HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-06-25 Work Session Minutes
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 1 of 13
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MONDAY, JUNE 25, 2012
_____________________________
Allen Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
__________________________
Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney.
Also present were Erik Kropp, Interim County Administrator; and, for a portion of
the meeting, Marty Wynne, Finance; David Givans, Internal Auditor; John Laherty
and Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development;
media representative Erik Hidle of the Bulletin; and one other citizen.
Chair DeBone opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m.
1. Before the Board was the Finance/Tax Update.
Marty Wynne said there were not too many changes from the previous report.
He updated the Board on the Fair/Expo fund, which includes a transfer. The
ending/beginning net working capital has changed to a higher amount.
He said that most of the larger account balances are a bit higher than projected.
This shows stability and that the budget and forecast are close, which is healthy.
The beginning net capital figures for the new fiscal year are forecast at the start
of budget meetings, and these numbers are very close to those.
2. Before the Board was a Discussion of Possible Code Changes regarding
Dog Board of Supervisors Decisions and Requirements.
Erik Kropp explained the basic issues relating to dog board hearings. There are
some things that need to be updated in the County ordinance for consistency.
Chair DeBone said he was contacted by a woman involved in a hearing and
there is some confusion.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 2 of 13
John Laherty stated there are two issues to consider. Some County rules do not
track exactly with State law. The second issue is where Code mirrors state law
but imparts requirements on the County that are not required by State law.
A livestock owner can request compensation from the County to cover costs of
livestock, requiring the County to file small claims against the dog owner. If
the dog owner went directly to court, it would be a one-step process. And it is a
burden on the Dog Board members to put a value on livestock. This is not
required by State law. He feels this provision should be removed and that
livestock owners be required to initiate this type of action in civil court
themselves.
If the Dog Board members make a decision about the value of livestock, there is
no provision for judicial revenue of that decision by the County. It is an
obligation that this group is not best suited to address.
The definition of livestock in County Code does not indicate if chickens should
be caged to be considered livestock. There have been inconsistent rulings on
this. The Courts have required them to be caged. Some involve free-range
chickens but on the owners’ property.
Another issue is the requirement for veterinary testing of a dog once
impounded, if that might provide further evidence of eating livestock, including
a fecal examination. It is not done that often because it can be days before the
Dog Board is aware of the case and by then it is too late. Mr. Laherty suggested
that this be left as discretionary.
The hearings process does not comply with State law, in writing, although in
practice it is handled that way. The wording needs to be changed.
Chair DeBone stated that there are cases when people let the ir chickens out
during the day or pens are not built well enough to keep out an aggressive dog.
Mr. Laherty stated that if the dog comes onto the chicken owners’ property, the
dog owner is responsible and can be cited for at least dog at large.
Commissioner Baney stated that once a dog kills chickens, it will happen again
if the opportunity arises. Mr. Laherty noted that despite the relatively small
impacts, they are very emotional to the parties. Chair DeBone said that the
Code is written to address large livestock killed or injured by dogs. It probably
was not the intention for it to include chickens. And there is a need to control
dogs that pack together and create a danger to livestock and humans.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 3 of 13
Mr. Laherty said that it gets emotional when it involves the disposition of the
dog. Sometimes the dog can be relocated but occasionally it results in
euthanasia.
Laurie Craghead said the definition of livestock comes from statute, and the
County can be more restrictive and not less. There is little case law on this.
She is not sure requiring fencing for the chickens can be supported.
Commissioner Unger stated that it is a control issue. If someone tries to keep
the chickens safe, that’s one thing. If the chickens are loose and the fencing is
inadequate, that is another thing.
Mr. Laherty said that the majority of cases now involve chickens. They may
have a coop but let the chickens out during the day. Usually they know it is a
dog because the instances are seen. There have been three cases with the same
chicken owners recently, but the fence is just three feet high. Two of three dogs
were shot by the chicken owner. He knows that this is an issue but does not
seem to want to fix the fencing. There should be more responsibility on the
chicken owners. This could escalate into a more serious issue.
Mr. Laherty asked if the Board wants more responsibility put on the livestock
owners. Commissioner Baney asked what the obligation of the dog owner is to
contain their dogs. Some dogs will stay close but others won’t.
Mr. Laherty indicated that in addition to the Dog Board ordinance, depending
on the level of the offense a lot of things can happen; but there is a dog at large
ordinance which cites them into court, resulting in a fine. There are serious
consequences for people who do not contain their dogs. They can be cited for
dog at large regardless of the livestock impacts.
Commissioner Unger thinks that the livestock needs to be protected in a
reasonable way; and dogs need to be kept on their own property as well.
Mr. Laherty added that rabbits and other fur bearing animals need to be
confined; but there is nothing noted for poultry. The Dog Board may have to
make a determination as to what is considered adequate for protection. A cage
would have a roof; a fence would not, so what is "reasonable" needs to be
determined.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 4 of 13
Commissioner Baney and Chair DeBone support reasonable containment, a
reasonable good-faith effort.
It is implied that there should be an exception for those returned to the owner.
Also, it is unclear what evidence has to be received in order for law
enforcement to impound a dog. At this point it has to come from a
complainant. A situation was that the livestock owner wanted the dog
impounded, but the livestock owner would not sign the complaint. The
livestock owner did not attend the hearing, either. The evidence should include
a written complaint form signed by the livestock owner.
Commissioner Unger said that the Deputy should be able to do this if there is
clear evidence of the offense. Mr. Laherty said that it might be a recurring
problem with a specific dog and the Sheriff’s Office says the Deputy can sign
the complaint in those cases.
Regarding substantial additional evidence done through a veterinarian, this
should be within the discretion of the County.
The dog owner is supposed to complete a hearing request form, but this is not
set forth in Code although it is in State law. It is what they have been doing
anyway.
State law requires any decision of the Dog Board to be supported by substantial
evidence, but this is not noted in Code. Code allows the Dog Board to charge
the complainant if the dog is not found guilty; the complainant would pay the
impound fees. Ms. Craghead said there is a one-time $20 impound fee plus
there likely are daily boarding fees. Mr. Laherty said that historically the bill
for the impound fees is paid by the dog owner or the County.
Some of these cases have deeper issues between neighbors. It might make
sense to have this in place in case it is not truly a dog board case .
State law requires that any dog found guilty of these infractions is to be ID
chipped.
