The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-04-11 Work Session Minutes Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 11, 2012 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, APRIL 11, 2012 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney. Also present were Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; and for a portion of the meeting, David Givans, Internal Auditor; Dan Despotopulos, Fair & Expo Center; Nick Lelack and Paul Blikstad, Community Development; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; Patrick Flaherty and Mary Anderson, District Attorney’s Office; Teresa Rozic, Property & Facilities; and ten other citizens including media representatives of The Bulletin: Hillary Borrud and Scott Hammers. Chair DeBone opened the meeting at 1:35 p.m. 1. Economic Development Loan Fund Request (Central Oregon Truck Company). Jon Stark of Redmond Economic Development, Inc., Jim McConnell of McConnell Labs, and Roger Lee of EDCO (Economic Development for Central Oregon) came before the Board. Commissioner Unger stated that he is on the REDI Board. Jon Stark gave an overview of the item. He said they started working with Central Oregon Truck Company of Prineville, when they announced they needed to consolidate in one location and grow. They expect to grow from 215 to 250 employees eventually. There was an extensive process to evaluate the project and site needs. The Company realized there was another opportunity for them in Reno, Nevada, so this process was very competitive. They identified a site, and brought in a team to help them with this process. The proposal is for funding to help 31 employees move and add four others to the facility, resulting in 35 new jobs for Deschutes County. They will also include 31 more trucking and logistics personnel but some won’t be here. Headquarters will be here. They would like $50,000 to offset costs for job creation. This is a big win for this area. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 11, 2012 Page 2 of 9 Jim McConnell explained that the company has had some down times but has recovered well, and now has a clear path and vision of where they want to be. They wanted a new building to bring out a better image for the company. Commissioner Unger said that as the area wants to be recognized, the city and others came together to hold these jobs here on Highway 97, not along an interstate somewhere else. This shows support of local transportation efforts. Commissioner Baney agreed. She said, however, that this is essentially transferring jobs from Crook County to Deschutes, as part of the region. She realizes that the retention piece is important and there was a significant private investment in this regard. Commissioner Baney stated that this highlights the fund’s ability to help retain and create positions. However, as a region, she does not want to see others here loose positions, but it is important to keep the jobs in this area and in Oregon. Mr. Stark stated the company was going to leave Prineville anyway, since Prineville was not able to help with this situation. Operations needed to be consolidated and Prineville was then going to be short-term. Without the work that was done, this project would have left the region and the state. UNGER: Move approval of this use of the economic development loan fund. BANEY: Second. VOTE: UNGER: Yes. BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. 2. Child Support Enforcement Discussion. Patrick Flaherty and Mary Anderson came before the group. He would like to bring child support enforcement services back to his office. The D.A. is obligated by law to enforce support orders (he read statute in regard to this). In 2011, the Department of Justice took over this responsibility; it seemed to be a sound idea at that time. Since then he has learned that the level of enforcement in Deschutes County has gone down. Also, he has heard complaints from attorneys that they can’t get anything done through the D.O.J.; that the process is too cumbersome. He has also heard complaints from citizens in this regard but has to tell them the D.A.’s Office cannot assist them. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 11, 2012 Page 3 of 9 The D.A. has much greater ability to handle this here than having it administered by the D.O.J. from the valley. He has attorneys who are ready, willing and able to take this responsibility back. Commissioner DeBone asked if this has to do with dollars going to the families. Mr. Flaherty said that they also have to establish paternity, after which there would be a support order. If the order is not complied with, collection efforts begin. They would then move into the courtroom for contempt, then criminal non-support. The D.O.J. does not seem able to proceed with the entire process so there is little leverage over the parent who is delinquent. He asked that 3 FTE be added to the D.A.’s budget; two would be case managers currently working in the area, and the other a receptionist. They are prepared to provide the attorney from existing staff at this point. Mary Anderson went over the estimates for the quarter. When she first started working on this, she found that it turned into a passion. The impact of child support issues is significant on children and families. The program should put the families first through working with employers, finding adequate medical coverage and so on. This fosters better relationships between parents and others. It also has a dramatic impact on the use of other public programs. Child support can be nearly 40% of a family’s income. The D.O.J. does the best it can but they do not have the resources needed to handle the work. She has worked on an MOU with the D.O.J. to help with attorney time. The other local counties support this change. (She referred to a chart showing the performance of each county.) Commissioner Baney asked why the request is coming no w and not later, and how the FTE’s fit in. Ms. Anderson said they could start immediately but there would probably be a delay. They want to be sure everything is in place as well. The request includes the three FTE’s but two have a high skill level. In effect, they would be covering a 5.5 FTE level, including attorney assistance. Commissioner Unger likes the presentation, but would like to get the perspective of the D.O.J. representatives located in the same building. Mr. Flaherty indicated that this is the most cost effective for the community as a whole, and will help hundreds of families here. Sometimes families go on public assistance because they are not receiving the child support that is due. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 11, 2012 Page 4 of 9 He feels the D.O.J. is supportive of this proposal. The County went from one of the highest collection rates in the State ten years ago to being one of the lowest ones now. Normally they would ask for an attorney position but feel they can cover this need for now, mostly for the initial appearance in a case. Commissioner Unger would like to accept this proposal but get more input from the D.O.J., and then have it reviewed by the Budget Committee. Ms. Anderson stated they would continue working with others on the MOU in the meantime. Mr. Flaherty added that there is a lot of support from other D.A. Offices to bring this back to the local level. Chair DeBone asked if they have room for these new positions. Mr. Flaherty replied that it needs to be accessible. They will likely end up in the stone building for now. There are some federal requirements for the space as well. Chair DeBone likes the idea of a positive effect on the area. Mr. Flaherty noted that there would be a dramatic increase in the level of support collected. The caseload would go up as they increase their efforts. Ms. Anderson said they are not critical of the D.O.J. but know they have limited resources. Commissioner Baney would like to hear from the Courts as well, since they would be impacted by this. Mr. Flaherty said the Courts hear complaints about the current level of service as well. The Board would like to conduct another work session in a couple of weeks to include the D.O.J. and someone from the Courts. This can be part of the budget deliberations. 3. Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(e), Real Property Negotiations. 4. Forester Update. Joe Stutler referred to a document showing current projects. He is concerned about the FEMA decision that was made three months ago. Formal documentation has not been received, and he needs to start the third grant process. He hopes to get in touch with staff at Senator Wyden’s office and ask them to speak with FEMA. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 11, 2012 Page 5 of 9 In regard to the Assistant County Forester position, Mr. Stutler explained that there have been 48 applicants. The application period has closed. He recommends using certain criteria for this selection. What is important is having someone who can carry on the work now in progress and not having to have a great deal of training. He looked at community fire plan history and other activities. Mr. Kropp added that he is treating this as more of a department head hire eventually. Mr. Stutler does not want to guess at how the relationship with fire chiefs and the Sheriff will go. He has narrowed the choices do wn to seven, including one veteran. Probably three are stronger than the others. The plan is to interview the seven, and whether any of the Commissioners want to be on the interview panel. Commissioner Unger feels one Commissioner should be on the panel . A decision can be made which one, depending on who is available. Mr. Stutler wanted to talk about how decisions are being made on unprotected lands. (He referred to an oversized map at this time.) This is all private property. There are locations where a fire could be catastrophic; including land between Bend and Sisters and the eastern parts of the County. The fire districts are maxed out and the population in those areas don’t support expansion. Some people are willing to pay for protection, while others are not. The County cannot just sit back and do nothing if this happens. From a risk management perspective, they can choose to do nothing – with consequences. The other option is the Sheriff’s Office doing what they can, but that is not in their scope of work. Something needs to be done, even if it is just to educate them. He has spoken with the Sheriff and fire chiefs and they are comfortable with the Board identifying someone as fire chief for the unprotected areas. Mr. Kropp said that people choose not to purchase fire protection, and this should not be encouraged. And in the matter of fairness, how many tax dollars should go to people who choose not to pay for fire protection but expect a response when there is an emergency. Mr. Stutler said there is an ordinance in place for defensible space and open burning. He is comfortable with the Sheriff’s Office making decisions, but Mr. Stutler often is there. Tactically, someone needs to figure out if a fire deserves a serious conflagration response or whatever else is needed to react to the situation – such as a tanker truck of water, or several, or a helicopter dropping water. It could be as much as looking for serious resources. There are requirements if State resources are called in. Someone needs to make those decisions. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 11, 2012 Page 6 of 9 Commissioner Unger feels they need someone out there making those decisions; this needs to be someone who knows what they are doing. It is difficult because so much land is adjacent to public lands. Mr. Stutler said that the issue would continue to be face work. A mutual aid agreement is a start. There 175,000 private acres here opposed to 6 million acres of public lands. The County needs to take this on itself and make some decisions as to what needs to be done and what the County is not willing to do. Mr. Stutler then showed a large fire map. People pay taxes to the Oregon Department of Forestry and the fire district for different things. The fire district is to protect the structures; the other is for adjacent lands. The ODF gets 50% of their funding from large property owners on the west side, but much of the protection has to occur on the east side. Someday ODF is going to pull that boundary back and let people find another way to protect private property, and concentrate only on the State lands. This will result in more unprotected lands in the County. Mr. Stutler said with a fire chief for unprotected lands, there could be a mutual aid agreement with the districts. Another option would be a supplemental suppression agreement that would pay for their help. The other option is not doing anything and taking their chances. 