Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2013-09-25 Work Session Minutes
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, September 25, 2013 Page 1 of 9 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, SEPTEMBER 25, 2013 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Alan Unger and Anthony DeBone; Commissioner Tammy Baney was out of the office. Also present were Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Wayne Lowry, Finance; Judith Ure, Administration; Nick Lelack and Peter Gutowsky, Community Development; Chris Doty, Road Department; Senator Tim Knopp; and seven other citizens including representatives of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Justin Rainey of Public Affairs Counsel, Senator Tim Knopp, and Susanna Julber of Senator Merkeley’s office. Chair Unger opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. ___________________________ 1. Finance Update. Wayne Lowry explained the investment report. Most investment is in the pool, which is overseen by the State Treasurer. The return is be tter than most, but it is about 50% corporate debt, with higher risk. He would like to see this investment changed to a lower percentage. Rates are up significantly from a year ago, so any change should be gradual. The County and the Advisory Committee are developing a new investment policy for Board consideration. The County may or may not want the services of an investment advisor. He presented actual figures for 2013, and year to date for this fiscal year. Revenue is seasonal while expenditures are more or less straight-line. There are a lot of unfilled FTE’s at this time that were budgeted. There will be a lag in wages and benefits. The general fund balance is down due to paying back part of the Solid Waste loan. Community Development is having a strong year so far. This shows a trend for the area overall. They may exceed their revenue estimates in the long run. The general fund transfer will not happen, as it will be diverted to Solid Waste. The Road Department fund has had a change in its balance, but that is due to approved but unanticipated expenses and revenue. Solid Waste revenue is a little ahead at this point. They anticipate a 4% increase in revenue overall. The Health Benefits fund is getting closer to revenue covering expenses. The fund had been losing from its balance but that amount is narrowing, and is approaching equilibrium. Last year the Fair & Expo budget was upside down, but that should change this year. The annual County fair typically contributes to the Fair & Expo in the amount of$250,000 for use of the facilities. It is more around $180,000 this time, so probably will not meet the amount. Recent changes to room tax criteria should help. Most capital projects funds have been around for a while, with no updates. The jail remodel project is fully funded at this point, and on track. Chair Unger said that one contractor complained about the CMGC process and feels it is unfair, due to the way the individual companies manage their numbers. Mr. Lowry said they use the same type of process for schools, such as the Sherwood school project. New construction is easier than a remodel that could be fraught with hidden problems. Most contractors are experienced in this bidding process. The contractor has not gone out to the sub-contractors yet but is locked in to a specific amount, so they have to be careful. The contingency is only $280,000, low for a project this size. Mr. Kropp said they had value engineered this up front. 2. 2013 Legislative Session Wrap-Up. Justin Rainey of the Public Affairs Counsel said that there is a special session of the legislature next week. The leaders have agreed to the framework. They will likely address PERS overall, but especially cost of living increases for retirees, and a variety of tax and small business issues, as time allows. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, September 25,2013 Page 2 of9 Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, September 25, 2013 Page 3 of 9 By conference phone, Mark Nelson of the PAC joined in. He said the Governor indicated he would veto the bills as presently written and which are being discussed by the legislature. There is another bill meant to take legislators out of PERS. The corporate tax rate bill may pass, as might the small business tax credit, coupled with an export tax credit that benefits only certain companies. They may also pass the tobacco tax, although they might make some changes first. Bill 633, prohibiting counties from the GMO, is questionable. The only real question is PERS. There are hearings this week, but no one has seen any language. They are planning to handle the rest on Monday. Senator Knopp stated that the votes do not exist for the package today. It has been agreed to in general, but the details are holding things up, such as a small business income threshold and whether it should be adjusted for inflation. There is the question as to whether service prior to being a legislator gets counted towards PERS. They met for many hours, but are moving forward with hearings. There is a basic lack of agreement prior to a vote. No one has seen a legislative bill yet, just legislative concepts. Mr. Rainey said that there is a $16.9 billion lottery fund budget, an increase from before with the potential additional funds. The State forecast is stable. Mr. Nelson stated that this does not count the $850 million from a third source of general fund, the possible savings on PERS. Mr. Rainey said that a priority one bill was HB 3130, with Senator Knopp and Representative Whisnant watching it, regard ing the La Pine signal light. There has been a lot of focus on special issues. Bills have to be submitted by November 22. Public Affairs Counsel wants to be sure they are tracking all that are important. The Cyrus appeal was spearheaded by Sen. Huffman, along with the program for low-cost septic systems in counties that cannot afford to meet all the requirements of the DEQ. Mr. Lelack said that regarding the Cyrus situation, Representative Clem informed all that it needs consensus to be successful. Ms. Ure indicated there should be a way to streamline the update process and narrow the focus to specific issues. Some departments may have different priorities and can track bills themselves. She suggested referencing a link to the information as it is submitted rather than printing out a lot of documents. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, September 25, 2013 Page 4 of 9 Mr. Rainey stated they are monitoring various issues. Health care is the big one; the CCO’s implementation, and expanding mental health, as well as the health insurance exchange and ‘cover Oregon’. They need to consider education, the ELC transition and the new hubs, and the youth development council to make sure appropriate funds are delivered. Public safety is an ongoing discussion, as to whether reduced jail sentences result in true savings. They are discussing increasing the 9-1-1 tax and County administrative issues such as changes in voting, which would be a burden on the Clerks. Regarding land use, there are the Cyrus project, EFU and agriculture zoning issues, and details regarding Deschutes basin water. Mr. Nelson said they are very involved with health reform. He advised that his firm also represents HeadStart, and he is concerned the State may try t o consolidate or eliminate this budget. There are a lot of discussions regarding the merging of CCO’s with the hubs. His firm also represents Linn County on a number of things. He feels there are no conflicts of interest in all of this, but just wants all to be aware. 3. Discussion of a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Proposal to Protect the Oregon Spotted Frog under the Federal Endangered Species Act. Jennifer O’Reilly and Nancy Gilbert of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service came before the Board. They referred to oversized map of local areas that could be affected. They put out a press release on August 29 and scheduled two public meetings; these are 6 to 8 PM on October 8 at the SHARC in Sunriver, and October 16 at the La Pine Senior Center. They indicated the proposed listing of the frog as threatened or endangered sets off a 60-day public review period, which has been extended to November 12. Chair Unger said that this could affect a lot of people who live where there are wetlands. He asked if conversations have been lively, or are people calm about it. Ms. Gilbert stated that they are trying to get full information out. They expect to hear concerns and questions. They have not yet had a large number of calls. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, September 25, 2013 Page 5 of 9 There will be a second comment period when the economic analysis comes out. If there are possible exemptions included, there will be another comment period. This process might take the rest of the year. Nick Lelack stated that work on the south County wetlands inventory helped to get significant access to properties. One way of looking at the critical habitat is to recognize that property owners have been good stewards, and these programs have been effective. This species depends on the wetlands that are there. At this time a PowerPoint presentation was given. (A copy is attached for reference.) It was explained that cattle actually help by chewing down the grass that is not desirable. Significant predators include the bullfrog, which is more prolific now and found as far north as Gilchrist. Non-native fish are also a factor. Much of this is occurring due to overall climate change. Critical habitat in specific geographic areas may require some special management or protection. There are 14 critical habitat units across the range; this area has units 8 and 9. Some of the area is County owned; some is in La Pine State Park. Deep water areas (over 20 feet deep) are not included. There are 4,509 acres (1,563 tax lots) in the proposed area. Mr. Lelack noted that regarding non-federal land, there have been good laws and regulations in place already, but some things cannot be changed, such as regulated water. They have to work with the irrigation districts. Ms. Gilbert said that early discussions mean planning ahead. They have also looked at other species to maybe deal with those at the same time. There could be a downstream effect. They are working with representatives of the Old Mill District, the Sunriver Nature Center and others, as it is a good educational opportunity and these are highly visible areas. Chair Unger asked if using vector control is a threat. Jennifer O’Reilly replied that the chemicals now being used are not a threat. The biggest need is providing water in the winter to help the frogs. There is a stronger population in Sunriver due to this. In fact, the vector control people helped provide important information. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, September 25, 2013 Page 6 of 9 Planning ahead now while the spotted frog is just a candidate, and utilizing conservation plans with many groups, may will help them try to avoid a listing. People would have to get permits for activities if a those activities are a potential detriment. Owners can agree to a conservation plan. Things like this may keep it from being listed. Mr. Gutowsky added that they are on a similar track with the Sage Grouse in Harney County. The Soil & Water Conservation District can issue permits if there are cooperative efforts. There is an educational component that comes into play if someone is going to build or develop property. The Deschutes River Coalition will help disseminate information, and the schools are also involved. There are some restoration opportunities, an example of which is Ryan Ranch, which includes a historic 70-acre site that they are trying to bring on line. Additional information can be obtained through the U.S. Fish & Wildlife website, www.fws.gov/wafwo/osf.html. Commissioner DeBone asked if the spotted frog would be introduced or reestablished in other areas or states. Ms. Gilbert replied that there has been no other critical habitat designated other than where they are now. They probably used to be in a lot of other places. They would have to evaluate what habitat is presently suitable. Chair Unger asked if the bullfrogs are being managed. Ms. O’Reilly responded that at this point, they are not sure what is effective other than destroying them outright. Ms. Gilbert stated that there could be exclusions through the economic analysis. When a species is listed as threatened or endangered, decisions are made regarding risk factor for extinction, and weigh in other factors such as economics. Chair Unger said that it sounds as if it can be managed and mitigated. Few people transcend between the forest and water collaborative work. Ms. Gilbert replied that with the Endangered Species Act was enacted, i t was meant to conserve habitat since that is what was being destroyed. The frogs like other species represent the overall health of the ecosystem. The reason the Deschutes basin has some of these frogs is because of protection of the land. The Deschutes River is important to the overall community. In so many other areas, the viability of the river systems is gone. Mr. Lelack noted that regulations have done a good job of protecting habitat. Some development had to be eliminated. They have to connect the dots, considering how this affects road building, bridges, sewer systems and other factors. It is a big overall issue. Mr. Gutowsky added that if an exception is granted, for instance for a cluster system, they can use the local land use process. The federal government does not have a role in this review. The cost of a centralized sewer system will increase due to the federal permitting process and installation factors, which will have a bearing on this type of development. Ms. Gilbert said that the permitting process allows for some variance. The Corp of Engineers would have to analyze the proposed project. There are clearly some mitigation opportunities and various tools that can be used, but it would involve more process and more time. Nancy: permit process allows for some. Corp of Engineer would have to analyze the proposed project. Commissioner DeBone asked if this involves all of the properties along the river. Mr. Gutowsky responded that it would be parcels designed by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service as having habitat, less public rights of way. Ms. O'Reilly said that some parcels might just touch the critical habitat line. So developing that parcel may not be a problem. This is part of a large-scale GIS report. Mr. Gutowsky stated that this is a proposed listing, and there may be changes as the state and federal processes address this issue. He hopes that especially in view of potential sewering, that they will build upon coordination between agencies. Citizen Ellen Curry said that the community worked a long time on Goal 11, as a cluster or sewer system is the best way to deal with waste. When there are conflicts between drinking water, waste water systems and the spotted frog, she asked who decides which is the most important. Mr. Gutowsky replied that there is a permitting process and other ways that they deal with this type of thing on a regular basis. All impacts will be measured. They always try to come up with something that is a win-win for all. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, September 25, 2013 Page 7 of9 Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, September 25, 2013 Page 8 of 9 4. Discussion of Support Letter for H.R. 1526, the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act. DEBONE: Move approval nunc pro tunc of a support letter to Rep. Greg Walden regarding the mentioned Act. UNGER: Second. VOTE: DEBONE: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. 5. Other Items. Mr. Kropp said that the Sheriff wishes to participate in the Equitable Sharing Program, whereby proceeds from seized property or funds can benefit local agencies; in this case, the Sheriff’s Office. This request is for $960 worth of computer equipment. DEBONE: Move approval of Document No. 2013-548. UNGER: Second. VOTE: DEBONE: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. ___________________________ Mr. Kropp stated that a citizen contacted the Board with concerns about the cost of emergency air transport. The question was, why do people have to sign up for both carriers. This should be a competitive situation with perhaps a reciprocal agreement. The Board, as the governing body of the Ambulance Service Area Advisory Committee, should look at this issue, or ask the Committee to weigh in on this. Perhaps they could invite both companies in for discussion, or at least contact both to find out more about it. He explained that this is part of the ASA calls. Funding is through charging private insurance or by citizens buying membership s. However, it appears they have to buy two memberships to have full coverage since they don’t have a choice when the provider is called. Chair Unger suggested a letter be written to both providers stating the concerns of them double-charging citizens. They should work out some kind of reciprocity. Otherwise, the Board may have to address the situation. Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 4:05 p.m. DATED this ~J!:: Dayof ~J-~ 2013 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Alan Unger, Chair Tammy Baney, Vice Chair ATTEST: Anthony DeB one, Commissioner ~~ Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners ' Work Session Wednesday, September 25,2013 Page 9 of9 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org WORK SESSION AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1:30 P.M., WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25,2013 1. Finance Update -Wayne Lowry 2. 2013 Legislative Session Wrap-Up -Judith Ure 3. Discussion of a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Proposal to Protect the Oregon Spotted Frog under the Federal Endangered Species Act -USFWS and Peter Gutowsky 4. Discussion of Support Letter for H.R. 1526, the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act 5. Other Items PLEASE NOTE: At any time during this meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2) (e), real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2) (h), litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor negotiations; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues. Meeting dates. times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board ofCommissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St .• Bend. unless otherwise indicated. lfyou have questions regarding a meeting. please call 388-6572. 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 TTY. Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. ~ 11. us. ·\1:£_N:_elk~Cu--+'_M--,ai--,-Iing Address ~1 / 1;;.Ah, 1J I ~ Work Session (Please Prin~t)__ I -L lli_l-~i Phone # 1j?sj/3 e-mail address J,.J.rr ~n .R (;)r ("Ov~~(t _ e.n,n, ___ _ ~~_R~A'2--Sit-3~3-1JI.J(. 11 c119MJMtiH'L {JIfL1S 1~' _. !_ __. r-S'll'.J.P-711'1 ~.~~_tlJ'''''''-.('~<'-'IO.?~?M\M "-J~~~.J.¥t'Iu);k'(lol-h\L ~i;'v''''~~~---1 <;I{HI 'il · )2·-'{ ~1 ~~:'~.qt~.?J I I --I --J '.J ~c-{~ df* -Cpp -r-NJl,lklJP--dk(V 11 ---+_ (l .c.." "iNr Dr-.-;d... I ~:3<1 NvJ vA.tJL OC:LUEY L..,...... clwc..rt-..:..i; Vtd,,~~()(''J_ _ __ _ G'77t11 Si/I-'-I2A-'6l)!7~ _~tYL~_,<}'+--k. ~j'/. fllf!1 _U r:l2~~-J_C,iLW kt - __ l _____~_ ~~'W'r ~"'h.lJ :l~, ___!-.)e.I'L.~)~JlJ CH-E f'a .,..d~~i{ ,..p/e tf9. ---h-~MCrr{ \ e tTm - Pa2:e # of +-~ -+- Monthly Meeting with Board of Commissioners Finance Director/Treasurer AGENDA September 25, 2013 (1) Monthly Investment Report (2) August 2013 Financials ~ Municipal Debt Corporate Notes Time Certificates U. S. Treasuries Federal Agencies Bankers' Acceptances LGIP/BOTC $ 632,083 9,650,501 7 ,216,462 104,965 ,666 0.52% 7.88% 5.89% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 85 .71% Total Investments $ 122.464.712 100.00% Total Portfolio: By Investment Types Corporate TimeNotes Certificates7.9% 5.9% lGIP/BOTC 85 .7% Investments By County Function General $ 122,464,712 $ Investment Income Fiscal Year 2013·14 Aug·13 I I Y·T·D 56 ,927 $ 113,098 . - Total Investments $ 122,464,712 Total Investment Income Less Fee : 5% of Invest. Income Investment Income· Net 1$ 56,927 {2,846) 54,080 113,098 {5 ,655) $ 107,443 Yield Percentages -~.~BOTe I L GIP ~ 0 .53% 0.53% Investments ~ 0.61 % 0.67% Averag e ~ 0.54% 0.55% Category Maximums: U.S . Treasuries 100% '-ILGIP 100% "-J Federal Agencies 75% Banker's Acceptances 25% Time Certificates 25% Municipal Debt 25% Commercial Paper 20% {;e tt 3 Month Treas . ~ 0.03% 12 Month Treas. ~ 0.12% 3 Month e p ~ 0.11% Term Maximums: 0-18 Months 100%1-- 19 -24 Months 30% Months to Maturity 18 Months 98% 24 Months 2% 1 Memorandum Date: September 16, 2013 To: Board of County Commissioners Tom Anderson, County Administrator From: Wayne Lowry, Finance Director RE: Monthly Financial Reports Attached please find August 2013 financial reports for the following funds: General (001), Community Justice -Juvenile (230). Sheriffs (255, 701,702), Public Health (259). Behavioral Health (275), Community Development (295), Road (325), Community Justice -Adult (355). Commission on Children & Families (370-399), Solid Waste (610), Insurance Fund (670), 9-1-1 (705), Health Benefits Trust (675), and Fair & Expo Center (618). The projected information has been reviewed and updated, where appropriate, by the respective departments. Cc: All Department Heads Revenues Property Taxes -Current Property Taxes -Prior Other General Revenues Assessor County Clerk BOPTA District Attorney Tax Office Veterans Property Management Grant Projects Total Revenues Expenditures Assessor County Clerk BOPTA District Attorney FinancefTax Veterans Property Management Grant Projects Non-Departmental Total Expenditures Transfers Out Total Exp & Transfers Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance GENERAL FUND Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31,2013 FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) FY 2013 FY 2014 I Ufo Of Actual Actual Budget Budget I Projection ~ $ Variance 20,734,019 -0% a) 21,031 ,062 1,108,377 215,909 30% 720,000 2,683,531 603,143 31% b) 1,955,900 866,121 220,693 27% c) 812,421 1,710,900 281,168 20% c) 1,415,487 16,419 4,469 29% c) 15,200 174,794 4,149 2% 184,194 252,869 64,080 31% c) 208,750 74,348 10,150 14% 70,920 100,249 15,167 17% 91,000 2,000 333 17% 2,000 27,723,627 1,419,261 5% 26,506,934 3,439,127 577,958 16% 3,687,131 1,299,189 188,963 13% 1,500,045 58,401 12,553 16% 76,901 5,034,333 852,185 15% 5,638,777 779,725 108,677 13% 846,733 250,880 47,350 16% 299,163 275,329 40,636 16% 258,807 122,139 20,937 16% 129,951 1,221,749 137,651 9% 1,492,993 21,031,062 720,000 1,955,900 812,421 1,415,487 15,200 184,194 208,750 70,920 91,000 2,000 26,506,934 3,687,131 1,500,045 76,901 5,638,777 846,733 299,163 258,807 129,951 1,492,993 12,480,872 I 1,986,909 14% 13,930,501 13,930,501 13,930,307 2,000,696 15% d) 13,015,578 13,515,578 {500,000~ 3,987,605 15% 26,946,079 27,446,079 (500,000) 1,312,448 26,411,179 (2,568,344) (439,145) (939,145) 9,059,394 10,371,843 109% 9,500,000 10,371,843 871,843 $ 10,371,843 $ 7,803,499 * $9,060,855 $ 9,432,698 $ 371,843 * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 9,060,855 a) Current year taxes due November, February and May b) PILT received in July -$500,941 c) A & T grant - 1 st Quarter payment received in July d) Transfer to Jail Project Fund for repayment of inter-fund loan (Solid Waste Closure Reserve Fund) Page 1 COMM JUSTICE-JUVENILE Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31,2013 Revenues Federal Grants SB #1 065-Court Assess . Jail Funding HB #2712 Discovery Fee Food Subsidy OVA Basic & Diversion Inmate/Prisoner Housing Contract Payments Interest on Investments Leases Grants -Private CFC Interfund Grant Interfund Grant -Gen Fund 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 - FY 2014 -Year to FY 2013 Date (17% of Year) I %of Actual Actual Budget -7,090 167% a) 8,606 367 6% 101 ,659 9,142 25% 8,703 1,855 22% 24,650 1,909 8% 354,583 -0% b) 113,760 1,050 1% c) 90,765 -0% d) 6,343 1,175 20% 1,200 300 25% 1,729 122 10% 120,595 -n/a 20,000 -0% 790 -0% 853,383 23,010 4% 4,878,315 799,366 16% 1,086,677 146,410 13% d) --0% 50,400 -0% 6,015,391 945,776 16% (5,162,008) (922,766) 5,344,523 894,724 17% 182,515 (28,042) 995,051 1,177,566 105% $ 1,177,566 $ 1,149,524 * FY 2014 Budget I Projection I $ Variance 4,254 11,715 7,461 6,000 6,000 - 36,568 36,568 - 8,300 8,300 - 24 ,000 24,000 - 364,268 359,149 (5,119) 125,000 125,000 - 120,000 5,000 (115,000) 6,000 6,000 - 1,200 1,200 - 1,250 1,250 - --- 20,000 20 ,000 - 650 650 - 717,490 604,832 (112,658) 5,109,496 5,109,496 - 1,085,433 970,433 115,000 100 -100 3,660 3,660 - 6,198,689 6,083,589 115,100 (5,481,199) (5,478,757) 2,442 5,368,346 5,368,346 - (112,853) (110,411) 2,442 1,125,000 1,177,566 52,566 $1,012,147 $1,067,155 $ 55,008 * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 1,012,147 a) Received late payment for FY 13 grant which increases amount received for FY 14 b) Minimal adjustment from states final figures, received after budget process closed c) $9,300 billing outstanding d) BRS/Maplestar program discontinued, funding eliminated--associated expenditures also reduced by $115,000 Page 2 SHERIFF -Fund 255 Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31,2013 Revenues Law Enf Dist Countywide Law Enf Dist Rural Total Revenues Expenditures Sheriffs Division Civil Automotive/Communications Investigations/Evidence Patrol/Civil/Comm Supp Records Adult Jail Court Security Emergency Services Special Services Division Training Division Other Law Enforcement Svcs Non-Departmental Total Expenditures Revenues Jess Expenditures FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year)FY 2013 Actual I BudgetActual 18,708,928 3,386,701 14% 12,206,355 2,134,353 15% 30,915,283 5,521,054 16% 2,263,061 436,236 18% 723,704 182,435 16% 1,837,849 469,087 29% 1,425,223 260,891 18% 8,174,690 1,322,347 15% 685,178 120,890 16% 12,850,417 2,160,372 15% 298,060 48,989 18% 185,439 53,250 24% 1,236,781 246,821 16% 481,717 66,398 13% 667,913 139,722 18% 85,253 13,617 17% 5,521,054 16%30,915,283 -- * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 5,284,491 FY 2014 Budget Projection I $ VarianceI 24,478,462 21,161,510 3,316,952 14,525,221 12,556,982 1,968,239 39,003,683 33,718,492 5,285,191 2,401,838 2,401,738 100 1,110,175 1,110,175 1,643,912 1,643,912 1,472,678 1,472,578 100 8,544,952 8,544,952 774,452 774,352 100 14,384,459 14,384,459 275,852 275,752 100 223,273 223,173 100 1,498,298 1,498,298 527,979 527,879 100 779,623 779,523 100 81,701 81,701 33,719,192 33,718,492 700 * 5,284,491 5,285,891 Page 3 SHERIFF -Expenditure Detail Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31, 2013 FY 2013 Actual Expenditures Sheriff's Services Personnel 1,311 ,042 Materials & Services 952 ,019 Capital Outlay Total Sheriffs Services 2,263,061 Civil/Special Units Personnel 637 ,830 Materials & Services 85 ,874 Capital Outlay Total Civil 723 ,704 Automotive/Commun ications Personnel 413 ,153 Materials & Services 1,406 ,033 Capital Outlay 18 ,663 Total Automotive/Communications 1,837,849 Investigations/Evidence Personnel 1,283 ,221 Materials & Services 142 ,001 Capital Outlay Total Investigations/Evidence 1,425,223 Patrol/Civil/Comm Support Personnel 7 ,325,801 Materials & Services 613,033 Capita l Outlay 235 ,856 Total Patrol/CiviUComm Supp 8,174,690 Records Personnel 583 ,461 Materials & Services 101 ,717 Capital Outlay Total Records 685,178 Adult Jail Personnel 10 ,934,201 Materials & Services 1,879 ,643 Capital Outlay 36 ,573 Transfer Out -Jail Debt Service Total Adult Jail 12,850,417 Court Security Personnel 285 .997 Materials & Services 12 ,063 Capital Outlay Total Transport/Court Security 298,060 Emergency Services Personnel 175,729 Materials & Services 9 ,710 Capital Outlay Total Emergency Services 185,439 Special Services Personnel 1,024,967 Materials & Services 175,717 Capital Outlay 36 ,096 Total Special Services 1,236,781 Training Personnel 345,417 Materials & Services 136,300 Capital Outlay Total Training 481 ,717 Other Law Enforcement Services Personnel 607 ,877 Materials & Services 60 ,035 Capital Outlay Total Other Law Enforcement Svcs 667,913 Non-Departmental Materials & Services 85,253 Total Non-Departmental 85,253 Total Expenditures 30,915,283 FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) FY 2014 Actual I Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance 233,185 17% 1,411 ,820 1,411,820 203,051 21% 989 ,918 989,918 -0% 100 100 436,236 18% 2,401,838 2,401,738 100 172,070 17% 1,009 ,306 1,009,306 10,365 11% 95 ,769 95,769 -0% 5,100 5,100 182,435 16% 1 ,110,175 1,110,175 65,062 16% 404,407 404,407 398,234 33% 1,202 ,505 1,202,505 5,790 16% 37,000 37,000 469,087 29% 1,643,912 1,643,912 220,455 16% 1,338,593 1,338,593 40,436 30% 133 ,985 133,985 -0% 100 100 260,891 18% 1,472,678 1,472,578 100 1,234,779 16% 7,723,459 7 ,723,459 87 ,568 16% 563 ,921 563 ,921 -0% 257,572 257 ,572 1,322,347 15% 8,544 ,952 8,544,952 115,000 17% 665 ,327 665,327 5,890 5% 109 ,025 109,025 -0% 100 100 120,890 16% 774,452 774,352 100 1,918,322 16% 12,060,079 12,060,079 233,100 12% 1,947,790 1,947,790 8,950 12% 76 ,590 76,590 -0% 300 ,000 300,000 2,160,372 15% 14,384,459 14,384,459 44 ,949 17% 265 ,966 265 ,966 4 ,040 41% 9,786 9,786 -0% 100 100 48,989 18% 275,852 275,752 100 49 ,622 25% 196,825 196,825 3,628 14% 26,348 26,348 -0% 100 100 53,250 24% 223,273 223,173 100 221,991 18% 1,251 ,196 1,251,196 24 ,830 12% 211 ,502 211,502 -0% 35 ,600 35 ,600 246,821 16% 1,498,298 1,498,298 57,972 15% 384 ,725 384 ,725 8,426 6% 143 ,154 143 ,154 -0% 100 100 66,398 13% 527,979 527,879 100 123,512 18% 705,392 705,392 16,210 22% 74,131 74,131 -0% 100 100 139,722 18% 779,623 779,523 100 13,617 17% 81,701 81 ,701 13,617 17% 81,701 81,701 5,521,054 16% 33 ,719,192 33,718,492 70~age 4 - - - - SHERIFF 701 Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31, 2013 - FY 2014 -Year to FY 2013 Date (17% of Year) FY 2014 Actual Actual I Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance Revenues Tax Revenues -Current Tax Revenues -Prior Federal Grants State Grant Jail Funding HB 2712 Transp. of State Wards SB 1145 Prisoner Housing Des . Cty Gen Fund Grant Des . Cty Video Lottery Grant Grants Des Cty Court Security Des Cty Juvenile Contract Title III Reimbursement Inmate Commissary Fees Work Center Work Crews Concealed Handgun Classes Inmate Telephone Fee Soc Sec Incentive-Fed Medical Services Reimb Sheriff Fees Interest Donations-"Shop with a Cop" Miscellaneous Total Operating Revenues EXPENDITURES & TRANSFE DC Sheriffs Office DC Comm Systems Reserve Transfer to Reserve Fund Total Expenditures Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 15,812,544 -0% a) 16,103,377 817,322 160,644 32% 507,902 24 ,510 -0% 25,500 158 ,199 -0% 115,524 101 ,659 9 ,142 20% 46,143 3 ,289 -0% 5 ,000 1,479,991 369 ,998 23% b) 1 ,584 ,991 284,189 -0% 80,000 --0% 4 ,762 5,000 -0% 5 ,000 20,640 -n/a - 116,646 -0% c) 99 ,318 12 ,051 -0% 10 ,000 39,916 -n/a - 29,756 2,349 16% 15,000 53,237 6,741 13% 50 ,000 8,050 550 16% 3 ,500 97,403 7,731 10% 80,000 14,600 3,200 64% 5,000 20,461 -0% 13,000 314,668 64,494 26% 250 ,000 44,629 5,270 16% 32 ,000 31,717 25,573 49% 51 ,897 21 ,599 4,664 16% 28 ,849 19,512,075 660,356 3% 19,116,763 RS 18,708,928 3 ,386,701 16% .. 24,478,462 80,000 -0% 80 ,000 100,000 -0% 100 ,000 16,103 ,377 507 ,902 25 ,500 115 ,524 46 ,143 5 ,000 1,628,947 43 ,956 80 ,000 4 ,762 5,000 45,632 (53 ,686) 10,000 15,000 50,000 3,500 80,000 5,000 13,000 250,000 32,000 51,897 28,849 - 19,107,033 (9,730) 21,161 ,510 3,316,952 80,000 - 100,000 - 18,888,928 3,386,701 16% 24,658,462 21,341,510 (3,316,952) 623 ,147 (2 ,726,345) (5 ,541,699) (2,234,477) 3,307 ,222 5,883 ,963 6 ,507,110 5 ,541,699 6,507 ,110 965,411 $ 6,507,110 $ 3,780,765 $ -$4,272,633 $4,272,633 * Payment to Sheriffs Fund adjusted monthly to equal actual expenditures attributable to countywide services a) Current year taxes due November, February and May b) 1145 inmate reimbursement will exceed budget amount for the year c) State OJD distributions will be less than planned for the year Page 5 SHERIFF 702 Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31,2013 FY 2014 -Year to Date FY 2013 (17% of Year) Actual Actual I Budget Revenues Tax Revenues -Current Tax Revenues -Prior Federal Grants Federal Grants-BLM US Forest Service Bureau of Reclamation State Grant SB #1065 Court Assessment Marine Board License Fee Des Cty General Fund Grant Des Cty Transient Room Tax Asset Forfeiture City of Sisters Des Cty COD Contract Des Cty Solid Waste Contr School D istricts Claims Reimbursement Seat Belt Program Sheriff Fees Court Fines & Fees Interest Grants-Private Donations Miscellaneous Total Revenues EXPENDITURES & TRANSFER S DC Sheriffs Office DC Comm Systems Reserve Transfer to Reserve Fund -0% a)7,698 ,340 404 ,894 78 ,828 30% 53,818 -0% 20,881 -0% 78,750 19,688 26% 40,580 -0% 274,465 10,392 6% 367 1%8,606 143,724 -0% 136,735 -0% 379,050 17%2 ,513,265 -n/a11,760 81 ,113 17%468,060 54,366 9,878 17% 54,366 9,878 17% 46,212 -0% -n/a860 1,610 16%5,390 9,617 1,745 17% 23,741 19%120,247 2,052 17%20,654 -n/a6,500 -n/a11 ,650 44,728 10,887 21% 12,228,468 629,229 5% 12 ,206 ,355 2,134 ,353 15% * 120,000 -0% 100,000 -0% Total Expenditures 12,426,355 2,134,353 17% Change in Fund Balance (197,887) (1,505,124) Beginning Fund Balance 3,244,571 3,046 ,683 Ending Fund Balance $ 3,046,683 $1,541,560 FY 2014 Budget I Projection I $ Variance 7 ,839,932 7,839,932 263,858 263,858 14,500 14,500 25,000 25,000 76 ,500 76,500 26 ,000 26 ,000 169,000 169,000 55 ,000 55,000 150,000 150,000 375,703 375 ,703 2 ,274,297 2,274 ,297 486,678 486,678 59,270 59,270 59 ,270 59,270 40,000 40,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 125,000 125,000 12,000 12 ,000 53,000 59,669 6,669 12,125,008 12,131,677 6,669 14,525,221 120,000 100,000 12,556,982 120,000 100,000 (1,968,239) 14,745,221 12,776,982 (1,968,239) (2,620,213) (645,305) 1,974,908 2,620,213 3,046,683 426,470 $ $2,401,378 $2,401,378 * Payment to Sheriffs Fund adjusted monthly to equal actual expenditures attributable to countywide services a) Current year taxes due November, February and May Page 6 Revenues Medicare Reimbursement Federal Grant Federal Grant (ARRA) State Grant Child Dev & Rehab Center State Miscellaneous OMAP Family Planning Exp Proj Grants (Intergovern & Pvt) Environmental Health-Water Contract Payments Patient Insurance Fees Health Dept/Patient Fees Vital Records-Birth Vital Records-Death Environmental Health-Lic Fac Interest on Investments Donations Interfund Contract Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expend itu res Personnel Services Materials and Services Capital Outlay Transfers Out Total Expenditures Revenues less Expenditures Transfers In-General Fund Transfers In-PH Res Fund Transfers In-Gen. Fund Other Total Transfers In Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance PUBLIC HEALTH Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31,2013 FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year)FY 2013 I % of Actual BudgetActual 68 -n/a 630 -n/a -0% 2,700,025 212,500 430,642 16% a) 38 ,154 -0% b) 248,176 1,646 1% b) 578,042 84,451 14% 519,121 43,359 8% 40 ,214 - -0% 174,624 95,224 2,913 2% 214,544 30,040 16% 95,108 17,474 15% 32,475 6,345 15% 112,235 17,660 18% 755,693 33,731 4% 6,262 957 16% 19,366 10,025 557% 162,757 -0% c) 3,425 418 30% 679,661 11%6,008,643 6,344,766 1,036,676 16% 2,036 ,535 237 ,835 11% -0% 157,200 - -0% 8,538,501 1,274,511 nfa (594,850)(2,529,858) 450,246 17% 62,136 2,349,357 -0% 65,100 -0% 2,476,593 450,246 16% (53,265) (144,604) FY 2014 Budget 4,000 85,000 2,655,897 39,609 163,310 612,400 550,000 30,915 94,200 151,316 184,200 119,400 41,000 100,000 753,750 6,000 1,800 180,426 1,400 5,774,623 6,495,548 2,070,058 100 157,320 I Projection I$ Variance 86,085 82,085 85,000 2,660,571 4,674 39,609 83,110 (80,200) 747,400 135,000 550,000 164,924 134,009 94,200 156,316 5,000 184,200 119,400 41,000 100,000 753,750 6,000 10,025 8,225 91,691 (88,735) 1,587 187 5,974,868 200,245 6,495 ,548 2,070,058 100 157,320 8,723,026 8,722,926 100 (2,948,403) (2,748,058) 200,345 2,701,475 2,701,475 33,000 33,000 65,100 65,100 2,799,575 2,799,575 (148,828) 51,517 200,345 1,385,592 1,273,934 P11,658~ $1,236,764 $ 1,325,451 $ 88,687 1,273,934 92%1,327,199 $ 1,129,330 *$ 1,273,934 * FY 2014 ContingencY-$ 1,236 ,764 a) Oregon Health Authority grant projected at amended contract amount b) Received quarterly in arrears Page 7 c) Interfund contract reduced due to elimination of F.T.E. - - - - BEHAVIORAL HEALTH Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31, 2013 I "~- FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) FY 2013 FY 2014 % of Actual Actual Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance I Revenues Marriage Licenses Divorce Filing Fees Federal Grants Federal Grant (ARRA) State Grants State Miscellaneous Adult Mental Health Initiative Title 19 Liquor Revenue School Districts Patient Fees Interest on Investments Rentals Administrative Fee Interfund Contract-Gen Fund Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditures Personnel Services Materials and Services Capital Outlay Transfers Out Total Expenditures Revenues less Expenditures Transfers In-General Fund Transfers In-OHP-CDO Transfers In-Acute Care Svcs Transfers In-ABHA Total Transfers In Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 5,650 122,971 252,331 63,750 7,552,648 62,361 229,038 121,876 144,595 23,317 110,491 19,900 16,625 5,224,877 127,000 17,482 1,945 30% 6,500 21,413 15% 140,600 -0% 252,349 -0% 25,500 1,321,414 17% 7,893,477 5,155 8% 61,860 -0% 230,000 34,821 24% 144,246 ~-0% 137,000 -n/a 49,827 32% 158,082 2,925 14% 20,500 1,500 8% 18,500 1,116,441 13% 8,318,643 -0% 127,000 1,845 96% 100 14,094,911 2,557,286 15% 17,534,357 10,916,057 2,005,513 15% 13,082,340 5,970,799 646,754 9% 6,828,913 26,965 -0% 10,000 204,000 -0% 204,900 6,500 140,600 252,349 25,500 7,893,477 61,860 230,000 144,246 137,000 158,082 20,500 18,500 8,318,643 127,000 1,930 1,830 17,536,187 1,830 13,082,340 - 6,828,913 - 10,000 - 204,900 - 17,117,821 2,652,267 13% 20,126,153 20,126,153 (3,022,9091 (94,981) (2,591,796) 1,307,787 484,494 264,631 524,039 229,550 - 48,932 - 17% n/a 17% n/a 1,377,302 - 293,593 - (2,589,966) 1,830 1,377,302 293,593 -- 2,580,951 278,482 1,670,895 1,670,895 (441,958) 183,501 (920,901) (919,071) 1,830 3,113,095 2,671,137 77% 3,461,651 2,671,137 {790,514~ $ 2,671,137 $2,854,638 * $ 2,540,750 $1,752,066 $ (788,684) * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 2,540,750 Page 8 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31,2013 FY 2013 Actual Revenues Admin-Operations 31,848 Admin-GIS 778 Admin-Code Enforcement 239,264 Building Safety 1,563,938 Electrical 336 ,210 Contract Services 166,428 Env Health-On Site Prog 340,564 Planning-Current 798,221 Planning-Long Range 348 ,545 Total Revenues 3,825,796 Expenditures Admin-Operations 1 ,311,935 Admin-GIS 117,502 Admin-Code Enforcement 208,357 Building Safety 599,764 Electrical 200,596 Contract Services 163,822 Env Health-On Site Pgm 160,291 Planning-Current 581,155 Planning-Long Range 356 ,807 Transfers Out (DIS Fund) 179 ,155 Total Expenditures 3,879,383 Revenues less Expenditures (53,586) Transfers In General Fund -Gen Ops 854,872 General Fund -UR Planning 495,360 A&T Reserve (DIS assistance) 89,577 Other - Total Transfers In 1,439,809 Change in Fund Balance 1,386,223 Beginning Fund Balance 192,482 Ending Fund Balance $1,578,705 * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 384,103 a) Includes $63 ,891 for the Computer Software FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) FY 2014 I % Of Actual Budget I' Budget ~ PrOjection I $ Variance 7,787 148 45 ,004 319,464 72,700 26,088 96,803 141,187 65,225 14% 10% 25% 26% 26% 13% 34% 22% 24% 56 ,243 1,500 178,000 1,247,359 283,073 204,800 288,484 634,602 274,527 56,243 1,500 178,000 1,247,359 283 ,073 204 ,800 288,484 634,602 274 ,527 774,405 24% 3,168,588 3,168,588 319,403 20% a) 1,610,396 1,610,396 20,195 16% 124,246 124,246 46 ,017 17% 275,515 275,515 99,615 15% 672,796 672,796 36,624 17% 218,300 218,300 35,785 22% 162,658 162,658 31,436 18% 171 ,529 171 ,529 103,527 16% 665,901 665,901 53,590 12% 450,498 450,498 -0% 179,035 179,035 746,191 16% 4,530,874 4,530,874 28,214 (1,362,286) (1,362,286) -0% b) 465,121 (465,121) 82,560 17% 495,360 495,360 -0% b ) 89,518 (89 ,518) -0% 100 !100~ 82,560 8% 1,050,099 495,360 (554,739) 110 ,774 (312 ,187) (866,926) (554,739) 1,578,705 227% 696,290 1,578,705 882,415 $1,689,479 * $ 384,103 $ 711,779 $ 327,676 b) FY 14 revenues are projected to be sufficient to cover FY 14 expenditures Page 9 ROAD Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31, 2013 FY 2013 Actual Revenues Federal Grant (ARRA) 7,335 Mineral Lease Royalties 140,591 Forest Receipts 1,265,279 Federal -PIL T Payment State Miscellaneous 542,290 Motor Vehicle Revenue 10,495,426 City of Bend 45,486 City of Redmond 11,554 City of Sisters 1,861 City of La Pine 10,000 Interest on Investments 32,342 Interfund Contract 526,110 Equipment Repairs 255,369 Vehicle Repairs 82,542 Vegetation Management 49,503 Forester 24,628 Other Inter-fund Services 30,387 Inter-Fund Sales -Fuel 623,074 Sale of Equip & Material 287,313 Miscellaneous 35,018 Total Revenues 14,466,108 Expenditures Personnel Services 5,303,241 Materials and Services 7,277,398 Capital Outlay 67,987 Transfers Out 275,000 Total Expenditures 12,923,627 Revenues less Expenditures 1,542,481 Trans In -Solid Waste 276,272 Trans In -Transp SOC Trans In-Road Imp Res Total Transfers In 276,272 Change in Fund Balance 1,818,753 Beginning Fund Balance 4,723,852 Ending Fund Balance $ 6,542,605 FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) I % Of Actual Budget -n/a 2,132 2% -0% 1,064,365 n/a -0% 1,732,074 16% 19,887 6% 3,328 1% 3,624 36% -0% 6,259 35% -0% 17,979 8% -0% -n/a -0% 1,601 13% 57,841 11% 3,005 1% 3,325 13% 2,915,420 19% 906,106 17% 5,385,717 5,385,717 947,453 9% 10,306,609 10,306,609 -0% 2,882,108 2,882,108 -0% 450,000 450,000 1,853,559 10% 19,024,434 19,024,434 1,061,861 (4,753,012) (3,686,647) 1,066,365 -0% d) 282,148 282,148 -0% 400,000 400,000 -0% 1,000 1,000 -683,148 683,148 1,061,861 (4,069,864) (3,003,499) 1,066,365 6,542,605 109% 6,014,368 6 ,542,605 528,237 $ 7,604,466 * $ 1,944,504 $3,539,106 $1,594,602 * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 1,944,504 a) Payment received annually in January b) One-time PIL T payment. Not anticipated at the time the FY 2014 budget was adopted . c) Billed upon completion of work Page 10 d) Payments to be received in June 2014 from other Road Department funds ADULT PAROLE & PROBATION Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31, 2013 FY 2014 -Year to FY 2013 Date (17% of Year) FY 2014 Actual Actual I % ot Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance Revenues DOC Measure 57 219,240 -0% a) 219,240 State Miscellaneous 4,301 -0% b) 4,301 Alternate Incarceration 7,408 49% c) 15,000 State Subsidy 22,329 3,457 25% 13,826 SB 1145 2,748,555 687,139 23% 2,951,504 Probation Work Crew Fees 14,136 1,280 10% 13,376 Claims Reimbursement 6,997 n/a d) Miscellaneous 4,648 18 0% 4,500 Electronic Monitoring Fee 177,947 35,736 23% 156,000 Probation Superv. Fees 189,330 31,855 18% 175,000 I nterest on Investments 5,743 1,076 18% 6,000 Interfund -Sheriff 50,000 8,333 17% 50,000 Sale of Equipment 250 -n/a Crime Prevention Grant 50,000 -0% e) 50,000 CFC-Domestic Violence 63,906 -0% e) 73,938 Total Revenues 3,550,384 783,299 21% 3,732,685 Expenditures Personnel Services 2,956,034 533,809 16% 3,326,077 Materials and Services 912,384 137,722 14% 955,003 Capital Outlay --0% 100 Total Expenditures 3,868,418 671,532 16% 4,281,180 Revenues less Expenditures (318,034) 111,767 (548,495) Transfers In-General Fund 435,328 75,198 17% 451,189 219,240 4,301 15,000 13,826 2,951,504 13,376 6,997 6,997 4,500 156,000 175,000 6,000 50,000 50,000 73,938 3,739,682 6,997 4,281,080 100 3,326,077 955,003 100 (541,398) 7,097 451,189 Change in Fund Balance 117,294 186,965 (97,306) (90,209) 7,097 Beginning Fund Balance 630,226 747,520 106% 707,953 747,520 39,567 Ending Fund Balance $ 747,520 $ 934,485 * $ 610,647 $ 657,311 $ 46,664 * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 610,647 a) M57 contract not finalized b) Payment usually not received until 3rd quarter c) Utilization of AlP funds trending higher that expected d) One time only revenue event e) Payments received quarterly Page 11 CHILDREN & FAMILIES COMMISSION Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31, 2013 Revenues Federal Grants Title IV -Family Sup/Pres HealthyStart Medicaid Youth Investment State Prevention Funds HealthyStart /R-S-G OCCF Grant Charges for Svcs -Misc Program Fees Court Fines & Fees Interest on Investments Donations Interfund Grants Total Revenues Expenditures Personnel Services Materials and Services Total Expenditures Revenues less Expenditures Transfers In General Fund General Fund -Other Total Transfers In Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance FY 2013 Actual FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) Actual ~ % Of Budget 252 ,020 39,533 80,557 196,053 65 ,270 219,950 392,440 5,148 5,645 73,959 3,659 13 358,343 -0% a) -0% -0% -n/a -n/a -0% -0% b) 50 3% -n/a 12 ,848 17% c) 515 52% -n/a -0% d) 1,692,590 13,413 1% 570,985 1,424 ,002 1,994,987 94,438 26 ,103 120,541 16% 3% d) (302,397) (107,128) $ 275,984 - 275,984 (26,413) 574 ,985 548,572 $ 46,456 - 46,456 (60,672) 548,572 487,901 17% 13% 146% * $ FY 2014 Budget I Projection I $ Variance 402,044 19,767 30 ,000 119,539 89,475 2,000 75,034 1,000 350,375 1,089,234 913,061 (176,173) 573,849 573 ,849 1,093,135 998,038 95 ,097 1,666,984 1,571,887 95,097 (577,750) (658,826) (81,076) 278,739 278,739 89,350 89,350 368,089 368,089 (209,661 ) 375,704 (290 ,737) 548,572 (81,076) 172 ,868 1< FY 2014 Contingency-$166,043 a) DFC #11 Grant of $93,750 was not received, CDS #2 grant was reduced by $8,364 b) Relief Nursery grant of $63,329 was not received c) Grant award was higher than budgeted d) Revised based on actual grant award 299,930 (102 ,114) 19,767 30,000 119,539 26,146 (63,329) 2,000 77,086 2,052 1,000 337,593 P2,782} 166,043 $ 257,835 $ 91 ,792 Page 12 SOLID WASTE Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31,2013 Operating Revenues Miscellaneous Franchise 3% Fees Commercial Disp. Fees Private Disposal Fees Franchise Disposal Fees Yard Debris Special Waste Interest Leases Recyclables 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 Capital Reserve Total Transfers Out Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 588,009 a) Due April 15, 2014 b) Seasonal - FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year)FY 2013 Actual Actual I Budget 19,127 3,363 15% 209,076 5,508 3% a 971,213 175,028 18% 1,376,005 316,406 24% 3,980,498 740,397 18% 107,801 20,760 24% b 73,568 11,400 46% c 8,118 1,546 19% 10,801 2,700 25% d 47,033 8,189 18% 3,131 -n/a 6,806,370 1,285,297 19% 1,651,419 298,095 16% 2,808,337 355,927 11% 946,711 -0% e 76,335 -0% 5,482,802 654,022 11% 1,323,569 631,275 -0% g 630,000 276,272 -0% h 906,272 -0% 417,297 1,285,297 0 807,470 1,224,767 148% $1,224,767 $ 2,510,064 * c) Unpredictable-revenue mainly from clean-up projects d) Sept rent received and posted e) Payments made November and May f) No capital purchases made yet g) Paid quarterly h) Transfers will be made quarterly FY 2014 Budget I Projection I$ Variance 22,000 22,000 200,000 200,000 954,100 954,100 1,309,350 1,309,350 4,095,525 4,095,525 85,000 85,000 25,000 25,000 8,000 8,000 10,801 10,801 45,000 45,000 6,754,776 6,754,776 1,868,124 3,311,993 930,157 55,000 6,165,274 589,502 1,868,124 3,311,993 930,157 55,000 6,165,274 589,502 282,148 282,148 545,000 545,000 827,148 827,148 (237,646) (237,646) 825,655 1,224,767 399,112 $ 588,009 $ 987,121 $399,112 Page 13 RISK MANAGEMENT Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31 , 2013 Revenues Inter-fund Charges: General Liability Property Damage Vehicle Workers' Compensation Unemployment Claims Reimb-Gen Liab/Property Process Fee-Events/Parades Miscellaneous Skid Car Training Interest on Investments TOTAL REVENUES Direct Insurance Costs: GENERAL LIABILITY 5201 Settlement / Benefit 5202 Defense 5203 Professional Service 5204 Insurance 5205 Loss Prevention 5206 Miscellaneous 5207 Repair / Replacement Total General Liability PROPERTY DAMAGE 5204 Insurance 5207 Repair / Replacement Total Property Damage VEHICLE 5204 Insurance 5205 Loss Prevention 5207 Repair / Replacement Total Vehicle WORKERS' COMPENSATION 5201 Settlement / Benefit 5204 Insurance 5205 Loss Prevention 5206 Miscellaneous Total Workers' Compensation 5201 UNEMPLOYMENT -Settlement/Benefits Total Direct Insurance Costs Insurance Administration: Personnel Services Materials &Srvc, Capital Out. &Tranfs. Total Expenditures Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance FY 2013 FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) Actual Actual I %ot Budget 262,333 45,471 17% 313,480 54,421 17% 173,635 27,358 17% 1,448,553 252,031 17% 254,165 51,701 17% 34,401 13 0% 1,300 140 6% 76 9 11% 23,060 1,080 8% 12 ,226 2,523,228 2,187 18% 434,411 16% 382,659 91,518 50,919 5,459 85,751 85 148,035 149,983 8,790 - 3,290 1,825 200 679,645 159,171 - 248,869 62% 166,668 54,449 213,620 366 2,029 168,697 67% 354 16,030 1,165 54 ,919 71,316 367,051 2,694 4,213 4% 68,129 141,960 90,469 36,000 7,408 46,366 591,376 137,082 1,693,039 - 166,006 21% -0% 587,786 308,508 49,919 15% 131,414 2,132,961 22,039 11% 659,744 390,267 (225,333) 2,240,791 2,631,057 2,631,057 2,405,724 -~------------------------~ FY 2014 Budget I Projection I $ Variance 272,823 272,823 326,526 326,526 164,150 164,150 1,512,188 1,512,188 310 ,203 310,203 40,000 40,000 2,300 2,300 80 80 14,000 14,000 12,050 12,050 2,654,320 2,654,320 400,000 450,000 50,000 250,000 250,000 120,000 110,000 (10,000) 800,000 750,000 (50,000) 200,000 180,000 (20,000) 1,770,000 1,740,000 (30,000) 333,327 197,193 2,300,520 333,327 197,093 2,270,420 100 (29,900) 353,800 2,517,479 2,871,279 383,900 2,631,057 3,014,957 30,100 113,578 143,678 * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 2,871,279 Page 14 DESCHUTES COUNTY 911 Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31,2013 FY 2013 Actual Revenues Property Taxes -Current 6,323,533 Property Taxes -Prior 319 ,349 Federal Grants 46 ,514 State Reimbursement 35,066 Telephone User Tax 767,453 Data Network Reimb. 64 ,247 Jefferson County 30 ,755 User Fee 69 ,012 Police RMS User Fees 229 ,103 Contract Payments 11 ,885 Miscellaneous 10 ,084 Claims Reimbursement 46 ,760 Interest 54,324 Total Revenues 8,008,083 Expenditures Personnel Services 3,982 ,162 Materials and Services 1,929 ,460 Capital Outlay 81,515 Total Expenditures 5,993,138 Revenues less Expenditures 2,014,945 Transfers Out -Reserve Fund 500,000 Change in Fund Balance 1,514 ,945 Beginning Fund Balance 8,883,086 Ending Fund Balance $ 10,398,030 * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 2,815,166 FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) FY 2014 I %of Actual Budget Budget I Projection I $ Variance -0% a) 5 ,947,600 5,947,600 62,332 28% 219,007 219,007 -0% b) 200,000 200,000 3,008 8% 36,000 36,000 -0% c) 750,000 750,000 -0% 30,000 30,000 250 1% 30 ,000 30,000 27,197 50% 54 ,000 54,000 -0% d ) 256,791 256,791 -0% 137,000 137,000 2,450 27% 9 ,000 9,000 -n/a 8,692 14% 60,600 60,600 103,929 1% 7,729,998 7,729,998 844,285 19% 4 ,432 ,356 4,432,356 422 ,175 20% 2,132 ,476 2,132,476 -0% 350 ,000 350 ,000 1,266,461 18% 6,914,832 6,914,832 (1,162,532) 815,166 815,166 -0% 7 ,800,000 7,800,000 (1,162,532) (6,984 ,834) (6,984,834) 10,398,030 106% 9,800 ,000 10,398,030 598,030 * $ 2,815,166 $ 3,413,196 $ 598,030$ 9,235,499 a) Current year taxes due November, February and May b) Reimbursement grant for CAD to CAD Capital Expenditures. No Capital expenditures made to date c) Payments received quarterly -October, January , April and July d) Billed annually Page 15 Health Benefits Trust Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31, 2013 Revenues: Internal Premium Charges Part-Time Employee Premium Employee Monthly Co-Pay COIC Retiree f COBRA Co-Pay Prescription Rebates Claims Reimbursements Miscellaneous Interest Total Revenues Expenditures: Personnel Services (all depts) Materials & Services Admin & Well ness Claims Paid-Medical Claims Paid-Prescription Claims Paid-DentalNision Claims Refunds Stop Loss Insurance Premium State Assessments Administration Fee (EMBS) Preferred Provider Fee Health Impact Other -Administration Other -Wellness Admin & Wellness Deschutes On-site Clinic Contracted Services Medical Supplies Equipment Other Total DOC Deschutes On-site Pharmacy Contracted Services Medication and Drugs Other Total Pharmacy Total Expenditures Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance FY 2014 -Year to FY 2013 Date (17% of Year) I % of Actual BudgetActual 12,874,815 2,380,515 16,7% 30 ,280 2,791 7 ,0% 643 ,918 104,150 10,6% 258 ,413 16,2%1,405,518 179,400 18,7%963,987 99,330 33,755 66 ,9% 50 NfA50,493 50 NfA1,240 70 ,959 10 ,215 17,0% 16,140,540 2,969,339 16.5% 28,534 13,6% 197,101 11,985,615 2,039,247 16,6% a) 175,492 16,5% a)1,059,923 1,728,916 291,536 16,0% a) (131,375) (11,032) NfA 336,407 73,286 19,5% 194,510 42,436 19,7% 334,141 83,438 25,3% 50,841 12,856 23.4% 52,224 4,331 7,9% 6,609 11 ,0% 101 ,616 49 ,996 2,291 3,0% 15,762,814 2,720,491 16.6% 108,741 11 ,9% 804 ,311 4,103 41,0%33,155 -0,0%2,170 46,715 3,225 8.4% 886,351 116,068 12.0% 24,620 8,5%367,193 1,446,770 133,641 8 ,9% 63,518 2,003 16,9% 1,877,480 160,265 8.9% 3,025,358 nfa18,723,746 (56,019)(2,583,206) 14 ,551 ,028 $11,967,822 102% .