Code does not address the requirements of mailing the decision to the dog
owner, although this is required by State law. It is done this way now, but
needs to be in writing.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 5 of 13
Code allows the livestock owner to submit a claim for compensation to the
County, and that this is paid by the County. The County would then have to
seek reimbursement. Small claims require a preponderance of evidence, when
it is just substantial evidence before the Dog Board.
Commissioner Baney asked if there could be a cap as to what the Dog Board
can set as a value of an animal. Mr. Laherty said there could be, and the
livestock owner can take any additional amounts to small claims court .
The costs to the dog owner can be $500 to $1,000 or more, and rarely does the
County get reimbursed for the costs of housing the dog. Trying to pursue
further costs would likely be fruitless.
Commissioner Unger asked why this does not go to Justice Court instead of
Circuit Court. Ms. Craghead said the decision of the Dog Board is final, and
anything further has to be in Circuit Court. Commissioner Baney asked if the
County can require the dog owner to pay the livestock owner direct. That is a
civil dispute. Ms. Craghead indicated the livestock owner could not enforce it.
Ms. Craghead said that the County pays impound fees for dogs to the shelters,
and if there is any further amount coming from the dog owners, the shelters
keep that as well. However, it is rare that the shelters get both.
If someone comes before the Dog Board and has a substantial loss, if there is a
limit set, the balance needs to be pursued in civil court. The Board spoke about
a $100 limit to cover smaller cases. Mr. Laherty said they can tell the livestock
owner to file a small claims case for anything larger. The Dog Board could
have authority to make an award for smaller cases. Commissioner Baney feels
that the fact that there is a dog at large citation plus a hearing, some people will
feel there has been at least an effort made towards resolution.
Commissioner Unger thought maybe the Dog Board should have some
flexibility if it is under or over a certain amount. Chair DeBone feels that
setting $100 is too rigid. Mr. Laherty thinks a cap is appropriate.
Commissioner Unger thinks $500 is appropriate from the County as there are
other avenues to pursue a higher amount.
Commissioners DeBone and Baney said that a $100 limit is correct, but this can
be revisited if needed.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 6 of 13
Mr. Laherty stated that the current wording is that the County ‘shall’ file against
the dog owner, and this should be worded to ‘may’ as appropriate.
In regard to adopting this by emergency, Ms. Craghead said it might be wise to
do so to remove the ‘shall’ requirements. Chair DeBone would like this to have
a public hearing, possibly with first reading at one meeting and second reading
at another.
3. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Support Letter for
Renewable Energy Proposals.
Commissioner Baney felt that the request for this letter is non-partisan, simply
that counties be allowed to share in the profit from renewables on public lands.
This might be appropriate since nearly 80% of the county is publicly owned. It
is supported by NACo.
Commissioner Unger stated that this would help give local control to local
impacts resulting from the development. This is on a national level. If this is
going to happen, the counties should be allowed to share any revenue to offset
the potential impacts at the local level. This is similar to what has happened
with forest revenue but would be for geothermal and other energy resources.
At the request of Chair DeBone, one paragraph was stricken and some minor
changes made, but the rest was felt appropriate to sign.
BANEY: Move signature of a letter of support.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
DEBONE: Abstain.
4. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Support Letter for
Governor’s Volunteer Awards (Jericho Road).
Mr. Kropp gave a brief overview. It is an annual award at the State level.
BANEY: Move signature of a letter of support.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
DEBONE: Chair votes yes.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 7 of 13
5. Before the Board was Discussion of Local Animal Welfare and
Consideration of Coordinating Programs and Efforts regarding Shelter
Activities.
Commissioner Baney wants to see a round table discussion of all parties who
provide spay/neuter services to animals in the community. The underlying
problem is pet overpopulation, primarily concerning cats, and the lack of
resources to control this. There is Cat Rescue, Adoption & Foster Team, Bend
Spay/Neuter Project, the Humane Societies and a few others. Clarification is
needed in terms of who should be taking on the role of educating the public and
taking control of this problem. She wants to know if there is a role for the
County to help encourage this effort.
Ms. Craghead said this is part of the contracts with the humane societies.
Commissioner Baney feels that there is a problem that is not being addressed,
and perhaps the County has a role in this. The question is whether the Board is
supportive of convening these groups, and have a conversation as to who is
doing what in this regard. It is mostly a cat issue but should relate to all
companion animals.
Chair DeBone said he is not a cat person but will go with the recommendation
for now. Commissioner Unger said that to get to a no kill status, spay/neuter
would help to get to critical mass. It will be an issue of how the costs get
covered. Commissioner Baney feels there should be a countywide and perhaps
a regional effort in this regard. The Board is supportive of these efforts.
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION, under ORS 192.660(2)(h), Pending or Threatened
Litigation.
The Board took action after the executive session.
BANEY: Move signature of an Order allowing staff to inform the Court,
upon receipt of an official remand of the Court, that the matter is to
be remanded to a County-appointed Hearings Officer.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
DEBONE: Chair votes yes.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 8 of 13
7. ADDITION TO THE AGENDA
The group took a short break, after which Consultant Greg Prothman joined the
meeting, as well as the assistant to the County Administrator, Dave Inbody, and
Anna Johnson, Communications. Mr. Prothman and his company have been
selected to assist the County in the recruitment of a new County Administrator.
Mr. Prothman said that the openings for positions such as this one has remained
fairly low, in large part because of the economy. Many people have remained
in place.
Mr. Prothman said they have taken the first cut at a recruitment brochure. What
has been left blank is the ‘ideal candidate’ information. This will be the
measuring point, and the Board will need to advise how far and wide to cast the
net. They typically start in the west or northwest, and distribute about 800
letters. These would mostly be directed at those people living in comparable
size communities.
Commissioner Unger said the community size criteria did not work with the
Redmond Airport; they ended up with a hire from a much larger community.
Ms. Prothman said they could expand the search higher but probably not go into
a smaller community.
They place additional advertising where county and city administrators would
see it. A lot of people have their site bookmarked as well. It will be by
definition a national search, but there would be a better chance of success of
attracting candidates from Colorado and west, where there is not as great a
cultural difference.
He will review applications and begin the screening process. He can identify
those that are rising and eliminate those that do not fit. He will then do
interviews as appropriate. Soon he will be prepared to update the Board. There
would have been preliminary background checks and Skype interviews. The
Board can go through the entire stack of resumes if desired, but at least the top
15 or 20 to see who, in their opinion, rises to the top.