5. Update: Upper Deschutes Watershed Coalition. Ryan Houston gave a PowerPoint presentation on the work being done by the Upper Deschutes Watershed Council. There are 60+ watershed councils in the State. The organization was formed in 1997 and has always had a County Commissioner on their board; currently Alan Unger. The Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board oversees the groups and handles much of the funding. Their programs are encompassed by monitoring, restoration and education. Restoration of habitat is of primary concern. They work hard to have people, especially children, learn a connection to place. They have a very diverse 18-member board of directors who represent various organizations and entities. They provide a cross-section of the community as a whole. They work closely with schools, and in fact, Highland Elementary School has adopted the Deschutes River as their storyline for all kinds of education. This involves 400 students for ten weeks. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 11, 2012 Page 7 of 9 The Camp Polk Meadow Preserve was a recent project that has helped to put Whychus Creek back into its original location from fifty years ago. This helps with salmon and steelhead restoration; four weeks later fish were already found there. This will result in about 70 acres of restored wetlands. Probably about ten of the watershed councils have the opportunity to do larger projects such as this. The group has also been able to work with model watershed partners from other states in the west, to determine there is long-term effectiveness and measurable improvements. Commissioner Baney said that this helps her during budget talks so that it is clear there is truly an investment in economic development. Chair DeBone asked about some of the readings found in the Deschutes River in south County. Mr. Houston said the State is trying to determine why some segments of rivers do not meet the TMDL process. For some reason, the pH or temperature or other aspects are not normal and research will show whether this is a normal situation for that particular part of a river. 6. Discussion of Housekeeping Amendments to Code. Commissioner Baney was not present for this discussion. Paul Blikstad went over the proposed changes, many of which are meant to comply with changes in State law. At the time the Board talked about room and board arrangements, the DLCD indicated they don’t care whether it is a thirty- day stay. Ms. Craghead said that statute does not explain this but it is something different than a typical bed and breakfast. Therefore, this would allow owners of EFU property to allow for bed and breakfast stays. It is the Board’s call as to whether shorter stays should be allowed. This use is not listed but is not prohibited, either. The Commissioners wanted to read more about this. No one qualifies for a solar setback exemption at this time. If it is added, there would be a fee for a variance. They would also have to get the concurrence of the neighbor who would be affected. The amendment for medical hardship variances should state relatives live in both structures. Some other changes reflect State law and simplifies some language regarding the State of Oregon. The Fire District wants a certain way to number properties that is not consistent with other entities. Ms. Craghead said some of the properties leapfrog so it would not be consistent with the City of Redmond's system. The Fire Chief requested this change. 7. Discussion of HIPPA Policy Revision. This item was delayed. 8. Other Items. Commissioner Baney was not present for discussion ofthe "other items". Follow-up Discussion regarding Ordinance No. 2012-004, Establishing Provisions for Agri-Tourism and Other Commercial Events and Activities, and to Amend the Winery Standards in the Exclusive Farm Use Zone. Nick Lelack said that in regard to wildlife recommendations and the events ordinance, he now has suggested wording to address this. This reflects the eagle nesting sites plus other birds and mammals. It would reference these things in distances from structures and activities. Commissioner Unger said that the events people have a short window to do what they would like to do. Chair DeBone would like to see the generic references. Commissioner Unger wants to go forward and see how things go since you can't always know what the impacts might be. You have to start somewhere. The second issue is noise standards. Ms. Craghead said that there is a LUBA case now referenced that required DEQ standards for noise impacts. She felt that the DEQ standards are not necessarily the County's responsibility. The DEQ standards are measured from the source of the noise, and not at the property line, so it would probably end up being less restrictive than the current noise ordinance. The six-minute part is already in the OAR's. Mr. Lelack said they could reference the DEQ standards in general, or nothing at all. Ms. Craghead said that unless someone files for a stay at LUBA, the ordinance is effective at adoption, and applicants can proceed at their own risk. Mr. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, April 11, 2012 Page 8 of9 Lelack said it could take months for LUBA to get around to it anyway if there was an appeal filed. They will draft two versions of these changes for the Board to review prior to the Board business meeting of April 16. Mr. Kropp said that there are two Planning Commission vacancies coming up: one at large, and one from Redmond. He asked if this should be opened up for applications for a month, then conduct interviews; and whether a Commissioner wants to be on the interview panel. Commissioner Unger asked that previous applicants be contacted to see if they are still interested. Being no further discussion, the meeting ended at 5:05 p.m. fo-n,., , DATED this / ~ Day of ~ 2012 for the Deschutes County Board of Commission; Anthony DeBone, Chair Alan Unger, Vice Chair ATTEST: Ta~SSioner ~~ Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, April 11, 2012 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, APRIL 11,2012 1. Economic Development Loan Fund Request (Central Oregon Truck Company) Roger Lee, EDCO 2. Child Support Enforcement Discussion District Attorney's Office 3. Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(e), Real Property Negotiations Susan Ross 4. Forester Update -Joe Stutler 5. Update: Upper Deschutes Watershed Coalition 6. Discussion of Housekeeping Amendments to Code -Paul Blikstad 7. Discussion of HIPP A Policy Revision -Dave Inbody 8. 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 I property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2) (h), litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor negotiations; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues. J Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board ofCommissioners' meeting rooms at r1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. Ifyou have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572. I 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 infurmation. N ~ 0 N . ~ ~ "C 0« "0 Q) ~ c o \ \ I I ?~ j ~ VI l' ~ ,.;VI ~ ~ I ~ J"'0 ' ~ ~I"'0 1 !O ~ {. oJki ~ jl!O E I ~ ';'~Q) ~ 1'-j'4 -~ -_. ...... cj. , $ ~ ~ ~ I " gl b I I I I-j- I I I I ...... o ~ Q) !O 0.. DESCHUTES COUNTY Business Development Forgivable Loan Fund Number of Employees: 215 Company Request: $50,000 EDCO Recommendation: $50,000 Proposed jobs transferred and created in Deschutes County by end of Q3 2013: 35 Average Pay for New Employees (all positions, excluding benefits): $52,905.61 Capital Investment: $4,000,000 by Q1 2013 Industry: Transportation and Logistics Website: www.centraloregontruck.com -APPLICATION The Business Development Forgivable Loan Fund disburses Deschutes County moneys for the purpose of increasing employment and capital investment in the county. The Fund has been established to offset the costs of business relocation to and within Deschutes County, including moving of equipment, purchase or construction of facilities, and site improvements such as the extension of public services and utilities. EDCO has been designated by Deschutes County as the administrator of this fund. The magnitude of funding is dependent on job creation (typically $500 $1000 per job). Key Requirements Are: • Grantees must create at least 5 new primary, permanent family wage jobs and shall have retained those jobs for at least one year . • Optional: Grantees must document the investment of at least $5 of new, taxable investments for each $1 allocated from the Business Development Forgivable Loan Fund. Section I -General Information Company Name: Central Oregon Truck Company, Inc. Location (City/County): Prineville, Crook -Relocating to Redmond, Deschutes Business Type: Long-haul, Flat-bed trucking 48 states and Canada Industry Type: Trucking No. of Employees: 215 HQAddress: 422 NW Beaver St., Prineville, OR 97754 State & Federal Taxpayer ID: Fed -93-1083989 State -06888512 Company Contact: Paul Coil Title: CFO Phone: 541-416-2180 x152 Email: pcoil@cotruck.net Parent Company: NA Website: CentralOregon Truck com Date: March 1, 2012 Section II -Company Profile 1. Please provide a brief overview of your business. The company was founded in Central Oregon 20 years ago and began as a simple brokerage operation offourpeople. The Company has grown to 175 trucks and 215 employees with anticipated growth byJuly 1, 2012 to 206 trucks and 250 employees. The 250 employee count includes the addition ofthe 4 headquarters positions listed above and 31 new driving positions (driver positions average wages are $45,293, excluding beneDts). While we can'tguarantee the driving positions wiD be hired 10caDy, we do employ a signiDcant number ofdn·vers who reside in Central Oregon. The company provides long-haul, Oat-bed services to 48 states and most ofCanada. All ofthe owners are Central Oregon residents and have raised their families here. The Redmond site wiD be new corporate headquarters, recruiting, training, maintenance operations, and will accommodate much more growth in our sales/brokerage operations. Section III -Project Activities 1. Please outline the proposed activities for these funds. How will access to the Business Development Forgivable Loan Fund support your strategic objectives, while increasing your employment and investment in the Central Oregon region? To facilitate ourgrowth, new oUice and improved training facilities are required. We will be constructing a 26,000 square foot facility ofwhich a substantial portion wiD be dedicated to training and which wiD allow us space to double our oUice staUing ··down the road". Upon completion, which we expect before January 1,2013, the 31 current employees working outside Deschutes County will immediately move to the Redmond facility. In addition, we anticipate a minimum growth of4 additional employees to accommodate the growth in our customer base and required brokerage services during this same time expandingyet again the number ofnew Deschutes County jobs. This is just the Drst step ofthe Company's growth plan. Section IV -Grant Terms and Conditions 1. Total Employment Grantees must create at least 5 new primary, family wage jobs (at $35,090 per year) and shall have retained those jobs for at least one year. Please provide a quarterly projection of expected job creation, including tides and/or descriptions. Also indicate expected wages. The completion ofour facility wiD bring 31 Headquarter employees to Redmond (not presently employed in Deschutes County) and 4 new employees at a company average annual compensation of$57,405. -see below for additional information regarding wages, excluding benefits. Quarter Ql2013 Q22013 Q32013 Q42013 Total Positions 31 2 2 o 35 .\verage \Vage per new position $52,905.61 # of new positions over next 12 months 35 Please be aware that these figures do not include the 14 jobs we already have in Deschutes County. 2. Capital Investment -Optional Although not required, capital investment plans are a helpful indicator of future plans. Grantees must document the investment of at least $5 of new, taxable investments for each $1 allocated from the Business Development Forgivable Loan Fund. Please provide a quarterly capital investment projection. Estimated new huilding construction costs -$4 million. In addition to the building, our growth plans will require us to expand our Beet equipment owned by more than $3.3 million, the orders and financing for which are already in place. 