requests made to Discretionary Grant Program. I Option IB: Contract with United Way to distribute Community Grant portion of funds. f 1. Board of Commissioners establishes funding priorities and amounts as described in steps 1-2 above. 2. Amount allocated to Community Grant Program is distributed by United Way through Icontractual arrangement either in whole or as defined by Board priorities. Video Lottery Fund Revenue FY 2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY 2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY2012 FY2013Summary of Video Lottery Fund Grants Il:leMC8 ,",artner (;rants . ,Grants 'Grants Juvenole ~me I-'fevention 'Grants )!her Grants Ulministrative ExDenses rransfels rotal VlQeo Lj)tt!JIy Funoed Grants Actual lll.\IIIti 213,9 15, 212 400.1 770,0 Actual 13,(, · 1775 7 367, 9,1 275. 944,. Actual :,uT ;.OW lIlI.lIlIf - 18,434 70.667 666,765 Actual :.I' .:.111 1I1D.UUIi - 54.1b(J 3,888 16,655 - 4lSU,1180 Actual :.I' .:.I::.Il 1w.ow 6:.1.3::11) 45974 13.860 17,407 . 070,349 r 1 1 . 666,073 Bt laet 1 1. Vld Ltte F ddSe . Prtn G tsI eo 0 try un e rvlce a er ran CO!1OIl1IC CECCQ) enInII~';ounQ1 on AOino Ie DC OA' ()!.rt~s~Advocates ;MA enInII Dreoon, . ­ 'ooer Deschutes watersneo ':.;ouncil Centra iJre!Ion If1teIDOvemmentaI ouncil Cl Ie otal Video Lottary Funoeu Hl'YIC8 t"armer \Orams Actual 99,996 -- :ZU.UUO 11lJ,lnIti Actual 00,000 · · - 13,171 113,717 Actual 1,000 32,501> 30.000 -- 13. rl llM1,i1l{ { Actual - 13Jlf Zl1,i1l{{ Actual 110,1 32 30,1 25,1 - 13.f::.ll 211,258 Actual it:< Bu :,£w 500 KlO 00 00 1 58 iUi ~ FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY2012 FY2013- FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 en! Iregon GO\.I'lC Ion Aging (e OCOA) ,~ at II! - 32,000 30,000 20,000 FY2007 AcI ~ · 32,500 30,000 20,000 FY2008 AI. - 20.000 FY2009 ,AI. ~ FY 2010 AI. 8! . - 20,000 FY 2011 AI. III -. FY2012 ,8", --- FY2013 Other Video I ""tt........ Fund .". - - - 6.265 -- FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY 2012 FY 2013 Actual lU.O::.Il 1I,3I)( --25.000 - --12.000 - 13.439-- --• -100 . 41,333 -. -- ----.-63,6:.13 ;n,till4 ZZ,4U{ ICe 0U1 (;ram :105) 1(220) • - -- 42,120 45,985 -• . . .. 169,891 · 106,000 1.667 -- I tifl,ti{U l;SIl,Ullti FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Communi Grants Actual Actual Actual Actual Bud et $ S $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 7,500 $ $ $ $ $ $ 2,500 $ $ $ $ $ 10,000 5000 $ 23,000 $ 10,000 $ $ $ 5,000 $ $ $ 15000 $ 7,500 $ $ 6,000 $ $ 4,000 $ 6,500 $ $ 12,000 $ $ $ $ $ ers $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 6,500 5.000 10,000 2,500 5,000 10,000 9,000 10,000 5000 10,000 10,000 5,000 2,000 5,000 5000 7,500 10,000 10,000 7.500 10,000 13,000 15,000 5,000 8,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ 7,000 9,000 8,000 10,000 7,000 10,000 6,000 12,000 4,000 11,000 12,000 4,000 4,000 13,000 6,000 261,000 r I I I ! I f I UnitedWtti of Deschutes County United Way of Deschutes County Admission Criteria for "New Member" Agencies • Provision of direct human services • Defined target population and geographic area • Nonprofit [501 (c)3] status • Services do not duplicate those of other agencies • Services are non-discriminatory • Agency is managed effectively • Strong community interest and acceptance of services • Services respond to prioritized needs appropriate for UW funding as set by UW Board I I l United Way of Deschutes County Community Impact Priorities Everyone should be SAFE FROM VIOLENCE & ABUSE High Priority Abused, neglected and exploited children, youth, adults (primarily women) and elderly _ Victims & abusers who are ignorant of current resources Priority -Vulnerable people (especially youth, women & elderly) often lack skills & resources that foster independence & self-sufficiency -Abuse victims (all ages) are isolated Barriers prevent abuse victims from using available services ~ Safe, quality, affordable childcare is in short supply Abusers, often former victims, lack skills needed to avoid abusing Abusers often have corresponding substance abuse problems Everyone deserves an opportunity to meet BASIC NEEDS, food, shelter & health High Priority , , People (including children & youth) who do not have enough food and go hungry at times People (including children & youth) who do not have adequate or stable housing and are homeless at times People (including children, & youth) who lack access to basic healthcare Elderly and disabled who cannot meet their basic needs: food, shelter, healthcare & transportation I People who sacrifice other essentials in order to pay for housing I l Priority Adults needing treatment for drug &/or alcohol dependency f ,~ People, especially women, needing post-treatment transitional housing t People in need of detoxification for drug &/or alcohol dependency Elderly and disabled who have diminished independence due to isolation I! J t f r• All children deserve a GREAT START in life High Priority ~ Babies born with low birth weight and/or poor health Babies born without benefit of prenatal care Young children who have developmental delays or deficits Children who do not receive proper nutrition needed for healthy development Priority Parents who lack knowledge & skills to enhance proper development ,-Children who do not receive health or dental care Children who are not "ready to learn" upon entering kindergarten Parents who do not know what services are available to help them YOUTH need help to stay ON TRACK for success High Priority Youth who have limited opportunities to develop, self-esteem, talents, character, experience community service outside of school setting Adolescent use of the gateway drugs of tobacco and alcohol and illicit drugs especially Meth Adolescents needing treatment for drug &/or alcohol dependency Priority Youth who lack the resilience to avoid developing a substance abuse problem "' Severe anxiety, grief, depression and attempted suicide among youth