$ 11,967822 $11,911,803 FY 2014 Budget I Projection $ Variance I 14,269,138 40,000 980 ,000 1,592,750 958,333 50,493 60 ,000 17,950,714 14 ,269,138 17,000 800,000 1,592,750 1,050,000 50,493 50 50 60 ,000 17,839,481 (23,000) (180,000) 91,667 50 50 (111,233) 209,676 209,676 12,321,732 12,321 ,732 1,064,841 1,064,841 1,825,442 1,825,442 (11 ,032) 11,032 375 ,000 375 ,000 215,000 215,000 330 ,000 330,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 60,162 60,162 76 ,739 76,739 16,378,916 16,367,884 11,032 915 ,000 915,000 10,000 10,000 250 250 38,310 38,310 963,560 963,560 289,004 289 ,004 1,500,000 1,500,000 11 ,876 11,876 1,800,880 19,353,032 1,800,880 19,342 ,000 11,032 (1,402 ,318) (1,502,519) (100 ,201) $ 11,700,000 $11,967,822 267,822 $ 10,297,682 $10,465,302 $ 167!620 1% of Exp covered by Rev 86.2% 98.1% 92.8% 92.2%1 • FY 2014 Contingency-$ 10,297,682, Page 16 FAIR AND EXPO CENTER Statement of Financial Operating Data Through August 31 , 2013 FY 2013 Actual Revenues Miscellaneous $ 4,102 Vending Machines Telephone Fees -Events 255 Special Events Revenues 383,339 Interest 76 Storage 35,283 Camping at F & E 16 ,700 Horse Stall Rental 48,036 Concession % -Food 139 ,006 Rights (Signage, etc.) 85,338 Interfund Rentals 2,400 Annual County Fair (net) 245,000 Interfund Contract 45,000 Total Revenues 1,004,534 Expenditures: Personnel Services 821,293 Materials and Services 580,396 Debt Service 114,117 Cap ital Outlay 9,000 Total Expenditures 1,524,806 Revenues less Expenditures (520,272) Transfers In General Fund 320,000 Room Tax -6% 25,744 Room Tax -1% 82,800 Fair & Expo Reserve 50,000 Total Transfers In 478,544 Change in Fund Balance (41,728) Beginning Fund Balance 35,055 Ending Fund Balance $ (6,673) $ * FY 2014 Contingency-$ 234 ,613 - FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) % of Actual Budget $ -0 .0% $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ -0 .0% 1,500 1,500 -n/a 35,214 8 .9% 395,000 395,000 148 N/A -0.0% 54 ,000 54,000 -0 .0% 11 ,000 11,000 1,440 4 .8% 30 ,000 30,000 3 ,808 2 .5% 152,000 152 ,000 6,000 7 .5% 80 ,000 80 ,000 400 16.7% 2,400 2 ,400 -0.0% a ) 250,000 185,000 (65,000) -n/a FY 2014 Budget Projection $ Variance 47,010 4.8% 980,900 915,900 (65,000) 146,227 16.5% 887,593 887,593 38 ,593 8 .0% 483 ,533 483,533 -0 .0% 112 ,974 112 ,974 -0 .0% 100 100 184,820 12.5% 1,484,200 1,484,100 100 (137,809) (503,300) (568,200) (64,900) 62,364 16.7% 374,186 374 ,186 4,290 16 .7% 25,744 25 ,744 31,526 16.7% 189,156 189,156 -0 .0% 100,000 100,000 98,180 14.2% 689,086 689,086 (39,629) 185,786 120 ,886 (64,900) (6,673) 48,827 {6 ,673} {55 ,500} (46,303) $ 234,613 $ 114,213 $ (120,400) 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 __'~",'___'_'_____~ _,~_',a;;f /liI;I"<iit~~r;.'i'~~''t 'Ii'""" &hi" rpM Ut"'Wh *j'~~.iII_it'~';mN;ilf1J'f' '¥lr"llj"lrMo'f*"llilIiI. CAPITAL PROJECTS • Bethlehem Inn • Jail Project • North County Campus • Sisters Health Clinic Deschutes County Bethlehem Inn (Fund 128) FY 2013-Actual; FY 2014-Year to Date Actual, Budget and Projection Through August 31, 2013 Revenues Grants -Private Lease Payments Total Revenues Expenditures Debt Service: Interest Expense Total Expenditures Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance FY 2013 Actual FY 2014 -Year to Date (17% of Year) Actual I %of Budget - - 24,408 4,068 24,408 4,068 14,617 2,384 14,617 2,384 1,6849,792 (2,710,173) (2,700,381) 0.0% 16.7% 16.7% 9.8% 9.8% 100.0% FY 2014 Budget I PrOjection 2,700,600 24,408 24,408 2,725,008 24,408 24,408 16,000 24,408 16,000 2,700,600 8,408 (2,700,600) (2.700,381) $ Variance (2,700,600) (2,700,600) 8,408 8,408 (2,692,192) 219 ${2, 700,381) $ (2,698,698) $ $ (2.691.973) $ (2,691.973) a) Interest on August 2013 negative cash balance: $1,180.36. b) Inception through July 31,2013: Revenues -Lease Payments Expenditures: Land/Building (Amertitle) -July 2007 Hickman Williams City of Bend -May 2008 KN EX CO Kleinfelder Total expended on facility Interest on Negative Cash Balance Total expended Net $ 77,292 2,241,313 17,578 250,000 5,289 3,732 2,517,913 258,077 2,775,990 $ (2,698,698) Deschutes County Jail Project (Fund 456) Phase 11-Beginning July 1, 2012 Through August 31, 2013 Project Budget (Note 1) Actual Through August 31, 2013 Committed Projected Total Variance Resources Interest Transfers In: General County Projects (142) General Capital Reserve (143) General Fund (001) Jamison Acq & Remodel (457) (Note 2) Bond Issuance,net Total Resources Expenditures Architect Engineering Environmental Surveying Consulting Building & Grounds Fees & Permits SDCs (water & sewer) Insurance Intemal Service Fund Charges Miscellaneous Administrative Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Construction -ExpanSion & Remodel Construction Contingency $ 26,157 100,000 1,2SO,OOO 750,000 540,939 8,400,000 11,067,096 820,000 35,000 130,000 180,000 40,000 33,700 30,000 50,000 9,448,396 300,000 $ 9,855 100,000 1,250,000 750,000 540,939 8,400,000 11,050,794 662,515 2,935 593 500 9,127 8,432 7,938 7,311 5,561 $ $ 16,302 151,885 13,332 31,667 16,302 5,600 21,668 121,568 180,000 32,062 26,389 24,439 50,000 9,448,396 286,846 $ 26,157 100,000 1,250,000 7SO,OOO 540,939 8,400,000 11,067,096 820,000 2,935 (2,935) 593 (593) 500 (SOO) 35,000 9,127 (9,127) 130,000 180,000 40,000 33,700 30,000 SO,OOO 9,448,396 286,846 13,154 Total Expenditures 11,067,096 704,911 196,884 10,196,968 11,067,096 (0) Net 10,345,883 (196,884) (10,180,666) (0) (0) Note 1: The project includes the Jail expansion and a remodel for the Medical Unit Note 2: The resources remaining in the "Jamison Acqusition and Remodel Fund" were transferred to this Capital Project Fund Deschutes County North County Services Building Inception through August 31, 2013 Received or ACTUALII Encumbrances II Project to _Expended & Commitments Date RESOURCES: Beginning Net Working Capital Loan Proceeds, net of issuance costs Resources from Fund 140 1,402,013 1,402,013 a) Resources from Fund 142 25,000 25,000 b) Transfer In (Fund 142) 600,000 600,000 Interest Revenue 7,251 7,251 Total Resources 2,034,264 ~034,264 EXPENDITURES: Materials & Services ArchitecturelDesign 51,735 25,000 76,735 b) Engineering Internal Service Fund Charges 16,246 16,246 Fees, Permits & SDCs 1,420 1,420 Utilities 18,474 18,474 Travel -Meals/Mileage Reimb 23 23 Total Materials &Services 87,897 25,000 112,897 Capital Out/ay Land and Building 1,402,013 1,402,013 a) Remodel 230 230 Total Capital Outlay 1,402,243 1,402,243 Contingency Total Expenditures 1,490,140 25,000 1,515,140 Net 544,125 (25,000) 519,125 * The project budget is the consolidation of FY 2012 & FY 2013 and FY 2014 adopted budget Project Budget * 5,500,000 1,402,013 25,000 700,000 50,000 7,677,013 325,000 100,000 31,724 200,000 20,000 676,724 1,402,013 5,481,426 6,883,439 116,850 7,677,013 5,500,000 1,402,013 25,000 700,000 50,000 7,677,013 325,000 100,000 31,724 200,000 20,000 23 676,747 1,402,013 5,481,426 6,883,439 7,560,186 116,827 Variance {23~ ~23~ 116,850 --(23) 116,827 a) The building was purchased in FY 2011 with resources from Project Development and Debt Reserve (Fund 140) -$1,402,013 b) $25,000 was paid to the architect in FY 2011 with resources from General County Projects Fund (Fund 142) Deschutes County Campus Improvement (Fund 463) Inception through August 31, 2013 RESOURCES: Transfer in (Note A) Transfer in -General Fund Oregon Judicial Dept Payment Interest Revenue Total Resources $ 796 ,617 150,000 12 ,750 7,322 966,689 EXPENDITURES: Basement Jail/Boiler Demolition Basement Public File View 1 st Floor Public File View 1 st Floor Restrooms/Haslinger Court 1 st Floor DeHoog Court/Jury Room Acct Area Open Workspace Courthouse DA Offices Hearing Room Justice Building 2 "Stone Building" Internal Service Fund Charges Total Materials &Services JB1 JB2 JB3 JB4 JB5 JB6 JB7 JB8 168,109 141 ,862 117980 401 ,231 55,623 9 ,543 34 ,348 37 ,809 720 5,177 972,401 Net Notes: A . Remaining proceeds from the FF&C borrowing for the OSP/911 Building $ (5,713) Deschutes County Sisters Health Clinic (Fund 464) Inception through August 31 , 2013 ACTUAL Projected RESOURCES: Beginning Net Working Capital Federal Grants 40,000 40,000 500,000 Resources from Fund 142 48,626 48,626 a) 48,626 Transfer in (Fund 142) 100,000 100,000 100 ,000 Interest Revenue 445 445 600 Total Resources 189,072 189,072 649,226 EXPENDITURES: Materials & Services Architecture/Design 56,499 56,499 a) 56,607 Engineering Planning 1,140 1,140 2,000 Surveying 2,029 2,029 2,029 Interfund Charges 2,022 2,022 3,318 Fees, Permits & SDCs 25,549 25,549 25,549 Utilities 2,000 Miscellaneous Project Costs 993 993 993 Miscellaneous Admin Costs 26 26 4 ,000 Total Materials & Services 88 ,258 88 ,258 96,496 Capital Outlay New Construction 55 ,312 497,418 552,730 b) 552,730 Total Capital Outlay 55,312 497,418 552,730 552 ,730 Contingency Total Expenditures 143,570 497,418 640,988 649,226 Net 45,501 (497,418) (451,916) ° a) $48,626 paid to the architect in FY 2012 with resources from General County Projects Fund (Fund 142) b) Additional costs due to delay in the project have not yet been determined . ------------------------------ ----------------------------------- ------------------------ ----------- ------------ -------------------------------------------- - --------------------- Deschutes County General Support Services -BOCC \ Conference/Seminar, Educationffraining and Travel Expenditures I County College Expenditures FY 2014 I I f---------------------------.----r------,--:=~=_:'_:__.___----- FY 20141 BOCC Conference _&_T_r__a__v_e_I_-I-_J_u_1 ______A_u...,:g'---''----_T_ot_a_1--'-___________ _ Tammy Baney Conf/Sem & Educffraining 35 35 Travel Meals Accommodations -- - ---------------~--------- Airfare _Mileage reimbursement 478 478 Ground TransportlPar~k~in:.'"'g'_____________= ___________===____=====____ Total Baney 513 513 ~Ian Unger_ ----------------- Conf/Sem &_~~ucffraJn~_______2_0_5__ 205 ---------------- Travel Meals Accom modations 192 192 ------ Airfare --------------------------------- Mileage reimbursement _ _________ ______________ Gr~_u_n~_!,"~nsportlParkin~ ______-==='------"""===_==== ------------------------------1 Total Unger 397 397 ~-~~----------------..:------===-----..--:--~=---:=-----:=---=~-------------:=---:=---=-----Tony DeBone _ _ ______ _ Conf/Sem & Educffraining --------- - -5-2-0---------------5-20------------------------ ------------------------------------ Travel Meals 82 821----;----------,,----,-:---------------------- Accom modations ------ 618 -----=--=--:-------------==-=--:-------------- 164 781 Airfare 658 50 708 ---=-:-:-:----:--:-------:----------------- Mileage reimbursement --=--=-=------------------------------------------ 105 105 ----------------- Ground Transport 74 74 --- 1,795 474 2,269 ----------------------~------- Total DeBone --------- --...III!!II!IIIII!II...--------...-----_.:: ----------------------------------,.. ------------------------- Total -BOCC Department ___________ _________ _______________________ __________ Conf/Sem & Educf!.r~!!1~ng _________22~____ ~~_ __760 ________________________________ Travel Meals 82 82 -------- Accommodations 810 164 973 ------ 50 708 1--::--:--:----------------------------- ~~re 6~ ----- ------------ Total -BOCC Department 583 583-------=--=--------------------------- 74 74 ---------------------------------j ___________2,!~~ ____98_7____~3,~17_9__________________________ _ _Mileage Rei'!!..~l!rsement __________ _ Ground Transport I---::=-=---=--=-:-::---c=----::----::-----:--::=:----:----,------------- FY 2014 Original Budget 1~~~.s~______________________________________ -- Percent of FY 2014 Budget Expended 20.8% ~-~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~.;...;,;,;;;;;;;;.;~~~~~~-~------~~~~--------~~==~-=----=--=-=--- BOCC County College1----~-_c----=------------------ _~ce~Copier Supplies ___________ _ ----------- --------- Meeting Supplies --------- Total BOCC County College -'""""""........."""'---"""""'".........=--------------- ------------ -------------------------------------"----- NOTE: Above amounts include only those expenditures processed for payment. Additional conference and travel costs may have been incurred, but not processed for payment. 9/5/2013 Deschutes County Legislative Report September 25, 2013 1:30pm – Allen Room 1-866-279-1568, *8678842* I. Special Session Update a. September 30, 2013 b. PERS/Taxes – Grand Bargain c. Columbia River Crossing II. 2013 Legislative Recap a. General Session Overview i. Budget - $16.9 Billion GF/LF b. Enacted - Deschutes County Priority 1 Support Legislation i. House Bill 3130 – La Pine Stoplight c. Enacted - Deschutes County Priority 2 Support Legislation i. Education ii. County Administrative Issues iii. Public Safety Health Care/Public Health iv. Energy/Environment/Natural Resources III. Interim Activities Underway a. Interim Days i. November 20-22 ii. January 15-17 b. 2013 Legislatively Authorized and Statuary Task Forces i. List of Legislative Appointments IV. 2014 February Session Timelines/Process a. February Session i. Feb 3 – Opening Day ii. March 9th – Last Day iii. Total: 35 Days 1 iv. 260 Bills b. Committee Bill Limits i. Chair 2 - Legislative Drafts ii. Vice-Chair - Legislative Drafts c. Member Bill Limits i. 2 - Legislative Drafts d. Committee Filing Timelines i. Committee Introductions by January 17, 2013 e. Member Bill Filing Guidelines i. Submit to LC by November 26, 2013 ii. Returned to Legislators by January 13, 2013 iii. Bills filed by January 21st will be Publically Available for Review V. 2014/15 Issues a. Health Care i. Implementation of the CCOs 1. Expansion of Mental Health ii. Health Insurance Exchange (Cover Oregon) iii. Task Force on the Future of Public Health Services (HB 2348) b. Education i. Early Learning Council Transition – Pilot Projects (HB 2013 and HB 3234) ii. Regional Educational Services Workgroup (HB 2013 and HB 3401) iii. Youth Development Council Transition c. Human Services/Housing i. Housing Transformation Transition Plan ii. Task Force on the Delivery of Human Services (SB 450) d. Public Safety/Judicial Branches i. Task force on Public Safety (HB 3194) ii. Department of Corrections Transition Programs iii. 911 Tax e. County Administration i. Task Force on Minority Language Voting Materials (HB 3506) 2 ii. Public Contracting (SB 805) f. Land Use/Water i. Water Storage/Water Grants - Implementation of SB 839 ii. Cyrus Heritage Ranch 1. Huffman Workgroup iii. EFU/AG Zoning Issues (SB 538) iv. DEQ Onsite Water Fees (SB 5520) VI. Deschutes County Department Updates a. Issues for PAC to Monitor 3 4 5 6 77th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2013 Regular Session Enrolled House Bill 3130 Sponsored by Representatives MCLANE, WHISNANT (at the request of Deschutes County) CHAPTER ................................................. AN ACT Relating to allowable use of moneys in industrial development revolving funds of individual counties; amending ORS 275.318. Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: SECTION 1. ORS 275.318 is amended to read: 275.318. (1) When the governing body of a county sells or leases real property acquired in any manner by the county, if that property is located in an area planned and zoned for industrial use under an acknowledged comprehensive plan of the county, the governing body may order all the moneys paid to the county under the terms of the sale be deposited with the county treasurer and credited to a special fund created by the governing body and designated the Industrial Development Revolving Fund of the county. (2) The county treasurer shall disburse the moneys in the Industrial Development Revolving Fund of the county only upon the written order of the county governing body and only for the purposes set forth in subsection (3) of this section. (3) The governing body of a county may expend moneys in an Industrial Development Re- volving Fund created under this section [by a county governing body shall be expended] only for : (a) The engineering, improvement, rehabilitation, construction, operation or maintenance, in whole or in part, including the preproject planning costs, of any development project authorized by ORS 271.510 to 271.540 [and] or 280.500 that is located in the county and that could directly result in one of the following activities: [(a)] (A) Manufacturing or other industrial production; [(b)] (B) Agricultural development or food processing; [(c)] (C) Aquacultural development or seafood processing; [(d)] (D) Development or improved utilization of natural resources; [(e)] (E) Operation of convention facilities [and] or trade centers; [(f)] (F) Operation of transportation or freight facilities; and [(g)] (G) Other activities that represent new technology or types of economic enterprise the county governing body determines are needed to diversify the economic base of the county. (b) Construction of off-site transportation or utility infrastructure that is necessary or appropriate to serve the development project. (4) If moneys from the sale of county property located in an area planned and zoned for indus- trial use are not credited to the Industrial Development Revolving Fund of the county, those moneys shall be distributed as provided in ORS 275.275. Enrolled House Bill 3130 (HB 3130-A)Page 1 7 (5) The governing body of a county may sell, lease or convey the real property described in this section, including any part thereof or interest therein, at public or private sale, with or without advertisement, and do all acts necessary to the accomplishment of the sale, lease or conveyance. Passed by House March 27, 2013 .................................................................................. Ramona J. Line, Chief Clerk of House .................................................................................. Tina Kotek, Speaker of House Passed by Senate May 20, 2013 .................................................................................. Peter Courtney, President of Senate Received by Governor: ........................M.,........................................................., 2013 Approved: ........................M.,........................................................., 2013 .................................................................................. John Kitzhaber, Governor Filed in Office of Secretary of State: ........................M.,........................................................., 2013 .................................................................................. Kate Brown, Secretary of State Enrolled House Bill 3130 (HB 3130-A)Page 2 8 DESCHUTES COUNTY SUPPORTED PRIORITY 2 BILLS Education/Youth Services House Bill 2013: The Early Learning Council (ELC), under the Oregon Education Investment Board (OEIB), was created through legislation in 2011. The Council guides efforts to “integrate and streamline” state programs for at-risk youth and ensures that children are prepared to learn when they enter kindergarten. Out of every 10 children in Oregon, at least four are not ready for kindergarten. Goals of the Oregon Early Childhood System include, and are not limited to: 1) the prevention of child abuse and neglect; 2) linking and integrating system programs and supports; and 3) parental braces in providing supportive environment for young children. HB 2013 directs the Early Learning Council (ELC) and Department of Education to assist school districts in implementing kindergarten readiness assessments for children and establishes a related grant program. Legislation requires standardized screening and referral services for voluntary statewide early learning system. Requires a permanent professional development and labor management committee be established for child care providers. Changes the program name for “Healthy Start Family Support Services” to “Healthy Families Oregon” and sets goal for program to target more than just first birth families and expands assessments to include children from zero to three years of age. HB 2013 directs the Oregon Health Authority and the ELC to develop performance metrics for prenatal care, delivery and infant care. Legislation instructs the Oregon Health Authority and the ELC to establish a grant program to support strategies that align voluntary statewide early learning systems and health systems to improve developmental outcomes for children from zero through three years of age. Requires preschool child with disability have comprehensive communication plan by the age of three years. Directs ELC to establish Early Learning Hub Demonstration projects, capping the number of projects at 7 in the first fiscal year of the 2013-15 biennium and at 16 in the second fiscal year. The bill appropriates an indeterminate amount of General Fund for demonstration projects. House Bill 2689: House Bill 2689-A establishes a streamlined, collaborative, project-based process, whereby public bodies may enter into agreements with youth job development organizations allowing youth participants (age 13 to 22) to work on public resource projects for job training, experience, or as part of an academic program. The measure also adds youth job development programs to the types of entities eligible to receive funding through the Career and Technical Education Revitalization Grant Program, in partnership with educational entities. 