3. Primary Employer Test Grantees must be private fums in manufacturing, high-technology, or technology-based businesses which have more than 75% of customers outside Deschutes County. Wnat percentage of your customer base exists outside Deschutes County? 99% DESCHUTES COUNTY Business Development Forgivable Loan Fund Summary of Redmond Incentives Committee Review Meeting Appling Company: Central Oregon Truck Company, Inc. Number of Employees: 215 Company Request: $50,000 Proposed jobs transferred and created in Deschutes County by end of Q3 2013: 35 Average Pay for New Employees (all positions, excluding benefits): $52,905.61 Capital Investment: $4,000,000 by Q12013 Industry: Transportation and Logistics Website: \\'WW.centtalorcgontruck.com Meeting Date: March 9, 2012 Attendance: Applicant Paul Coil, CFO Central Oregon Truck Company Redmond Incentives Committee Review Jason McKibbin, COO MEDISISS -Jim McConnell, CEO McConnell Labs Joe Centanni, CPA Joeseph W. Centanni CPA, PC Scott Carlson, CFO Hooker Creek Companies Jon Stark, Manager Redmond Economic Development, Inc. Location: Central Oregon Truck Company 422 N\'(l Beaver St., Prineville, OR 97754 Meeting Summary: The REDI Incentives Review Committee met with Central Oregon Truck Company (COTC) Chief Financial Officer, Paul Coil in order to review their application for funding under the Deschutes County Forgivable Loan fund. Mr. Coil presented the plans for the proposed 26,000 square foot building they intend to construct in 2012 with an expected occupancy date in early 2013. He shared the expected job creation in the Deschutes County by moving 31 headquarters personnel at an average wage of $52,905 and the hiring of 4 additional personnel by the end of the 3rrl quarter 2013. The Committee reviewed the company's comprehensive financials in order to establish that the ftrm would be able to execute the planned job creation and move, associated with the building construction, or be able to pay back the amount of the fund back to the County if it was unable to meet its obligations as part of the agreement. Also, the committee discussed the COTC's market demand, client base and forecasted growth related to the capital investments noted on the application. The Committee unanimously supported the company's request for $50,000 as long as it meets the expected job totals outlined in the application. Mr. Coil asked if there could be some flexibility built into the agreement that would give them some additional time to bring these jobs than the typical one year from application date, in case there are construction delays in occupying the building by Ql 2013. Mr. Stark will inquire with the Board of County Commissioners if an 18 or 24 month time frame could be extended for this project. He noted that the program is intended to be flexible. Follow up: REDI Manager, Jon Stark will contact Deschutes County Interim Administrator Erik Kropp for a date to present the application and the Committee's recommendation for discussion and approval. BRIEFING PAPER FOR CENTRAL OREGON TRUCK COMPANY (COTC) Request for Deschutes County Forgivable Loan April 11, 2012 }Jvl~ _ ~':1"~,ON -------J';~ ,. ~ Company Request: $50,000 ftl{J). \ /fJV", J()JVt fr.oft' lf$IL ...... EDCO Recommendation: $50,000 /' lvvATfY' Proposed Job Creation by end ofQ3 2013: 35 new employees Average Pay for New Employees (all positions, excluding commissions): $52,905 Industry: Transportation & Logistics Website: "vv,,''\l.centraloregontruck.com Company Background: COTC was founded in Central Oregon 20 years ago and began as a simple brokerage operation of four people. Since that time the company has grown be the largest Central Oregon based shipping and logistics company with 175 trucks and 215 employees. COTC specializes in long-haul, flatbed service to 48 states and most of Canada. The company is preparing for significant anticipated growth in 2012, expanding to 206 trucks and 250 employees. To improve efficiency, COTC is planning to consolidate its yard operations from Terrebonne and headquarters from Prineville to a new location. Added functions at the new site will include improved facilities for training, maintenance operations and sales/brokerage. With customers across the country, the company had seriously considered relocation to the Reno, NV area -an established logistics center on the West Coast -for their consolidated operations. The City of Redmond, Oregon Dept. of Transportation, Governor's Office (Community Solutions), Business Oregon Development Department, Redmond Economic Development, Inc., and EDCO teamed to retain the company in Central Oregon. This team did a comprehensive review of potential sites in the Hwy 97 corridor, locating an industrial parcel in Redmond near the recently constructed highway re-route. Deschutes County funding through the Forgivable Loan Program will be combined with other private capital to complete construction of the new $4 million facility. EDCO Recommendation In addition to its significant economic impact as a traded-sector employer in the tri-county area, COTC provides important logistical services to area businesses, including manufacturers. Since the company specializes in flatbed transport, it serves a smaller segment of the region's logistics needs, however it is still a notable secondary benefit to retaining the company in Central Oregon. EDCO is recommending to Deschutes County an award of $50,000 or approximately $1,428 per job. Conditions include: • Construction and occupancy of a new headquarters, service and training facility in Redmond. • Combined relocation and creation 35 jobs to the new facility in Redmond within one year of occupancy. :J yll6 • Maintain total employment within Deschutes County of at least 49 full time employees (14 existing in Terrebonne plus 35) for at least 12 consecutive months once the employment condition above are met. • Providing quarterly employment updates and complete fmanciaI statements from award date through termination of the yet-to-be executed agreement with Deschutes County. Failure to meet the first provision would result in not being able to access the funding, while failure on the second two could result in partial or full repayment of the loan, with interest. Phone: (541) 388-6520 Admin. Fax: (541) 330-4691 District Attorney Patrick J. Flaherty Felony Fax: (541) 388-6615 1164 NW Bond Street Grand Jury Fax: (541) 