HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-06-18 Work Session Minutes
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 18, 2012
Page 1 of 7
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
MONDAY, JUNE 18, 2012
___________________________
Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Alan Unger and, via conference
call for part of the meeting, Commissioner Tammy Baney. Also present were Erik
Kropp, Interim County Administrator; and, for a portion of the meeting, Marty
Wynne, Finance; Joe Stutler, Forester; Tom Anderson, Nick Lelack and Kevin
Harrison, Community Development; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; and
Susan Ross, Property & Facilities. No representatives of the media or other
citizens were in attendance.
Chair DeBone opened the meeting at 1:35 p.m.
1. Finance/Tax Update.
Marty Wynne provided an overview of the finance update. He reviewed
‘agency offerings’ showing the yield for the recent timeframe from one agency.
The rates look good by comparison. The average maturing time is 621 days.
Many government agencies are receiving a much lower rate. The preferred
maximum investment amount is $45 million, but County investments are
higher, equaling better earnings.
Commissioner Unger asked if this is the responsibility of the Treasurer or the
Finance Manager. Mr. Wynne said that in a County such as this one, it is the
elected Treasurer.
The general fund revenue as now shown is $8.7 million rather than $8.2
million. There has been additional income through property taxes, Clerk
revenue and transient lodging taxes.
Community Development’s budget has been adjusted to cover a small deficit
The Health Benefits Trust fund had a lot of expenses in May, so an adjustment
was needed there as well.
2. Forester Update.
Joe Stutler presented his update at this time. He reiterated that he is retiring the
end of June, but will assist his replacement for a while.
FEMA Update.
The last few weeks there have been a lot of changes in FEMA and OEM, but
the people he deals with the most are still there except for one. The Regional
Director ofFEMA is on assignment as well.
The 2007 grant shows that the County is still owed over $4,000. He is working
on the closeout documents on the 2008 grant, and there should be some funds
coming to the County from that as well. The grant paperwork is complicated
and labor intensive, especially when it has to do with sweat equity types of
work.
Transition Plan.
This will not be known until the various representatives either leave or come on
board with the other agencies. Mr. Stutler will keep working to make sure
everything gets handled as it should.
Interim Status.
Mr. Stutler will assist as needed during the time the new Forester comes on
board and is comfortable with what needs to be done.
Sweat Equity Funds Treatment Status.
Mr. Stutler said that they pulled in another 32,000+ acres for wildfire treatment.
A coalition is working on other areas that need to be addressed. They added
four neighborhoods this year that were never dealt with before, with good
results. Some were close-in while others are more remote. Participation was
excellent, and the work on these should be completed by July. They try not to
do this work when they go into fire restriction season because it is too difficult
for the contractors to do their job.
Fire Season Meeting at Fairgrounds.
This meeting is scheduled at the Fairgrounds on June 21.
Project Wildfire Recognition Meeting.
A Project Wildfire meeting happens on July 10, when they will also recognize
individuals and organizations, which may happen at Eagle Crest around 5 p.m.
This will be a bar-b-que. There should be over 100 people present.
Mr. Kropp said he is working on a party to send off Mr. Stutler in style.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, June 18,2012
Page 2 of7
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 18, 2012
Page 3 of 7
Mr. Stutler left, and Commissioner Baney joined the meeting via conference
call.
3. Discussion of La Pine Industrial Park.
Susan Ross discussed the future of LIGI and a letter from Darwin Thurston.
Commissioner DeBone indicated concern about the ongoing involvement and
expense of LIGI. LIGI was formed when the County took ownership of the
industrial land in La Pine, and wanted more involvement from the local
population. No other agency was in existence to handle this , so LIGI was
formed to do the marketing and oversight. They feel they have accomplished
what they set out to do, and recommend continued oversight. They do not want
to do the development piece any longer and want to focus mostly on marketing.
Their marketing is probably not limited to ju st that property, but they want to
promote the La Pine area in general. There is not much left there to be developed;
about forty acres that need development and another parcel that is shovel-ready.
Partitioning and infrastructure improvements are needed on some of it.
The agreement was to send funds that come in from the sale or lease of property
to LIGI, where it was to be used for marketing and overhead. Eventually the
properties would all be sold and the County would keep any revenue.
Commissioner Baney explained this is County land, and costs come out of any
sales or leases. She asked how much overhead is not associated with the land.
Ms. Ross did not know, but noted that Lee Smith is part-time.
Chair DeBone stated that he attended the annual meeting, and his wife is a
member of the La Pine Industrial Group although not on the board. He and the
mayor discussed this information. Mr. Smith was getting paid $2,500 or more a
month, but is retiring. LIGI wants to hire someone more full-time for the
position. There are several different models. Unfortunately, County land and
resources are covering these costs. Mr. Smith was spending time all over the
west coast to market the property, but nothing has been sold in a long time.
Ms. Ross said that it has been several years since they got anything substantial
sold there, including BioGreen, which is having problems finding a market.
She said that LIGI can remain LIGI and they can do whatever they want.
It comes down to money, and they want to keep the County’s funds and use it to
develop La Pine properties. It is clear what is supposed to be done with this
money. They would have to market the County’s property, but it cannot be
used for general economic development purposes there.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 18, 2012
Page 4 of 7
Chair DeBone wants to see benefits; he asked if property is sold, where does the
funding go. Ms. Ross stated that it is supposed to be dedicated to the industrial
park itself or for a wide variety of economic development activities, or to
diversify the economic base for the County, not necessarily just in La Pine.
These are segregated funds and do not go into the general fund.
Mr. Kropp said it does not make good business sense to continue spending this
money to market a particular parcel. Chair DeBone also came to the conclusion
that there is a problem with this, as there is not a lot of value to these efforts.
Ms. Ross stated that they have been doing it for a long time , but it is not
effective to do it in this way any longer. They are supposed to market just that
County property, but they want to do more of a regional effort. Chair DeBone
said that not everyone agrees to work with EDCO, which looks at the bigger
picture. However, he feels the monetary support should be discontinued.
Ms. Ross does not feel there is a great sense of urgency. Chair DeBone stated
that they want to hire someone else and want more funding. Mr. Kropp said
that this would be a good role for EDCO and he can perhaps find out if they
will work with LIGI and determine how to continue.
Ms. Ross said LIGI can form as a larger economic development agency, but the
County should not have to support it. Commissioner Baney said that most of
the property is shovel-ready, and the State and others are already aware of this.
She is in favor of a six-month effort to gear down and decide how to handle it.
The property can be sold by Realtors through a normal process. The County
can handle an offer to lease or purchase any of those properties. Roger Lee of
EDCO and Clark Jackson of the State occasionally attend LIGI meetings and
are aware of the properties in that area.
Chair DeBone stated that there is no listing agent. Darwin Thurston is also
leaving and Vic Russell will be the chair.
Commissioner Baney said it is a well-oiled machine and they have done fine,
but their work is done. Commissioner Unger added that EDCO is here and
involved in the region, and now La Pine is a city. The County owns acreage in
Redmond as well and does not have a specific agency similar to LIGI to deal
with it.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 18, 2012
Page 5 of 7
Ms. Ross noted that the City of La Pine is not as mature as a City as Redmond.
Commissioner Unger said that Jon Stark of REDI is independent from the City
of Redmond and he should be able to help with this. EDCO should be
contacted to find out how they can better service the La Pine area, and what the
costs would be.
Chair DeBone stated there could be involvement from members of the Chamber
in La Pine and other business owners. The City now exists and they need to be
a part of it.
Commissioner Baney asked if a work session could be set up with EDCO and
the Board and La Pine individuals to figure out how this can be structured. It is
small enough that they should be able to avoid hiring someone to do this work.
Commissioner Unger would like to see Jon Stark involved as well, but this
would mean hiring someone. Commissioner Baney asked if the County could
handle some of the issues; Ms. Ross said that the County can help with
partitioning, etc. but nothing much outside of infrastructure. EDCO gets over
$100,000 from the County, and EDCO should be able to oversee this process.
Commissioner Unger likes the idea of a six-month ramp-down. Mr. Kropp said
there have to be expectations on what happens with the funds from the County.
Chair DeBone indicated that some seem to think there is already a decision to
terminate the agreement. He feels there needs to be a notification that change is
desired.
Commissioner Baney said to give them six months so everyone can figure out
where they are going and to develop their vision for the future. Chair DeBone
would like this to be three months. Commissioner Baney said the letter from
Mr. Thurston sets the table for the conversation, and she agreed with a three-
month timeframe.
4. Discussion of Initiating Review of Administrative Decision (Downs).
This portion of the meeting was audio recoded.
Nick Lelack gave an overview and said that this is the first decision on an event
venue, and needs some interpretation. Staff worked through the decision , but
he is certain that the decision will be appealed if the Board does not call it up.
It would be faster to call it up now rather than having it go to LUBA and then
probably back to the County.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 18, 2012
Page 6 of 7
Laurie Craghead said that for those provisions that are in County Code, the Board
would be given deference. For those in State law, no deference would be given.
It would be a case of first impressions and would give LUBA a way to say yes or
no once they get it. The law is nebulous and decisions have to be made for
clarification.
Commissioner Unger feels the Board should do this, but he does not see the
connection between the event and a farm use. Mr. Lelack said they tried to
make a strong connection with the information from the applicant. Ms.
Craghead stated that if it is an approval, the applicant has to defend it. Mr.
Lelack said that the applicant has counsel and they or another party will likely
appeal. Ms. Craghead said the part about being related to a farm use is a State
issue. Farm use is defined in State statute so the County’s interpret ation would
be judged in that manner. Mr. Lelack said the farmland activities task force
was to define the meaning of ‘related to’, but it remains unclear.
UNGER: Move approval of Order No. 2012-031.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: UNGER: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
DEBONE: Chair votes yes.
5. Other Items.
Executive Session, called under ORS 192.660(2)(h), Pending or
Threatened Litigation.
Executive Session, called under ORS 192.660(2)(e), Real Property
Negotiations.
Being no further items addressed, the meeting adjourned after executive
session at 4:30 p.m.
DATED this 7./'--Day of __'<-+-_~f--____ 2012 for the J ~
Deschutes County Board of Commissioner
dtoO~
Anthony DeBone, Chai;-=-==
Alan Unger, Vice Chair
ATTEST: ~.Tammy aney, 0 . lSSlOner ~~
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, June 18,2012
Page 7 of7
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org
WORK SESSION AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
1:30 P.M., MONDAY, JUNE 18,2012
I. Finance/Tax Update -Marty Wynne
2. Forester Update -Joe Stutler
3. Discussion of La Pine Industrial Park -Susan Ross
4. Discussion of Initiating Review of Administrative Decision (Downs) -Kevin
Harrison
5. Other Items
Executive Session, called under ORS I 92.660(2)(h), Pending or Threatened
Litigation -Mark Pilliod
Executive Session, called under ORS 192.660(2)( d), Labor Negotiations -Erik
Kropp
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 o/Commissioners' meeting rooms at
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. Ifyou have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572.
Deschutes COWlty meeting locations are wheelchair accessible.
Deschutes COWlty provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TrY.
Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative fonnats or for further infonnation.
..
Agency Offerings
Sorted by Matu rity Barb Gibbs, SVP SNW (800) 452-9911
OR DIRECT LINE
2 Year Treas Yld 0.282% (503) 275-8333
3 Year Treas Yld 0.378%
6/18/2012
Par Amt. . MMKT Additional
($ 'ill )
ml ons
Ticker Coupon Maturity Next Call Call Type Y' ld
Ie
Eq.
Yield
C
omments
$4.000 FHLB 1.750% 3/8/13 Bullet 0.20% 0.20%
$15.000 FNMA 4.375% 3/15/13 Bullet 0.20% 0.20%
$15.000 FHLB 0.240% 4/26/13 Bullet 0.21 % 0.21 %
$15.000 US Treas 0.625% 4/30/13 Bullet 0.18% 0.18%
$2.959 FNMA 1.750% 5/7/13 Bullet 0.21 % 0.21 %
$2.485 FHLB 1.625% 6/14/13 Bullet 0.22% 0.22%
$15.000 US Treas 3.375% 6/30/13 Bullet 0.21 % 0.21 %
.. ~~.-. =--r-f~-_._~~:~. _-o-~ -\'~'. :_. ~... --=~--.!-_ I _-. --~.• :~.I.' ~----_----... -, -.'1
$8.000 FFCB 0.550% 7/25/13 7/25/12 Anytime after call 0.20% 0.49%
$15.000 FNMA 0.500% 8/9/13 Bullet 0.26% 0.26%
$15.000 FHLB 0.280% 8/13/13 Bullet 0.26% 0.26%
$5.600 FHLB 0.500% 8/28/13 Bullet 0.26% 0.26%
$3.000 FNMA 1.000% 9/23/13 Bullet 0.27% 0.27%
Bond MMKT Additional
Yield Yield
Eq.Yield to call Comments
$15.000 FHLMC 0.500% 10/25/13 Bullet 0.302% 0.02%
$1.000 FHLB 0.550% 10/25/13 10/25/12 One time call 0.470% 0.250%
$5.625 FNMA 0.550% 11/15/13 11/15/12 One time call 0.467% 0.260%1 I 100.115
$16.000 FHLMC 0.375% 11/27/13 Bullet 0.302% I 0.02%
-.
Agency Offerings
Sorted by Maturity Barb Gibbs, SVPSNW (800) 452-9911
OR DIRECT LINE
6/18/2012 2 Year Treas Yld 0.282% (503) 275-8333
3 Year Treas Yld 0.378%
$15.000 FHLB 0.340% 12/18/13 Bullet 0.320% 0.320%
$5.000 FHLMC 0.500% 12/20/13 12/20/12 Quarterly-steps to .75% 0.800% 0.220%
$12.120 FNMA 0.500% 12/27/13 12/27/12 One time call 0.412% 0.250% I
$1.950 FNMA 1.350% 2/24/14 0.342% 0.06%
$15.000 FHLB 0.350% 2/25/14 Bullet 0.350% I
$15.000 FHLB 2.375% 3/14/14 Bullet 0.342% 0.06%
$2.550 FHLMC 4.500% 4/2/14 Bullet 0.342% 0.06%
$15.000 FHLB 0.300% 4/30/14 Bullet 0.352% 0.07%
$15.000 FHLB 0.400% 5/22/14 6/22/12 Monthly calls 0.400% 0.400%
$15.000 FFCB 0.350% 6/9/14 9/6/12 Anytime after call 0.350% 0.350% I
$15.000 FHLB 2.500% 6/13/14 Bullet 0.402% 0.12%
$15.000 FFCB 0.375% 6/18/14 Bullet 0.362% 0.08%
$15.000 FHLMC 1.000% 8/20/14 Bullet 0.412% 0.13%
$9.550 FHLB 1.375% 9/12/14 Bullet 0.412% 0.13%
$1.215 FHLB 0.500% 12/12/14 Bullet 0.472% 0.19%
$15.000 FFCB 0.480% 12/26/14 6/26/13 Anytime after call 0.480% 0.480% Settles 6/26
$2.000 FHLB 0.500% 1/12/15 10/12/12 Anytime after call 0.500% 0.500% Settles 7/12/12
$4.000 FFCB 0.500% Bullet 0.488% 0.11%
$5.550 FNMA 0.500% Bullet 0.478% 0.10%
100.136
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.000
100.349
1 1
1
1 I I
I
Monthly Meeting with Board of CommissionersJ
I Finance Director/Treasurer j
I AGENDA
J
1
!
June 18,2012
I
1
t
I (1) Monthly Investment Report
(2) April 2012 Financials I
4
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
I
1
j
j
i
--
- -
Commercial Paper $
Corporate Notes 12,963,439
Time CertifICates 9,255,254
U. S. Treasuries
Federal Ageocies 13,082,406
Bankers' Acceptances
LGIP/BOTC 891038,571
Totallnveabnents S 124,338,170
Total Portfolio: By Investment Types
Corporate Time Notes Certificates
10% 7% Federal
Agencies
11%
LGIP/BOTC
72%
0.00%
10.43%
7.44%
0.00%
10.52%
0.00%
ZLl1!t
100.00%
-
Investments By County Function
General $ 124,339,670
Totallnv.abnents S 124,338,&70
Totallnveabnent Income
Less Fee: 5% of Invest. Income
Investment Income· Net
Category lIaximums:
U.S. Treasuries 100%
LGIP 100%
Federal AgenCies 75%
Banker's Acceptances 25%
Time Certificates 25%
Commercial Paper 20%
Coroorate Notes 10%
Investment Income
Flacal Year 2011·12
Apr·12 I I V·T·D
$ 67,899 $ 711,831
. .