Absence of positive adult role models and mentors in the lives of youth Youth engaged in risky behavior such as alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs '--I Youth engaged in risky behavior such as early sexual activity & exposure to sexually transmitted disease Teen pregnancy Development of parenting skills and provision of mental health services will be prominent strategies for addressing these four community conditions Appendix J County Service Partners Deschutes County has historically provided funding to certain private or governmental organizations that provide services that bear a direct connection to County services. These "Service Partners" are distinguished by the following characteristics: • The county receives revenue from a source whose use is dictated either by la w or practice for a specific purpose. The service partner uses this revenue to provide that service. • The service partner provides a service that the County would otherwise have to provide itself. • The service partner is an agency created by or whose governing board is appointed by the Board of County Commissioners. The following 11 organizations have been identified as Deschutes County Service Partners: Central Oregon 2-1 -1 Central Oregon 2-1 -1 is an easy to remember three-digit phone number that assists residents in connecting with community services they need. C0211 is staffed by certified Community Information Specialists who quickly assess the caller's needs and refer them to appropriate services. A comprehensive and well maintained database ensures that the most up to date infor­ mation is provided and eliminates the need for multiple calls in search of the appropriate services. Through the C02l1 web-I site, people can find services 2417. 211 also provides support to the community disaster response communication system. Central Oregon Council on Aging (COCOA) COCOA is a federally designated area agency on aging (AAA) for Deschutes County, providing federally mandated nutrition, transportation, case management and other services under the 1965 Older Americans Act. In many Oregon counties, the counties themselves are de s ignated as the AAA and find themselves subsidizing these services with general funds . Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council (COIC) COIC serves Deschutes, Jefferson and Crook Counties and the cities therein with planning, project management and econom­ ic development services. Appendix J Central Oregon Mediation provides dispute resolution and education in conflict management to Deschutes County through training and supporting volunteers in the mediation process and providing mediation services at low or no cost to the public. Central Oregon Mediation conducts approximately 80-100 mediations for Deschutes County Justice Court in Redmond . Provides 225 -325 media­ tions/services per year. FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Source of Funding Actual Actual Actual Budgeted County General Fund (001) 8,600 17,750 23.400 30,000 Juvenile Justice (230) 2,500 0 0 0 Sheriff's Office (255) 0 2,750 300 0 Community Development (295) 2,500 375 0 0 Dog Control (350) 5,000 1,800 0 0 Road (325) 5,000 0 0 0 Solid Waste (610) 5,000 0 0 0 TOTAL GRANT FUNDING 28,600 22,675 23,700 30,000 Central Oregon Visitors Association (COVA) COVA has been the pre-eminent destination marketing organization for Central Oregon since 1971. The agency markets and pro­ motes Central Oregon as a year-round destination to improve the long-term vitality of the region. Source of Funding FY 2009 Actual FY 2010 Actual FY 2011 Actual FY 2012 Budgeted Transient Room Tax (160) 504,638 465,731 447,710 478,042 Welcome Center (170) 410,000 337,000 324,024 347,348 TOTAL GRANT FUNDING 914,638 802,731 n1,734 825,390 Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) CASA provides volunteer advocates who speak for the best interests of abused and neglected children in court. Oregon law requires all counties to have a CASA program, and the presiding judge can order that the service be provided by the county Juvenile Depart­ ment if the courts are dissatisfied with the service provided by a non-profit CASA agency. Economic Development of Central Oregon (EDCO) EDCO is the leading economic development agency for Central Oregon, providing marketing, targeted business recruitment and business expansion services. Appendix J Humane Society of Central Oregon Deschutes County is a designated Dog Control District pursuant to ORS 609. The County contracts with the Humane Society of Central Oregon for animal shelter services. The County does not own or operate its own shelter. Humane Society of Redmond Deschutes County is a designated Dog Control Di s trict pursuant to ORS 609. The County contracts with the Redmond Humane Society for animal shelter services. The County does not own or operate its own shelter. * -The Humane Society of Redmond has also received loan funding through Fund 129 Sunriver Area Chamber of Commerce The Sunriver Area Chamber of Commerce is an organization of businesses, community organizations and individuals promoting the economic vitality of the Sunriver community . The Chamber also manages the Sunriver Visitors Center, a one-stop shopping center for visitors, vacationers and residents who seek information about Sunriver, Oregon and the surrounding area, as weU as recreation­ al activities and available services. Upper Deschutes Watershed Council Watershed Councils are non-profit organizations created pursuant to legislation adopted by the Oregon legislature in the 1990s. The Councils bring together local governments and private organizations to work on a variety of watershed restoration projects. Source of Funding FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Actual Actual Actual Budgeted County General Fund (001) 20,000 20,000 20,000 0 Video Lottery Fund (165) 0 0 0 20,000 TOTAL GRANT FUNDS 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000