Commissioner Baney said they went through a similar process and felt that they
had two good candidates, but those did not work out. She asked if there is a
secondary component in this situation. Mr. Prothman stated this is an important
issue, but there is a time factor involved; therefore, they do not want to wait too
long to act. If no one is found, they would conduct a further search. If the
person does not stay with the County for more than two years, not including
natural causes, the firm would do another search at that time.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 9 of 13
Mr. Kropp asked about the background check. Mr. Prothman said they ask for
structured references, such as supervisors, subordinates and others that are not
just the cream puff references. They will look also outside of those. They get a
sense of the pattern of employment, strengths and weaknesses. They verify
credit and criminal background. Some did not finish their degree as they claim.
Candidates are asked to disclose any involuntary separations or any lawsuits or
similar issues in the past, no matter how it resolved.
Mr. Prothman said that an investigator can be used for further background
research. Commissioner Baney stated that people seem to be hesitant to come
forward with whatever weaknesses they may have. The level of disclosure or
remembrance was widely varied. She wants to make sure it is different this time.
Mr. Inbody asked what the biggest roadblocks or concerns are. Mr. Prothman
said that they can generally figure out when someone is not being completely
truthful. They have done about 90 executive searches and three did not work
out well. He feels the process works and they know what to look for.
Candidate-supplied information is important, but so is input from others. He
looks for job patterns, especially if they are not completely accurate about dates
of employments. They look at the various skillsets needed for this type of
position. He can generally pinpoint any issues with particular skills, and
whether the same skill issue was the reason the person is no longer with a
previous employer.
Commissioner Baney stated they will be asked by the media how this search
will be different from the last. Mr. Kropp said that the firm will talk some
people into applying and others from not applying, outside the public eye. Mr.
Prothman said that credibility is important, and also being at arms -length.
Some candidates will contact him and ask if he thinks they might be a good fit
for a position.
Commissioner Baney may have a few names to forward on to Mr. Prothman.
Mr. Kropp said he also has a list.
Mr. Kropp asked about whether having city or county experience makes a
difference. Mr. Prothman responded that some have both, but generally the
skills are transferable. Counties are more difficult due to a wider range of
issues they have to address. Some counties provide more services than others
as well. There is a learning curve in any case. The working relationship with
the Board is the key component, along with the culture of the organization and
the area.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 10 of 13
Chair DeBone asked how much Mr. Prothman ends up being a mentor or career
coach. Mr. Prothman said they help managers to be successful in what they do.
There is a personal connection with many of them.
Anna Johnson asked how he would learn enough about the local culture to
convey this to others. Mr. Prothman stated that this is challenging, and he
hopes to learn some of that by talking with department directors and others.
Having Mr. Kropp as a key player in this process is encouraging.
Commissioner Unger asked if $120,000-$150,000 is the right salary range. Mr.
Prothman said it is a challenge to know if this is the right amount. The metro
areas tend to pay more, but the work is more complex. He does not know
enough yet to know if the top salary is sufficient to attract the best people.
However, there are political realities to consider. The proposal will include a
salary survey.
Mr. Kropp said the previous Administrator was terminated by a two to one vote.
He asked how this concern might be addressed. Mr. Prothman said that there
can be a wide variety of reasons for this that are not necessarily tied to job
performance. He wants to give candidates the best explanation possible and
where potential pitfalls may be.
Commissioner Baney asked how much research he has done on the Board. Mr.
Prothman said his wife has done much of it. The process starts today. He is
aware of the amenities of the area. He added that he assisted the City of Bend
with the search for Police Chief.
Mr. Kropp asked how candidates feel about a three-member Board. Mr.
Prothman replied that the more sophisticated ones know they have to be
credible with all three. They have to confident they are giving all three the
same input. Some think three is good because it is more manageable. Those
who are concerned about this may have other issues.
Commissioner Baney said that they need to understand the boundaries about
talking about things that may lead to a decision.
Commissioner Unger stated there is a macro view with the world, and a micro
view at the local level. Someone needs to understand budgets well and work
with departments, but someone needs to watch what is happening in the big
picture.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 11 of 13
Mr. Prothman said that in his experience, managers often are focused on the
short-term but need to look at least five years out, and think strategically. The
Board has to rely on the Administrator to have the whole picture in mind,
external and internal. The Administrator has to be sure the departments are
being run consistently and are achieving goals.
Commissioner Unger asked about training. There may be areas that need
improvement, but that did not happen with the last Administrator. Some things
cannot be changed while others can. A person needs to be adaptable to the
current situation.
Mr. Prothman stated that the person has to have fundamental core skillsets.
Those have to be in place first. It is not like a small city where you might be
able to learn as you go. The basics need to be there, and minor changes can
happen later.
Mr. Kropp said that the Administrator has to do actual work. There is not a lot
of staff to pick up the slack. The Administrator has to make decisions and get
involved and not just delegate. Mr. Prothman feels that it is critical to do staff
reports and work with the media. The number of candidates that expect a lot of
staff help is getting smaller.
Commissioner Unger voiced concerns about how the spouses are handled. Mr.
Prothman stated that he always asks about the family. Does the spouse work
and plan to continue on a career path? Are the children at an age where this
might be critical? There has to be a family plan, including the sale of the
current home. He recommends bringing out the spouse for interviews, and have
a program set up for the spouse to meet with employment counselors if
appropriate, and see all the amenities of the area.
Debbie Legg said that it is important to have that conversation early on so it
does not become an issue later.
Mr. Prothman confirmed the afternoon’s schedule and the plan going forward.
(See attached form.) Advertising can start as early as next week. He is racing a
deadline that has to do with the school year. This will help with those
candidates that have children in school. There are concerns about vacations but
via Skype, interviews can be handled from about anywhere. There is no perfect
time for everyone.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, June 25, 2012
Page 12 of 13
Commissioner Unger said they opened the position up to the private sector. It
was very telling that there were great differences. Mr. Prothman stated that
when you get down to selection, you find decisive people that make quick
decisions in the private sector, but it does not always fit in the public arena.
The process is important even if the decision is the right one.
Public sector managers have to know policy enough to know what can be done
quickly and what needs a greater process, more input from the Board or
citizens. If the person has served in public sector agencies, they may have
applicable skillsets. But if they have no public sector experience, they may be
frustrated by the public process.