I
I
67,899 711,831
(3,395) (35,592)
$ 64,504 $ 676,239
Comparators
3 Month Treas. ~ 0.10%
12 Month Treas. ~ 0.19%
3 Month C P ~ 0.18%
Averagellaturlty In Days
General ---&21
I
Memorandum
Date: May 14,2012
To: Board of County Commissioners
Erik Kropp, Interim County Administrator
From: Marty Wynne, Finance Director
RE: Monthly Financial Reports
Attached please find April 2012 financial reports for the following funds: General (001).
Community Justice -Juvenile (230), Sheriff's (255, 701, 702), Public Health (259).
Behavioral Health (275), Community Development (295). Road (325), Community
Justice -Adult (355), Commission on Children &Families (370-399), 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
GENERAL FUND
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
Budget I
Vearto Date
Actual j Variance JFY% I Coli. %
YearEnd $
Variance
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital $ 7,300,000 $ 8,245,725 $ 945,725 100% 113% $7,300,000 $8,245,725 $ 945,725
Revenues
Property Taxes 16,750,806 20,256,704 3,505,898 83% 101% 20,100,967 20,828,228 727,261
Gen. Rev. -excl. Taxes 1,985,268 2,079,040 93,772 83% 87% a) 2,382,321 2,382,321
Assessor 659,163 753,016 93,853 83% 95% b) 790,996 790,996
County Clerk 1,223,923 1.188.711 (35,212) 83% 81% 1,468,707 1,412,207 (56,500)
BOPTA 10,332 14.788 4,456 83% 119% b) 12,398 12.398
District Attorney 248,891 198.001 (50.890) 83% 66% c) 298.669 325.676 27,007
FinancelTax 161.583 206.624 45.041 83% 107% b) 193,900 206.624 12,724
Veterans 51.118 35,087 (16,031) 83% 57% 61.341 64,351 3,010
Property Management 80,167 80,167 (0) 83% 83% 96,200 96.200
Grant Projects 1,667 1,667 !Ol 83% 83% 2,000 2.000
Total Revenues 21,172,918 24,813,805 3,640,887 83% 98% 25,407,499 26,121.001 713.502
TOTAL RESOURCES 28,472.918 33,059,530 4,586.612 83% 101% 32,707.499 34,366.726 1,659,227
REQUIREMENTS: I Exp. %1
Expenditures
Assessor 2.837,750 2,713.674 124.076 83% 80% 3,405.300 3.283.300 122.000
County Clerk 1,186,638 924.741 261.897 83% 65% 1,423.965 1.183.965 240,000
BOPTA 60.335 54,901 5,434 83% 76% 72.402 72,402
District Attomey 4,066.080 3,768,910 297.170 83% 77% 4,879,296 4.511.771 367.525
FinancelTax 678.040 637,159 40.881 83% 78% 813,648 799,648 14.000
Veterans 218,429 210,261 8,168 83% 80% 262,115 260.100 2,015
Property Management 214.720 214,260 460 83% 83% 257,664 257,664
Grant Projects 98,929 99.408 (479) 83% 84% 118,715 118,715
Non-Departmental 1,514,135 861,687 652,448 83% 47% d) 1,816,962 1.696,962 120,000
Contingency 4,803,438 4,803,438 83% n/a e) 5,764,125 5.764.125
15.678,494 9,485,001 6.193,493 83% 50% 18,814,192 12,184,527 6,629,665
Transfers Out 11,548.842 10.674,027 874,815 83% 77% 13,858,610 13,858.610
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 27,227.336 20,159.028 7,068.308 83% 62% 32,672.802 261043,137 6.629[665
NET (Resources· Requirements) 1,2451583 12,900,502 11,654,920 e) 341697 8,323,589 8,288,892
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget I 8,300,000 I
a) Includes annual payments: Tax on Electric Co-ops $489.027. PILT $471,823
b) A & T Grant received quarterly-July. October, January & April. Total budgeted $847.898; total received $840.927
c} DA revenue includes: $155,069 HIDTA Grant to be received later in fiscal year and $122,400 Discovery Fee received monthly (YTD
actual includes nine months of receipts)
d} Budget includes $576.144 for payment to LED #2. This payment normally made annually in June and is projected to be
$110.000 less than budgeted
e) Appropriation (authority to spend) transferred to Video Lottery Fund $34,697
I
1,
Page 1
COMM JUSTICE-JUVENILE
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
Year to Date
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Revenues
Federal Grants
SB #1065-Court Assess.
Discovery Fee
Food Subsidy
OVA Basic & Diversion
Inmate/Prisoner Housing
Inmate Commissary Fees
Contract Payments
Miscellaneous
Program Fees
MIP Diversion Fees
Interest on Investments
Leases
Grants -Private
Behavioral Health
CFC Interfund Grant
Gen Fund Grant-Crime Prev
Budget !
$1,101,374
8,333
41,667
12,500
20,833
181,248
73,742
83
58,333
50
33
250
6,250
2,000
417
5,000
128,440
16,667
Actual ! Variance !FY % I Coil. %
$1,099,010 $ (2,364) 100% 100°/.
4,267 (4,066) 83% 43% a)
41,477 (190) 83% 83%
11,585 (915) 83% 77%
18,794 (2,039) 83% 75%
266,982 85,734 83% 123% b)
55,200 (18,542) 83% 62% c)
220 137 83% 220%
73,005 14,672 83% 104% d)
301 251 83% 502% e)
(33) 83% 0%
1,040 790 83% 347% e)
6,830 580 83% 91%
1,100 (900) 83% 46% f)
838 421 83% 168%
2,905 (2,095) 83% 48% g)
109,341 (19,099) 83% 71% h)i)
15,000 {1,667} 83% 75% i)
Budget
Year End
Projection Variance
$ 1,101,374 $1,099,010 $ (2,364)
10,000 10,000
50,000 50,000
15,000 15,000
25,000 25,000
217,498 355,730 138,232
88,490 80,000 (8,490)
100 250 150
70,000 100,000 30,000
60 365 305
40 40
300 1,200 900
7,500 8,200 700
2,400 1,200 (1,200)
500 1,000 500
6,000 3,400 (2,600)
154,128 134,620 (19,508)
20,000 20,000
Total Revenues 555,846 608,885 53,039 83% 91% 667,016 806,005 138,989
Transfers In-General Fund 4,434,550 4,434,550 83% 83% 5,321,459 5,321,459
TOTAL RESOURCES
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Community Justice-Juvenile
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Contingency
6,091,770
4,257,558
1,016,444
33,417
42,000
558,789
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 5,908,208
6,142,445
4,125,711
968,011
37,800
50,675
131,847
48,433
33,417
4,200
558,789
5,131,522 776,686
830/. 87%
I Exp·%1
83% 81% j)
83% 79% b)h)
83% 0%
83% 75%
83% nla
83% 72%
7,089,849 7,226,474 136,625
5,109,069
1,219,733
40,100
50,400
670,547
4,958,044
1,161,600
40,100
50,400
151,025
58,133
670,547
7,089,849 6,210,144 879,705
NET (Resources· Requirements) 183,562 1,010,923 827,361 1,016,330 1,016,330
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget 1,010,415 1
a) Federal Grant billing, reimbursed quarterly in arrears--$2,665 outstanding
b) OVA Basic and Diversion funding increased after budget was submitted. Projections for revenue and expenditures adjusted
accordingly. Payments received quarterly
c) Fees paid for housing for youth from other jurisdictions, need fluctuates and trending lower than anticipated
Billings outstanding -$14,040
d) Contract payments reimbursement requests submitted monthly. Received 1-2 months in arrears, trending higher than antiCipated
e) Revenues trending greater than antiCipated -dependent on use of programs or services (MIP Diversion Fees, photocopies, etc)
f) Citizen Review Board vacated. Revenue projected adjusted accordingly
g) Due to change in practice, Behavioral Health's referrals for functional family therapy have decreased
h) CFC (JCP) funding less than anticipated. Projections of revenue and expenditures adjusted accordingly
Page 2 i) Grants paid quarterly
j) Actual for the year projected to be less than budgeted due to vacant positions
SHERIFF -Fund 255
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Total Revenues
TOTAL RESOURCES
REQUIREMENTS:
Year to Date
Budget J Actual J Variance J FY %J Coli . %
Revised YearEnd
Budget Projection Variance
$ $ $ 100% nfa $ $ $
83% 68% * 22,084 ,821 18,688 ,541 (3,396,280)
83% 67% * . '. . -'. -.• ', -...::~-:.j
30,444,597 24,647,937 (5,796,660) 83% 67% 36,533,516 30,532,554 (6,000,962)
30,444,597 24,647,937 (5,796,660) 83% 67% 36,533,516 30,532,554 (6,000,962)
Exp. %1
EXPENDITURES & TRANSFERS
Sheriffs Division
Civil
Automotive/Communications
Investigations/Evidence
Patrol/Civil/Comm Supp
Records
Adult Jail
Court Security
Emergency Services
Special Services Division
Regional Work Center
Training Division
Other Law Enforcement SVC5
Non-Departmental
Contingency
Transfers Out -DIS Fund
2,153,284 2,070,204 83,080 83% 80% a) 2,583,941 2,536,941 47,000
686,746 624,830 61,916 83% 76% b) 824,095 748,995 75,100
1,418,506 1,244,046 174,460 83% 73% 1,702,207 1,698,107 4,100
1,445,182 1,203,300 241,882 83% 69% b) 1,734,218 1,520,664 213,554
6 ,670,587 6 ,586,243 84,344 83% 82% b) 8,004,704 7,862,704 142,000
600,592 531,211 69,381 83% 74% 720,710 694,610 26,100
8,755,439 7,829,261 926,178 83% 75% c) 10,506,527 9,704,527 802,000
238,835 230,715 8,120 83% 81% 286,602 275,402 11,200
154,688 148,098 6,590 83% 80% 185,625 175,525 10,100
1,112,634 917,201 195,433 83% 69% 1,335,161 1,307,161 28,000
2 ,515,388 2,384,361 131,027 83% 79% b) 3,018,466 2,835,366 183,100
270,221 207,559 62,662 83% 64% 324,265 285,165 39,100
526,880 509,883 16,997 83% 81% 632,256 614,156 18,100
61,026 61,026 83% 83% 73,231 73,231
3,667,923 3,667,923 83% nfa 4,401,508 4,401,508
166,667 100,000 66,667 83% 50% d) 200,000 200,000
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 30,444,598 24,647,938 5,796,660 83% 67% 36,533,516 30,532,554 6,000,962
NET (Resources -Requirements)
* Revenues from LED #1 & LED #2 adjusted monthly to equal actual expenditures
a) Less than planned personnel and software maintenance expenditures
b) Less than planned personnel expenditures due to open positions which may not be filled
c) Less than budgeted expenditures due to open positions, jail bed rental expenses, and jail management software costs
d) Semi-annual transfer in November and May
Page 3
Fund 701 LEO-Countywide
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital $5,108,671 $ 6,090,734 $ 982,063 100% 119% $ 5,108,671 $6,090,734 $ 982,063
Tax Revenues -Current 11,922,368 14,256,770 2,334,402 83% 100% 14,306,841 14,711,329 404,488
Tax Revenues -Prior 417,500 651,544 234,044 83% 130 % 501,000 651,544 150,544
Federal Grants & Reimb 29 ,333 30,784 1,451 83% 87% 35,200 35,200
State Grant 40,396 56,577 16,181 83% 117% 48 ,475 56,577 8 ,102
Transp. of State Wards 4,167 6,304 2 ,137 83% 126% 5,000 7,000 2,000
SB 1145 1,281,386 1,479,991 198,605 83% 96% a) 1,537,663 1,479,991 (57,672)
Prisoner Housing 77 ,809 77,809 83 % n/a b) 78 ,087 78,087
Des. Cty Video Lottery Grant 4 ,167 5,000 833 83 % 100% 5,000 5,000
Des Cty Court Security 75 ,833 74,783 (1 ,050) 83% 82% 91,000 91,000
Des Cty Juvenile Contract 3,483 3 ,224 (259) 83% 77% 4,180 4 ,180
Title III Reimbursement 125,000 40,358 (84,642) 83% 27% c) 150,000 150,000
Transport 833 465 (368) 83 % 46% 1,000 1,000
Other 3,570 3,570 83 % n/a 3 ,570 3 ,570
DC Fair & Expo Center 3,188 (3,188) 83% 0% 3,825 3 ,825
Inmate Commissary Fees 5 ,500 12,674 7,174 83 % 192% 6 ,600 14,000 7,400
Work Center Work Crews 41,667 32 ,910 (8,757) 83% 66% 50,000 50,000
Concealed Handgun Classes 2 ,917 3,225 308 83% 92% 3,500 3,500
Inmate Telephone Fee 40,000 69,069 29 ,069 83% 144% d) 48,000 84.000 36,000
Soc Sec Incentive-Fed 4,167 7 ,200 3,033 83% 144% 5,000 9 ,000 4,000
Miscellaneous 4 ,167 7,308 3,141 83 % 146% 5,000 8,500 3 ,500
Oregon Mentors 12 ,500 6,039 (6,461 ) 83% 40% 15,000 15,000
Debit Card Fee 194 194 83% n/a 200 200
Medical Services Reimb 13 ,333 11 ,646 (1,687) 83% 73% 16,000 16,000
Restitution 4 ,167 1,747 (2,420) 83% 35 % 5,000 5,000
Sheriff Fees 166,667 188,457 21 ,790 83% 94% 200,000 200,000
Interest 23,611 42,049 18,438 83% 148% 28,333 50,000 21,667
Interest on Unsegregated 2,944 1,288 (1,656) 83% 36% 3,533 3 ,533
Donations -"Shop with a Cop" 12,022 12,022 83% n/a e) 12,022 12,022
Donations 250 250 83% n/a 250 250
Sale of Reportable Assets 833 7,599 6,766 83% n/a 1,000 8,000 7,000
Total Revenues 14,230,127 17,090,856 2,860,729 83% 100% 17,076,150 17,757,308 681,158
TOTAL RESOURCES 19,338,798 23,181,590 3,842,792 83% 104% 22,184,821 23,848,042 1,663,221
REQUIREMENTS: 1 Exp. %1
Fund 255 Departments:
Sheriffs Services 2,019,759 1,941,831 77,928 83% 80% 2,423,711 2,379,625 44,086
Civil 686 ,746 624,830 61 ,916 83% 76% 824,095 748,995 75,100
Auto/Comm 530,791 465,510 65,281 83% 73% 636,949 635,415 1,534
Adult Jail 8,755,439 7,829 ,261 926,178 83% 75% 10,506,527 9,704,527 802,000
Court Security 238,835 230,715 8 ,120 83% 81% 286,602 275,402 11 ,200
Emergency Services 154,688 148,098 6 ,590 83% 80% 185,625 175 ,525 10,100
Special Services 773,514 637,647 135,867 83% 69% 928,217 908,751 19,466
Work Center 2 ,515,388 2,384 ,361 131,027 83% 79% 3 ,018,466 2,835,366 183,100
Training 164,967 126,713 38,254 83% 64% 197,961 174,090 23,870
Other (CODE , Forensic) 526,880 509,883 16,997 83% 81% 632,256 614,156 18,100
Non Dept -ISF Charges 30,574 30,574 (0) 83% 83% 36,689 36 ,689
Non Dept -Jamison DIS 166,667 100,000 66,667 83% 50% 200,000 200,000
Contingency 1,839,770 1,839,770 83% 0% 2,207,724 2,207,724
T ota l to Fund 255 18,404,018 15.029,422 3,374 ,595 22 ,084,821 18 ,688,541 3,396,280
Transfer to Reserve Fund (703) 83,333 100,000 (16,667) 83% 100% 100,000 100 ,000
Total Requirements 18,487,351 15,129,422 3,357,928 83% 68% 22 ,184 ,821 18,788,541 3,396,280
Net 851,447 8,052,168 7,200 ,721 5,059,501 5,059,501
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget 4.507,3521
• Payment to Sheriffs Fund adjusted monthly to equal actual expenditures attributable to countywide services .