330-4698 Bend, OR 97701 Juvenile Fax: (541) 383-0901 www.deschutesda.org DESCHUTES COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM Oregon's Child Support Enforcement program is primarily supported by Federal Matching Funds and Federal Incentives Funds. The goal of the Deschutes County District Attorney's Office is to return the DA caseload (non-assistance cases) to the DA's Office to provide the best enforcement of court ordered support for the children of Deschutes County. Enforcing support for children promotes healthy family relationships, health care coverage for children, economic stability and emotional support. The Oregon Child Support Program was established in 1975 under Title IV -D of the Social Security Act. The Oregon program consists of two primary partners, the Department of Justice Division of Child Support (DCS) and County District Attorneys (DA). In 2001 the Deschutes County DA CSE Program was transferred to the Department of Justice by an Intergovernmental Agreement. In exchange for DCS assuming Deschutes County DA's support enforcement responsibilities, DCS receives all of the Federal incentives and other funds for the program. In Oregon, Child Support caseloads are divided into two types of caseloads, the DA caseload for families and children not receiving public assistance and the DCS caseload for families and children involving current and former recipients' of public assistance where support rights are or have been assigned to the state as a condition of receiving cash assistance. CSE statewide reporting show that when the DA caseload that is assigned to aDA's office has had a higher percentage of collections than the mixed caseload. The return of the DA caseload to Deschutes County will provide increased enforcement, strengthen our partnership with DCS, and ensure that the children of Deschutes County are provided with every opportunity for the financial support they deserve. ---- ~~S~~~_T~~_.~O~~!y~I~R~CT Arr.~~_~_~~"__~L._ ..__ L._ PROPOSED BUDGET -CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014 -~-..----.T-~-~-·-----. I ..,L --~---J-.. i i Resources: +. " -._-~--_. Beginning Net Working Capitalr-... - -.~----....... -'--"--~-~ ---1----~-., .--1"---'-" ,_. Federal Funds Incentives --.----,-.----,-~.---~-..~.-------". _. Federal Funds -66% match State General Funds ~-.---.~--.... --------.-~. Interest Income i· L i Transfer from County General Fund ---""----]-.... -...•. Transfers: --_~L___ -~--r ~-. Total Resources Il ~ !~e~n~_it~!e~_: , i. ___ j ~. I:l~P_u.!~ District A~~~rn~y . Case~an~.e~~~t Spe~i~list Senior Case Management Specialist" ... :--. . ---. '-~-f ~~.~- Re~e'p'~o!!!~ . I-,- Ceil Phone Stipend I f ~:=:~I ~er~nnel Jstlmate-I ---~.-.---rsal;ry S~btotai ---.. --'1 ~---_... . '.-r----'r --. • • __ ,.,,___1_..·_·_ _ __ ~~; _* Disability i ___ L. "_~ ----.---~ '",,-----'-.. life Insurance Health/Dental Insurance _ .•._ M._.____ • ~ _. _ _. _ • __ ~._ FICA/Medicare ~ J". PERS---,I. --~_-! . r ._ Unemployment : ~o-ikers C~mp j-_ Additional Personnel Benefits -. ------'TSeneflts·Subtotai J. .! Total Personnel services I ! - -T' , ! _J._-~~__._ -1-I $" --" -. , , -... _.. ~ "i-" ----.->-,,~. , r$--64,464.00 ___.__t-".---..... lJ_~69,~~~:QQ ; $ 42,547.00 . --Is -6;634".Cro ------r"s -.--- ---'-r$" 383,169,00 _·t, ---"-_.----,--... 1 ; $ .S9~65·90 _ I 1---: $ 89,665.oo! .. . I ~r ---..... ----. ; I ---I .. jtt4~2.f834:oo ; i ---1 ~l ··l I -r-·- ---r ----. -I -----! . \$, ~6!~6_~.52 . . fI$ 49,065.91: 1_!:$ S6~697.23 1 if-23~476.21I --_.. _ i $ 480.00'ls . -_. li._ ±C1~~8.~ .__ . _ . !t._.$ ___256,700.87. ______ . ! _____L .. I.--J I _. 98~.:~~ ! $ 596.45 - --"\"$"--58,940.64 -' -.~--... -+ _. --.-.--.~-" . I $ 16,576.24-...!.-. -... -_..L $ _ 27!Qas.36 j $ 1,122.63 I· -. "..... -. --_. ._,.. _Jt__ 2,3~p.:~~ 1_~_1~-,?~~ ! $ 127,405.96 I--~--~ __ ._. : $ 384,106.83i .. j 1 -"j------I 4/4/2012Deschutes County program estimate I County Population Cases FTE Cases/FTE 2012 Total Budget Federal Funds Incentives Federal Funds 66% Match General Funds St ate General Funds County $25 An nual Fee General Funds Cou ntv ,Jackson 208,370 2,501 7.00 357 $585,315 $89,057 $327,531 $58,778 $9,052 $100,898 IYamhili 98,93 2 1,352 5.20 260 $452,223 $52,397 $263,885 $34,582 $5,506 $95,853 Deschutes County [DA17] 158,792 1,718 5.56 309 $472,834 $64,464 $269,524 $42,547 $6,634 $89,665 - Amount distributed from the Oregon Child Support Program Amount that the county would have to come up with from their existing budget note: Douglas & Linn counties were close in population and cases, but neither currently have child support programs Due to Program: Annual Budget Annual Audit Letter Quarterly Reimbursement Requests Due from Program: Quarterly Reimbursement federal match passthrough [distributed based on quarterly reimbursement request] Quarterly Reimbursement -state general fund [distributed based on quarterly reimbursement request] Quarterly Estimated Incentives Quarterly Distribution of $25 annual fee Annual distribution of estimated incentives reserves [depends on annual final award) Annual distribution of final incentives [depends on annual final award) DCS ESTIMATE INCENTIVES FFY 2012 r ~~-c-i~----~---------~c-- Program Totals $353,100,665 $484,174,541 DA Tota l, _ $~60,74 ~,141 $173,044 ,128 Actu al Pe rformance CRNT CLTNS PRCNT 1SPRT SPRT ONOF TL ORDRS CST EFF $3.60 $11.0<i $15.30 $14.13 $13 .18 $16.28 $28.18tnt $11 .60 $20.68 $14.42 $13 .83 $16.82 $9.31 $5.10 $7.30 $11.48 $8.18 $11 .39 $10.79 $1 1.00 $23.75 $18.00 $6.48 $17 .86 $18.64 $11.84 1 76.5% 59,7% 58.7% $5.37 35.7%, 97.1% 75.4% 76.6% PER FORMANC E INCENTIVE PERC EN TAGE CRNT CLTNS SPRT CST EFF SPRT ONORDRS (EST)DUE AR GS WEIG1-iTED COL LECTION S" INCENTIVE PERF PERCENTAGE SPRT ORDRS CRNT SPRT DUE CLTNS ON ARGS CST EFF WT 0 .75 WT1 .0 WT 1.0 WT 0.75 TOTAL COLLECTIONS Baker Benton Clackam a s Clatsop Ico lumbia Coos Crook Grant Harney Jackson Jos-e-p h1ne Klamath Lane Linco ln Malheur Marion Morrow Multnomah Po lk Tillamook Umatilla Union Wallowa IWasco yv ashi p-gt ~n Vamhlll ITL UNWGHTD CLTNS $192,353,524 $716,137 $2 ,737,165 $20,236,855 $2,239,451 $2,984,032 $3,426,770 $1,357,238 $310,069 $~2,~ $8,287,964 $3,324,369 $3,030,332 $16,292,697 $1 ,166,477 $934,578 $17,230,497 $550,112 $2 8,966,685 $3,458,279 $1,270,066 $3,525,841 $1,539,140 $371,970 $1,10 8,191 $30,169,443 $4,949,823 WGHTD CLTNS $311,130,413 $829,821 $2,854,183 $21 ,206,674 $2 ,464,436 $3 ,141,883 $3,736,690 $1,486.331 $322,266 $681,520 $9,106,198 $3 ,673,001 $3 ,329,340 $18,699,573 $1,259,61 7 $1,041,778 $18,581 ,870 $606,247 $31 ,052,521 $3 ,654,755 $1,442 ,911 $3,805,782 $1,688,679 $384,631 $1,174 ,515 $31,524,863 $5,294.043 " 64 .3% 0 .2% 0.6% 4.4% 0 .5% 0 .6% 0.8% 0.3% 0.1%1 0.1% 1.9%. 