Commissioner Unger asked whether the Commissioners should talk with
anyone who calls them about this. Mr. Prothman said that most candidates will
stick with the process. Those should be referred back to him, as they all should
know that there is a process to follow and this could be a red flag. It is like a
land use process where the Commissioners can’t receive information outside of
the process.
Commissioner Unger asked what a typical job length is for a position like this.
He feels five or six years is probably where most end up. Employees with the
County tend to stay for twenty years or longer. Mr. Prothman said the industry
average is about 3.5 to four years, although some have been in place for
decades. If the fit is good, and they enjoy the work, they could stay for seven or
eight years. They tend to closely look at those who have not been in a position
for two years. They tell candidates that they need to be able to commit for at
least five years.
Mr. Kropp said that individually the Commissioners should tell Mr. Prothman
what is expected when working with other elected officials, especially the
District Attorney and Sheriff, who are elected officials and have very strong
personalities.
Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 1:20 p.m.
DATED this I (""-Day of ~ 2012 for the
Deschutes County Board of Commissioner
~~
Anthony DeBone, Chair
Alan Unger, Vice Chair
ATTEST: T ~ammy aney, ommlSSloner ~~
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, June 25,2012
Page 13 of13
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org
WORK SESSION AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
10:00 A.M., MONDAY, JUNE 25,2012 -Note earlier time!
Allen Room -Administration Building -1300 NW Wall St., Bend
1. FINANCEffAX Update -Marty Wynne
2. DISCUSSION of Possible Code Changes regarding Dog Board of Supervisors
Decisions and Requirements -John Laherty
3. CONSIDERATION of Signature ofa Support Letter for Renewable Energy
Proposals -Commissioner Baney
4. CONSIDERATION of Signature of a Support Letter for Governor's
Volunteer Awards (Jericho Road) Erik Kropp
5. DISCUSSION of Local Animal Welfare and Consideration of Coordinating
Programs and Efforts regarding Shelter Activities Commissioner Baney
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION, under ORS 192.660(2)(h), Pending or Threatened
Litigation Mark Pilliod
7. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
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; ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues; or other executive session items.
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.
N-0
'"N '". ellIJ"\ ....,
N "C
<U "Cc CO::::I ..... .CO.;.. E1'0
I"0 ellc
0
~
-
=It::
ell
C,
0'..r:.
Q.
--"----
i8tl
51
'<J t
oj
M
'" (U
co
Q. W
C ..J ~ A
.....
0
0
..5: -'" cS:'"cu
V\ ~
.:¥. ~I
!J
=It::
.... Q,J'0 ~I -~ ~ ~
\~ (U
co
Q.
I
f ~ i
I
Monthly Meeting with Board of Commissioners
Finance Director/Treasurer
AGENDA
June 25, 2012
(1) Monthly Investment Report
(2) May 2012 Financials
•
~
Investments By County Function
General $ 124,057,178
Totallny..bnent. $ 124,057,17'
Totallnyesbn.nt Income
Less Fee·; 5% of Inyest. Income
Iny.sbnent Income -Net
Investment Income
Fiscal Year 2011-12
l lIay-12 I I Y-T-D
$ 65,660 $ 777,491
--
15,110 777,491
~3,283~ ~38,875l
1$ 12,377 $ 731,111
Commercial Paper
Corporate Notes
Time Certificates
U. S. Treasuries
Federal Agencies
Bank.n'A~s
LGIP/BOTC
$
12,963,439
9,255,254
13,082,406
0.00%
10.45%
7.41%
0.00%
10.55%
0.00%
Total Portfolio: By Investment Types
Corporate Time Notes Certificates
10% 7% Federal
Category Maximums:
U.S. Treasuries 100%
ILGIP 100% ~Federal Agencies 75%
Banker's Acceptances 25%
Time Certificates 2&%
Commercial Paper 20%
C~~orate Notes 10%
Comparators
3 Month Trcas ~ O . OF ~
12 M o nU, Trcd::' '' 0.18 '.;
3 Month C P ~ 0 20 ', u
AyerageMaturity in Days
General ---121
'Agencies
11%
LGIP/BOTC
72%
Memorandum
Date: June 18. 2012
To: Board of County Commissioners
Erik Kropp, Interim County Administrator
From: Marty Wynne, Finance Director
RE: Monthly Financial Reports
Attached please find May 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
Eleven Months Ended May 31, 2012
Year to Date
Actual Variance
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital $ 7.300.000 $
Revenues
Property Taxes 18,425,886
Gen. Rev. -excl. Taxes 2,183,794
Assessor 725,080
County Clerk 1,346,315
BOPTA 11,365
District Attorney 273,780
FinancelTax 177,742
Veterans 56,229
Property Management 88,183
Grant Projects 1,833
8.245,725 $ 945,725
21,346,272 2,920,386
2,154,028 (29,766)
755,202 30,122
1,321,121 (25,194)
14,788 3,423
210,114 (63,666)
210,547 32,805
52,331 (3,899)
88,683 500
1,833 0
Total Revenues 23,290,207 26,154,920 2,864,713
TOTAL RESOURCES 30,590,207
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Assessor 3,121,525
County Clerk 1,305,301
BOPTA 66,369
District Attorney 4,472,688
FinancelTax 745,844
Veterans 240,272
Property Management 236,192
Grant Projects 108,822
Non-Departmental 1,665,549
Contingency 4,790,253
34,400,645 3,810,438
100%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
113%
106%
90%
95%
90%
119%
70%
109%
85%
92%
92%
103%
105%
I Exp·%1
2,992,393 129,132 92% 88%
1,031,404 273,897 92% 72%
58,648 7,721 92% 81%
4,169,861 302,827 92% 85%
696,771 49,073 92% 86%
233,377 6,895 92% 89%
235,709 484 92% 91%
108,871 (49) 92% 92%
946,019 719,530 92% 52% e)
4,790,253 92% n/a f)
16,752,815 10,473,051 6,279,764 92% 57%
Transfers Out 12,813,726 12,554,322 259,404 92% 90%
$7,300,000
20,100,967
2,382,321
790,996
1,468,707
12,398
298,669
193,900
61,341
96,200
2,000
25,407,499
32,707,499
3,405,300
1,423,965
72,402
4,879,296
813,648
262,115
257,664
118,715
1,816,962
5,225,730
18,275.797
13,978,610
$
Variance
$8,245,725 $ 945,725
21,446,272 1,345,305
2,382,321
790,996
1,412,207 (56,500)
14,788 2,390
325,676 27,007
210,547 16,647
64,351 3,010
96,200
2,000
26,745,358 1,337,859
34,991,083 2.283,584
3,283,300 122,000
1,183,965 240,000
72,402
4,511,771 367,525
799,648 14,000
260,100 2,015
257,664
118,715
1,700,962 116,000
5,225,730
12,188,527 6,087,270
13,978,610
a)
b)
c)
c)
d)
c)
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 29.566.541 23.027,373 6.539.168 92% 71% 32,254,407 26,167.137 6,087,270
NET (Resources Requirements) 1.023,667 11,373,272 10,349,606 f) 453,092 8,823,946 8,370,854
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 8,700,000 I
a) Projection is year to date actual plus $150,000 estimated to be received in June.