a) Reduction in State Community Corrections funding for custody of SB 1145 inmates
b) Prisoner housing reimbursement SB 395
Page 4 c) Reimbursement requested semiannually in January and June
d) Change to new vendor resulting in revenue increase
e) Accounting change for Shop with a Cop donations
Fund 702 LED Rural
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30 , 2012
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital $2,936,523 $3,004,533 $ 68,010 100% 102% $2,936,523 $3,004,533 $ 68,010
Revenues
Tax Revenues -Current 6,123,438 7,194,837 1,071,399 83% 98% 7,348,125 7 ,426,095 77,970
Tax Revenues -Prior 214,167 324,316 110,149 83% 126% 257,000 324,316 67,316
Federal Grants & Reimb 10,000 11,377 1 ,377 83% 95% 12,000 12,000
Federal Grants-BLM 20,833 17,285 (3,548) 83% nJa 25,000 25,000
US Forest Service 65,625 39,375 (26 ,250) 83% 50% 78,750 78 ,750
State Grant 167,477 100,563 (66,914) 83% 50% 200,972 200,972
SB #1065 Court Assessment 50 ,000 41,477 (8,523) 83% 69% 60,000 60,000
Marine Board License Fee 118,610 73,663 (44,947) 83% 52% a) 142,332 142 ,332
Bureau of Reclamation 22,720 22,720 83% nfa b) 26 ,000 26,000
Des Cly General Fund Grant 480,120 (480,120) 83% 0% c) 576,144 466,144 (110,000)
Des Cly Transient Room Tax 1,728 ,213 1 ,728,213 83% 83% c) 2,073,856 2,183,856 110,000
Des Cly Tax/Fin Contract 540 540 83% 540 540
Cily of Sisters 374,968 374,968 83% 83% 449,961 449,961
Des Cly COD Contract 45,305 45 ,305 83% 83% 54,366 54,366
Des Cly Solid Waste Contr 45,305 45,305 83% 83% 54,366 54,366
Des Cly Clerk/Election 1,667 (1,667) 83% 0% 2,000 2,000
School Districts 66 ,667 23,445 (43 ,222) 83% 29% d) 80 ,000 40,000 (40,000)
Claims Reimbursement 24,719 24,719 83% nfa 24,719 24,719
Securily & Traffic Reimb 4 ,167 680 (3,487) 83% 14% 5,000 5 ,000
Seat Belt Program 10 ,000 6,790 (3,210) 83% 57% 12,000 12,000
Miscellaneous 6 ,667 12,867 6,200 83% 161% 8,000 14,000 6,000
False Alarm Fees 1,667 1,400 (267) 83% 70% 2,000 2,000
Restitution 2,219 2,219 83% nfa 5,000 5,000
Sheriff Fees 8 ,333 7,814 (519) 83% 78% 10,000 10,000
Court Fines & Fees 95 ,833 115,131 19,298 83% 100% 115,000 140,000 25,000
Impound Fees 5,833 3 ,700 (2,133) 83% 53% 7,000 7,000
Restitution -Street Crimes 417 (417) 83% 0% 500 500
Seizure/Forfeiture 1,324 1,324 83% nfa 1,324 1,324
Interest 8,333 19,406 11 ,073 83% 194% 10 ,000 20 ,000 10,000
Interest on Unsegregated 1,500 650 (850) 83% 36% 1,800 1,000 (800)
Grants-Private 7,000 7 ,000 83% nfa 7,000 7,000
Donations 10,155 10,155 83% nfa 10,155 10,155
Sale of Equip & Material 5 ,000 11,580 6,580 83% 193% 6 ,000 15,000 9 ,000
Sale of Reportable Assets 16,667 59 ,128 42,461 83% 296% e) 20 ,000 60,000 40,000
Total Revenues 9,676,812 10,3271952 651,140 50% 89% 11,612,172 11,881,396 269,224
TOTAL RESOURCES 12,613,335 13,332,484 719,149 50% 92% 14,548,695 14,885,929 337,234
REQUIREMENTS: 1 Exp. %1
Fund 255 Departments:
Sheriffs Services 133,525 128,373 5,152 83% 80% 160,230 157,316 2,914
Auto/Comm 887,715 778,536 109,179 83% 73% 1,065,258 1,062,692 2,566
Investigations 1 ,445,182 1,203,300 241 ,882 83% 69% 1,734,218 1 ,520,664 213,554
Patrol 6,670,587 6,586,243 84,344 83% 82% 8,004,704 7,862,704 142 ,000
Records 600,592 531,211 69,381 83% 74% 720,710 694,610 26,100
Special Services 339,120 279,554 59 ,566 83% 69% 406 ,944 398,410 8,534
Training 105,254 80,846 24,407 83% 64% 126,304 111,075 15,230
Non Dept -ISF Charges 30 ,452 30 ,452 83% 83% 36,542 36 ,542
Contingency 1828154 1 828154 83% 0% 2193784 2193784
Transfer to Reserve Fund (704) 83,333 100,000 (16,667) 83% 100% 100,000 100,000
Total Requirements .--:12:;.".;.;12;;..3...:..,9;;...1;..;;3__9;;..:,_7.;;..18'-',.;;..51....;5'----'-2-'-,4-'0..;;..5:..;.,3_97'-83% 67% 14,548,695 11,944,013 2 ,604,682
Net 489,422 3,613,969 3,124 ,546 2,941,916 2,941,916
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget 2 ,859,9151
• Payment to Sheriffs Fund adjusted monthly to equal actual expenditures a"ributable to rural services.
a) Reimbursement requested semiannually in January and June
b) BOR patrol contract signed after budget adopted
c) Received annually in June. Less will be received from General Fund due to additional resources available from Transient Room TaJPage 5
d) Reimbursement for SRO deputies will be less than planned from the Bend La Pine School District
e) Proceeds for sale of used patrol vehicles higher than planned
PUBLIC HEALTH
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
RESOURCES:
Year to Date
Actual Variance
Net Working Capital $1,596,918 $ 1,702,129 $ 105,211 100% 107% $1,596,918 $1,702,129 $ 105,211
Revenues
Medicare Reimbursement 500 770 270 83% 128% 600 800 200
Federal Grants 5,000 5,000 83% n/a 5,000 5,000
Stale Grant 2,258,453 2,119,375 (1 83% 78% 2,710,144 2,729,165 19,021
Child Dev & Rehab Center 20,506 17,824 83% 72% 24,607 30,759 6,152
State Miscellaneous 187,358 79,565 (107,793) 83% 35% 224,829 127,000 (97,829)
OMAP 436,542 508,762 72,220 83% 97% 523,850 582,000 58,150
Title 19 352 352 83% n/a 500 500
Planning Exp Proj 433,333 404,167 (29,166) 83% 78% 520,000 532,000 12,000
Local Grants 37,500 92,829 55,329 83% 206% 45,000 118,448 73,448
Water Program-Base Fee 35,000 28,158 83% 67% a) 42,000 38,000 (4,000)
Contract Payments 25,000 25,000 83% n/a 25,000 25,000
Water Work 46,514 28,295 (18,219) 83% 51% a) 55,817 55,817
H20 Insp-Priv Wells 167 (167) 83% 0% 200 200
Miscellaneous 4,129 4,129 83% n/a 7,000 7,000
Patient Insurance Fees 112,817 150,285 37,468 83% 111% 135,380 170,000 34,620
Health DepVPatient Fees 87,076 (11 83% 73% 118,770 110,000 (8,770)
Vital Records-Birth 25,500 31,890 6,390 83% 104% 30,600 35,000 4,400
Vital Records-Death 83,333 85,400 2,067 83% 85% 100,000 100,000
Environmental Health 586,958 718,629 131,671 83% 102% c) 704,350 735,185 30,835
NSF Fee 60 60 83% n/a 60 60
Interest on Investments 10,000 8,698 (1 83% 72% 12,000 10,000 (2,000)
Donations 21,692 9,781 (11,911) 83% 38% 26,030 15,000 (11,030)
Interfund Contract 165,323 125,703 (39,620) 83% 63% a) 198,387 160,000 (38,387)
Administrative Fee 83% 83%
Total Revenues (28,723) 83% 83% 5,487,620 5,601,990 114,370
Transfers In-General Fund 1,931,470 1,931,470 83% 83% 2,317,765 2,31
Transfers In-PH Res fund 25,000 22,500 (2,500) 83% 75% 30,000 30,000
Transfers In-Gen. fund Other 83% 75%
TOTAt RESOURCES 8,180,656 8,249,219 68,563 83% 87% 9,497,403 9,716,984 219,581
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Personal Services 5,158,943 5,071,961 86,982 83% 82% 6,190,732 6,100,000 90,732
Materials and Services 1,748,912 1,516,933 231,979 83% 72% 2,098,694 1,904,960
Outlay 109.583 109,583 83% 0% 131,500 89,000 42,500
Transfers Out 238,333 214,500 23,833 83% 75% 286,000 286.000
Contingency 83% n/a
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 7,914,502 6,803,394 1,111,108 83% 72% 9,497,403 8,379,960 1,117,443
NET (Resources -Requirements)
Beginning Net Working Capital per Pr()pc,sed Budget
a) Received quarterly, in arrears
b) Elimination of the State self sufficiency program
C) Line includes, among other items, 1) Restaurant Fees 2012 and 2) Pool 8. Fee (FY 2012 6
Budget=$110,000), These are due annually and collected primarily in December and January
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
Year to
Actual Variance
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital $3,268,759 $ 3,108,163 $ (160,596) 100% 95% $3,268,759 $ 3,108,163 $ (160,596)
Revenues
Marriage Licenses 4,583 4,520 (63) 83% 82% 5,500 5,600 100
Divorce Filing Fees 110,833 123,291 12,458 83% 93% 133,000 150,000 17,000
Domestic Partnership Fee 83 65 (18) 83% 65% 100 100
Federal Grants 230,539 152,978 (77,561) 83% 55% 276,647 276,647
State Grants 5,803,502 6,430,633 627,131 83% 92% a) 6,964,202 7,566,736 602,534
State Miscellaneous 103,478 32,522 (70,956) 83% 26% b)c) 124,173 61,860 (62,313)
ABHA 164,728 164,728 83% nla d) 170,000 170,000
Title 19 235,248 145,523 (89,725) 83% 52% 282,297 177,300 (104,997)
Liquor Revenue 87,500 105,757 18,257 83% 101% 105,000 141,500 36,500
School Districts 63,000 62,750 (250) 83% 83% 75,600 75,600
Miscellaneous 11,667 5,815 (5,852) 83% 42% 14,000 14,000
Patient Insurance Fees 94,750 157,650 62,900 83% 139% 113,700 170,000 56,300
Patient Fees 1,506 847 (659) 83% 47% 1,807 1,150 (657)
Interest on Investments 20,833 21,327 494 83% 85% 25,000 26,700 1,700
Rentals 10,917 12,500 1,583 83% 95% b) 13,100 13,100
Donations 108 108 83% nla 200 200
Administrative Fee 3,691,408 3,655,535 (35,873) 83% 83% 4,429,689 4,429,689
Sheriff 16,667 (16,667) 83% 0% e) 20,000 (20,000)
Interfund Contract-Gen Fund 105,833 109,686 3,853 83% 86% b) 127,000 127,000
Comm. on Children & Fam 725 725 83% nla 725 725
Total Revenues 10,592,347 11,186,960 594,613 83% 88% 12,710,815 13,407,907 697,092
Transfers In-General Fund
Transfers In-OHP-CDO
Transfers In-Acute Care Svcs
Transfers In-ABHA
1,052,930
226,168
210,430
250,719
1,052,930
330,066
210,430
290,605
103,897
39,886
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
122%
83%
97% f)
1,263,515
271,402
252,515
300,863
1,263,515
396,077
252,515
387,473
124,675
86,610
TOTAL RESOURCES 15,601,353 16,179,154 577,800 83% 90% 18,067,869 18,815,650 747,781
REQUIREMENTS: ! EXP.%!
Expenditures
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Contingency
8,690,155
4,838,124
325,000
238.333
964,945
7,904,922
4,473,430
111,406
214.500
785.233
364,694
213,594
23.833
964,945
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
76%
77%
29%
75%
nle
10,428,186
5,805,749
390.000
286.000
1,157,934
9,486,500
5,300,000
390,000
286,000
941,686
505,749
1,157,934
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 15,056,557 12,704,258 2,352,299 83".4 70% 18,067,869 15,462,500 2,605,369
NET (Resources -Requirements) 544,796 3,474,696 2,930,099 3,353,150 3,353,150
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget 3,320,9681
e) Department of Human Services Grant projected at amended contract amount
b) Received quarterly, in arrears
c) Elimination of State contract for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program
d) Revenue for Adult Mental Health Initiative Clients, not included in original budget
e) Funding for Mental Health Court from the Sheriffs Department eliminated
f) Transfer made quarterly Page 7
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
Vearto Date
Budget I Actual I Variance I FY % I Coli. % Budget
Year End
Projection Variance
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Revenues
Admin-Operations
Admin-GIS
Admin-Code Enforcement
Building Safety
Electrical
Contract Services
Env Health-On Site Prog
Planning-Current
Planning-Long Range
$ 229,822
20,292
833
138,917
1,000,733
215,958
133,500
233,667
562,417
211,438
131,776
23,033
1,596
142,293
792,719
189,173
79,543
238,435
450,247
192,383
$ (98,046)
2.741
763
3.376
(208.014)
(26,785)
(53,957)
4.768
(112.170)
(19,055)
100'..