9 County Administrative Issues House Bill 2140: ORS 293.728 establishes the Oregon Short Term Fund, a pool of state and local government funds, as the investment vehicle for funds not authorized for discrete investment. The State and Local Government Efficiency Task Force, established by House Bill 2855 in 2011, recommended allowing local governments the option to invest in the Intermediate Term Pool, a separate investment pool. The measure provides express legal authority for local governments (cities, counties, school districts, community colleges, and special districts) to invest in the Oregon Short Term Fund (OSTF) though the Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP). The measure also allows local governments to invest in “…any other commingled investment pool established by the State Treasurer.” For example, this would include the Oregon Intermediate Term Pool (OITP), which is a non-statutory account. By allowing local governments to invest in these additional Treasury products, the local governments would be able to invest amounts beyond the statutory limit provided by ORS 294.810. House Bill 2698: The Legislative Assembly created a pilot program with the passage of House Bill 3462 (2009) for the purposes of cross-training building inspectors so that an inspector could perform an inspection in more than one specialty code. These inspectors are referred to as specialized building inspectors. The pilot program, scheduled to sunset on January 1, 2016, was designed to address the shortage of building inspectors in some regions of the state, particularly in certain specialty codes. House Bill 2698-A eliminates the sunset date on the program to continue the training, qualification and certification of specialized building inspectors. Legislation clarifies the authority of the Director of Department of Consumer and Business Services to appoint building inspectors in multiple specialty codes. It allows the Director to appoint building inspectors to perform inspections throughout different geographic region. HB 2689 allows the Director to consider factors specific to geographic regions when determining qualifications of inspectors. It grants the Director the authority to initiate rules to promote clarity in state building code and in licensing requirements. House Bill 2739: When a person registers to vote, updates voter registration information, or when the boundaries of a voter’s precinct change, the county clerk is required to send to the voter a memorandum card of convenient size containing the name and residence address of the elector (person qualified to vote), the name or number of the precinct in which the elector resides, and a brief statement of the circumstances under which the elector is required to register or update a registration. House Bill 2739A renames the memorandum card to “voter notification card” and makes indicates that the county may, rather than shall, mail notification cards to voters when precinct changes occur. House Bill 2829: Existing law requires each county governing body to publish a monthly schedule of expenditures exceeding $500 and a statement of proceedings reflecting actions taken by the body at public meetings. Currently, such reports are required to be posted on bulletin boards at the county courthouse and in all public libraries in the county. In addition, notice advertising the availability of the posted information must be published in a general circulation newspaper in the county at least once each month. House Bill 2829 A adds the Internet as a posting location and notice method and allows 10 counties to use one or more of the specified posting locations and notice methods to comply with the law. Legislation allows a county to comply with posting requirements by publishing a monthly schedule of expenditures and county actions at county courthouse, library bulletin boards, or on Internet. SB 562: The Building Codes Division (BCD) of the Department of Consumer and Business Services provides code development, administration, inspection, plan review, licensing, and permit services to the construction industry. Staff located in five regions around the state partner with other state and local government entities to help facilitate local construction projects, and assist local governments with other services such as e-permitting, best practices, and dispute resolution. Local programs are required to submit a report every four years and apply for renewal every four years. When a local provider chooses or is unable to execute plan review or permit services, the BCD provides these services. Legislation allows DCBS, at request of affected municipalities, to enter into agreement, combine resources, and share fee revenue with local government for DCBS to assist local government to administer and enforce all or part of building inspection program for specified period or project. It directs DCBS to adopt rule that the Department will charge the same fees and hourly rate for services that were charged by county before assumption of services by Department if Department assumes administration and enforcement of county manufactured dwelling services, building inspection program or part of building inspection program when county abandons or is unable to administer programs due to budget constraints resulting from reduced or eliminated federal timber payments. Legislation authorizes the Director to take action necessary to ensure efficient and responsive state building code system, including utilizing and hiring municipal or Department personnel and expending resources for purposes of carrying out administrative and enforcement duties according to agreement. Public Safety House Bill 2234: Currently, Oregon has over 3,000 offenders under local control post-prison supervision. Offenders may be placed on inactive status when they comply with the terms and conditions of their supervision and require less intensive supervision. The offender’s probation or parole officer may return an offender to active supervision if the officer finds it necessary to do so. Inactive supervision was included in House Bill 3508 from the 2010 session. This provision sunsets on July 1, 2013. Offenders are placed under local control after release from serving a sentence of 12 months or less in the local jail. House Bill 3508 allowed for offenders to be placed on inactive supervision status after serving half of his or her sentence. Legislation eliminates the sunset on provisions that allows offender on post-prison supervision to be placed on inactive status. House Bill 3194: In February of 2012, legislative leadership requested that the Governor continue the work done by the previous iteration of the Commission on Public Safety. In response, Governor Kitzhaber reconvened and reconstituted the Commission on Public Safety. After nearly six months of hearings (http://www.oregon.gov/CJC/Pages/2012ComPubSaf.aspx), the Commission issued a final report, which was the basis for discussions of the Joint Committee on Public Safety. 11 The measure impacts five areas of Oregon criminal law: 1) Sentencing; 2) Offender Incentives; 3) Offender Supervision; 4) Program Assessment; and 5) Correctional Resources. It reduces presumptive sentence for repeat offenders convicted of Identity Theft and Robbery III; eliminates prohibition on probation for offenders convicted of multiple drug offenses; modifies sentencing for marijuana offenses and driving while suspended or revoked; modifies crime of harassment. Increases maximum length of short-term transitional leave Department of Corrections (DOC) may grant; authorizes reduction in supervision term for certain offenders. Legislation authorizes supervisory authority to propose modifications to special conditions of probation. HB 3194 establishes Task Force on Public Safety. The bill directs the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission (OCJC) to collect best practices applicable to specialty courts. House Bill 3317: The current emergency communications tax is set to expire on January 1, 2014. There have been six sunset extensions of this tax since 1981. The tax rate is $0.75 cent per month per device capable of accessing 9-1-1 services, with the exception that federal, state, and local governments are tax exempt. The tax rate is set in statute and has been unchanged at $0.75 since 1995. The tax is collected by phone companies and wireless providers each month and then remitted to the Department of Revenue. The tax is used to pay for the Department of Revenue’s collect costs (up to one half of one percent), the Military Department’s - Office of Emergency Management program’s administrative costs and 9-1-1 training conducted by the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training (up to 4%); and statewide equipment and circuit charges (35%). The remaining revenue is distributed primarily to cities and counties on a quarterly basis to fund over 45 Public Safety Answering Points across the state (60.5%). Funds are distributed on a per capita basis; however, each county must receive a minimum of one percent of the net account balance. HB 3317 extends sunset date for emergency communications tax from January 1, 2014 to January 1, 2022. SB 93: A juvenile convicted of a Measure 11 offense is sentenced to the legal custody of the Oregon Department of Corrections, but placed in an Oregon Youth Authority facility. Most of these youth have difficulty readjusting to life outside the institution when released. Many do not have a place to live. Research shows that providing services, including housing, substantially reduce the chances of these youth re-offending. The cost savings associated with the reduction of recidivism is significantly greater than the costs of the re-entry program. Legislation allows the Oregon Department of Corrections to make grants to counties for the purposes of providing reentry services to youth under 19 years old. The bill establishes that the services may include transitional housing. Senate Bill 598: Public safety communications infrastructure has not kept pace with rapid advancements in communications technology generally, resulting in inconsistent ability to transmit information from a 9-1-1 caller’s phone into the 9-1-1 reporting system. Ideally, an incoming 9-1-1 call should immediately and automatically transmit an accurate callback number and the specific location of the emergency, without undue reliance on conversation with a caller. When emergency responders are 12 delayed due to incomplete and/or inaccurate information, the consequences can be grave. Senate Bill 598A requires that certain multiline phone systems comply with requirements of the automatic location identification database accessed by public safety answering points, to provide immediate, accurate information to emergency responders. SB 598 requires operators to enable public safety answering points (PSAPs) to obtain street address and building name, at minimum, from automatic location identification database (ALID) for 9-1-1 calls. It exempts operators of key telephone systems, wireless telecommunications, and multiline systems serving single level, single tract structures of 10,000 square feet or less. Legislation requires diligent efforts by managers to ensure user awareness of 9-1-1 call procedure and requires operators to arrange ALID update upon installation of new phone system to enable PSAPs to obtain 9-1-1 caller address and callback number. Health Care/Public Health House Bill 2348: The Oregon public health system is comprised of state, federal and local agencies, private organizations and other partners working together to protect and promote the health of Oregonians. The Oregon Health Authority asserts that a strong public health system is necessary to achieve better health outcomes at lower costs and to continue the transformation of health care delivery. House Bill 2348-A creates a task force to study the future of public health in Oregon. The task force is directed to develop recommendations for legislation to continue providing public health services efficiently and effectively and to submit a final report before the 2016 regular session of the Legislative Assembly. It requires task force report to interim committee no later than October 1, 2014. SB 132: According to the Oregon Public Health Division, for the last decade, Oregon’s non-medical exemption to the school immunization rate for kindergartners has increased from less than 2 percent in 2001 to 5.8 percent in 2012. In some counties, the rate of non-medical exemption is as high as 12 percent. Oregon has the highest non-medical exemption rate for one or more immunizations in the United States, and some Oregon schools have an exemption rate as high as 70 percent. Senate Bill 132-A requires parents to sign a document declining immunizations on behalf of the child. The document may include reasoning for declining the immunizations, such as for religious or philosophical belief. The document must include a signature from a health care practitioner verifying that the parent has reviewed information about the risks and benefits of immunization or include certification verifying that the parent has completed an online educational video approved by the Oregon Health Authority. SB 436: Coordinated Care Organizations (CCOs) have been directed by the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) to reduce the health care cost curve by 1 percent next year and 2 percent per year over the following 3 years. Many of the efforts to achieve these savings will be focusing on individuals who over- utilize emergency rooms, and/or adults with serious chronic or mental health conditions. Supporters assert that many prevention programs and children’s health programs have been in place for a long time 13 and have a proven record of success, and are concerned that these programs will not be a focus of the CCOs in many areas. SB 436 requires coordinated care organization (CCO) and community advisory council to adopt health improvement plan. The bill specifies that strategies are to be included in plan. Legislation authorizes Oregon Health Authority (OHA) provide incentive grants, and directs CCOs submit report to OHA, and OHA to compile information and present to Legislative Assembly by December 31, 2014. Energy/Environment/Natural Resources SB 839: The Subcommittee recommended appropriated $30,000 General Fund to the Water Resources Department (WRD). Senate Bill 839-B establishes a Water Supply Development Account and sets expectations for making loans and grants from the account. It also makes a one-time appropriation of $30,000 General Fund to support two task forces established by the bill. The $30,000 General Fund appropriation will pay for the actual and necessary travel and other expenses of task force members. The major provisions of the bill are as follows: It establishes the Water Supply Development Account which is continuously appropriated to the Water Resources Department (WRD). WRD will operate the Water Development Supply program and is charged with evaluating applications for loans and grants and for recommending project funding. The Water Resources Commission is directed to adopt rules as well as set operative and repeal dates for certain sections in the measure by January 1, 2015. Costs associated with rule making are assumed to be absorbable within the parameters of the agency’s legislatively adopted budget. A technical review team to score and rank projects will include: Department of Agriculture, Business Development Department (Business Oregon), Department of Environmental Quality and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. These agencies will absorb the workload within their regular budgets. Lottery-backed bonds have been requested in Senate Bill 5533 to provide $10 million for which the agency anticipates utilizing to carry out the capital grant and loan provisions of the bill. 14 1 Public Affairs Counsel From:Capitol Club <oregoncapitolclub@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, July 07, 2013 10:13 AM To:Public Affairs Counsel Subject:Senate Rule Amendments, Interim Calendar, Draft Concurrent Resolution Attachments:Proposed Senate Rule Revisions-2013 Sine Die.pdf; ATT00001.htm; Interim Calendar.pdf; ATT00002.htm; Draft Concurrent Resolution.pdf; ATT00003.htm Dear Capitol Club Members: Attached are the proposed amendments to the Senate Rules before we sine die. These are the amendments circulated with each caucus earlier today. Under SR 2.05, we will also place a copy at the Senate floor desk and the Reading Clerk will read the proposed amendments this afternoon. The rules can then be voted on tomorrow. Also attached is the Interim Calendar and Draft Concurrent Resolution circulated earlier. In summary: 1. Fact-Finding Missions: SR 14.15 establishes a procedure to officially approve fact-finding missions by Senators paid for by outside groups. An application would be submitted to the Secretary of the Senate along with an itinerary for the trip and a written opinion from the Ethics Commission approving the trip. After the trip, the trip’s organizer would then confirm who participated in the trip, the actual expenses, and the activities on the trip. Approved applications and the follow-up documentation will be posted on the Secretary of the Senate’s website. Any reporting requirements with the Ethics Commission continue to apply. For a frame of reference, we used this process for the Wallowa County Tour earlier this session by Sen. Hansell and Sen. Dingfelder. 2. Updated Budget: SR 15.20 is updated to reflect members’ budgets for the Interim and Short Session. 3. Updated Bill Limits: SIR 213.20(2) reflects that interim committees will have three measure drafting requests. The chair is allocated two requests and the chair and vice-chair in agreement are allocated one request. Members will have two drafts each under the Concurrent Resolution to be adopted. 4. Deadline for Interim Committees to Vote: SIR 213.20(4) sets January 17, 2014, as the deadline for interim committees to vote on measure introductions. This is the last day of the January 2014 Legislative Days. 5. Deadline to Drop Bills & Procedure for Confidentiality: The Concurrent Resolution to be adopted will set November 26, 2013, as the deadline to submit drafting requests to Counsel. The Resolution then requires Legislative Counsel to return your drafts by January 13, 2014. The Resolution then sets January 21st as the deadline to file measures with the Secretary of the Senate. Senate Interim 213.20(5) then provides that all measures filed by January 21, 2014, will not be confidential and will be released publicly before the Short Session. This will allow staff and the public to review the bills before the Short Session and will give your bill the best chance of success in the session. If you would prefer to keep you bill confidential until session, then you may file the bill after January 21st and no later than February 3, 2014. Those bills will be kept confidential until February 3rd, when they will be processed in the regular course for First Reading. 