b) Includes annual payments: Tax on Electric Co-ops $489,027, PIL T $471.823
c) A & T Grant received quarterly-July, October, January & April. Total budgeted $847.898; total received $840,927
d) 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)
e) Budget includes $576,144 for payment to LED #2. This payment normally made annually in June and is projected to be
$116,000 less than budgeted
f) Appropriation (authority to spend) transferred to Video Lottery Fund $34.697, F & E $47,295, Annual Fair $46,100
and Funds 160/170 $325,000
Page 1
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Revenues
Federal Grants
SB #1 065-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
Total Revenues
Transfers In-General Fund
TOTAL RESOURCES
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Community Justice-Juvenile
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Contingency
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS
NET (Resources -Requirements)
COMM JUSTICE-JUVENilE
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31,2012
Year to Date
Budget I Actual I Variance LFY % l Coil. %
$1,101,374
9,167
45,833
13,750
22,917
199,373
81,116
92
64,167
55
37
275
6,875
2,200
458
5,500
141,284
18,333
611,432
4,878,005
6,590,811
$1,099,010
6,932
43,916
12,868
21,489
266,982
65,420
220
84,213
337
1,040
7,424
1,200
934
2,905
109,341
15,000
640,221
4,878,005
6,617,236
$ (2,364) 100% 100%
(2,235) 92% 69% a)
(1,917) 92% 88%
(882) 92% 86%
(1,428) 92% 86%
67,609 92% 123% b)
(15,696) 92% 74% c)
128 92% 220%
20,046 92% 120% d)
282 92% 562% e)
(37) 92% 0%
765 92% 347% e)
549 92% 99%
(1,000) 92% 50% f)
476 92% 187%
(2,595) 92% 48% g)
(31,943) 92% 71% h)i)
(3,333) 92% 75% i)
28,789 92% 96%
92% 92%
26,425 92% 93%
I Exp. %1
4,683,313
1,118,089
36,758
46,200
614,668
6,499,028
91,783
4,531,380
1,056,440
37,800
5,625,620
991,616
151,933
61,649
36,758
8,400
614,668
873,408
899,833
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
89% j)
87% b)h)
0%
75%
n/a
79%
Budget
YearEnd
Prolection Variance
$1,101,374 $1,099,010 $
10,000 10,000
50,000 50,000
15,000 16,000
25,000 25,000
217,498 355,730
88,490 80,000
100 250
70,000 111,000
60 400
40
300 1,200
7,500 8,000
2,400 1,200
500 1,000
6,000 5,500
154,128 134,620
20,000 20,000
(2,364)
1,000
138,232
(8,490)
150
41,000
340
(40)
900
500
(1,200)
500
(500)
(19,508)
667,016 819,900 152,884
5,321,459 5,321,459
7,089,849 7,240,369 150,520
5,109,069
1,219,733
40,100
50,400
670,547
4,970,000
1,155,000
40,100
50,400
139,069
64,733
670,547
7,089,849 6,215,500 874,349
1,024,869 1,024,869
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 1,010,415 I
a) Federal Grant billing, reimbursed quarterly in arrears
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 -$7,080
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--$2,352 billing outstanding
h) CFC (JCP) funding less than anticipated. Projections of revenue and expenditures adjusted accordingly
i) Grants paid quarterly Page 2
j) Actual for the year projected to be less than budgeted due to vacant positions
SHERIFF -Fund 255
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31, 2012
RESOURCES:
Year to Date
Actual Variance Variance
Beg. Net Working Capital $ $ $ 100% nla $ $ $
Revenues
Law Enf Dist Countywide 20,244,419 16,636,037 (3 ,608 ,382) 92% 75% * 22 ,084,821 18,593 ,066 (3,491 .755)
92% 73% *
Total Revenues 33,489,056 27,219,336 (6,269,720) 92% 75% 36,533,516 30,356,554 (6,176,962)
TOTAL RESOURCES 33,489,056 27,219,336 (6,269,720) 92% 75% 36,533,516 30,356,554 (6,176,962)
REQUIREMENTS: Exp. %1
EXPENDITURES & TRANSFERS
Sheriffs Division 2,368,613 2,255,139 113,474 92% 87% a) 2,583,941 2,478,941 105,000
Civil 755,420 686,982 68,438 92% 83% b) 824,095 748,995 75,100
Automotive/Communications 1,567,431 1,386,838 180,593 92% 81% c) 1,709,925 1,558,107 151,818
Investigations/Evidence 1,589,700 1,315,878 273,822 92% 76% b) 1,734,218 1,538,664 195,554
Patrol/Civil/Comm Supp 7,337,645 7,188,858 148,787 92% 90% b) 8,004,704 7,862,704 142,000
Records 660,651 635,441 25,210 92% 88% 720,710 694,610 26,100
Adult Jail 9,630,983 8,639,348 991,635 92% 82% d) 10,506,527 9,704,527 802,000
Court Security 262,719 251,967 10,752 92% 88% 286,602 275,402 11,200