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
57%
95%
160%
85%
66%
73%
50%
85%
67%
76%
a)
b)
b)
c)
b)
d)
$ 229,822
24,350
1,000
166,700
1.200,880
259,150
160,200
280,400
674,900
253,726
$ 131,776
27,000
1,900
171,500
1,025,000
231,000
106,100
291,000
575,000
235,000
(98,046)
2,650
900
4,800
(175,880)
(28,150)
(54,100)
10,600
(99,900)
(18,726)
Total Revenues 2,517,755 2,109,423 (408,332) 83'. 70"10 3,021,306 2,663,500 (357,806)
Trans In-GF
Trans In-GF for Lng Rng Ping
Trans In-Other
TOTAL RESOURCES
608,023
412,800
83
3,768,483
524,690
412,880
3.178,770
(83,333)
80
(83)
(589,713)
83%
83%
83%
83"/"
72%
83%
0%
71%
729,625
495,360
100
4,476,213
729,625
495,360
4,020,261
(100)
(455,952)
REQUIREMENTS:
EXPENDITURES & TRANSFERS
Admin-Operations
Admin-GIS
Admin-Code Enforcement
Building Safety
Electrical
Contract Services
Env Health-On Site Pgm
Planning-Current
Planning-Long Range
Transfers Out (DIS Fund)
Contingency
1,176,515
106,463
170,475
468,360
197,850
138,074
119,257
515,835
399,005
144,904
293,440
1,167,671
103,145
173,110
461,976
179,758
141,926
124,638
491,415
374,386
160,242
8,844
3,318
(2,635)
6,384
18,092
(3,852)
(5,381)
24.420
24,619
(15,338)
293,440
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
Exp. %1
83%
81%
85%
82%
76%
86%
87%
79%
78%
92%
n/a
e)
1)
d)
g)
1,411,818
127,755
204,570
562,032
237,420
165,689
143,108
619.002
478,806
173,885
352,128
1,403,590
123,990
210,679
551,447
230,040
171,713
144.862
608.794
452,033
173,885
8,228
3,765
(6,109)
10,585
7,380
(6,024)
(1,754)
10,208
26,773
352,128
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 3,730,178 3,378,268 351,910 83% 75% 4,476,213 4,071,033 405,180
NET (Resources -Requirements) 38,305 (199,498} 1237.8031
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget
Revenues 2,109,423
Expenditures 3,378,268
Net from Operations ~1,268,845}
a) GIS revenue is sporadic based on the frequency of customer requests
b) Fall activity less than anticipated
c) Contract payments from Redmond are currently on hold pending finalization of a new contract
d) As Tumalo area wetland inventory grant will not be received, budgeted expenses will not occur
e) Year to date actual includes payout to retired employee
f) Extra Help expenditures occur primarily in the summer months
g) Transfers recorded November ($160,242) & May ($13,643)
i50,772~ (50,772)
4,000 I
3.021,306
4,476,213
(1,454,907)
2,663.500
4,071.033
(1,407,533)
(357,806)
405,180
47,374
Page 8
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Revenues
System Development Charge
Federal Reimbursements
Federal Grant (ARRA)
Mineral Lease Royalties
Forest Receipts
State Miscellaneous
Motor Vehicle Revenue
City of Bend
City of Redmond
City of Sisters
City of La Pine
Admin Reoovery (SOC)
Miscellaneous
Road Vacations
Interest on Investments
Parking Fees
Interfund Contract
Equipment Repairs
Vehicle Repairs
LID Construction
Vegetation Management
Forester
Car Washes
Car Rental
Sale of Equip & Material
Total Revenues
Trans In -Solid Waste
Trans In • Transp SOC
Trans In-Road Imp Res
TOTAL RESOURCES
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Contingency
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS
ROAD
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30. 2012
Year to Date
Budqet I
$3,417,158 $
500.000
16.667
33.333
1.092.635
416.701
9,450,000
229.167
291,667
8.333
8,333
833
16,667
833
16,667
120
608,333
166.667
75.000
8.333
59.583
20.833
2.917
527,500
Actual I Variance IFY % I CoiL %
3,417,158 $ 0 100% 100%
924 924 83% nfa
600.000 100.000 83% 100% a)
20.000 3.333 83% 100% b)
137.761 104,428 83% 344% c)
1.322.661 230.026 83% 101% d)
500.041 83.340 83% 100% e)
8,660.748 (789.252) 83% 76% f}
29.941 (199.226) 83% 11% g)
4.248 (287,419) 83% 1% g)
(8.333) 83% 0% g)
(8.333) 83% 0% g)
2,101 1,268 83% 210%
28.464 11.797 83% 142%
1.500 667 83% 150%
16,443 (224) 83% 82%
(120) 83% 0%
(608.333) 83% 0% h)
179.699 13.032 83% 90%
(75,000) 83% 0%
(8,333) 83% 0% h)
(59.583) 83% 0% h)
(20.833) 83% 0% h)
4.064 1.147 83% 116%
758 758 83% nfa
680.176 152.676 83% 107%
13,551,122 12,189,529 (1,361,593) 83% 75%
238.144 214.330 (23,814) 83% 75%
208.333 187,500 (20,833) 83% 75%
10.000 (10,000) 83% 0%
17,424,757
4,679,436
8,962.593
1,030,576
500.000
1,682,627
16,008,517 (1,395,407) 83% 86%
I Exp.%1
4,459.948 219,488 83% 79%
7,141,715 1,820,878 83% 66% i)
75.288 955,288 83% 6% j)
600,000 (100,000) 83% 100%
1,682,627 83% nfa
16,855,232 12,276,951 4,578,281 83% 61%
Budqet
YearEnd
Projection Variance
$ 3,417,158 $ 3,417,158 $ 0
924 924
600.000 600.000
20.000 20.000
40.000 140.000 100.000
1.311.162 1,322.661 11,499
500.041 1.365.151 865,110
11.340.000 10.460.748 (879,252)
275.000 29,941 (245.059)
350,000 350.000
10,000 (10.000)
10.000 (10.000)
1.000 2.500 1.500
20.000 32.000 12.000
1,000 1,500 500
20.000 19,731 (269)
144 144
730.000 746.579 16,579
200.000 220.000 20.000
90.000 78.800 (11,200)
10,000 (10,000)
71,500 40.175 (31.325)
25.000 27.709 2.709
3.500 5,000 1.500
1.000 1.000
633.000 842.810 209.810
16,261,347 16,307,373 46,026
285,773 285,773
250.000 250,000
12,000 (12.000)
20,226,278 20,260,304 34,026
5.615.323 5,348,551 266,772
10.755,112 9,883,998 871,114
1,236,691 85,936 1,150,755
600,000 600,000
2,019,152 2,019,152
20,226,278 15,918,465 4,307,793
NET (Resources· Requirements) 569,525 3,731,566 3,182,874 4,341,819 4,341,819
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget 4,719,551 I
a) Revenue received in November at completion of the Cascade Lakes chip seal project
b) Payment received in December
c) Mineral leases higher than anticipated
d) Received annually in January
e) Annual payment received in August, plus payments rrom FY 2010 & 2011 previously reserved for 19th St expected to be received in FY 2012
f) Revenues trending less than estimates provided by ODOT
g) Billed upon completion of work
h) Payments to be received in June 2012 from other Road Department funds
Page 9 i) Expenditures are seasonal and higher during summer. YTD includes $2.5 million paid to Knife River on the
Full Depth Reclamation Project in South County
j) Budget includes $1,096.691 for future projects that will not be expended in FY 2012
ADULT PAROLE & PROBATION
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Revenues
DOC Measure 57
State Miscellaneous
Alternate Incarceration
State Subsidy
SB 1145
Probation Work Crew Fees
Miscellaneous
Electronic Monitoring Fee
Probation Superv. Fees
Interest on Investments
Interfund -Sheriff
Crime Prevention Grant
CFC-Domestic Violence
Total Revenues
Transfers In-General Fund
TOTAL RESOURCES
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Contingency
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS
Budget
YearEnd
Projection Variance
Year to Date
Budget
$ 560,000
181,125
3,584
25,765
10,833
2,379,715
20,000
3,417
141,667
166,667
7,500
41,667
41,667
62,360
3,085,967
281,910
3,927,877
2,640,573
739,075
83
24,000
430,812
I Actual JVariance !FY % I Coil. %
$ 634,125 $ 74,125 100% 113%
219,240 38,115 83% 101%
4,301 717 83% 100%
(25,765) 83% 0%
13,826 2,993 83% 106%
2,748,556 368,841 83% 96%
17,840 (2,160) 83% 74%
2,130 (1,287) 83% 52%
107,380 (34,287) 83% 63%
155,690 (10,977) 83% 78%
5,137 (2,363) 83% 57%
41,667 83% 83%
37,500 (4,167) 83% 75%
56,124 (6,236) 83% 75%
3,409,391 323,424 83% 92%
281,910 83% 83%
4,325,426 397,549 83% 94%
1Exp. %1
2,527,592 112,981 83% 80%
600,034 139,041 83% 68%
83 83% 0%
21,600 2,400 83% 75%
430,812 83% nJa
3,834,543 3,149,226 685,317 83% 68%
a)
a)
b)
c)
c)
d)
d)
e)
f)
$ 560,000 $ 634,125 $
217,350 219,240
4,301 4,301
30,918
13,000 13,826
2,855,659 2,748,953
24,000 21,180
4,100 2,550
170,000 125,446
200,000 182,674
9,000 9,000
50,000 50,000
50,000 50,000
74,832 74,832
74,125
1,890
(30,918)
826
(106,706)
(2,820)
(1,550)
(44,554)
(17,326)
3,703,160 3,502,002 (201,158)
338,292 338,292
4,601,452 4,474,419 (127,033)
3,168,688 3,084,689 83,999
886,890 800,000 86,890
100 100
28,800 28,800
516,974 516,974
4,601,452 3,913,489 687,963
NET (Resources· Requirements) 93,334 1,176,200 1,082,866 560,930 560,930
Beginning Net Working capital per Proposed Budget 570,000 I
a) Annual allocation received in January
b) AlP funds are being spent down from previous year; we do not anticipate any new funds this year
c) Payments received from State at beginning of quarter
d) Interfund grant received end of each quarter
e) Less than planned expenditures due to open positions
f) Less than planned expenditures due to Measure 57 tax amount
Page 10
CHILDREN & FAMILIES COMMISSION
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
Vearto Date
Budget I Actual I Variance IFY % I Coli. % Budget
YearEnd
Projection Variance
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capita. $ 467,111 $ 556,143 $ 89,032 100% 119% $ 467,111 $ 556,143 $ 89,032
Revenues
Federal Grants 249,573 192.200 (57.373) 83% 64% a) 299,488 305,416 5,928
Title IV -Family Sup/Pres 32,774 30.155 (2.619) 83% 77% alb) 39.329 39.534 205
HealthyStart Medicaid 79,167 19.205 (59,962) 83% 20% a)c) 95,000 85.000 (10,000)
Level 7 Services 214,985 154,986 (59.999) 83% 60% a)b) 257.982 196.898 (61.084)
State Prevention Funds 20,417 79.801 59.384 83% 326% d) 24.500 79.801 55,301
HealthyStart IR-S-G 259.865 217,498 (42,367) 83% 70% alb) 311.838 258.203 (53.635)
OCCF Grant 454,336 433.712 (20.624) 83% 80% alb) 545.203 509.579 (35,624)
Program Fees 3.213 3.213 83% n/a e) 3,500 3,500
Charges for Svcs-Misc 6.667 1,826 (4.841) 83% 23% f) 8,000 3.000 (5,000)
Court Fines & Fees 65.000 73,974 8,974 83% 95% g) 78,000 79,485 1.485
Interest on Investments 4.167 3,723 (444) 83% 74% 5.000 5,000
Donations 71 71 83% nJa e) 300 300
Interfund Grants 100,729 316,041 215,312 83% 261% h) 120.875 320,875 200,000
Total Revenues 1,487,680 1,526,405 38,725 83% 86% 1,785,215 1,886,591 101,376
Trans from General Fund 227,470 227,470 83% 83% 272,960 272,960
Total Transfers In 227,470 227.470 83% 83"1. 272,960 272,960
TOTAL RESOURCES 2,182,261 2,310,018 127,757 83% 91% 2,525,286 2,715,694 190,408
REQUIREMENTS: I Exp.%1
Expenditures
Personal Services 504.266 494,390 9,876 83% 82% i) 605,119 589,664 15,455
Materials and Services 1,405,816 1.152.725 253,091 83% 68% j) 1,686.979 1.631.476 55.503
Capital Outlay 83 83 83% 0% 100 100
Contingency 194.240 194,240 83% nJa 233.088 233.088
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 2,104,405 1,647,115 457,290 83% 65% 2,525,286 2,221,240 304,046
NET (Resources -Requirements) 77,856 662,903 585,047 494,454 494,454
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget 511,9941
a} Grant payments received normally within 60 days after the end of each quarter
b} FY 2012 and FY 20131ntergovemmental Agreement finalized funding levels from OCCF. Community Schools grant included in
year-end projection at $9,484. Additional Casey Foundation grant of $11 ,214 received
c) Medicaid revenues reduced due to lower projections
d} Youth Suicide Prevention grant increased by $5.000. Runaway/homeless youth grant from DHS not budgeted for $48,122
e} Youth Suicide Prevention training donations & fees expected to be received
f) Charges for services lower than projected
g} Court fees projected to be higher than estimated in the original budget
h) Two additional grants of $55,000 & $180,000 awarded. $55.000 received in last fiscal year, $20,000 grant from OHP expected
i} Personnel projection increased due to TML sell back. overtime. and increased hours for EC Specialist
j) Sub-grant expenditures paid quarterly. Federal grant amount increased and SPF-5IG grant expenditures added Page 11
$21.214 in expenditures added. remaining $10,000 for staff expenses
SOLID WASTE
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
Year to Dale
Budget
Year End
Projection Variance
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Revenues
Miscellaneous
Franchise 3% Fees
Commercial Disp. Fees
Private Disposal Fees
Franchise Disposal Fees
Yard Debris
Special Waste
Interest
Leases
Donations
Sale of Reportable Assets
Recyclables
Bond Issuance
Premium
Budget
$1,092,508
18,333
166,667
716,667
1,095,000
3,333,333
60,833
20,833
6,250
25,000
4,195,250
132,028
I Actual I Variance I FY % I Coli. %
$ 1,141,691 $ 49,183 100% 105%
15,437 (2,896) 83% 70%
205,107 38,440 83% 103%
702,283 (14,384) 83% 82%
1,058,310 (36,690) 83% 81%
3,214,587 (118,746) 83% 80%
69,477 8,644 83% 95% a)
4,794 (16,039) 83% 19% b)
8,903 2,653 83% 119%
8,594 8,593 83% nfa c)
2,880 2,880 83% nfa d)
16,494 16,494 83% nfa e)
65,761 40,761 83% 219% f)
5,044,437 849,187 83% 100% g)
148,507 16,479 83% 94% g)
$1,092,508
22,000
200,000
860,000
1,314,000
4,000,000
73,000
25,000
7,500
1
30,000
5,034,300
158,434
$ 1,141,691 $ 49,183
22,000
210,000 10,000
860,000
1,314,000
4,000,000
80,000 7,000
10,000 (15,000)
9,500 2,000
10,394 10,393
2,880 2,880
16,494 16,494
72,000 42,000
5,044,437 10,137
148,507 !9,927~
Total Revenues 9,770,195 10,565,571 795,376 83"10 90% 11,724,235 11,800,212 75,977
TOTAL RESOURCES 10,862,703 11,707,262 844,559 83'" 91% 12,816,743 12,941,903 125,160
REQUIREMENTS
Expenditures
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Debt Service
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out-Road
Trans Out-Post Closure
Trans Out-Equip Reserve
Trans Out-Capital Res
Contingency
1,392,998
2,484,560
5,062,956
143,333
238,144
333,333
208,333
353,333
463,628
1,340,695
2,154,755
5,503,172
160,400
214,330
200,000
250,000
212,000
52,303
329,805
(440,216)
(17,067)
23,814
133,333
(41,667)
141,333
463,628
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
Exp. %1
80%
72%
91%
93%
75%
50%
100%
50%
nfa
g)
h)
h)
1,671,598
2,981,472
6,075,547
172,000
285,773
400,000
250,000
424,000
556,353
1,623,865
3,002,274
6,075,547
179,930
285,773
400,000
250,000
424,000
47,733
(20,802)
(7,930)
556,353
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 10,680,618 10,035,352 645,266 83% 78% 12,816,743 12,241,389 575,354
NET (Resources -Requirements) 182,085 1,671,910 1,489,825 700,514 700,514
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget 700,513 I
a) Seasonal item-Fall and Spring
b) Dependent on special clean-ups such as asbestos and contaminated soil
c) Revenue from rent on Rickard Road property, not included in Original budget
d) Incentive for energy efficient lighting upgrade in Knott Transfer Station building
e) Sold glass crusher at auction
f) Recycling markets are higher than expected. Often it can be seasonal Page 12
g) Refunding of FF&C 2003 debt
h) Transfers will be completed in June
RESOURCES:
Beginning Net Working Capital
Rewnues
Inter-fund Charges:
General liability
Property Damage
Vehicle
Workers' Compensation
Unemployment
Claims Reimb-Workers' Compensation
Claims Reimb-Gen Uab/Property
Process Fee-Events/Parades
Miscellaneous
Skid Car Training
Interest on Investments
Other Interest
TOTAL REVENUES
Transfers In-General Fund
TOTAL RESOURCES
AppropriationslExpendltures
Direct Insurance Costs:
GENERAL LIABILITY
Settlement / Benefit
Defense
Professional Service
Insurance
Repair / Replacement
Total General Liability
PROPERTY DAMAGE
Insurance
Repair I Replacement
Total Property Damage
VEHICLE
Professional Service
Insurance
Loss Prevention
Repair / Replacement
Total Vehicle
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
Settlement I Benefit
Professional Service
Insurance
Loss Prevention
Miscellaneous
Total Workers' Compensation
UNEMPLOYMENT -SettlemenUBenefits
Total Direct Insurance Costs
Insurance Administration:
Personal Services
Materials & Service
Capital Outlay
Total Insurance Administration
Transfers Out
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS
NET
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget
* Contingency is $2,030,893.
RISK MANAGEMENT
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
Year to Date
Budget I Actual I Variance I % of FY I % Coli.
$2,100,000 $2,039,937 ($60,063) 100% 97%
209,046
259,694
148,592
1,228,287
210,361
4,167
16,667
1,250
42
15,000
12,500
42
2,105,646
166,667
209,046
259,694
148,592
1,228,287
210,630
548
64.732
1,665
11,410
11,656
2,146,260
0
(0)
0
0
269
(3,618)
48.065
415
(42)
(3,590)
(844)
(42)
40,614
{166,6671
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
11%
324%
111%
0%
63%
78%
0%
85%
0%
Budget
YearEnd
PrOjection Variance
$2,100,000 $2,039,937 ($60,063)
250,855 250,855
311,633 311,633
178,310 178,310
1,473,944 1,473,944
252,433 252,433
5,000 5,000
20,000 75.000 55,000
1.500 2,000 500
50 50
18,000 14,000 (4,000)
15,000 15,000
50 50
2,526,775 2,578,275 51,500
200,000 200,000
4,372,313 4,186,197 (186,116) 83% 87%
I % Ex~. I
118,228
194,139
5,677
131,591
5,517
395,833 455,153 (59,320) 83% 96% a)
116,268
67,605
250,186 183,873 66,313 83% 61%
157
376
14,053
78,343
84,571 92,929 (8,359) 83% 92%
812,240
5,000
105,997
48,432
32,959
1,000,000 1,004,628 (4,628) 83% 84% a)
208,333 184,953 23,380 83% 74%
1,938,923 1,921,537 17,387 83% 83%
245.298 217,383 27,915 83% 74%
139.764 114,851 24,913 83% 68%
83 83 83% 0%
385,145 332,234 52,911 83% 72%
6,000 5,400 600 83% 75%
2,330,068 2,259,171 70,897 83% 81%
2,042,244 1,927,026 ,115,2181 *
4,826,775 4,818,212 (8,563)
475,000 475,000
300,223 240,000 60,223
101,485 100,000 1,485
1,200,000 1,200,000
250,000 250,000
2,326,708 2,265,000 61,708
294,357 294,357
167,717 167.717
100 100
462,174 462,074 100
7,200 7,200
2,796,082 2,734,274 61,808
2,030,893 2.083,938 53,245
I 2,000,000 I
Page 13
a) Expenditures are projected to exceed current appropriation. Appropriation transfer is pending.