0 .8%, 0.7% 3.9% 0.3%1 0.2%) 3.8 %1 0 .1% 6.4%1 0 .8% 0.3% 0.8 % 0 .3% 0.1% 0.2 % 6.5 % 1.1% I 72.3% 98 .0% 98.8% 97.7% 96.9% 96.2% 94 .2% 97.7% 90 .1% 98.4% 97.0% 97.7% 95.8% 97 .6% 98 .3 % 98 .0% 96.5% 94 .5% 97.6% 97.6% 98.0 % 96.4% 98 .1% 93 .5 % 99.3% 97.0% 95.3% DUE 49.5% 75.7% 79.6% 76.6% 73 .7% 77.8% 72.4% 78.7% -'" 84.0% ~~.?.% 70.2% 71 .3% 72.0% 74 .2% 74.4% 65.3% 74.8% 77.6% 75.4% 74.6% 80.7% 74.0% 78.5% 70.9% 77.0% 78.0% 74.4% ARG_S 53 .6% 76 .1% 73.9% 80.8% 80.1% 80.5% 71.2% 8 3.5" 69 .8% 2,2d,% 71.8% 76.0% 71.8% 76.9% 77.9% 65 .5% 74.9% 74.5% 75.9% 75.3% 83.8% 73.4% 81.0% 84.0% 80.2% ~.2% 75.6% 84% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%',.. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 92% 100% 59% El3% 90% 92% 98% 86% 92% 100% 86% 100% 94% 100% 84% 82% 96% 100% ,88% 80% 82% 84% 88% 88% 75 % 88% 94% 90% 88% 100% 88% 96% 80% 94% 96% 88% 69% 90% 100% 79% 84_% 82% 90% 8 2% 92 % 94% 75% 88% 88% 90 % 90% 100% 86 % 100% 100% 100% 98% 90% 68% 92% 70% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100~ 100 % 100% 100% 100% 100 %1 100% 100% 100 % 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100" 100%. $261,349,547 $829,821 $2,854,183 $21,206,674 $2 ,464 ,436 $3,141,883 $3 ,736,690 $1,486,331 $322,266 $681,520 $9,106,198 $3,673,001 $3 ,329,340 $18,699,573 $1 ,259,617 $1 ,041,778 $18,581,870 $606,247 $31,052,521 $3,654,755 $1 ,4 42,911 $3,805,782 $1,688,679 $384,631 $1,174,515 $31,524,863 $5 ,294,043 $434,393,675 $173,044,128 $1 8 3,566,944 $746,839 $2,797,099 $19,510,140 $2,119,415 $2,953 ,370 $3 ,138,820 $1,426,878 $322,266 $599,738 $7,284,958 $3,011,861 $2,796,646 $16,455,624 $1,108,463 $781,334 $16,352,046 $569,872 $27,947,269 $3,216,184 $1 ,442,911 $3,349,088 $1,621,132 $307,705 $1,104,044 $30,263 ,86 8 $4,558,758 $339,453,271 $155,886,327 $147,009,120 $572,576 $1,840,948 $15,905 ,006 $1,848,327 $2,356,412 $2,298,064 $1,114,748 $190,943 $429,358 $5,600,312 $2,479,276 $2,047,544 $12,902,705 $888,030 $586,000 $12,264,034 $400,123 $20,960,452 $2,466,960 $1 ,0 8 2,183 $2,454,729 $1,266,509 $288,473 $880,886 $23,170,774 $3 ,573,479 $266,877,972 $119,868,852 $163,343,467 $622,366 $2 ,140,637 $15,905,006 $1,848,327 $2,356,412 $2,802,518 $1,114,748 $241,700 $511,140 $6,829,649 $2,754,751 $2,497,005 $14,024 ,680 $944,713 $781,334 $13,936,403 $454,685 $23 ,289 ,391 $2,741,066 $1,082,183 $2 ,854,337 $1 ,266,509 $288,473 $880,886 $23 ,643 ,647 $3 ,970,532 $293,126,563 $129,783,096 1/30/ 2012 April 11, 2011 Forester Update Deschutes County Commissioners Agenda Program Update Since the last update the following accomplishments have occurred: • Resolved Grant 1 of the FEMA grant where Deschutes County had approximately $180,000 fiscal liability. We are awaiting the formal documentation from FEMA. • Working to resolve Grant 2, two areas of concern are Starwood and Aspen Lakes where work occurred based on my interpretation of the EA, we continue to make progress but may need additional intervention by the congressional delegation. It rest with FEMA's interpretation ofEA coverage versus Deschutes County. • Grant 3, we are finalizing the Scope of Work again and still remain optimistic we will have the environmental assessments complete and finalizing the $3 million grant by September. • Finalized the qualified pool concept with 24 bidders. • Finalized the Spring FireFree Program and will treat fuels in 14 neighborhoods this spring and summer utilizing remaining grants. • Completing the final draft of the East West CWPP, expect to complete by June and then will move on to the update of the Upper Deschutes Coalition CWPP. • Continued involvement with the Deschutes Collaborative Forest Restoration project with significant progress made with both input to environmental assessments and work on the ground within the project area. • Close to finalizing the $300,000 grant with the FS for the County Forester to provide leadership for the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Strategy. • Participated in the IAFC WUI Conference in Reno with over 500 participants. Commissioner Unger was able to attend to present the efforts locally with the Deschutes Collaborative and both Katie Lighthall and I made presentations on fire adapted communities using the Project Wildfire model and the Cohesive Strategy. • Completed four grinding operations and successfully closed the disposal sites on county owned lands. We ground over 20,000 yards of defensible space material which equates to over 2,000 acres treated since last fall. Again, this material was all contributed by our sweat equity program. • Completed an agreement with Solid Waste to utilize existing facilities for our sweat equity and other fuels management programs. The exciting news that all materials brought in by FireFree effort count towards recycling credits for Solid Waste and we will now go back for the last several years to document those estimates. We conservatively estimate over 400,000 cubic yard of recycled materials which equates to over 40,000 acres treated, and over 100,000 green tons of materiaL • Working in conjunction with the City of Bend, Parks and Recreation and William Smith Properties we successfully treated 39 acres on the south slope of Awbrey Butte which was the largest piece of open space remaining. This fuels treatment substantially reduced the wildland fire threat and our costs/contributions were only $4,000 which was paid using existing grants. • We partnered with the City of Bend, Oregon Department of Forestry and Rim Rock West to create another FireWise Community in Bend with effort continuing to identify others. We now have 11 FireWise Communities in Deschutes County. • Successfully advertised the Assistant County Forester Position with approximately 40 applicants. Future Considerations Assistant County Forester position: I have successfully screened 37 applicants for the Assistant County Forester position. The position officially closes on April 8, 2012. I expect a few more applicants