Emergency Services 176,848 161,931 14,917 92% 84% 192,925 175,525 17,400
Special Services Division 1,223,898 1,009,995 213,903 92% 76% 1,335,161 1,283,161 52,000
Regional Work Center 2,766,927 2,620,514 146,413 92% 87% b) 3,018,466 2,868,366 150,100
Training Division 297,243 241,463 55,780 92% 74% 324,265 285,165 39,100
Other Law Enforcement Svcs 579,568 557,857 21,711 92% 88% 632,256 609,156 23,100
Non-Departmental 67,128 67,128 92% 92% 73,231 73,231
Contingency 4,020,949 4,020,949 92% n/a 4,386,490 4,386,490
Transfers Out -DIS Fund 183,333 200,000 (16,667) 92% 100% 200,000 200,000
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 33,489,056 27,219,339 6,269,717 92% 75% 36,533,516 30,356,554 6,176,962
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
c) Expenses for Communication System Study will be incurred next fiscal year
d) Less than budgeted expenditures due to open positions, jail bed rental expenses, and jail management software costs
Page 3
Fund 701 LED-Countywide
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31,2012
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 13,114,604 14,990,406 1,875,802 92% 105% 14,306,841 15,100,406 793,565
Tax Revenues -Prior 459,250 710,590 251,340 92% 142% 501,000 740,590 239,590
Federal Grants & Reimb 32,267 30,784 (1,483) 92% 87% 35,200 35,200
State Grant 44,435 56,577 12,142 92% 117% 48,475 56,577 8,102
Transp. of State Wards
SB 1145
Prisoner Housing
Des. Cty Video Lottery Grant
4,583
1,409,524
4,583
6,304
1,479,991
99,763
5,000
1,721
70,467
99,763
417
92%
92%
92%
92%
126%
96%
nfa
100%
a)
b)
5,000
1,537,663
5,000
7,000
1,479,991
120,000
5,000
2 ,000
(57,672)
120,000
Des Cty Court Security 83,417 82,261 (1,156) 92% 90% 91,000 91,000
Des Cty Juvenile Contract 3,832 3,224 (608) 92% 77% 4,180 4,180
Title III Reimbursement
Transport
Other
137,500
917
40,358
465
4,074
(97,142)
(452)
4,074
92%
92%
92%
27%
46%
nla
c) 150,000
1,000
100,000
1,000
4,074
(50,000)
4,074
DC Fair & Expo Center 3,506 (3,506) 92% 0% 3,825 3,825
Inmate Commissary Fees 6,050 13,823 7 ,773 92% 209% 6,600 14,000 7,400
Work Center Work Crews 45,833 33,630 (12,203) 92% 67% 50,000 50,000
Concealed Handgun Classes
Inmate Telephone Fee
Soc Sec Incentive-Fed
3,208
44,000
4,583
3,650
78,953
9,200
442
34,953
4,617
92%
92%
92%
104%
164%
184%
d)
3,500
48,000
5,000
3,650
84,000
9,200
150
36,000
4,200
Miscellaneous 4,583 7,681 3,098 92% 154% 5,000 8,500 3,500
Oregon Mentors
Debit Card Fee
13,750 7,239
251
(6 ,511)
251
92%
92%
48%
nfa
15,000 15,000
275 275
Medical Services Reimb 14,667 12,820 (1,847) 92% 80% 16,000 16,000
Restitution 4,583 1,747 (2,836) 92% 35% 5,000 5,000
Sheriff Fees 183,333 208,619 25,286 92% 104% 200,000 225,000 25,000
Interest 25,972 45,849 19,877 92% 162% 28,333 50,000 21,667
Interest on Unsegregated
Donations -"Shop with a Cop"
3,239 1,495
12 ,022
(1,744)
12,022
92%
92%
42%
nfa e)
3,533 3,533
12,022 12,022
Donations 250 250 92% nfa 250 250
Sale of Reportable Assets 917 7,599 6,682 92% nla 1,000 8,000 7,000
Total Revenues 15,653,136 17,954,626 2,301,490 92% 105% 17,076,150 18,2531274 1,177,124
TOTAL RESOURCES 20,761,807 24,045,360 3,283,553 92% 108% 22,184,821 24,344,008 2,159,187
REQUIREMENTS: I Exp. %1
Fund 255 Departments:
Sheriffs Services 2,221,735 2,115,298 106,437 92% 87% 2,423,711 2,325,222 98,489
Civil 755,420 686,982 68,438 92% 83% 824,095 748,995 75,100
AutofComm 586,517 518,941 67,576 92% 81% 639,837 583,028 56,809
Adult Jail 9 ,630,983 8,639,348 991,635 92% 82% 10,506,527 9,704,527 802,000
Court Security 262 ,719 251,967 10,752 92% 88% 286,602 275,402 11,200
Emergency Services 176,848 161,931 14,917 92% 84% 192,925 175,525 17,400
Special Services 850,866 702,159 148,707 92% 76% 928,217 892,066 36,151
Work Center 2,766,927 2,620,514 146,413 92% 87% 3,018,466 2,868 ,366 150,100
Training 181,464 147,411 34,053 92% 74% 197,961 174,090 23,870
Other (CODE, Forensic) 579,568 557 ,857 21,711 92% 88% 632,256 609,156 23,100
Non Dept -ISF Charges 33,631 33,631 0 92% 92% 36,689 36,689
Non Dept -Jamison DIS 183,333 200,000 (16,667) 92% 100% 200,000 200,000
Contingency 2,014,408 2,014,408 92% 0% 2,197,536 2,197,536