6. Legislative Days: The attached calendar also shows important dates in the interim. Notably, Legislative Days are scheduled for: a. September 16-18, 2013. 15 2 b. November 20-22, 2013. c. January 15-17, 2014. d. May 28-30, 2014. If you have any questions, please let me know. Jolene Bynum Capitol Club, Lobby Message Center 900 Court St. NE, 60-G Salem, OR 97301 oregoncapitolclub.org P: 503-378-9800 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Office of the Senate President 900 Court St NE S-203, Salem, Oregon, 97301 * (503) 986-1600 voice * (503) 986-1004 fax * sen.petercourtney@state.or.us MEMORANDUM TO: Robert Taylor, Secretary of the Senate FROM: Peter Courtney, President of the Senate DATE: August 26, 2013 RE: Appointments to Interim Task Forces and the Special Committee on University Governance and Operations Effective immediately, I am making the following appointments: Oregon Innovation in Infrastructure Task Force (House Bill 2345, 2013) Senator Lee Beyer Senator Bill Hansell Task Force on the Future of Public Health Services (House Bill 2348, 2013) Senator Bill Hansell Senator Laurie Monnes Anderson Task Force on Procuring Through Small and Local Businesses (House Bill 2667, 2013) Senator Herman Baertschiger Senator Chip Shields Task Force on High School and Transition Success for Students with Disabilities (House Bill 2743, 2013) Senator Betsy Close Senator Chris Edwards Task Force on Individual Responsibility and Health Engagement (House Bill 2859, 2013) Senator Brian Boquist Senator Betsy Johnson Task Force on Resilience Plan Implementation (Senate Bill 33, 2013) Senator Alan Olsen Senator Arnie Roblan 28 Special Committee on University Governance and Operations (Senate Bill 270, 2013) Senator Peter Courtney Senator Richard Devlin Senator Fred Girod Senator Bill Hansell Task Force on Apprenticeship in State Contracting (Senate Bill 782, 2013) Senator Chip Shields Senator Chuck Thomsen If you have any questions, please contact my office at (503) 986-1600. cc: State Senators Speaker of the House Senate Democratic Office Senate Republican Office House Democratic Office House Republican Office Legislative Administration Committee Services Legislative Counsel Legislative Fiscal Legislative Revenue Governor’s Office 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 DATE: September 17, 2013 TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners FROM: Peter Gutowsky, Principal Planner MTG: September 25, 2013 Work Session RE: Oregon Spotted Frog / Proposed Listing / Endangered Species Act FWS Presentation The purpose of the September 25 work session is to enable the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to discuss their proposal to protect the Oregon spotted frog as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) (Attachment 1). The FWS opened a 60-day public comment period on August 29 to allow the public to review and comment on the proposal and provide additional information. All relevant information received from the public, government agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested parties by October 28, 2013, will be considered and addressed in the agency’s final listing determination for the species. The FWS will have up to one year to determine whether the proposed listing and proposed critical habitat should become final. On September 16, the FWS mailed notices to all affected property owners in Deschutes and northern Klamath counties and alerted them to public meetings scheduled on the following dates: October 8, 2013 from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Sunriver Homeowner Aquatic & Recreation Center, Dillon Hall, 57250 Overlook Road, Sunriver, Oregon; and October 16, 2013 from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the La Pine Senior Center, 16560 Victory Way, La Pine, Oregon. Habitat The FWS proposes to designate 68,192 acres and 23 stream miles as critical habitat for the Oregon spotted frog throughout Washington and Oregon. In Deschutes County, their habitat extends along the Upper Deschutes and Little Deschutes rivers, terminating in Bend at the Old Mill. Maps of the proposed critical habitat in Deschutes County are shown in Attachment 2. A large, parcel scale map will be provided at the work session. Table 1 identifies the number and acreage of tax lots affected by critical habitat in rural Deschutes County and the Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB) of Bend and La Pine. -2- Table 1 – Proposed Critical Habitat for Oregon Spotted Frog / Affected Deschutes County Tax Lots1 Jurisdiction Federal Properties Private Properties Total Acres of Critical Habitat Tax Lots Acres Tax Lots Acres Bend UGB 0 0 49 23.75 23.75 La Pine UGB 0 0 91 135.05 135.05 Rural Deschutes County 35 1,222.32 1,563 4,509.16 5,731.48 Total 35 1222.32 1,703 4,667.96 5,890.28 The maps depicting proposed critical habitat are conservative. According to the FWS Proposed Rule designating critical habitat for the Oregon spotted frog (Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 168), Critical habitat areas identify those physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the species (such as space, food cover and protected habitat). Primary constituent elements are those specific elements of the physical and biological features that provide for a species’ life-history processes and are essential to the conservation of the species.2 The Proposed Rule states that at least one of these primary constituent elements needs to be in existence to be considered critical habitat: Primary constituent element 1 - Non-breeding (N), Breeding (B), Rearing (R), and Overwintering Habitat (O). Ephemeral or permanent bodies of fresh water, including, but not limited to natural or manmade ponds, springs, lakes, slow-moving streams, or pools within or oxbows adjacent to streams, canals, and ditches, that have one or more of the following characteristics: o Inundated for a minimum of 4 months per year (B-R) (timing varies by elevation but may begin as early as February and last as long as September); o Inundated from October through March (O); o If ephemeral, areas are hydrologically connected by surface water flow to a permanent water body (e.g. pools, springs, ponds, lakes, streams, canals, or ditches) (B-R); o Shallow water areas (less than or equal to 30 centimeters (12 inches), or water of this depth over vegetation in deeper water (B-R); o Total surface area with less than 50 percent vegetative cover (N); o Gradual topographic gradient (less than 3 percent slope) from shallow water toward deeper, permanent water (B-R); 1 Data listed in Table 1 excludes water bodies and rights -of-way. 2 http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/species/osf/OSF_pCriticalHabitat_FR.pdf -3- o Herbaceous wetland vegetation (i.e. emergent, submergent, and floating-leaved aquatic plants), or vegetation that can structurally mimic emergent wetland vegetation through manipulation (B-R); o Shallow water areas with high solar exposure or low (short) canopy cover (B-R); and o An absence or low density of non-native predators (B-R-N). Regulations Designation of critical habitat does not affect land ownership, establish a refuge or preserve and has no impact on private landowners taking actions on their land that do not require federal funding or permits. If a landowner needs a federal permit or receives federal funding for a specific activity, the agency responsible for issuing the permit or providing the funds would consult with the Service to determine how the action may affect a listed species or its habitat. In Deschutes County, regulations have been in place for over twenty-five years protecting wetlands and riparian habitat in the upper Deschutes River basin. A majority of the critical habitat along the Upper Deschutes and Little Deschutes rivers is identified as wetlands on the County’s Local and National Wetland Inventories. Along both rivers, a riparian setback of 100 feet is required, measured from ordinary high water. Attachments: 1. FWS News Release 2. Proposed Critical Habitat in Deschutes County for Oregon Spotted Frog Page 1 of 2 Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish & Wildlife Office 2600 SE 98th Avenue, Suite 100, Portland, Oregon 97266 Phone: 503-231-6179 Fax: 503-231-6195 http://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo/ August 29, 2013 Contact: Washington: Taylor Goforth, (360) 753-4375 Oregon: Elizabeth Materna, (503) 231-6912; Nancy Gilbert, (541) 383-7146 Klamath Falls: Matt Baun, (530) 340-2387 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Proposes to Protect Oregon Spotted Frog under the Endangered Species Act Agency Seeks Information from the Public, Scientific Community Before Making Final Decision As part of an effort to keep the Oregon spotted frog from becoming extinct in the foreseeable future, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) proposed today to protect the frog as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. The Service also proposed to designate 68,192 acres and 23 stream miles as critical habitat for the Oregon spotted frog throughout Washington and Oregon. The Service now has up to one year to determine whether the proposed listing and proposed critical habitat in today’s announcements should become final. Of the proposed designated (acres plus stream) critical habitat, 67 percent is Federally owned, 3 percent is state owned, 30 percent is under local municipality or private ownership, and less than 1 percent is under county jurisdictions. No Tribal lands were proposed as critical habitat. “Aquatic species are good indicators of our water quality and wetland health, and because the Oregon spotted frog is the most aquatic native frog in the Pacific Northwest, it is particularly important that we pay attention to its plight.” said Ken Berg, manager, Washington Fish and Wildlife Office. Historically, the Oregon spotted frog ranged from the lower Fraser River in British Columbia to the Pit River drainage in northeastern California. It was known from at least 48 watersheds (three in British Columbia, 13 in Washington, 29 in Oregon, and three in California) and currently occupies 31 watersheds. Oregon spotted frogs currently have a very limited distribution west of the Cascade crest in Oregon, are considered to be extirpated from the Willamette Valley in Oregon, and may be extirpated in the Klamath and Pit River basins of California. They are known to exist in five counties in Washington (Whatcom, Skagit, Thurston, Skamania and Klickitat) and five counties in Oregon (Jackson, Lane, Wasco, Deschutes and Klamath). Page 2 of 2 The Service first identified the Oregon spotted frog as a candidate for ESA protection in 1993 due to the threat posed by ongoing habitat destruction, curtailment of the species range and introduction of exotic predators such as bullfrogs. The frog’s historic range has been reduced by at least 76 percent and maybe as much as 90 percent, and habitat continues to be impacted and/or destroyed by human activities that result in the loss of wetlands, hydrologic changes, reduced water quality, and vegetation changes. The final decision whether or not to protect the Oregon spotted frog under the Federal Endangered Species Act will be based on the best scientific and commercial data available. The Service will open a 60-day public comment period on Aug. 29, 2013, to allow the public to review and comment on the proposal and provide additional information. All relevant information received from the public, government agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested parties by Oct. 28, 2013, will be considered and addressed in the agency’s final listing determination for the species. Comments and information must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on Oct. 28, 2013. They may be submitted electronically at http://www.regulations.gov or in writing at Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R1-ES-2013-0013; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. Requests for public hearings must be received, in writing, by Oct. 13, 2013, at the same mailing address noted above. More information on submitting comments is available online at http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/. For more information about the Oregon spotted frog and the Federal Register notice, visit http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/osf.html. The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. We are both a leader and trusted partner in fish and wildlife conservation, known for our scientific excellence, stewardship of lands and natural resources, dedicated professionals, and commitment to public service. For more information on our work and the people who make it happen, visit www.fws.gov. Connect with our Facebook page at www.facebook.com/usfws, follow our tweets at www.twitter.com/usfwshq , our YouTube Channel at http://www.youtube.com/usfws and download photos from our Flickr page at http://www.flickr.com/photos/usfwshq · .. us. FISH &WlLDLIFE SERVICE United States Department of the Interior ~ FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ~ ¥,.f.,·'\,.... ' Bend Field Office 63095 Deschutes Market Road Bend, Oregon 97701 Phone: (541) 383-7146 FAX: (541) 383-7638 August 29, 2013 Board of County Commissioners Deschutes County 1300 NW WaIl Street, Suite 200 Bend, OR 97701 Dear Deschutes County Commissioners, The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is proposing to protect the Oregon spotted frog as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and to designate critical habitat in Oregon and Washington. In Oregon, the frog currently inhabits Deschutes, Klamath, Jackson, Wasco, and Lane Counties and 53,866 acres are proposed for designation as critical habitat in these counties. In the Deschutes County, there are 25,522 acres of proposed critical habitat of which 3,894 acres occur on private land. Critical habitat is proposed in the Upper Deschutes River Basin upstream of Bend including the Little Deschutes River sub-basin. Maps of the proposed critical habitat are available at the web link below. The Service has up to one year to determine whether the proposed listing and proposed critical habitat should become final. The reasons for our proposed listing and proposed critical habitat designation are described in detail in the Federal Register notice published on August 29, 2013, and available at the web link below. The Service first identified the Oregon spotted frog as a candidate for ESA protection in 1993 due to the threat posed by ongoing habitat destruction, curtailment of the species range and introduction of exotic predators such as buIlfrogs. We are currently working with federal, tribal, state and local governments and private landowners to develop and implement conservation actions to protect the frog with minimal impacts to property uses and values. In addition, the Service is considering developing a special rule to exempt certain ongoing land and water management activities (e.g., grazing, mechanical vegetation management, water level manipulation) from take prohibitions of the Act ifthe Oregon spotted frog is listed, when those activities are conducted in a manner consistent with the conservation ofthe frog. The Bend Field Office will be scheduling meetings in Deschutes County and will provide additional details as soon as the meetings are scheduled. The final decision whether or not to protect the Oregon spotted frog under the federal Endangered Species Act will be based on the best scientific information available. The Service will open a 60-day public comment period on August 29, 2013, to aIlow the public to review and comment on the proposal and provide additional information. All relevant information received .. .2 by 11.59 p.m. Eastern Time on October 28,2013, will be considered and addressed in the agency 's fmallisting determination for the species. We are interested in receiving thorough review and commeI1 ts and encourage your participation in this process. The complete proposed rule and additional information on the Oregon spotted frog can be found at http://www.fws.gov/wafwo /osfhtml . If you have questions or would like to discuss this further , please contact me at (541) 383-7146. Sincerely, ~~~ Nancy Gilbert Bend Field Supervisor D e s c h u t e s R i v e r L i t t l e D e s c h u t e s R i v e r Wickiup Dam Bend Wickiup Reservior Dilman Meadows 121°20'0"W 121°20'0"W 121°25'0"W 121°25'0"W 121°30'0"W 121°30'0"W 121°35'0"W 121°35'0"W 121°40'0"W 121°40'0"W 121°45'0"W 121°45'0"W 121°50'0"W 121°50'0"W 4 4 °5 '0 "N 4 4 °5 '0 "N 4 4 °0 '0 "N 4 4 °0 '0 "N 4 3 °5 5 '0 "N 4 3 °5 5 '0 "N 4 3 °5 0 '0 "N 4 3 °5 0 '0 "N 4 3 °4 5 '0 "N 4 3 °4 5 '0 "N 4 3 °4 0 '0 "N 4 3 °4 0 '0 "N 4 3 °3 5 '0 "N 4 3 °3 5 '0 "N Oregon Unit 8A: Upper Deschutes River (Below Wickiup Dam), Oregon (Deschutes County)Critical Habitat for Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa) 0 2 4 6 8 Miles 2366 Acres / 958 Hectares 1:250,000 No warranty is made by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as to the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of these data for individual or aggregate use with other data. Original data were compiled from various sources. Spatial information may not meetNational Map Accuracy Standards. This information may beupdated without notice.®Proposed Critical Habitat for the Oregon Spotted Frog 2013U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Critical Habitat (Occupied) Critical Habitat P r o p o s e d (Not known to be occupied, but essential for conservation ofthe species) D e s c h u t e s R i v e r Wickiup Reservior Hosmer Lake Lava Lake Little Lava Lake WinopeeLake Cultus Lake Little Cultus Lake Deer Ck C ultu s C k CranePrairieReservior D e s c h u t e s R i v e r DavisLake O d e l l C r e e k Muskrat Lake 121°35'0"W 121°35'0"W 121°40'0"W 121°40'0"W 121°45'0"W 121°45'0"W 121°50'0"W 121°50'0"W 121°55'0"W 121°55'0"W 122°0'0"W 122°0'0"W 122°5'0"W 122°5'0"W 4 4 °0 '0 "N 4 4 °0 '0 "N 4 3 °5 5 '0 "N 4 3 °5 5 '0 "N 4 3 °5 0 '0 "N 4 3 °5 0 '0 "N 4 3 °4 5 '0 "N 4 3 °4 5 '0 "N 4 3 °4 0 '0 "N 4 3 °4 0 '0 "N 4 3 °3 5 '0 "N 4 3 °3 5 '0 "N Oregon Unit 8B: Upper Deschutes River (Above Wickiup Dam), Oregon (Deschutes/Klamath County)Critical Habitat for Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa) 0 2 4 6 8 Miles 22031 Acres / 8916 Hectares 1:250,000 No warranty is made by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as to the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of these data for individual or aggregate use with other data. Original data were compiled from various sources. Spatial information may not meetNational Map Accuracy Standards. This information may beupdated without notice.