and will screen those on Monday and have used the following criteria for the "best qualified" and those deserving of an interview: • Combination of experience and education to successfully perform the duties. • Experience with Community Fire Plans including the development, maintenance and understanding of the Healthy Forest Restoration Act and the implications of CWPP in relation to community/stakeholder involvement and actions by the federal agencies for treating fuels on public lands. • Wildland fuels and fire experience in Central Oregon fuel models, and ICS experience and qualifications which would enable the applicant to deal with wildland fires, fuels treatments, evacuations including coordination with law enforcement and respective local, state and federal agencies with wildland fire jurisdictional responsibilities. • Knowledge of local, state and federal wildland fire laws and policy. • Knowledge of applicable environmental laws and best management practices. Using these evaluation criteria I have narrowed the field to eight highly qualified candidates and will be coordinating the interviews with a target date of June 1 sl of the successful candidate to begin work. Unprotected Lands Designation of Fire Chief for the County Forester Historical Perspective: In Deschutes County there are approximately 175,000 acres of unprotected lands. Simply stated these lands have no organized structural or wildland response, the lands are not within a designated fire district and in all cases are immediately adjacent to other jurisdictions. These lands generally are covered by law enforcement and ambulance service districts. These lands are generally north and west of Redmond, west of Bend between Bend and Sisters, all of Alfalfa and lands in eastern Deschutes County but including the communities ofMilican, Brothers and Hampton. There are approximately 350 homes located within the unprotected lands. The purpose of this preliminary discussion is for the County Commissioners to consider formally designating the County Forester as the wildland fire Chief for the unprotected lands in Deschutes County. The rationale for this recommendation is as follows: • Deschutes County has both defensible space and open burning ordinances in place and the County Forester has officially been deputized by the County Sheriff to enforce these regulations. • These acres are currently covered by Community Fire Plans and classified by Senate Bill 360 defensible space standards. • It is inevitable that these unprotected land will experience a significant wildland fire in future years and other than a law enforcement response for evacuations, Deschutes County has no formal process for taking the appropriate action for a wildland fire response. The range of actions may include, do nothing, request assistance by hire of cooperating agencies wildland fire apparatus and staffing to successfully mitigate the loss of life and property in the unprotected lands, and in perhaps the worst case scenario request State Fire Marshall assistance under the Conflagration Act which mobilizes sufficient resources to protect homes and property from damages of a wildland fire. • The County Commissioners have statutory authority under 401.309 1 Declaration of state of emergency by city or county and 401.305 1 Emergency management agency of city or county, to formally delegate those emergency decisions by a qualified person during these situations. • Currently if a wildland fire occurred where communities, structures and property were threatened, the County Forester would respond but the question of authority, decision space, fiscal responsibilities are unknown. • The consequences of failure without a programmatic strategic plan in place are simply too high. • From a risk management perspective, Deschutes County must identify those circumstances where the appropriate actions would be taken, decisions made by a qualified and competent wildland fire professional and within the purview of existing statutory authorities. 2012 Update to County Commission Ryan Houston Executive Director Oregon’s Watershed Councils Restoration Education Monitoring What we do…  Land Use Planning  REALMS Middle School  Central Oregon Flyfishers  Bend City Council  Native Fish Society  Oregon Community College  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service  Oregon Water Resources Department  Central Oregon Irrigation District Diverse, Inclusive Board  Bend Resident  Rainshadow Organics Farm  Construction Management Services  Newton Consultants  Richter Environmental Consulting  Deschutes National Forest  Deschutes County Commission  Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife  Architecture Youth Education 3,000 students / year Highland Elementary Storyline Project 400 students 10 weeks 15 field days Stream Stewardship Day Special Projects Restoration projects Field guides Art Camp Polk Meadow Preserve Monitoring Effectiveness 10-year pilot project: Rigorous monitoring Long-term tracking of results Peer review Funding Grants (State) $556,989 (61%) Grants (Federal) $107,633 (12%) Grants (Non -Governmental) $183,653 (20%) Deschutes County $20,000 (2%) Events and Donations $27,311 (3%) Contract Services $12,536 (2%) Funding 94% grant funded: 78% success rate $9.8 million since 2002 Funding sources: 97% from outside Central Oregon 85% of expenditures are local Lean operations: 9% overhead Shared facilities & staff County funding used to: Maintain basic operations Develop new projects Leverage outside funding Funding Source Amount Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board $1,240,658 U.S. Forest Service $174,348 Pelton Round Butte Fund $164,478 National Forest Foundation $100,000 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service $60,020 Bonneville Environmental Foundation $35,000 The Freshwater Trust $29,761 Other sources $27,533 Deschutes County $20,000 Deschutes River Conservancy $13,933 National Fish and Wildlife Foundation $12,518 Oregon Dept. of Environmental Quality $8,191 Laird Norton Family Foundation $5,000 The Clabough Foundation $2,500 The Roundhouse Foundation $2,100 Total $1,896,040 Thank you! Integration Streamflow Restoration ¤ Fish Passage / Screening ¤ Stream Restoration ¤ ¤ Land Conservation ¤ Monitoring ¤ Community Engagement ¤ ¤ ¤ www.RestoreTheDeschutes.org Reintroduction