T ota l t o Fund 255 20,244,419 16,636,038 3,608 ,38 1 22,084 ,8 21 18,593,066 3,491,755
Transfer to Reserve Fund (703) 91,667 100,000 (8,333) 92% 100% 100,000 100,000
Total Requirements 20,336,086 16,736,038 3,600,047 92% 75% 22,184,821 18,693,066 3,491,755
Net 425,721 7,309,322 6,883,601 5,650,941 5,650,941
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 4,507,352 I
• 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) Less than planned SAR mission Title III reimbursements . Funds will carryover to next year
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
Eleven Months Ended May 31, 2012
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Revenues
Tax Revenues -Current
Tax Revenues -Prior
Federal Grants & Reimb
Federal Grants-BlM
US Forest Service
State Grant
SB #1065 Court Assessment
Marine Board License Fee
Bureau of Reclamation
Des Cty General Fund Grant
Des Cty Transient Room Tax
Des Cty Tax/Fin Contract
City of Sisters
Des Cty CDD Contract
Des Cty Solid Waste Contr
Des Cty Clerk/Election
School Districts
Claims Reimbursement
Security & Traffic Reimb
Seat Belt Program
Miscellaneous
False Alarm Fees
Restitution
Sheriff Fees
Court Fines & Fees
Impound Fees
Restitution -Street Crimes
Seizure/Forfeiture
Interest
Interest on Unsegregated
Grants-Private
Donations
Sale of Equip & Material
Sale of Reportable Assets
$2,936,523
6,735,781
235,583
11,000
22,917
72,188
184,224
55,000
130,471
528,132
1,901,035
412,464
49,836
49,836
1,833
73,333
4,583
11,000
7,333
1,833
9,167
105 ,417
6 ,417
458
9,167
1,650
5,500
18.333
$3,004,533
7,538 ,451
353,199
11,377
22 ,758
59 ,063
117,534
43 ,916
73,663
22 ,720
1,901 ,035
540
412 ,464
49 ,836
49 ,836
595
23,445
24 ,719
680
7,245
13 ,009
1,500
2 ,219
8 ,649
125,138
4 ,300
1,324
21,229
754
7,000
13 ,755
11 ,601
66,490
$ 68,010 100%
802,670 92%
117,616 92%
377 92%
(159) 92 %
(13 ,126) 92%
(66,690) 92%
(11,084) 92%
(56,808) 92%
22,720 92%
(528,132) 92%
(0) 92%
540 92%
0 92%
(1 ) 92%
(1 ) 92%
(1,239) 92 %
(49,888) 92%
24,719 92%
(3,903) 92%
(3,755) 92%
5,676 92%
(333) 92%
2,219 92%
(518) 92 %
19,721 92%
(2,117) 92 %
(458) 92%
1,324 92%
12,062 92 %
(896) 92%
7,000 92%
13,755 92%
6,101 92%
48 ,157 92 %
102%
103%
137%
95%
n/a
75%
56%
73%
52%
n/a
0%
92%
92%
92%
92%
30%
29%
n/a
14%
60%
163%
75%
n/a
66 %
109%
61 %
0%
n/a
212%
42%
n/a
n/a
193%
332%
$2,936,523
7,348,125
257,000
12,000
25,000
78,750
200,972
60,000
a) 142,332
b)
c) 576,144
c) 2,073,856
449,961
54 ,366
54 ,366
2,000
d) 80,000
5,000
12,000
8,000
2,000
10,000
115,000
7 ,000
500
10,000
1,800
6,000
e) 20,000
$3,004,533
7,578 ,451
373 ,199
12 ,000
25 ,000
78,750
200,972
60,000
142,332
26 ,000
460 ,144
2 ,189,856
540
449 ,961
54,366
54 ,366
2 ,000
40 ,000
24 ,719
5,000
12,000
14 ,000
2,000
5,000
10,000
140,000
7,000
500
1 ,324
23,000
1 ,000
7 ,000
13 ,755
15 ,000
66,490
$ 68,010
230,326
116,199
26,000
(116,000)
116,000
540
(40,000)
24,719
6,000
5,000
25 ,000
1,324
13,000
(800)
7,000
13,755
9,000
46,490
Total Revenues 10,644,491 10,990,039 345,548 60% 96% 11 z612,172 12z095,725 483,553
TOTAL RESOURCES 13,581,014 13,994,571 413,557 60% 96% 14,548,695 15,100,258 551,563
REQUIREMENTS: 1 Exp %1
Fund 255 Departments:
Sheriffs Services 146,878 139,841 7,036 92% 87% 160,230 153,719 6 ,511
Auto/Comm 980,914 867,897 113,017 92% 81% 1,070,088 975,079 95 ,009
Investigations 1,589,700 1,315,878 273,822 92% 76% 1,734,218 1,538,664 195 ,554
Patrol 7,337,645 7,188,858 148,787 92% 90% 8,004,704 7 ,862,704 142 ,000
Records 660,651 635 ,441 25 ,210 92 % 88% 720,710 694 ,610 26,100
Special Services 373,032 307,836 65 ,195 92 % 76% 406 ,944 391,095 15,849
Training 115,779 94,052 21 ,727 92 % 74% 126,304 111,075 15,230
Non Dept -ISF Charges 33,497 33 ,497 92 % 92% 36,542 36,542
Contingenc 2 ,006 ,541 2 ,006541 92% 0% 2 ,188,954 2188954
63488 I
Transfer to Reserve Fund (704) 91,667 100,000 (8,333) 92% 100% 100,000 100,000
Total Requirements 13,336,304 10 ,683,301 2 ,653,003 92% 73% 14 ,548 ,695 11,863,488 2 ,685 ,207
Net 244 ,710 3 ,311,270 3,066 ,560 3 ,236,770 3 ,236 ,770
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 2,859,915 I
• Payment to Sheriffs Fund adjusted monthly to equal actual expenditures attributable to rural services.