®Proposed Critical Habitat for the Oregon Spotted Frog 2013U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Critical Habitat (Occupied) P r o p o s e d L i t t l e D e s c h u t e s R i v e r D e s c h u t e s R i v e r Wickiup Reservoir L o n g P r a i r i e C r e s c e n t C r e e k L i t t l e D e s c h u t e s R i v e r C l o v e r C r e e k B i g M a r s h C k B i g M a r s h H e m l o c k C r e e k £¤97DavisLake Sunriver La Pine CranePrairieReservoir OdellLake CrescentLake 121°25'0"W 121°30'0"W 121°30'0"W 121°35'0"W 121°35'0"W 121°40'0"W 121°40'0"W 121°45'0"W 121°45'0"W 121°50'0"W 121°50'0"W 121°55'0"W 121°55'0"W 122°0'0"W 122°0'0"W 122°5'0"W 122°5'0"W 4 3 °5 0 '0 "N 4 3 °5 0 '0 "N 4 3 °4 5 '0 "N 4 3 °4 5 '0 "N 4 3 °4 0 '0 "N 4 3 °4 0 '0 "N 4 3 °3 5 '0 "N 4 3 °3 5 '0 "N 4 3 °3 0 '0 "N 4 3 °3 0 '0 "N 4 3 °2 5 '0 "N 4 3 °2 5 '0 "N 4 3 °2 0 '0 "N 4 3 °2 0 '0 "N 4 3 °1 5 '0 "N Oregon Unit 9: Little Deschutes River, Oregon (Deschutes/Klamath County)Critical Habitat for Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa) 0 2 4 6 8 Miles 11361 Acres / 4598 Hectares 1:250,000 No warranty is made by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as to the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of these data for individual or aggregate use with other data. Original data were compiled from various sources. Spatial information may not meetNational Map Accuracy Standards. This information may beupdated without notice.®Proposed Critical Habitat for the Oregon Spotted Frog 2013U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Critical Habitat (Occupied) Critical Habitat P r o p o s e d (Not known to be occupied, but essential for conservation ofthe species) Oregon spotted frog: proposed for ESA listing Oregon spotted frog – Ranger Creek, Deschutes NF Al St. John (August 1990) Timeline: ESA candidate since 1993 USFWS proposed to list as threatened under ESA on August 29, 2013 Comment period ends November 12, 2013 Public meetings scheduled for October 8 and October 16, 2013 Public hearing in Lacey, WA – October 21, 2013 Final listing determination is due before the end of FY 2014. Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa) Proposed ESA Listing Determination for OSF Oregon spotted frog is in danger of becoming extinct in the foreseeable future. Therefore, Service is proposing to list as “threatened” throughout its range. The Service has identified the most important geographic areas that are critical to the survival of the Oregon spotted frog. We consider these areas necessary to ensure the conservation of the species and are, therefore, proposing them as designated critical habitat. Oregon spotted frog breeding sites in Upper and Little Deschutes River sub-basins OSF Habitat: Riverine Marshes and ponds Lake habitat Upper blue pool wetlands Little Lava Lake wetlands Marshes Breeding habitat in late March early April Egg mass Threats: Loss of habitat Vegetation succession (lodgepole encroachment) Vegetation succession (lodgepole encroachment) Invasive reed canarygrass Threats: Hydrologic modification Regulated river flow Beaver removal or trapping Threats: Grazing Threats: Introduced predators Stocked non-native fish Bullfrogs Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as: (1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those physical or biological features (a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and (b) Which may require special management considerations or protection; and (2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. Proposed Rule: Critical habitat •Unit 8 – Upper Deschutes River sub-basin •Unit 9 – Little Deschutes River sub-basin OSF Critical Habitat Unit Federal Acres State County Private Total Unit 8A: Upper Deschutes River Below Wickiup Dam 1,180 180 45 962 2,366 Unit 8B: Upper Deschutes River Above Wickiup Dam 22,031 0 0 <1 22,031 Unit 9: Little Deschutes River 5,275 216 81 5,789 11,361 OSF Critical Habitat in the Upper Deschutes River Basin NOTE: Deep water areas (i.e., greater than 20 ft (6 m) without floating or submerged aquatic vegetation are not included as critical habitat within larger waterbodies. Approximately 4,509 acres (1,563 tax lots) are within proposed critical habitat in rural Deschutes County. •Critical habitat areas identify those physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the species (such as space, food cover and protected habitat). •Primary constituent elements are those specific elements of the physical and biological features that provide for a species’ life -history processes and are essential to the conservation of the species. (1)Primary constituent element 1 - Non-breeding (N), Breeding (B), Rearing (R), and Overwintering Habitat (O). Ephemeral or permanent bodies of fresh water, including, but not limited to natural or manmade ponds, springs, lakes, slow-moving streams, or pools within or oxbows adjacent to streams, canals, and ditches, that have one or more of the following characteristics: •Inundated for a minimum of 4 months per year (B-R) (timing varies by elevation but may begin as early as February and last as long as September); •Inundated from October through March (O); •If ephemeral, areas are hydrologically connected by surface water flow to a permanent water body (e.g. pools, springs, ponds, lakes, streams, canals, or ditches) (B-R); •Shallow water areas (less than or equal to 30 centimeters (12 inches), or water of this depth over vegetation in deeper water (B-R); •Total surface area with less than 50 percent vegetative cover (N); Primary constituent element 1 - Non-breeding (N), Breeding (B), Rearing (R), and Overwintering Habitat (O). Ephemeral or permanent bodies of fresh water, including, but not limited to natural or manmade ponds, springs, lakes, slow-moving streams, or pools within or oxbows adjacent to streams, canals, and ditches, that have one or more of the following characteristics: •Gradual topographic gradient (less than 3 percent slope) from shallow water toward deeper, permanent water (B-R); •Herbaceous wetland vegetation (i.e. emergent, submergent, and floating-leaved aquatic plants), or vegetation that can structurally mimic emergent wetland vegetation through manipulation (B-R); •Shallow water areas with high solar exposure or low (short) canopy cover (B-R); •An absence or low density of non-native predators (B-R-N) (2) Primary constituent element 2 - Aquatic Movement Corridors. Ephemeral or permanent bodies of fresh water that have one or more of the following characteristics: •Less than or equal to 5 kilometers (3.1 miles) linear distance from breeding areas; •Barrier free (barriers may include, but are not limited to, dams, abundant predators, or lack of refugia from predators) (3) Primary constituent element 3 - Refugia Habitat. Non-breeding, breeding, rearing, or overwintering habitat or aquatic movement corridors with habitat characteristics (e.g., dense vegetation and/or an abundance of woody debris) that provide refugia from predators (e.g., nonnative fish or bullfrogs). What a listing may mean to future planning efforts: Federal actions: Federal agencies consult under ESA if May Affect listed species or CH (e.g., ACOE, BOR, FS, BLM) Non-Federal: Responsibility of non-federal actions is to not injure or kill listed species (directly or indirectly through habitat impacts) FWS working with landowners - tools include HCP, CCAA, conference opinions, 4(d) Deschutes HCP has included OSF as a covered species from the start Restoration Opportunities http://www.fws.gov/wafwo/osf.html Information Oregon spotted frog – Crane Prairie Reservoir– Al. St. John (1990) P.O. Box 6005 • Bend, OR 9770B-6oo5 1300 NW Wall St. Suite 206· Bend. OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570· Fax (541) 385-3202 www.co.deschutes.or.us board@co.deschutes.or.usSeptember 18, 2013 Tammy Baney Anthony DeBone Alan Unger Honorable Rep. Greg Walden House Natural Resources Committee Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 RE: H.R. 1526 Dear Representative Walden: The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners wishes to express support for H.R. 1526, the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act. This proposal renews the federal government's commitment to manage federal forests, improve forest health and prevent catastrophic wildfires. Deschutes County applauds the commitment to addressing job creation and enhancement of rural forest economies. The management provisions in H.R. 1526 will provide a long term solution to ensuring sustainable revenue sharing with forested counties. Deschutes County, Oregon supports the preservation of healthy forests. We support HR 1526 and its aim to put people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, and provide certainty for counties so that we can provide services to our citizens. We also support the management of the forests to prevent catastrophic wildfires and believe that there are forested lands that are suitable for timber harvest and management to be resilient against fire. For these reasons, we support the passage ofH.R. 1526. Sincerely, /hO.t/~ Anthony DeB one, Commissioner For the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners Enhancing the Lives of Citizens by Delivering Quality Services in a Cost-Effective Manner DC 2013·536 TALKING POINTS FORESTRY LEGISLATION • Before leaving DC, however, the Natural Resources Committee moved one step closer to putting people back to work in the woods and to building strong communities and healthy forests. • The committee approved the "Restoring Healthy Forests for Communities Act" (H.R. 1526), of which Rep Greg Walden is a cosponsor (no current Democrat cosponsors). • HR 1526 aims to put people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide certainty for counties so that they can provide essential services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing. • Rural forested counties across the country and in Oregon, like Josephine County, are facing bankruptcy because of the constant litigation that keeps Oregon families out of the woods. • This biJl would help provide the certainty of timber supply that mills in Oregon need to stay in business and employ families in our rural forest communities. • This bill includes the O&C Trust Act, the bipartisan proposal Rep DeFazio, Rep Schrader, and Rep Walden developed that creates or protects over 3,000 jobs, generate millions in revenue for essential county services, and make our forests healthy again. (OFRI-2011 Study) • According to the Governor's O&C Report, our proposal would provide $120 million for local counties. Funds that are desperately needed to provide police officers, teachers, and other essential services 1ike roads. • This comprehensive proposal secured broad support across the state including members of the Oregon State House and Senate, fifteen Oregon county boards of commissioners, State Sheriff's Association, and other labor and industry groups. • Oregonians have been successfully managing forests since the time of the Oregon Trail, which is why the O&C Trust would be managed by a board of trustees including 2 local foresters, 1 representative ofthe public, a forest scientist, and 2 local county commissioners, and one statewide eJected official. • O&C Trust Act stewards timber production through the Oregon Forest Practices Act, the first in the nation progressive forest management legislation rooted in 1941. Provisions include (from Oregon Department of Forestry website): o Activities near streams, lakes, and wetlands must include water quality protection. o Wildlife trees and down logs must be left in most large clear-cut areas. o Clear-cut size is usually limited to 120 acres. I o Sensitive bird nesting, roosting, and watering sites require protection. o Activities on slopes must include erosion and landslide control. o Replanting or land use changes must be completed within two years after harvesting. o Road and skid trail use must prevent erosion into streams, lakes, and wetlands. o Harvesting adjacent to designated Scenic Highways requires special practices. • Oregonians in our forested communities are facing extreme poverty, systemic unemployment, and thousands of children on free and reduced lunch; Oregon can't afford for any more mills to close, like Rough & Ready Lumber. • We know that litigation is a main cause of the current gridlock on our federal forests, so this legislation limits litigation to 1 lawsuit within the first 60 days. and it has to be in DC Circuit Court, avoiding 9 th Circuit Court of Appeals. • The Trust prohibits designation of monuments on O&C Trust Land, preventing abuse of the Antiquities Act by any Administration. • This will return management to nearly 50% of the BLM Medford District and Rogue Siskiyou National Forest "controverted lands". This is compared with less than 6% of BLM lands in the Medford district that are currently manageable. • To provide revenue for counties and put people back to work in the woods, HR 1526 requires the Forest Service to put up for sale half ofthe annual growth each year on forest land that is suitable for timber production. (Approximately 11 billion board feet). • To cut through that red tape, this bilJ limits environmental assessments to 100 pages and requires agencies to complete them within 180 days. • Overstocked, bug infested and diseased forests surround our communities, putting them at risk of catastrophic fire. Oregonians like our forests to be green, not black. • That's why this bill provides (HFRA style) exemptions and processes to expedite thinning and grazing projects in areas local states and counties identify as high risk for wildfires, giving local communities more control. (Gosar and Tipton) • This bill provides states like Oregon and opportunity to manage a 200,000 forest pilot project on federal land to increase harvest, and show how land can be effectively managed under state forest practices. (Labrador) • These changes won't take place overnight, so this bilt includes a 1 year extension of Secure Rural Schools funding to keep counties above water while we put people back to work in the woods. I I I I • Oregonians have been success full y managing forest land since the time of the Oregon Trail. We get back to work in the woods, pull families out of poverty, and have healthy forest when we provide certainty of active forest management. FORESTRY: BACKGROUND ON JACKSON COUNTY (each county could have similar statistics pulled and organized) • Jackson County currently faces 9.6% unemployment. 9 of the 20 counties I represent are facing double digit unemployment. • 59% of school children in Jackson county are eligible for Free or Reduced lunch programs. • Last week, Josephine County Sheriff Gil Gilbertson described how he is down to 1 patrol deputy to cover 1642 miles. That'd be like one patrol deputy for all of Rhode Island. According to the Sheriff, burglary is up 1594% over last year. Auto theft 1714%.Theft-1435%. Domestic assault-ll00%. • For severa1 weeks now, the skies across here in southern Oregon have been choked with smoke from fires on overstocked federal forests. • Last year, the Forest Service only harvested timber on 208,000 acres nationwide. Only 0.14% of the total 144 million acres of the National Forest System. Less than 2 tenths of one percent! • Last year, 10 times as many Forest Service acres burned as were harvested. 2.8 million acres - a size equivalent to all of Grant County. • A lack of management on our federal forest lands has caused shortfalls for our communities, forcing counties to reduce essential services, laying off police officers and teachers. • One thing is clear. The status quo in our federal forest policy is not working for our forests, and it is certainly not working for the families in our rural communities. t I BE IT REMEMBERED, that at a regular term of the Board of Commissioners of the State of Oregon, for the County of Union, sitting for the transaction of County business, begun and held at the Joseph Building Annex in the City of La Grande, in said County and State, when were present: The Honorable Mark D. Davidson, Chairman Steve McClure. Commissioner William D. Rosholt, Commissioner WHEN, on Thursday the 12th day of September 2013, among others the following proceedings were had to wit: IN THE MA TIER OF A ) Resolution RESOLUTION SUPPORTING ) 2013-10 H.R 1526, RESTORING HEALTHY ) FORESTS FOR HEALTHY ) COMMUNITIES ACT ) NOW, the Union County Board of Commissioners recognize that Oregonians in our forested communities are facing extreme poverty, systemic unemployment, and thousands of children on free and reduced lunch. WHEREAS, Union County currently faces 8.3% unemployment; and . WHEREAS, 53% of school children in Union County are eligible for Free or Reduced lunch programs; and WHEREAS, Union County's poverty rate is 16.6%; and WHEREAS, these negative economic conditions can be attributed to the reduction in timber harvests in our National Forests (80% reduction over the past 30 years) and corresponding mill closures; and WHEREAS, Union County cannot afford for any more mills to close and desire to recover our lost mill capacity; and WHEREAS H.R 1526 is a bipartisan effort that aims to put people back to work in the woods, reduce litigation, provide certainty for counties so that they can provide essential services, lift families out of poverty, and prevent catastrophic wildfires that we have been experiencing. I I I i i [ NOW THEREFORE the Union County Board of Commissioners HEREBY RESOLVE to support H.R. 1526, Restoring Healthy Forests For Healthy Communities Act, and urge all members of the U.S. House of Representatives to support the passage and implementation of this important legislation. DATED this __day of September, 2013 Mark D. Davidson, CHAIRMAN Steve McClure, COMMISSIONER William D. Rosholt, COMMISSIONER DESCHUTES COUNTY DOCUMENT SUMMARY Date: September 25, 2013 Department: Sheriff's Office Type of Document: This is an Amendment to document 2013-426, the annual Agreement and Re-certification between Deschutes County, by and through its Sheriffs Office, and the U.S. Department of Justice. Goods and/or Services: Two adjustments were made to the original: 1) Line "a" on page 2 was amended to indicate that the Sheriffs Office received non-cash assets; and 2) Table "H" on page 3 was changed to list "Miscellaneous computer equipment" that the Sheriff's Office received from the Justice Department. This agreement and re-certification allows the Deschutes County Sheriff's Office to participate in the Department of Justice's Equitable Sharing Program. Through this Agreement, the