DESCHUTES COUNTY 911
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30. 2012
Actual Variance
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital $6,400,000 $ 7,559,639 $ 1,159,639 1000/. 1180/. $6,400,000 $7,559,639 $ 1,159,639
Revenues
Year to Date
Property Taxes -Current 4,986,478 5,917,109 930.631 83% 99% 5.983.773 6,100,289 116,516
Property Taxes -Prior 166,667 251,926 85,259 83% 126% 200,000 254,005 54.005
Federal Grants 184,578 184,578 83% nfa 203.958 203,958
State Reimbursement 45,000 23,514 (21,486) 83% 44% a) 54,000 27,000 (27.000)
Telephone User Tax 625,000 446,015 (178,985) 83% 59% 750,000 750,000
Grant -Sunriver Serv Dist 22,500 22,500 83% nfa 22,500 22,500
Data Network Reimb. 22,667 34,698 12,031 83% 128% b) 27,200 34,698 7,498
Jefferson County 29,167 28,048 (1,119) 83% 80% 35,000 35,000
User Fee 43,333 6,469 (36,864) 83% 12% c) 52,000 52,000
Police RMS User Fees 165,833 22,428 (143,405) 83% 11% d) 199,000 199,000
Contract Payments 26,667 33,061 6,394 83% 103% b) 32,000 33,061 1,061
Miscellaneous 7,500 9,752 2,252 83% 108% 9.000 11,750 2,750
Interest 29,167 45,953 16,786 83% 131% 35,000 55.000 20,000
Interest on Unsegregated Tax 667 535 (132) 83% 67% 800 800
Donations 750 750 83% nfa 750 750
Total Revenues 6,148,146 7,027,336 879,190 83% 95% 7,377,773 7,779,811 402,038
TOTAL RESOURCES
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Contingency
12,548,146
3,534.028
1,606,130
945,517
416,667
4,979,136
14,586,974
3.172.780
1,365,725
492,031
500,000
2,038,828
361,248
240,405
453,486
(83,333)
4,979,136
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
106%
% Exp·1
75%
71%
43%
100%
nfa
e)
13,777,773
4.240.834
1.927,356
1.134,620
500,000
5,974,963
15,339,450
3,800,000
1,927,356
1.134.620
500,000
1,561,677
440.834
5.974,963
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 11,481,478 5,530,536 5,950,942 83% 40% 13,777,773 7,361,976 6,415,797
NET (Resources -Requirements) 1,066,668 9,056,438 7,989,770 7,977,474 7,977,474
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget 8,000,000 I
a) GISfMSAG monthly billings to Oregon Emergency Management-projected revenue overestimated. Projection revised to $27,000
Awaiting payment receipts for February and April
b) Invoiced annually; all expected revenues received
c) US Forest Service invoiced $2156.25 quarterly. Crooked River Ranch invoiced annually June 30th. Payment will not be received
from Crooked River Ranch until FY 2013
d) Fees will be billed out this month
e) Entire amount budgeted transferred to reserve fund in September
Page 14
Health Benefits Trust
RESOURCES
Beg. Net WOI1Ilng Capital $ 15,500,000 $ 15,829,888 $ 329,888 100% o $15,500,000 $15,829,888 329,888
Revenues:
Intemal Premium Charges 10.013.093 10,060,175 47,083 83% 84% 12,015,711 12,070,000 54.289
prr Emp -Add'i Prem 41,667 26.143 (15,524) 83% 52% 50,000 31.000 (19.000)
Employee Prem Contribution 525.000 496,520 (28.480) 83% 79% 630,000 595,000 (35.000)
COIC 1.050,000 1,086,904 36,904 83% 86% 1,260,000 1.300.000 40,000
Retiree I COBRA Co-Pay 416,667 703,779 287,112 83% 141% 500,000 800,000 300.000
Fees for Clinic Services 200 200 83% nla 200 200
Federal Payment (ERRP) 150,431 150,431 83% nla' 150.431 150,431
Prescription Rebates 81,117 81,117 83% nla 81.117 81,117
Claims Reimbursements 4.535 4,535 83% nla 4,535 4.535
Vending Machines (Wellness Rebate) 51 51 83% nla 51 51
Interest __.....=.66;:.:.;;;..66::.;7:-_.-..,;86=,3:.:5:.,:.7__--:.19;:;.;•.=.69;;;..1"-83% 108% 80.000 100.000 20.000
Total Revenues 12,113,093 12,898,212 583,120 83% 87% 14,535,711 15,132,334 596,823
TOTAL RESOURCES 27,813,093 28,528,101 913,008 92% 103% 30,035,711 30,962,222 928,511
REQUIREMENTS
Expenditures:
PfwlllOntIl SfH'Vlce. 126,015 118,603 7,412 83% 78% 151.218 151.218
lIIate"aI. & Service.
Claims Paid-Medical/Rx 10,395.237 10,449,234 (53.997) 83% 84% a) 12.474.284 12,586,646 (112,362)
Claims Paid-OentalMsion 1,553,311 1,614.538 (61.227) 83% 87% a) 1.863.974 1.944,784 (80.811)
Refunds (66,590) 66,590 83% nla (66.590) 66.590
Insurance Expense 291,667 295,217 (3.550) 83% 84% 350.000 350.000
State Assessments 125,000 155.263 (30,263) 83% 104% 150,000 155,263 (5.263)
Administration Fee 266,667 265.095 1,572 83% 83% 320,000 320,000
PPOFee 41,667 40.648 1.018 83% 81% 50.000 50,000
Health Impact 45.833 42.925 2.908 83% 78% 55.000 55.000
Other -Administration 51,932 89,522 (37.591) 83% 144% 62.318 95,000 (32,682)
Other -Wellness __-.;;;.65.;..:,.;;..70"'3;;....._......;2;;;;2"-,8;;.,;;3;".;4__-...;.4""2.""87.;.,.0... 83% 29% 78.844 78,844
Admin & Wellness 12,963,032 13,027,289 (64,257) 83% 84% 15,555,638 15,720,186 -164,528
Deschutes On-site Clinic
Healthstat 797.667 564.729 232,938 83% 59% 957,200 857,200 100,000
MedlcationslOrugslVacc 270.833 127.241 143.593 83% 39% 325.000 225,000 100,000
Medical Supplies 2.500 22,481 (19,981) 83% 749% 3,000 30,000 (27.000)
Equipment 3.333 150 3.183 83% 4% 4.000 1.000 3.000
Miscellaneous ___4"",5;;.,;4""2__--..;9;..:.•.;.;18""1__.......(4-'-',6.=,;3:;..;;9;.<..) 83% 168% 5.450 10,000 (4,550)
ToI8l DOC 1,078,875 723,781 355,094 83% 56% 1,294,850 1,123,200 171,450
Deschutes On-site Pharmacy
Remodeling Costs 110.871 (110.871) 83% nla 110.871 (110,871)
T0181 Pharmacy 110,871 (110,871) 83% "fa 110,871 (110,871)
Capital Outlay 167 167 83% nla 200 200
Contingency 10.987,686 10.987,686 83% nla 13.185,223 -13.185.223
TOTAL EXPEND/REQUIREMNTS 25,155,774 13,980,544 11,175,230 83% 47% 30,035,711 16,954,237 13,081,474
NET (Resources -Requirements) 2,457,318 14,545,558 12,088,238 14,007,985 14,007,985
Beginning Net Working Capital per Requested Budget 14,500,000 I
• Early Retirement Reinsurance Program (ERRP). Federal program to help pay the cost of insuring retirees who are not yet Medicare eligible.
a) Projection based on annualizing 44 weeks of claims paid. YTO actual is $272.663 per week.
Page 15
I
Deschutes County· Fair and Expo Center
YTD·Budget Basis Commissioners
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
Year to Date
Budget (10/121
of annual) Actual 1 Variance 1 FY % 1 Coli. %
Year End
Budget Projection Variance
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Receipts:
Special Events Revenues
Interest
Storage
Camping at F & E
Horse Stall Rental
Concession % -Food
Rights (Signage, etc.)
Grants
Interlund Contract
Miscellaneous
Total Receipts
$ 75,000
504,167
1,250
48,333
5,000
25,000
183,333
93,333
39,167
5,673
905,256
$ (40,601) $ (115,601)
438,518
135
37,072
7,900
10,179
125,213
44,000
46,667
10,215
719,898
(65,649)
(1,115)
(11.261)
2.900
(14,822)
(58,120)
(49,333)
7.500
4,542
(185,358)
100%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
-54%
72%
9%
64%
132%
34%
57%
39%
n/a
99%
n/a
66%
$ 75,000
605,000
1,500
58,000
6,000
30,000
220,000
112,000
47,000
6,807
1,086,307
$ (40,601) $ (115,601)
558,518 (46,482)
385 (1,115)
37,072 (20,928)
10,900 4,900
28,179 (1,821 )
155,213 (64,787)
127,000 15,000
33,424 33,424
47,001 1
11,202 4,395
1,008,894 (77,413)
Transfers In
General Fund (001)
Room Tax (160)
Welcome Center (170)
Annual County Fair (619)
Reserve Fund (617)
Total Transfers In
141,667
21,453
69,000
183,333
83
415,537
291,670
21,450
69,000
220,000
602,120
36,667
(83)
36,583
83%
83%
83%
83%
83%
172%
83%
83%
100%
0%
170,000
25,744
82,800
220,000
100
498,644
370,000
25,744
82,800
220,000
698,544
200,000
pOO~
199,900
TOTAL RESOURCES 1,395,793 1,281,417 (114,376) 83% 77% 1,659,951 1,666,837 6,886
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures:
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Debt Service
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
721,682
557,304
95,890
83
1,374,959
691,066
525,614
71,266
1,287,946
30,616
31,690
24,624
83
87,013
1 Exp. %1
83% 80%
83% 79%
83% 62%
83% 0%
866,018
668,765
115.068
100
1,649,951
815,264
712,998
113,695
1,641,957
50,754
(44,233)
1,373
100
7,994
Transfers Out· Reserve Fund 8,333 10,000 (1,667) 83% 100% 10,000 10,000
Contingency 83% n/a
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 1,383,293 1,297,946 85,346 83% 78% 1,659,951 1,651,957 7,994
NET (Resources Requirements) 12,500 (16,530) (29,030) 14,880 14,880
Beginning Net Working Capital per Proposed Budget 46,373
Page 16
00.
u ~
~
0
~
~
~
~
<
~
~
~
<
u
til::s
0.. e
CI:S
U
>.
~ :::::s
0
U
..s:
1::
0 z
•
::::::-
e
(1)..s:
(1)....s: ~
(1)
CO
•
II
!
.,
i
1
Deschutes County
North County Services Building
Inception through April 30, 2012
ACTUAL
Received and
Expended
Encumbrances
Mommitm~
Project to
D~
Project
Budget
PROJECTION
Projected Variance
FY 2013
Requested
Bu~et
RESOURCES:
Beginning Net Working Capital
Loan Proceeds, net of issuance co
Resources from Fund 140
Resources from Fund 142
Transfer in
Interest Revenue
Total Resources
1,402,013
25,000
600,000
3,176
2,030,189
1,402,013
25,000
600,000
3,176
2,030,189
a)
b)
2,000,000
1,402,013
25,000
600,000
4,027,013
3,400,000
1,402,013
25,000
600,000
3,176
5,430,189
1,400,000
3,176
1,403,176
300,000
3,400,000
100,000
10,000
3,810,000
EXPENDITURES:
Materials &Services
Architecture/Design
Engineering
Planning
Interfund Charges
Fees, Permits &SDCs
Utilities
Travel -Meals/Mileage Reimb
Total Materials & Services
Capital Outlay
Land and Building
Remodel
Total Capital Outlay
Contingency
Total Expenditures
Net
45,075
1,386
84
7,251
3
53,799
1,402,013
230
1,402,243
1,456,042
574,147
4,925
4,925
4,925
(4,925)
50,000
1,386
84
7,251
3
58,724
1,402,013
230
1,402,243
1,460,967
569,222
b)
a)
100,000
10,000
1,663
60,000
2,000
173,663
1,402,013
2,451 1337
3,853,350
4,027,013
100,000
10,000
1,663
60,000
2,000
3
173,666
1,402,013
3 1851,337
5,253,350
5,427,016
3,173
ill
(3)
(1,400,000)
(1,400,000)
(1,400,003)
3,173
25,000
75,000
11,639
75,000
10,000
196,639
3,300,000
3,300,000
313,361
3,810,000
a) The building was purchased in FY 2011 with resources from Project Development and Debt Reserve -$1,402,013
b) $25,000 was paid to the architect in FY 2011 with resources from General County Projects Fund (Fund 142)
..
North County Services Building -Fund 462
ENCUMBRANCES AND COMMITMENTS
Through April 30, 2012
Vendor Description
Commitment
Amount Amount Paid
Balance
Due
BLRB/GGL Architects Architectural Services 50,000 45,075 4,925
50,000 45,075 4,925
Deschutes County
Bethlehem Inn (Fund 128)
Ten Months Ended April 30, 2012
Budaet Actual Variance IFy%1 Coil. %1 Budaet Projection 1 Variance1
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital $(2,711,235) $(2,716,581) $ (5,346) 100% 100% $ (2,711,235) $ (2,716,581) $ (5,346)
Revenues
Grants -Private 2,334,856 -(2,334,856) 83% 0% 2,801.827 -(2.801.827)
Lease Payments 20.340 20,340 83% 83% 24,408 24,408
Total Revenues 2,355,196 20,340 (2,334,856) 83% 1% 2,826,235 24,408 (2,801,827)
TOTAL RESOURCES (356,039) (2,696,241) (2,340,202) 83% ·2345% 115.000 (2,692,173) (2,807,173)
REQUIREMENTS: Exp. %1
Expenditures
Debt Service:
Interest Expense 12,500 15,335 (2,835) 83% 102% a) 15,000 17,000 (2,OOO)
Interest Payment 83,333 83,333 83% 0% 100,000 100,000
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 95,833 15,335 80,499 83% 13% 115,000 17,000 100,000
NET (Resources· Requirements) (451,873) (2,711,576)
a) Interest on April 2012 negative cash balance: $1,397.57.
b) Inception through April 30, 2012
Revenues -Lease Payments
Expenditures:
LandlBuilding (Amertitle) -July 2007
Hickman Williams
City of Bend -May 2008
KNEXCO
Kleinfelder
Total expended on facility
Interest on Negative Cash Balance
Total expended
Net
$ 44,748
2.241,313
17,578
250,000
5,289
3,732
2,517,913
238,411
2,756,324
$(2,711,576)
(2,259,703) b) (2,709,173, (2,707,173)
/
Deschutes County
General Support Services -BOCC
Conference/Seminar, Education/Training and Travel Expenditures
and
BOCC -County College Expenditures
FY 2012
eocc Conference & Travel I Jul I Aug I Sep I Oct I Nov I Dec I Jan I Feb I Mar I Apr IYTD Total.
:Tammy Baney ....___....____~=-=-'-_~_
~~~T~~a~sEdlJclTraining 665=~~-20~OC=~=~~~-=~---~~J~
Accommodations 996 . 211 429 • 1,265 i ...~....___ ~985 i
f-Airfare---···· _ I
-Mileager-ei-mb-ursem-e-n-t----~-----c---.-----79-4-'-------::6::::77;::----:3O=9~--:5O::2c:c9--c:-"20-4--i7s:=--L-rioo'
... Ground Transportl7.::P::-:a:::,rk7-in-g---f----->-----'---;1-;50~:--~---='-" --_.. -...--_... ..--.-..~
Total Baney -'<-==:::1=::,SC=S71+1===-=1=:=,:;:::37;;;;5::-':-====734::=:=': .... 722 + 399 1,870: 204 ··.·===:7:::c:Oc=2"'=='-=~7=:::,665~
Alan lJnger I : i
\AJn"",,,,,, & Educf [G1UIIIIY 665 : -305 45 75 30 45 ! 45 1,210i
Travel Meals
Accon 1I"vuauv,,<> 1,131 ! 322 1,452 .