Sheriffs Office is entitled to receive funds from the federal equitable sharing program following the close of each fiscal year. The funds in this program are from forfeited cash, property and other proceeds. Background & History: Each year the Sheriffs Office submits an agreement and re certification form for the Department of Justice Equitable Sharing Program. This is a Federal Asset Forfeiture program in which the Sheriffs Office receives funds from forfeited cash, property and other proceeds. The Sheriffs Office agrees to use the funds solely for drug-related investigations as mandated by statute as well as the strict guidelines set out by the Department of Justice. Annual Value or Total Payment: No funds were distributed to the Sheriffs Office during the 2013 fiscal year, but the Sheriffs office received some computer equipment from the Justice Department with a value of $960.00. Funding Source: (Included in current budget?) [gJ Yes D No Is this a Grant Agreement providing revenue to the County? DYes [gJ No Departmental Contact and Title: Capt. Tim Edwards Phone #: 541-388-6656 Sheriffs Approval: ---;~\---,'::::......f~r::F-"""""':"'-"'--- 9/25/2013 I Distribution of Document: Call Pat Davis, Sheriff's Office Legal Assistant, x3367, when ready for pick up. Official Review: County Signature Required (check one): L8J SOCC D Department Director (if <$25K) D Administrator (if >$25K but <$150K; if >$150K, SOCC Order No. ____-1) Date 1· /)..s-jL3Legal Review Document Number __...:2:.:0t...,:1:...:o:::3.....o-5"-4:..:::8'--___ 9/25/2013 ------------------------------------------ --------------------------- --------------------------- .. OMB Number 1123-0011 Expires 9-30.2014Equitable Sharing Agreement and Certification o Police Department @ Sheriff's Office 0 Task Force (Complete Table A) o Prosecutor's Office 0 National Guard Counterdrug Unit 0 Other • Please nn each required field. Hover mouse over any flliable field for pop-up instructions. • Agency Name: Deschutes County Sheriffs Office NCC/ORIITracking Number: I0 IRio I 0 I 91 0 I 0 I 0 I 0 I Mailing Address: 63333 Highway 20 West City: Bend State: OR Zip: 97701 Finance Contact: First: James Last: Ross Phone: 541-322-4819 E-mail: jross@deschutes.org Preparer: First: Tim Last: Edwards O Sameas ail d hFinanceContact Phone: 541-388-6656 E-m' : time@ esc utes.org Independent Public Accountant: E-mail: skatler@kk:ncpa.com Last FY End Date: 06/30/2013 Agency Current FY Budget: $39,003,683.00 o New Participllnt: Read the Equitable Sharing Agreement and sign the Affidavit O Existing Participant: Complete the Annual Certification Report, read the Equitable Sharing Agreement and sign the Affidavit ®Amended Form: Revise the Annual Certification Report, read the Equitable Sharing Agreement, and sign the Affidavit. Annual Certification Report Suml1Ullry of equitable Shllring Activity Justice Funds1 T....sury Funds2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Beginning Equitable Sharing Fund Balance (must match Ending Equitable Sharing Fund Balance from prior FY) Federal Sharing Funds Received Federal Sharing Funds Received from Other law Enforcement Agencies and Task Forces (To populate, complete Table BI Other Income Interest Income Accrued Non-Interest Bearing ® Interest Bearing 0 Total Equitable Sharing Funds (total of lines 1 -5) Federal Sharing Funds Spent (total of lines a • m below) Ending Balance (difference between line 7 and line 6) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Page 1 of5 October 2012 Ven/on.2.1 DC -;:> n 1 ~-h II f} Summary of Shared Funds Spent Justice Funds Treasury Funds I a Total spent on salaries under permitted salary exceptions b Total spent on overtime c Total spent on informants, "buy money", and rewards d Total spent on travel and training e Total spent on communications and computers f Total spent on weapons and protective gear g Total spent on electronic surveillance equipment h Total spent on buildings and improvements I i Total transfers to other participating state and local law enforcement agencies (To populate, complete Table C) j Total spent on other law enforcement expenses (To populate, complete Table D) i k Total Expenditures in Support of Community-Based Programs (To populate, complete Table E) I I ! Total Windfall Transfers (To populate, complete Table F) m Total spent on matching grants (To populate, complete Table G) i n Total $0.00 $0.00 a Did your agency receive non-cash assets? @ Yes ONo (fyes, complete Table H. I Table B: Equitable Sharing Funds Received from other Agencies Transferring Agency Name, City, and State Justice Funds Treasury Funds Please fill out the following tables, if applicable. Table A: Members of Task Force Agency Name NCIC/ORlrrracking Number Agency Name: I NCIC/ORlffracking Number: I I I I I I I I I I CJI Table C: Equitable Sharing Funds Transferred to Other Agencies Receiving Agency Name, City, and State Justice Funds Treasury Funds , Agency Name: I ICJ NCIC/ORlffracking Number: I II I I I I I I I CJ Page 2 of5 October 201 2 Version 2.1 II " Table D: Other Law Enforcement Expenses Description of Expense Justice Funds Treasury Funds ~I III Table E: Expenditures in Support of Community·Based Programs Recipient Justice Funds Table F: Windfall Transfers Justice Funds Treasury Funds IReciple" II III II Table G: Matching Grants Matching Grant Name Justice Funds Treasury Funds II 1/1 1/ Table H: Other Non·Cash Assets Received Source Description of Asset Justice @ Tr~asury 0 Miscellaneous computer equipment valued at $960. Table I: Civil Rights Cases Name of Case Type of Discrimination Alleged DRace Natioo Color 0 Origin ----..., nder o Disability 0 Age o Other Paperwork Reduction Act Notice Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. We try to create accurate and easily understood forms that impose the least possible burden on you to complete. The estimated average time to complete this form is 30 minutes. If you have comments regarding the accuracy of this estimate, or suggestions for making this form simpler, please write to the Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, 1400 New York Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20005. Page30fS October 2012 Version 2.1 Equitable Sharing Agreement This Federal Equitable Sharing Agreement, entered into among (1) the Federal Government, (2) the above-stated law enforcement agency ("Agency"), and (3) the governing body, sets forth the requirements for participation in the federal Equitable Sharing Program and the restrictions upon the use of federally forfeited cash, property, proceeds, and any interest earned thereon, which are equitably shared with participating law enforcement agencies. By its signatures, the Agency agrees that it will be bound by the statutes and guidelines that regulate shared assets and the following requirements for participation in the federal Equitable Sharing Program. Receipt of the signed Equitable Sharing Agreement and Certification (this "Document") is a prerequisite to receiving any equitably shared cash, property, or proceeds. 1. Submission. This Document must be submitted to aca.submit@usdoj.gov within 60 days of the end of the Agency's fiscal year. This Document must be submitted electronically with the Affidavit/Signature submitted by fax. This will constitute submission to the Department of Justice and the Department of the Treasury. 2. Signatories. This agreement must be signed by the head of the Agency and the head of the governing body. Examples of Agency heads include police chief, sheriff, director, commissioner, superintendent, administrator, chairperson, secretary, city attorney, county attorney, district attorney, prosecuting attorney, state attorney, commonwealth attorney, and attorney general. The governing body's head is the person who allocates funds or approves the budget for the Agency. Examples of governing body heads include city manager, mayor, city council chairperson, county executive, county council chairperson, director, secretary, administrator, commissioner, and governor. 3. Uses. Any shared asset shall be used for law enforcement purposes in accordance with the statutes and gUidelines that govern the federal Equitable Sharing Program as set forth in the current edition of the Department of Justice's Guide to Equitable Sharing for State and Local Law Enforcement (Justice Guide), and the Department of the Treasury's Guide to Equitable Sharing for Foreign Countries and Federal, State, and Local Law Enforcement Agencies (Treasury Guide). 4. Transfers. Before the Agency transfers cash, property, or proceeds to other state or local law enforcement agencies, it must first verify with the Department of Justice or the Department of the Treasury, depending on the source of the funds, that the receiving agency is a current and compliant Equitable Sharing Program participant. 5. Internal Controls. The Agency agrees to account separately for federal equitable sharing funds received from the Department of Justice and the Department of the Treasury. Funds from state and local forfeitures and other sources must not be commingled with federal equitable sharing funds. The Agency shall establish a separate revenue account or accounting code for state, local, Department of Justice, and Department of the Treasury forfeiture fu nds. Interest income generated must be accounted for in the appropriate federal equitable sharing account. The Agency agrees that such accounting will be subject to the standard accounting requirements and practices employed for other public funds as supplemented by requirements set forth in the current edition of the Justice Guide and the Treasury Guide, including the requirement in the Justice Guide to maintain relevant documents and records for five years. The misuse or misapplication of shared resources or the supplantation of existing resources with shared assets is prohibited. Failure to comply with any provision of this agreement shall subject the recipient agency to the sanctions stipulated in the current edition of the Justice or Treasury Guides, depending on the source of the funds/property. 6. Audit Report. Audits will be conducted as provided by the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and OMB Circular A-133. The Department of Justice and Department of the Treasury reserve the right to conduct periodic random audits. Page4 of 5 October 2012 Version 2.1 .. Affidavit -Amended Form Under penalty of perjury, the undersigned officials certify that they have read and understand their obligations under the Equitable Sharing Agreement and that the information submitted in conjunction with this Document is'an accurate accounting of funds received and spent by the Agency under the Justice and/or Treasury Guides during the reporting period and that the recipient Agency is in compliance with the National Code of Professional Conduct for Asset Forfeiture. The undersigned certify that the recipient Agency is in compliance with the nondiscrimination requirements of the following laws and their Department of Justice implementing regulations: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.c. § 2000d et seq.), Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.s.c. § 1681 et seq.), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.s.c. § 794), and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.c. § 6101 et seq.), which prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, or age in any federally assisted program or activity, or on the basis of sex in any federally assisted education program or activity. The Agency agrees that it will comply with all federal statutes and regulations permitting federal investigators access to records and any other sources of information as may be necessary to determine compliance with civil rights and other applicable statutes and regulations. During the past fiscal year: (1) has any court or administrative agency issued any finding, judgment, or determination that the Agency discriminated against any person or group in violation of any of the federal civil rights statutes listed above; or (2) has the Agency entered into any settlement agreement with respect to any complaint filed with a court or administrative agency alleging that the Agency discriminated against any person or group in violation of any of the federal civil rights statutes listed above? 0 Yes @ No If you answered yes to the above question, complete Table I Governing Body Head Signature: Name: Alan Unger Title: County Commissioner Date: E-mail: Alan. U nger@deschutes.org Signature: Name: Title: Sh riff Date: E-mail: Larry. lanton@deschutes.org Subscribe to Equitable Sharing Wire: The Equitable Sharing Wire is an electronic newsletter that gives you important, substantive, information regarding Equitable Sharing policies, practices, and procedures. 1=======================1 Final Instructions: Step 1: Click to save for your records Step 3: E-mail the XML file to aca.submit@usdoj.gov Step 2: Click to save in XML format Step 4: Fax THIS SIGNED PAGE ONLY to (202) 616-1344 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Entered by ____ Entered on ____ 1 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111o FY End: 06/30/2013 Date Printed: September 17, 2013 08:12 o NClC: OR0090000 Agency: Deschutes County Sheriffs Office Phone: 541-322-4819 State: OR Finance Contact: James Ross E-mail: jross@deschutes.org Page 5 of 5 October 2012 Version 2.1 AirLink to get a competitor; Life Flight Network to open base at Redmond Airport II The ... Page 1 of2 lbe Bulletinbendbulletin.com Life Flight plans Redmond base as area's 2nd medical I ~ air outfit By Scott Hammers I The Bulletin I Published: February 16. 2012 4:00AM PST I A second medical air transport company plans to touch down in Central Oregon next week, providing the first-ever competition for AirLink, the region's sole provider for nearly 30 years. Life Flight Network, based in Aurora, is scheduled to open a base at the Redmond Airport on Feb. 22. Holly Love, the Ii company's director of customer service, said the base will open with a single helicopter for emergency patient transport, I and that fixed-wing craft used for less urgent flights could be added later. The company said it plans to station 14 people, including pilots, medical personnel and mechanics, in Redmond.I J Love said the company's decision to move into the Central Oregon market is largely driven by the rapid growth in the region since 1985, when AirLink began flying under the name Air Life of Oregon. While the population has doubled, AirLink has stayed the same size, she said. Life Flight already has helicopters based in Eugene, Ontario and La Grande, Love said, which occasionally fly missions in Central Oregon when AirLink's helicopter is unavailable. "This is sort of the hub of the wheel," Love said. "If we put a base in Redmond we've sort of surrounded Central Oregon . ... It's a great fit; it makes a lot of sense." Emergency dispatchers send the nearest helicopter to incidents requiring air transport, Love said, so she expects Life Flight will pick up many of the flights in the northern part of the region, while Bend-based AirLink will respond to incidents farther south. However, representatives of AirLink aren't convinced such an arrangement can work for either company. Owned by Cascade Healthcare Communities, AirLink flies approximately 40 helicopter flights and 30 to 35 fixed-wing flights a month, according to Bob Gomes, a CHH executive who oversees the program as well as St. Charles Redmond and Pioneer Memorial Hospital in Prineville. Gomes said AirLink, based at St. Charles Bend, has explored adding a second helicopter in the past, but hasn't seen the demand to support such a move. "The pie's not very big, and I'm not sure there's enough for two of us here," Gomes said. Gomes said the use of helicopter transports has been declining in recent years, even as the area's population has grown. Ambulance providers have been investing in the training of their emergency responders, Gomes said, improving the level of care a patient can expect to receive during a ground trip to a hospital. Additionally. hospitals in Madras, Prineville and http;llwww.bendbulletin.comiapps/pbcs.dll/artic1e? AID=1201202161NEW80 11202160389/... 9/24/2013 AirLink to get a competitor; Life Flight Network to open base at Redmond Airport II The ... Page 20f2 Redmond have much better trauma centers than they did 10 years ago, he said, diminishing the need to rapidly transport patients to St. Charles Bend. Flights on an AirLink helicopter cost $6,000 to $10,000 on average, Gomes said, and are typically billed to a patient's insurance provider. Cascade Healthcare Communities will need to reassess its business plans for AirLink once Life Flight is up and running, Gomes said, but he's expecting it will be difficuH for a small market to support two providers. "It's like setting up a second hospital in Prineville," he said. "It's a puzzle, I guess I don't see the volume: Love said Life Flight will be flying a helicopter much like the one used by AirLink. Neither helicopter offers any significant advantage over the other in terms of speed or performance at high altitude or in adverse conditions. Flights from either company will transport patients to whatever medical facility is recommended by ground paramedics responding to an incident. AirLink and Life Flight operate under a similar business model, selling annual memberships that ensure individuals who are transported by air pay nothing out-ot-pocket. Due to a reciprocity agreement between the companies, patients with a membership with either company are transported at no charge on the other company's aircraft. Reporter: 541-383-0387, shammers@bendbulletin.com Published Daily in Bend Oregon by Western Communications, Inc. © 2011 www.bendbulletin.com htto:llwww.bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dlVarticle?AID=/201202161NEWS01l2021603891... 9/24/2013 Bonnie Baker From: Jerry Thackery <jthack@bendbroadband.com> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 20132:45 PM To: Board Subject: Emergency Medical transport by air. Good afternoon Commissioners, The issue of two competing emergency air transports companies in central Oregon to causing citizens a lot of money. am sure that you know that the injured person does not have a choice as to which company is called. If you are a member of the "other" company, there is no honoring membership, one to the other, and the patient is out several thousand dollars, without recourse. I truly believe that this is wrong. One should not have to pay membership to both companies. I do not know if the commission has dealt with this matter before but it is a significant annual cost to the citizens to have to a member of each company. Thank you, Jerry Thackery Redmond i I ~ I f 1 I, t