Ai~rn -I t:JM~ilea~ge~~."'im:@ih"~'''~'''''..~''''~~=-==-=-=~=--=:== . __..,.. I~_==-=_====_===~===_=~-~=~________ __.... ._.Ground TransporVParking
___Total Unger'__ __.... _____________________________627 ,45 75 ;30 i 45' 2,S62=-_.=-=-__. .. __ . =====:=J--'--==1:=:,7=96' 45' 1IIIIIIIIj
Tony DeBone
... Conf/Sem & EducITrainirig-.~_-· c----=6.;:c6=-5 __ 305__ ____. --45' _.----5-3-5--. -3-0----·--30-------1,-6-10
~IMeals ..____ _.'-•. __._-_____ __ ·····159-=-_---1:-~-_~= -==-'-_
Accommodations 908 429 --. --' -1,337.--------==-r--.----.---.... -_. ---.---..-._-.------------=_=_=__
Airfare _______-+__~--.---_---,__.___.. -. 573' -50 I -. 623
Mileage reilnbursemimt 300 146 : 163 138 412 104 !-1264i
Ground TransPcirt------·-··· ····~···---·-------····~-----·137
c----T-ot-al-Ot-he-r-----1,573 : 354 i 8801 45 i 163~46: 442 426 i 5,130
~1-BOCCDepartment =.==~...................., ..................................~..........~
Conf/Sem & EducITrainin..9 __~··.. 1,995 : ___..c_~.__~1?____J()~_____i __ ~~60 ..~__75 I 45 .3,880
Travel Meals . 220 30 90. ....__199 :539
c--Accommodations - . 3,034 211 1,17_9_.__...____..__. _1.265 i 84 5,774
r-A-irf-a-te-"--"'--.---..--~ , 573 . 50 .--623
I-Mileage Reimburselllerii ____ .. -_.... 300 794.-146-67j-~f-;-668 ••.. ~ 682 . . -~--4,355- _
_Ground Transport 54 , 150 i 83 287
_Total-BOC9Department 5,029 i 354-'---h3!_5_~~~812 .~~~676~~5~_1!,~~======::==='=:=t:=---=... _ .... _ .... _-...
~?012 BudQet 14,750
--=..
Percent of FY 2012 Budget Expended 104.8%._--_._-!
eocc County College
___ 9Jfi.c;e/C()pier Supp_lie~s___________ 120 _--;;:;;;;;;-...,----;=59.· __1_1___._1.~2_'_-------__j_-.-----.~2;~01;;:_
Meeting Supplies ....-556 829 . 788 - , 2,172 _ ....__.....__...___...._ ... _ ....=~===--====--====-c-====..-..=,..=.:..=._..=== =='-"'..........;"-==
5/1/2012
______________________________________
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 of Commissioners’ m eeting rooms at
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you 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.
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
FORESTER UPDATE
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
1:30 P.M., MONDAY, JUNE 18, 2012
___________________________
FEMA update
Transition Plan
Intermittent Status
Sweat Equity fuels treatment status.
Fire Season meeting 6/21 @ fairgrounds.
Project Wildfire recognition meeting 7/10.
Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division
P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 15, 2012
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Paul Blikstad, Senior Planner
RE: Board initiation of review of the Limited Use Permit for Kerry and Deborah Downs
(File No. lUP-12-2)
Kerry and Deborah Downs have applied for a Limited Use Permit for a commercial events or
activities facility (weddings) for their 39.S-acre property within the Exclusive Farm Use zone on
Dodds Road southeast of Bend. The applicants are requesting approval for up to 6 weddings
on their property, within the months of June through September. They have applied for the
proposed use based on the County's adoption of Ordinance No. 2012-004, which was adopted
after the provision for these types of events was established in State law under Senate Bill 960.
Staff has issued an Administrative Decision approving the Limited Use Permit. The Board has
previously discussed the possibility of initiating review of the Planning Division's decision on
lUP-12-2. Staff has drafted Order No. 2012-031, which will require that the Board hold a public
hearing on the application.
Attached for your review is a copy of the decision on lUP-12-2. If you should have any
questions, feel free to contact either Nick lelack or me.
Quality Services Performed with Pride
ORDER NO. 2012-031, JUNE 18, 2012
For Recording Stamp Only
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Order Initiating Review of Administrative
Decision in File No. LUP-12-2.
*
*
ORDER NO. 2012-031
WHEREAS, staff issued an Administrative Decision on Application No. LUP-12-2; and
WHEREAS, Section 22.28.050 of the Deschutes County Code allows the Board of County
Commissioners (“Board”) to initiate review of any administrative action within 12 days of the date of mailing of
the final written decision of the Planning Director; and
WHEREAS, the Board has given due consideration as to whether to initiate review of this application;
now therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, HEREBY
ORDERS as follows:
Section 1. The Board hereby initiates review of application LUP-12-2 pursuant to Title 22 of the
Deschutes County Code and other applicable provisions of the County land use ordinances.
Section 2. The review shall be heard de novo.
Section 3. Staff shall set a hearing date and cause notice to be given to all persons or parties
entitled to notice pursuant to DCC 22.24.030 and DCC 22.32.030.
Dated this _______ of ___________, 2012 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
______________________________________
ANTHONY DEBONE, Chair
______________________________________
ALAN UNGER, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Recording Secretary
______________________________________
TAMMY BANEY, Commissioner
REVIEWED
______________
LEGAL COUNSEL
FINDINGS AND DECISION
FILE NUMBER: LUP-12-2
APPLICANT/OWNER: Kerry and Deborah Downs
24885 Dodds Road
Bend, OR 97701
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a Type 2 Limited Use Permit for a
commercial events or activities facility on a 39.83-acre parcel in
the Exclusive Farm Use zone.
STAFF CONTACT: Paul Blikstad, Senior Planner
I. APPLICABLE CRITERIA:
Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance
Chapter 18.16, Exclusive Farm Use Zone
Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance
Oregon Revised Statutes 215.296
II. BASIC FINDINGS:
A. LOCATION: The subject property has an assigned address of 24885 Dodds Road,
Bend, and is identified on Deschutes County Assessor's Map 18-14 as Tax Lot 903.
B. LOT OF RECORD: The subject property is a legal lot of record pursuant to being parcel
1 of Partition Plat No. 1992-06.
C. ZONING: The subject property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use – Alfalfa subzone (EFU-
AL). This property is designated Agriculture on the Deschutes County Comprehensive
Plan.
D. SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject property is 39.83 acres and has an existing dwelling
and barn, as well as an open air structure with enclosed restrooms, which are accessed
from an existing driveway off Dodds Road. The topography of the site is level to rolling,
and the site includes a hay field and irrigated pasture surrounded by fences. There is a
lawn area adjacent to the dwelling, as well as a graveled area adjacent to the dwelling
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 2
and barn. The property is served by an existing domestic well, and an on-site septic
system.
E. SURROUNDING LAND USES: The properties to the west, northwest, south and east
consist of residences with some farming occurring, which are also zoned EFU-AL. To
the north across Dodds Road is land under the administration of the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM – 18-14, 100).
F. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to establish a commercial events or activities
facility on the subject property. The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing site as a
wedding facility, with up to six commercial events/weddings each year from June 1
through September 30. The applicant’s burden of proof states the following:
“These weddings tend to be very similar with respect to many characteristics. With one
exception, we have never had a request for a wedding on any day other than a
Saturday. Therefore, that is the day that most if not all of these events will take place.
The day before (Friday) will consist of some minimal preparation such as setting up
chairs and tables. This activity usually occurs in the late afternoon and lasts no more
than 2-3 hours. Typically, there will be 125-150 people in attendance on the day of the
wedding (Saturday). The typical Saturday wedding day consists of the following: The
wedding participants (12-20 people) will arrive around 1 p.m. to allow time for pictures
and final preparation. Around 3:30 p.m., the guests will start arriving and the wedding
ceremony will usually commence around 4:00 p.m. The typical wedding ceremony lasts
30-45 minutes and a reception with all of the guests and participants follows. By 8:00
p.m., the majority of people in attendance will have left. By 9:00 p.m. over 80% of the
people in attendance will have left. By 10:00 p.m., everyone will have left and vacated
the property. The following day (Sunday) consists of final clean-up and involves no
more than 2-3 people with everything picked up and done by 11:00 a.m.”
G. PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS: The Planning Division mailed notice to several
agencies and received the following comments:
1. Deschutes County Environmental Soils Division: The proposed change in use for
the Accessory structure served by an onsite wastewater treatment system will
require an Authorization Notice to determine that the existing onsite system is
sufficient to serve the proposed use.
2. Deschutes County Transportation Planner: I have reviewed the submittal
materials to hold up to six weddings in June-Sept. on a 40-acre parcel at 24885
Dodds Road, Bend, aka 18-14-00, TL 903. The applicant’s materials state the
peak day will be Saturday with attendees ranging from 125-150 people.
Assuming two people per vehicle, that would result in 63-75 additional vehicles
on Dodds Road. The most recent count (2010) on Dodds indicates 680 average
daily traffic (ADT) 0.07 miles north of US 20 and 176 ADT 0.10 miles south of
Alfalfa Market Road. There is adequate capacity on Dodds Road to handle these
events as the County allows 9,600 ADT on existing County roads as an
acceptable level of service (LOS).
3. Deschutes County Road Department: The Road Department received a copy of
this letter from Edna McBride concerning the land use application LUP-12-2.
She referenced the driveway and the danger with animals crossing so I looked
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 3
up the driveway permit and this access was approved through MP-91-35. It
required an easement from the BLM at this location as the property did not front
Dodds Road and they had to cross BLM property to get to Dodds. It does not
appear there were any issues with sight distance so I really do not know what
can be addressed concerning her issue with crossing wildlife.
4. County Building Safety Division: I met briefly with Downs and Nick Lelack.
Based on their description of the proposed use and the permit history, the
Building Division has no further requirements.
5. The following agencies did not respond to the notice: Central Oregon Irrigation
District, Central Electric Cooperative, Pacific Power and Light, Bend Fire
Department, County Assessor, Bureau of Land Management.
H. PUBLIC COMMENTS: The Planning Division sent notice of this proposal to all property
owners within 750 feet of the subject property. The following written comments were
received:
Edna Joanne McBride: “I share the East boundary of said property. My front door is in
direct line with said ‘barn.’ I am 147 feet from the property line, making it 404 feet from
this structure, with roadway making it even closer. I believe this is a little close.
“I can not object [to] this application for fear of reprisal. You see, I am the one who
turned him in for not having permits on this barn. He has threatened me if I take any
more pictures of his weddings I will be sorry. In addition, the other neighbors west of
Downs share the same well, which happens to be on Downs property. So you can see,
you are not going to get any objection from any of them. The Denhams across the road
have moved away. I would however like you to look into the application for said barn. I
do not believe the bathrooms were set up for 150 to 200 people in a single day. Also,
how can having weddings generate any sales of hay crops. My daughter and I had a
meeting with Mrs. Downs last fall, and she informed us that they do not charge for the
weddings. These are all friends of there (sic) children from collage (s ic), and they will
continue to have them if we like it or not.
“There is however, some confusion on the entrance to Downs' driveway onto Dodds
Road. There is a small hill that blocks the vision both directions when pulling out onto
Dodds Road. This is where the Deer and Elk cross from the BLM into our property. Our
neighbors totaled their car hitting a deer on this hill. It is not if, but when someone tears
out the drive at 10:00 at night in the dark and hits an animal or vehicle. You as decision
makers, upon your approval, will be responsible for said accident. I know the county
decision will not affect your life, but it will certainly affect my quality of living.”
Gary Dodds: “I have reviewed the notice of application letter regarding Kerry and
Deborah Downs limited use permit for a type 2 commercial events or activities facility on
EFU land. The file number is LIP-12-2 @ 24885 Dodds Road, Bend, OR.
I have reviewed the Down’s application and request the permit be denied for the
following reasons:
1. No sign posted as required.
2. Permits are being appealed by Central Oregon Landwatch.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 4
3. No demand. Only two permits applied for county wide.
4. Events held in hay barn building has agricultural or commercial permit?
5. Permit states wedding held on non-productive land. But in fact, land is irrigated
by Central Oregon Irrigation water rights. Land may be non-productive to hay but
still producing non-native vegetation (farm use).
6. Downs and Dodds share a well. No compensation plan in place to amend for
excessive water use.
7. Permit specifies generation of hay sales at weddings. One Craig’s list add would
sell more hay than 6 weddings. Very ineffective sales method.
8. Farm tax deductions or commercial events. Weddings do not qualify for farm
use tax assessments. (Please reference the attached Information Circular)
9. According to profit or loss from farming tax forms accompanying the permit
application, the tax loss is less without weddings.”
I. NOTICE REQUIREMENTS: The applicant complied with the posted notice
requirements of Section 22.23.030(B) of Deschutes County Code (DCC) Title 22. The
applicant submitted a Land Use Action Sign Affidavit, dated May 16, 2012, indicating the
applicant posted notice of the land use action on that same date.
J. REVIEW PERIOD: This application was submitted on May 11, 2012. The Planning
Division sent an incomplete letter dated May 24, 2012. The applicant submitted an
addendum to the application, which was received on May 29, 2012. This application
was thus deemed complete and accepted it for review on May 29, 2012.
K. ADJACENT PARCELS: The properties in the area that are within one mile of the
boundaries of the subject property are as follows:
Tax lot no. Owner Size (acres) Dwelling Farm use Tax
deferred
18-14, 904 Dodds 39.82 1993 Grass hay Yes
18-14, 1001 McBride 39.39 1930/1998 Pasture,
horses
Yes
18-14, 1000 Bussard 37.94 1989 Pasture Yes
18-14, 1101 Penland 20 1980 Grass hay Yes
18-14, 1105 Duren 30 1927 Pasture Yes
18-14, 1103 Fortin 5 1997 Pasture No
18-14, 1102 Cook/Ross 22.61 2006 Grass hay No
18-14, 1104 Phillips 11 1977 Pasture,
cattle
Yes
18-14, 1100 Floyd 71.59 1972 Grass hay Yes
18-14, 301 Roberts 89.94 1993 Grass hay,
pasture
Yes
18-14, 302 Thompson 2.68 2004 None No
18-14, 303 Rubaloff 3.93 2005 None No
18-14, 1203 Clarno Cattle 42.88 2000 Pasture Yes
18-14, 1200 Clarno 122.90 1971 Grass hay Yes
18-14, 100 USA/BLM 19,377 No None No
18-14, 300 COID 480.53 No None No
18-14, 700 COID 211.28 No None No
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 5
18-14-7,
100
Deschutes
County
9.93 No None No
18-14-7,
402
Denham 42.15 1988 Pasture Yes
18-14-7,
401
O & M Inc. 4.38 2002 None No
18-14-7,
400
O & M Inc. 71.90 No Pasture,
Grass hay
Yes
18-14-7,
405
Winger 26.26 No None No
18-14-7,
404
Olsen 25 2007 None No
18-14-7,
200
Swan
25 No None No
18-14-7,
300
Gerhardt 34.84 1997 None No
18-14-7,
600
Bradetich 5.22 1984 Grass hay Yes
18-14-7,
700
Williamsen
5.41 2000 None No
18-14-7,
800
Moriarty 59.53 1996 Grass hay,
pasture
Yes
18-14-7,
900
Conners 36.16 2001 Grass hay Yes
18-14-7,
901
Pensco 38.09 No Grass hay Yes
18-14-7,
902
Pensco 2 No None No
18-14-7,
500
Robinson 21.70 1994 Grass hay,
pasture
Yes
18-14-7,
100
Deschutes
County
9.93 No None No
III. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS:
Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance.
A. CHAPTER 18.16. EXCLUSIVE FARM ZONE
1. Section 18.16.025. Uses Permitted Subject to the Special Provisions Under DCC
Section 18.16.038 or DCC Section 18.16.042 and a Review Under DCC Chapter
18.124 where applicable.
K. Agri-tourism and other commercial events and activities subject to DCC
18.16.042.
FINDING: The applicant is proposing a commercial events and activities facility, consisting of a
wedding venue. The criteria under DCC 18.16.042 are addressed in this decision. There are
no criteria under DCC 18.16.038 for the proposed use, and it is not subject to site plan review
under DCC Chapter 18.124.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 6
2. Section 18.16.042 Agri-Tourism and other Commercial Events or Activities
Limited Use Permit
A. Agri-tourism and other commercial events or activities related to and
supportive of agriculture may be approved in an area zoned for exclusive
farm use only if the standards and criteria in this section are met.
FINDING: The applicant is proposing a commercial events or activities facility, which will
consist of conducting weddings at the site. The standards under DCC 18.16.042(C) are
addressed below.
B. Application. The application shall include the following.
1. The General Provisions information required in DCC 22.08.010.
FINDING: The applicant has submitted a copy of a warranty deed (Vol 410 Page 2847)
demonstrating that the applicants are the owners of the subject property. The applicant has
submitted the Limited Use Permit application form, a burden of proof statement addressing the
criteria in DCC 18.16.042, the filing fee of $785.00, and has submitted the affidavit attesting to
the fact that the land use action sign was posted on the property on May 16, 2012.
2. A written description of:
a. The proposal.
FINDING: The applicant has addressed the above standards on pages 1-3 of the burden of
proof statement. The applicant states that up to six commercial events/weddings will be held on
the property each year from June 1 through September 30. The applicant has also stated that,
based on past experiences, weddings are generally on a Saturday. The applicant’s burden of
proof states that the day before the wedding (Friday) includes preparation of the site, including
setting up chairs and tables. The weddings generally have 125-150 people in attendance. The
applicant provides a description of the Saturday activities, including the wedding and reception
and the times that they occur. The time frame for activities on Saturdays is from approximately
1:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., when, according to the applicant, everyone will have left and vacated
the property. The following day (Sunday) consists of final clean-up that involves 2-3 people,
with everything picked up and done by 11:00 a.m. Access and egress, parking facilities, and
sanitation and solid waste operational characteristics are addressed below.
b. The types of agri-tourism and other commercial events or activities
that are proposed to be conducted, including the number and
duration of the agri-tourism and other commercial events and
activities, the anticipated maximum daily attendance and the hours
of operation, and how the agri-tourism and other commercial events
or activities will be related to and supportive of agriculture and
incidental and subordinate to the existing farm use on the tract.
FINDING: The applicant addressed 2(b) above with the following statements in the burden of
proof:
“There exists an undeniable connection to these activities and the agricultural
practices that I conduct on my property. The couples that wish to have their
wedding ceremony on our farm have a multitude of other options to choose from
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 7
for their wedding site (hotels, resorts, golf courses, churches, parks, forests, etc.)
but are interested in my location because they WANT to have their wedding on a
farm. Specifically they want to be in an open air rural environment surrounded by
lush green fields. They choose and want to have their wedding in an
environment that includes the sounds and sights of irrigation sprinklers, tractors,
hay balers, etc. These attributes and connections do not exist anywhere else
other than a farm setting. Further, I have 90-100 tons of Orchard Grass Hay that
needs to be sold annually. By exposing 125-150 people to my farm (per event), I
will routinely and invariably generate some hay sales from hosting a wedding on
our farm. These sales become an important part of my operation because the
volume of Hay that I produce dictates that my sales are spread over several
small transactions vs. one or two large transactions.
“Not counting maintenance activities during the winter months my farm operation
encompasses approximately 183 days of actual production with the onset of the
irrigation season to the end of the irrigation season. The proposed events with
this limited use permit will encompass at most 6 days during the time frame of
June-September with those 6 days only utilizing 8-10 hours of time farm per
event. The total amount of land usage for these events is approximately 2 acres
(non productive land). Therefore, these proposed events utilize the following:
Time as a percentage of farm production year – 3.2%
Time as a percentage of total year – 1.6%
Land usage as a percentage of total parcel – 5.02%
“In summary, the appeal and indication of interest I receive from future
grooms/brides for the purpose of having their wedding on my farm is because of
my farm operation rather than in spite of it being a farm.”
Senate Bill (SB) 960, approved by the State Legislature in 2011, is the legal basis for DCC
18.16.042. SB 960 establishes the “related to and supportive of agriculture” standard, as well
as the “incidental and subordinate to a farm use” standard. The law, however, does not define
these terms or phrases. Staff has not found the “related to and supportive of agriculture”
standard defined elsewhere in state law or Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) decisions.
Several LUBA decisions address the “incidental and subordinate to a farm use” standard, but
each case appears to be applicable to the particular circumstances of the subject application,
property, and local regulations.
Therefore, to better understand and apply the meaning and intent of these terms and phrases,
staff looks to the following sources:
1. The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development’s “Guide to Wineries
and Events in EFU Zones” dated, March 1, 2012;
2. The Webster’s New World Dictionary; and
3. The Association of Oregon Counties (AOC) Farmland Activities Task Force Final Report
and Recommendations, dated December 13, 2010. This report was the basis for SB
960 and is included in the State Legislative record for SB 960 and Deschutes County’s
record for the ordinance adopting DCC 18.16.042.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 8
Staff summarizes each of these sources in order.
1. DLCD’s “Guide to Wineries and Events in EFU Zones” states:
“Q: What does ‘related to’ and ‘supportive of’ agriculture mean in SB 960? What
about ‘incidental and subordinate?’
A: We interpret ‘related to’ and ‘supportive of’ to mean that the proposed agri-
tourism or other commercial event or activity is physically and/or economically
logically connected to, and supports, an existing on-site farm operation. For
example, ‘related to’ could mean that the proposed event involves a product that
is produced on site that has a meaningful and significant relationship to the
proposed event. ‘Supportive of’ could involve the generation of supplemental
income to support a farm. ‘Incidental and subordinate’ means that the event or
activity is strictly secondary and ancillary to on-site farming in terms of income
generated, area occupied, and off-site impacts.”
2. Webster’s New World Dictionary defines:
Related: “connected or associated, as by origin or kind”
Supportive: “that gives support, help or approval”
Incidental: “happening as a result of in connection with something more important;
secondary or minor”
Subordinate: “inferior to or placed below another in rank, power, importance, etc.;
secondary”
3. AOC Farmland Activities Task Force Final Report and Recommendations
Page 4. “The Task Force realizes these recommendations may not provide an
opportunity to conduct activities and events on farmland which do not promote farm use.
However, we believe it is a good basis for providing balance between the conservation
of farmland and the need of farmers to use their land in beneficial yet non-traditional
ways.”
Page 6. “The Farmland Activities Task Force developed a set of principles with the
assistance of state agencies and other interested parties to guide its work. A list of
issues was also compiled based upon the responses to the statewide survey referenced
above and the comments and discussion of the Task Force.
“Principles
The FATF developed and approved the following principles:
1. Give preference to ‘farm use’ as defined in ORS 215.203(2) (a) on farmland.
2. Support economic activities that compliment farm use.
3. Seek opportunities for better communication between those wishing to establish
nontraditional farm uses and those who may be impacted by such activities.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 9
4. Ensure compliance with public health, environmental health and safety requirement
when establishing other uses on farm land.
5. Ensure activities associated with ‘farm use’ (i.e. efficient operation of equipment and
transport of products to market in a timely manner) are not impaired.
6. Assist counties with establishment of clear, transparent, and to the extent possible,
consistent processes for consideration of traditional and nontraditional farm activities.
7. Identify ‘best practices’ in the public process for consideration of nonfarm issues on
farm land.”
Staff believes the key components of this criterion for which findings must be made are:
1. Is there a farm use, as defined in ORS 215.203(2), on the property?
2. How is the commercial event related to and supportive of agriculture?
3. How is the commercial event incidental and subordinate to the farm use?
Staff addresses each component of this criterion in order.
1. Is there a farm use, as defined in ORS 215.203(2), on the property?
Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) defines a farm use under ORS 215.203(2) as:
“(2)(a) As used in this section, “farm use” means the current employment of land
for the primary purpose of obtaining a profit in money by raising, harvesting and
selling crops or the feeding, breeding, management and sale of, or the produce
of, livestock, poultry, fur-bearing animals or honeybees or for dairying and the
sale of dairy products or any other agricultural or horticultural use or animal
husbandry or any combination thereof…”
Staff finds this element of the criterion is met because the primary use of the property is to seek
a profit in money by the sale of Orchard Grass Hay.
2. How is the commercial event related to and supportive of agriculture?
DLCD’s interpretation of “related to”’ and “supportive of” mean that the commercial event or
activity is “physically and/or economically logically connected to, and supports, an existing on-
site farm operation.” The agency’s Guide states, “‘related to’ could mean that the proposed
event involves a product that is produced on site that has a meaningful and significant
relationship to the proposed event. ‘Supportive of’ could involve the generation of supplemental
income to support a farm.”
Staff poses a series of questions and answers/findings to address this issue.
Do commercial events include commercial weddings?
Staff finds the answer to this question is “yes,” commercial events include commercial
weddings. The text amendment to adopt SB 960 into Deschutes County Code (DCC) also
included a new definition of “commercial event or activity.” As defined in DCC:
“Commercial event or activity” means any meeting, celebratory gathering,
wedding, party, or similar uses consisting of any assembly of persons and the
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 10
sale of goods or services. It does not include agri-tourism. In DCC 18.16.042, a
commercial event or activity shall be related to and supportive of agriculture.
In addition, while weddings have historically occurred on farms throughout Central Oregon and
across the state and nation they are not considered a traditional farm activity. In public
testimony on Deschutes County Ordinance 2012-004 adopting SB 960 and new definitions into
Deschutes County Code from several sources, including AOC, Oregonians In Action, the
Oregon Farm Bureau, and others, weddings were clearly contemplated as an allowed use as a
commercial event or activity under SB 960 for properties with an existing farm use. The AOC
Task Force Final Report and Recommendations supports this testimony in its principles (listed
above), which call for “economic activities that support farm use,” “activities associated with
‘farm use;’” and “consideration of traditional and nontraditional farm activities.” Weddings are an
economic activity that support a farm use, a nontraditional farm activity, and an activity
associated with a farm use.
In comments to Deschutes County during consideration of Ordinance 2012-004, DLCD Policy
Analyst Michael Morrissey and Farm/Forest Specialist Katherine Daniels, wrote:
“We aren’t sure a wedding meets a definition of agri-tourism, but it isn’t hard to see it as
an ‘other commercial event.’ The department believes that ‘related to and supportive of
agriculture’ (together with ‘incidental and subordinate’) is specific to the site. That means
there needs to be on-site farming taking place, and that any wedding activities must
either provide supplementary income to a farm operation that earns a larger income, so
that they financially ’support’ the onsite farming. It could also mean that wedding
activities must use products grown on the farm as part of the wedding activities (e.g.,
flowers from a flower farm, etc.). However, as an example, a free standing 15 -acre
‘wedding mill,’ on an EFU zoned site, with a dwelling and a personal backyard vegetable
garden would not meet the standards, in our opinion.”
Are weddings physically and/or economically logically connected to a farm use, and specifically
to a hay operation?
The applicant’s burden of proof statement explains that weddings are physically and
economically connected to the existing 39.83-acre farm and helpful to the farm use on the
property. Commercial weddings are physically connected to this specific farm by people
choosing to have their wedding in a pastoral setting with its green fields, irrigation sprinklers,
tractors, hay balers, and associated sounds. In addition, weddings are economically connected
to this farm by the importance of hay sales at such events in the overall farm operation,
according to the applicant. The burden of proof states, “These sales become an important part
of my operation because the volume of Hay that I produce dictates that my sales are spread
over several small transactions vs. one or two large transactions.” In addition, the applicant
states in the burden of proof, “I will routinely and invariably generate some hay sales from
hosting a wedding on our farm.”
Weddings also are supportive of this farm by providing supplemental income.
How are commercial weddings economically connected to this farm use?
Deschutes County Planning Director Nick Lelack called and asked the applicant, Mr. Downs, on
June 11, 2012 how the commercial weddings facilitate sales of hay at these events. Mr. Downs
explained that his direct involvement in and attendance throughout all commercial events on his
property provide him with opportunities to integrate hay sales with weddings by:
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 11
(1) Bringing people to his farm who otherwise would not or do not know about it; and
(2) Providing him opportunities to “network” in person with the wedding party, attendees, and
associated service providers about his agricultural practices, the types of grasses growing
on the farm, and the potential uses for the hay.
Mr. Downs explained that these “networking” opportunities have directly lead to hay sales in the
past, and he has customers today who continue to purchase hay that he previously met while
conducting weddings on his farm.
The sales of Orchard Grass Hay to event attendees, and the supplemental income generated
by events to support the agricultural operations, creates a direct economic connection between
the commercial events and the applicant’s agricultural operations.
Staff finds the proposed commercial weddings are related to and supportive of agriculture for
this application.
3. How is the commercial event incidental and subordinate to the farm use?
Staff identifies two components to this question:
1. There must be farm use, as defined in DCC 18.04.030, occurring on the property.
2. The commercial event must be lower in rank or importance, or secondary and ancillary,
to the farm use. It also means that the intensity, scope, duration, etc. of the commercial
event must be judged proportionate to the scale of the farm use.
The first component is addressed above. A farm use exists on the property.
Therefore, the second and primary question is whether the commercial weddings are incidental
and subordinate to the farm use.
The applicant’s burden of proof statement demonstrates compliance with this standard based
on the amount of time and land used for the weddings compared to that of the farm use.
Specifically, the applicant is applying for six (6) days each year to conduct weddings. A few
hours the day before and a few hours the day after the six (6) wedding days would be used for
set-up and take down. This total amount of time is less than 5% of the overall total amount of
time for farm production each year (183 days) according to the application.
The area occupied by the wedding events is less than 3 acres, including the parking area. The
County Assessor’s records indicate the property has 34 irrigated acres. Therefore, the area
used for weddings is less than 10% of that used for farming.
Staff finds that the wedding event time period and land area is incidental and subordinate to the
farm use on the property.
In sum, staff finds a qualifying farm use on the subject property, and that the commercial
weddings are related to and supportive of agriculture and incidental and subordinate to the
existing farm use.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 12
Staff finds this criterion is met.
c. The types and locations of all permanent and temporary structures,
access and egress, parking facilities, and sanitation and solid waste
to be used in connection with the agri-tourism or other commercial
events or activities.
FINDING: The applicant addressed c above on page 3 of the burden of proof as follows:
“All activities related to these events will take place exclusively on non-productive farm
ground (approximately 2 acres) within my 40 acre property. Traffic to these events
comes via Hwy 20 to Dodds Road (traveling east) with a direct access right hand turn
onto our driveway. The first 660 feet of our driveway is a pave d surface with the final
250 feet via a rocked portion of the driveway into a 2 acre grass horse pasture used for
parking event vehicles (this pasture is not part of my hay production ground). Traffic
into, on, and from our property is solely on either a paved surface, rock surface, or grass
surface and produces absolutely zero dust. All of the wedding event activities
(ceremony/reception) occur within the landscaped portion of our residence. We utilize
an accessory structure to our residence (an open air structure) for a portion of the event
activities. Sanitation and solid waste for people attending these events is handled by
two (2) county permitted restrooms in the accessory structure. These restrooms are
serviced via a county dedicated/permitted septic system exclusively for these two (2)
restrooms.”
Staff finds that the applicant has adequately described the structures on the property, as well as
access and egress, parking and sanitation. Any solid waste would be disposed of at the County
landfill. Staff has imposed conditions of approval to address this standard.
Staff finds this criterion is met with the conditions of approval.
3. A traffic management plan that:
a. Identifies the projected number of vehicles and any anticipated
use of public roads;
b. Provides an assurance that one traffic control person shall be
provided for each 250 persons expected or reasonably expected
to be in attendance at any time during the agri-tourism and other
commercial event or activity. The traffic control personnel shall
be certified by the State of Oregon and shall comply with the
current edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
FINDING: The applicant addressed these criteria on page 3 of the burden of proof as follows:
“The proposed events under this limited use permit will generate 30-50 vehicles usage
for all participants/guests of the event. Virtually all of the vehicles travel from Bend east
on Highway 20 to Dodds Road. They then travel east on Dodds Road to a direct right
hand turn onto our property. Access to our property is a direct turn with no crossing of
the opposing lane of traffic. When existing our property the vehicles turn left onto Dodds
Road with excellent visibility in both directions for traffic entering Dodds Road. For all
events, I will place temporary signage on Dodds road alerting motorists to an “event in
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 13
progress” both east and west of our driveway on Dodds Road. As unlikely as it may
seem, if we ever host an event that exceeds the 250 participants threshold we will also
provide a licensed traffic control person (certified by the State of Oregon) stationed at
the entrance of our driveway to Dodds road.
Staff finds that the applicant has adequately described the number of any anticipated number of
vehicles for the event site. The anticipated number of guests (125-150) will require that at least
one traffic control person must be on-site during the wedding event. Any attendance over 250
will require a second traffic control person.
Staff finds this criterion is met with the requirement under “b” above as a condition of approval.
c. Demonstrates that the parcel, lot or tract has direct access such
that the lot, parcel or tract on which commercial events will
occur:
i. Fronts on a public road; or
ii. Is accessed by an access easement or private road, and all
underlying property owners and property owners taking
access between the subject property and the public road
consent in writing to the use of the road for agri-tourism and
other commercial events or activities at the time of initial
application.
FINDING: Approximately one-half of the subject property (west half) has direct frontage on
Dodds Road. The east half of the property appears to have a sliver of land under the
administration of the Bureau of Land Management, with a right of way grant (OR 47891) to
cross this land. According to BLM staff, this right of way has been extended in perpetuity
(Decision letter is in the record).
Staff finds this criterion is met because the BLM has extended the right of way grant, they
consent to the use of the road by the applicant.
4. Inspection of Event Premises Authorization. The applicant shall
provide in writing a consent to allow law enforcement, public health,
and fire control officers and code enforcement staff to come upon
the premises for which the Limited Use Permit has been granted for
the purposes of inspection and enforcement of the terms and
conditions of the permit and DCC Chapter 18.16 Exclusive Farm Use
Zone and DCC Chapter 8.08 Noise Control, and any other applicable
laws or ordinances.
FINDING: The applicant states the following in the burden of proof:
“If the County has a written form for this consent document I will provide a signed
version upon receiving my Limited Use Permit. Otherwise, I will draft a version if
necessary.
Staff finds that this requirement is met with a condition of approval that the consent form be
submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the first commercial event.
C. Approval Criteria.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 14
2. Type 2. Up to six (6) agri-tourism and other commercial events or
activities in a calendar year on a tract may be approved by a limited use
permit that is personal to the applicant and is not transferred by, or
transferred with, a conveyance of the tract, if in compliance with:
a. Minimum lot or parcel size: 10 acres.
FINDING: The subject property is 39.83 acres. Staff finds this criterion is met.
b. Agri-tourism event may not, individually, exceed a duration of 72
consecutive hours, excluding set-up and take down of all temporary
structures and facilities. The limitation on the hours of operations is
included within the duration of 72 consecutive hours.
FINDING: The applicant is not proposing any agri-tourism events. This criterion is not
applicable.
c. Commercial events or activities may not, individually, exceed a
duration of 30 consecutive hours, excluding set-up and take down of
all temporary structures and facilities. The limitation on the hours of
operations is included within the duration of 30 consecutive hours.
FINDING: The applicant has stated in the burden of proof that each proposed event will last
between 8-10 hours in consecutive duration, and the events will be conducted on six calendar
days each year. Set up and take down will occur for a few hours the day before and the day
after the commercial event is conducted.
Staff finds this criterion is met and imposes a condition of approval based on the application
submitted limiting commercial events to the applicant’s proposal – 6 calendar days each year,
excluding the set-up and take down of all temporary structures and facilities.
d. Must be incidental and subordinate to existing farm use of the tract,
and shall be related to and supportive of agriculture.
FINDING: The findings for this criterion are addressed above. Staff incorporates those findings
herein by reference. Staff finds this criterion is met.
e. Set-up and take down of all temporary structures and facilities shall
occur up to one business day prior to the agri-tourism and other
commercial events or activities and one business day after the agri-
tourism and other commercial events between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00
p.m.
FINDING: The applicant states in the burden of proof statement that set-up and take down of
the facilities used at the site will occur one day before and one day after the weddings, within
the time limits listed under “e” above. Staff finds this criterion is met.
f. May not require that a new permanent structure be built, used or
occupied in connection with the agri-tourism or other commercial
events or activities.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 15
FINDING: The applicant is not proposing any new permanent structure and the Planning
Division is not requiring any new permanent structure be built, used or occupied in connection
with the commercial events. The existing open-air building will be used as part of the wedding
site. Staff finds this criterion is met.
g. May not, in combination with other agri-tourism or other commercial
events or activities authorized in the area, materially alter the
stability of the land use pattern of the area.
FINDING: There are no other authorized agri-tourism or commercial events or activities
proposed or occurring in the area. The proposed event site is for up to six weddings over 4
months. The wedding events will be temporary in nature and practice. The existing land use
pattern of the area is single-family dwellings with some farm use occurring, as well as some dry
land (such as the BLM and COID lands to the north). Staff finds that the temporary nature of
the weddings will have no impact on the land use pattern of the area. The farm use in the area
will continue as currently conducted, which is mainly grass hay and livestock raising and
grazing.
Staff finds that the proposed wedding event site and activities meet this criterion.
h. Must comply with ORS 215.296.
FINDING: Oregon Revised Statutes 215.296, Standards for approval of certain uses in
exclusive farm use zones, has two criteria that apply to the proposed use. They are:
(1) A use allowed under ORS 215.213(2) or 215.283(2) may be approved only
where the local governing body or its designee finds that the use will not:
b. Force a significant change in accepted farm or forest practices on
surrounding lands devoted to farm or forest use: or
c. Significantly increase the cost of accepted farm or forest practices on
surrounding lands devoted to farm or forest use.
FINDING: None of the properties in the area surrounding the subject property are in forest use.
There are many properties in farm use, including properties immediately adjacent to the subject
property to the west, south and east. The main farm use in the surrounding area appears to be
grass hay, with livestock raising and grazing occurring on lands devoted to pasture. Staff finds
that conducting up to six (6) weddings on six (6) calendar days for up to 10 hours per event on
the applicant’s property in a 4-month period will not force a significant change in these farm
practices, or significantly increase the cost of accepted farm practices. Staff believes that
existing farm uses will not be impacted by the wedding events and that the events will have any
impact on the hay operations, livestock or grazing activities.
Staff finds this criterion is met.
i. Limited Use Permits approved under this section expire two years
from the date of approval.
j. Limited Permits may be renewed for an additional two years subject
to:
i. An application for renewal; and
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 16
ii. Demonstration of compliance with conditions that apply to the
limited use permit and applicable provisions in this section, DCC
Chapter 18.16.042.
FINDING: The approval for LUP-12-2 would be valid for two years from the date of approval.
The date of approval would be after the review process is completed, including all appeals. The
possibility for renewal exists, based on submittal of an application, and findings made
demonstrating compliance with the conditions of approval as well as the then-current Deschutes
County Code and state law. Staff finds this criterion is met.
4. The area in which the agri-tourism or other commercial events or
activities are located shall be set back at least 100 feet from the
property line.
FINDING: The commercial events or activities areas all are at least 100 feet from the property
line, as evidenced by the air photo in the record. The only exception to this is the entrance
driveway into the site, which is closer than 100 feet at the front of the property. Staff finds that
the entrance road is not part of the “activities” of the wedding venue site.
Staff finds this criterion is met.
5. Notification of agri-tourism and other commercial events or activities.
a. The property owner shall submit in writing the list of calendar days
scheduled for all agri-tourism and other commercial events or
activities by April 1 of the subject calendar year or within 30 days of
new or renewed limited use permits, if after April 1, to Deschutes
County’s Community Development Department and Sheriff’s Office,
and all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property.
b. The list of calendar dates for all agri-tourism, commercial events
activities may be amended by submitting the amended list to the
same entities at least 72 hours prior to any date change.
c. If such notice is not provided, the property owner shall provide
notice by Registered Mail to the same list above at least 10 days
prior to each agri-tourism and other commercial event or activity.
d. The notification shall include a contact person or persons for each
agri-tourism and other commercial event or activity who shall easily
be accessible and who shall remain on site at all times, including the
person(s) contact information.
FINDING: A condition of approval is included requiring compliance with these criteria for
notification of events.
6. Sanitation facilities shall include, at a minimum, portable restroom
facilities and stand-alone hand washing stations.
FINDING: The applicant is proposing to utilize two bathrooms already on the property. These
are more than the minimum required based on the expected number of attendees. The
applicant states that hot and cold water for hand washing stations will be utilized for these
events. Staff finds this criterion is met with the condition of approval that such facilities be
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 17
maintained for the approved use and be subject to inspection upgrading if required by the
Environmental Soils Division.
7. Hours of Operation. No agri-tourism and other commercial event or
activity may begin before 7:00 a.m. or end after 10:00 p.m.
FINDING: The applicant states that all events will occur and end within the specified hours.
Staff finds this criterion is met with a condition of approval requiring compliance.
8. Overnight camping is not allowed.
FINDING: The applicant states that no overnight camping will occur. Staff finds this criterion is
met.
9. Noise Control
a. All noise, including the use of a sound producing device such as
but not limited to, loud speakers and public address systems,
musical instruments that are amplified or unamplified, shall be in
compliance with applicable state regulations.
b. A standard sound level meter or equivalent, in good condition,
that provides a weighted sound pressure level measured by the
use of a metering characteristic with an “A” frequency weighting
network and reported as dBA shall be available on-site at all
times during agri-tourism and other commercial events or
activities.
FINDING: The applicant states that all noise and sound associated with these events will be
monitored with a sound level meter and kept within the permitted levels allowed under this
ordinance. Staff finds these criteria are met.
10. Transportation Management.
a. Roadways, driveway aprons, driveways and parking surfaces
shall be surfaces that prevent dust, and may include paving,
gravel, cinders, or bark/wood chips.
b. Driveways extending from paved roads shall have a paved apron,
requiring review and approval by the County Road Department.
c. The parcel, lot or tract has direct access as defined in DCC
Chapter 18.16.042(B)(3)(c).
d. Adequate traffic control must be provided by the property owner
to address the following:
i. There shall be one traffic control person for each 250 persons
expected or reasonably expected to be in attendance at any
time.
ii. All traffic control personnel shall be certified by the State of
Oregon and shall comply with the current edition of the
Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
FINDING: The applicant states that all surfaces utilized during these events will occur on a
paved driveway, gravel driveway, or grass area for parking of vehicles. Staff conducted a site
visit and confirms the property has a paved apron and paved driveway connection to Dodds
Road.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 18
The property has direct access to Dodds Road through an approved right of way grant from the
BLM.
The anticipated number of persons expected or reasonably expected to be in attendance is 125-
150 people. This requires one traffic control person. A condition of approval is that 1 or 2 traffic
control persons be on-site, depending upon the number of persons reasonably expected to be
attendance at each wedding.
Staff finds this criterion is met.
11. Health and Safety Compliance
a. All permanent and temporary structures and facilities are subject
to fire, health and life safety requirements, and shall comply with
all requirements of the Deschutes County Building Safety
Division and the Environmental Soils Division and any other
applicable federal, state and local laws.
b. Compliance with the requirements of the Deschutes County
Building Safety Division shall include meeting all building
occupancy classification requirements of the State of Oregon
adopted building code.
FINDING: The proposed open-air pavilion the applicant will use for the wedding facility meets
the building code requirements for its use. Staff confirmed this with the County Building
Division.
Staff finds this criterion is met and imposes a condition of approval that all permanent and
temporary structures and facilities comply with all State of Oregon adopted building code
requirements and all Environmental Soils Division requirements.
12. The maximum number of people shall not exceed 500 per calendar
day.
FINDING: The applicant states that the average attendance is expected to be 125-150. Staff
finds this criterion is met, and imposes a condition of approval that specifies no more than 500
people for all parts of any particular wedding, including any catering service, is permitted.
13. Agri-Tourism and other Commercial Events or Activities shall not be
allowed:
a. Within the County adopted big game winter ranges during the
months of December through March.
b. Within the County adopted big game migration corridors during
the month of April and during the months of October and
November.
c. Within the County adopted sensitive bird and mammal habitat
areas as defined in DCC 18.90.020, unless a site has had no
nesting attempt or the nest has failed, as determined by a
professional wildlife biologist in May of the calendar year in
which the application is approved, unless a site has had no
nesting attempt or the nest has failed which could be determined
in May by a professional wildlife biologist.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 19
FINDING: The subject property is not located within any big game winter range, big game
migration corridor, or sensitive bird and mammal habitat area. Staff finds this criterion is met.
3. Section 18.16.043, Single Permit
A. The maximum number of agri-tourism and other commercial events or
activities on a lot, parcel or tract may not exceed the total number of
commercial events allowed by any individual land use approval, including a
winery authorized under DCC 18.16.038(B), and events, outdoor mass
gatherings or extended outdoor mass gatherings authorized under DCC
Chapter 8.16.
B. The following permits may not be combined:
1. Agri-tourism and other commercial events or activities under DCC
18.16.042.
2. Winery under DCC 18.16.038(B),
3. Events, outdoor mass gatherings, extended outdoor mass
gatherings, parades or funeral processions authorized under DCC
Chapter 8.16,
4. Home occupation for commercial events or activities.
FINDING: The applicant is not proposing any other events at the site, beyond the 6 weddings
they are requesting. Staff finds this criterion is met.
4. Section 18.16.060. Dimensional Standards.
E. Building height. No building or structure shall be erected or
enlarged to exceed 30 feet in height, except as allowed under DCC
18.120.040.
FINDING: The applicant is not proposing any new structures, or any additions to existing
structures. Therefore, this standard is not applicable to the limited use permit.
5. Section 18.16.070. Yards.
A. The front yard shall be a minimum of: 40 feet from a property line
fronting on a local street, 60 feet from a property line fronting on a
collector street, and 100 feet from a property line fronting on an
arterial street.
B. Each side yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet, except that for a
nonfarm dwelling proposed on property with side yards adjacent to
property currently employed in farm use, and receiving special
assessment for farm use, the side yard shall be a minimum of 100
feet.
C. Rear yards shall be a minimum of 25 feet, except that for a nonfarm
dwelling proposed on property with a rear yard adjacent to property
currently employed in farm use, and receiving special assessment
for farm use, the rear yard shall be a minimum of 100 feet.
D. In addition to the setbacks set forth herein, any greater setbacks
required by applicable building or structural codes adopted by the
State of Oregon and/or the County under DCC 15.04 shall be met.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 20
FINDING: The applicant is not proposing any new structures or additions to existing structures.
These setbacks are not applicable to the limited use permit.
IV. CONCLUSION:
Based on the foregoing Findings, staff concludes the proposed limited use permit can
comply with the applicable standards and criteria of the Deschutes County zoning ordinance if
conditions of approval are met.
V. DECISION:
APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions of approval.
VI. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. This approval is based upon the application, specifications, and supporting
documentation submitted by the applicant. Any substantial change in this Limited Use
Permit will require review through a new Limited Use Permit application. No more than
six (6) commercial events shall be conducted each year beginning on the date of this
approval. The six (6) commercial events shall occur between June 1 through September
30.
2. The six (6) commercial events shall be limited to six (6) calendar days each year,
excluding set-up and take down. No activity for a commercial event shall be conducted
before 7:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m.
3. Prior to initiation of use, the applicant shall:
a. Provide in writing a consent to allow law enforcement, public health, fire control
officers and code enforcement staff to come upon the premises for which the Limited
Use Permit has been granted for the purpose of inspection and enforcement of the
terms and conditions of the Permit, and Chapter 8.08 of the county code, noise
control.
b. Provide notification of the weddings as prescribed under DCC 18.16.042(C)(5).
c. The sanitation facilities shall be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Soils
Division prior to the first event. The Environmental Soils Division may require
additional sanitation facilities if the number of expected attendees exceeds the
maximum capacity of the permanent, existing on-site facility.
4. The noise emanating from the site shall at all times meet applicable state regulations. A
standard sound level meter or equivalent, in good condition, that provides a weighted
sound pressure level measured by use of a metering characteristic with an “A” frequency
weighting network and reported as dBA shall be available on-site at all times during the
weddings.
5. All lighting on the subject property shall be required to comply with Chapter 15.10 of the
Deschutes County Code, the Outdoor Lighting Control Ordinance. All exterior lights
shall be sited and shielded so that no direct light projects off-site.
LUP-12-2, Downs Page 21
6. Solid waste shall be disposed of at the Knott Landfill.
7. One traffic control person, certified by the State of Oregon, shall be required for up to the
first 250 persons in attendance at the site, including any persons involved in conducting
the wedding. A second traffic control person shall be required if more than 250 persons
are reasonably expected to be in attendance at the site, including any persons involved
in conducting the wedding.
8. No more than 500 people shall be in attendance for any wedding at the site, including
persons involved in conducting the wedding and caterers.
9. No overnight camping shall be allowed.
10. Catering is subject to licensure and inspection at the caterer’s base of operations only,
including transportation vehicles and equipment. Food prepared on site requires a
temporary restaurant license.
11. All permanent and temporary structures shall comply with the State of Oregon’s adopted
building code and the Deschutes County Building Safety Division’s fire, health, life
safety, accessibility, and occupancy requirements at all times.
12. Agriculturally exempt structures are prohibited from occupancy by the public.
13. If a small, non-regulated water system is used to supply water to the public, they must
be approved by the Environmental Health Division prior to the first event.
VII. DURATION OF APPROVAL:
The applicant shall complete all conditions of approval and initiate the proposed event
facility within two (2) years of the date this decision becomes final, or obtain an extension of
time pursuant to Section 22.36.010 of the County Code, or this approval shall be void.
This decision becomes final twelve (12) days after the date of mailing, unless appealed
by a party of interest.
DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION
Written by: Paul Blikstad, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Nick Lelack, Planning Director
Dated this 15th day of June, 2012 Mailed this 15th day of June, 2012