a) Reimbursement requested semiannually in January and June
b) BOR patrol contract signed after budget adopted
Page 5 c) Received annually in June. less will be received from General Fund due to additional resources available from Transient Room Tax
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
Eleven Months Ended May 31, 2012
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working $1 $ 1,702,129 $ 100% 107% $1,596,918 $1,702,129 $ 105,211
Revenues
Medicare Reimbursement 550 770 220 92% 128% 600 800 200
State Grant 2,484,299 (88,705) 92% 88% 2,710,144
Child Dev & Rehab Center 4 92% 104%
State Miscellaneous 1 72 92% 55% alb) 224,829
OMAP 480,196 548,857 92% 105% 523,850 582,000 58,150
Title 19 352 352 92% nfa 500 500
Family Planning Proj 476,667 448,039 (28,628) 92% 86% 520,000
Local Grants 41 63,145 92% 232% 45,000
Water Program-Base Fee 58 (10,342) 92% 67% a) 42,000 38,000 (4,000)
Contract 51,092 51,092 92% nfa 51,092 51,092
Water Program-Field Work 51,166 28,295 (22,871 ) 92% 51% a) 55,817 55,817
H20 Sys Insp-Priv Wells 183 (183) 92% 0% 200 200
Miscellaneous 92% nfa 7,000
Patient Insurance Fees 124,098 166,218 92% 123% 170,000 34,620
Health DepUPatient Fees 108,873 94,345 92% 79% 118,770 110,000 (8,770)
Vital Records-Birth 28,050 34,545 6,495 92% 113% 30,600 35,000 4,400
Vital Records-Death 93,185 1,518 92% 93% 1 100,000
Environmental Health 91 92% 105% c) 704,350 745,000
NSF Fee 60 60 92% nfa 60 60
Interest on Investments 11,000 (1 92% 79% 12,000 10,000 (2,000)
Donations 23,861 10,052 (13,809) 92% 39% 26,030 15,000 (11,030)
Interlund Contract 181,855 125,703 (56,152) 92% 63% a) 198,387 160,000 (38,387)
Administrative Fee 92% 92%
Total Revenues 13,106 92% 92%
Transfers In-General Fund 7 2,124,617 92% 92% 2,317,765 2,317,765
Transfers In-PH Res Fund 27,500 22,500 (5,000) 92% 75% 30,000 30,000
Transfers In-Gen. Fund Other 92% 75%
TOTAL RESOURCES 92% 94% 9,497,403 9,747,891 250,488
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Personal Services 5,674,838 80,945 92% 90% 6,190,732 6,103,000 87,732
Materials and Services 1,923,803 240,569 92% 80% 2,098,694 1,904,960 193,734
Capital 1 92% 51% 131 89,000 42,500
Transfers Out 262,167 214,500 92% 75% 286,000 286,000
Contingency 92% nfa
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 8,705,954 7,558,218 1,147,736 92% 80% 9,497,403 8,382,960 1,114,443
NET (Resources -Requirements)
Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget
a) Received quarterly, in arrears
b) Elimination of the State self
c) Line includes, among other items, 1) Fees 2012 Budget=$450,000) and 2) Pool & Spa Fee (FY 2012 Page 6
10,000). These are due and collected primarily in December and January
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31, 2012
Year to Date
Actual Variance 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 5,042 4,970 (72) 92% 90% 5,500 5,600 100
Divorce Filing Fees 121,917 133,924 12.007 92% 101% 133,000 150,000 17,000
Domestic Partnership Fee 92 65 (27) 92% 65% 100 100
Federal Grants 253,593 217,488 (36,105) 92% 79% 276.647 276,647
State Grants 6.383.852 7.108,851 724.999 92% 102% a) 6,964.202 7.566.736 602.534
State Miscellaneous 113.825 47.987 (65.838) 92% 39% b)c) 124.173 61,860 (62.313)
ABHA 164,728 164.728 92% nla d) 170.000 170,000
Title 19 258,772 184,613 (74,159) 92% 65% 282,297 202,300 (79,997)
Liquor Revenue 96,250 115,758 19,508 92% 110% 105,000 141,500 36,500
School Districts 69,300 80,300 11,000 92% 106% 75,600 80,300 4,700
Miscellaneous 12,833 7,322 (5,511 ) 92"/0 52% 14,000 14,000
Patient Insurance Fees 104,225 182,497 78,272 92% 161% 113.700 192,000 78,300
Patient Fees 1,656 946 (710) 92% 52% 1,807 1,150 (657)
Interest on Investments 22,917 23,282 365 92% 93% 25,000 26,700 1,700
Rentals 12,008 13,125 1,117 92% 100% b) 13,100 14,000 900
Donations 108 108 92% n/a 200 200
Administrative Fee 4,060,548 4,014,675 (45,873) 92% 91% 4,429,689 4,429,689
Sheriff 18,333 (18,333) 92% 0% e) 20,000 (20,000)
Interfund Contract-Gen Fund 116,417 109,686 (6,731 ) 92% 86% b) 127,000 127,000
Comm. on Children & Fam 725 725 92% nfa 725 725
Total Revenues 11,651,580 12,411,050 759,470 92% 98% 12,710,815 13,460,507 749,692
Transfers In-General Fund
Transfers In-OHP-CDO
Transfers In-Acute Care Svcs
Transfers In-ABHA
1,158,223
248,785
231,473
275,791
1,158,223
363,073
231,473
290,605
114,287
14,814
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
134%
92%
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 16,834,611 17,562,587 727,975 92% 97% 18,067,869 18,868,250 800,381
REQUIREMENTS: I Exp. %1
Expenditures
Personal Services 9,559,171 8,743,723 815,448 92% 84% 10,428,186 9,486,500 941,686
Materials and Services 5,321,937 5,150,310 171,627 92% 89% 5,805,749 5,350,000 455,749
Capital Outlay 357,500 111,406 246,094 92% 29% 390,000 390,000
Transfers Out 262,167 214,500 47,667 92% 75% 286,000 286,000
Contingency 1,061,440 1,061,440 92% nfa 1,157,934 1,157,934
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 16,562,215 14,219,939 2,342,276 92% 79% 18,067,869 15,512,500 2,555,369
NET (Resources -Requirements) 272,396 3,342,648 3,070,251 3,355,750 3,355,750
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 3,320,9681
a) 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 Sheriff's Department eliminated
f) Transfer made quarterly Page 7
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
Total Revenues
Trans In-GF
Trans In-GF for Lng Rng Ping
Trans In-Other
TOTAL RESOURCES
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
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31,2012
Year to Date
Budget I Actual l Variance l FY % I Coil. %
Budget
Year End
Proiection Variance
229,822 131,776 $ (98,046) 100% 57% $ 229,822 $ 131,776 (98,046)
22,321
917
152,808
1,100,807
237,554
146,850
257,033
618,658
232,582
25,226
1,721
157,456
897,403
211,707
89,869
275,918
495,025
219,205
2,905
804
4,648
(203,404)
(25,847)
(56,981 )
18,885
(123,633)
(13,377)
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
104%
172%
94%
75%
82%
56%
98%
73%
86%
a)
b)
b)
c)
b)
d)
24,350
1,000
166,700
1,200,880
259,150
160,200
280,400
674,900
253,726
27,500
1,900
171,800
1,075,000
235,000
115,000
301,000
565,000
240,000
3,150
900
5,100
(125,880)
(24,150)
(45,200)
20,600
(109,900)
(13,726)
2,769,530 2,373,531 (395,999) 92% 79% 3,021,306 2,732,200 (289,106)
668,825
454,080
92
4,122,349
677,159
454,080
3,636,546
8,334
(92)
(485,803)
92%
92%
92%
92%
93%
92%
0%
81%
729,625
495,360
100
4,476,213
849,625
495,360
4,208,961
120,000
{100~
(267,252)
Exp. %1
1,294,167
117,109
187,523
515,196
239,663
151,882
131,182
567,419
438,906
159,395
300,757
1,294,350
111,833
191,864
507,980
196,897
155,957
138,816
543,543
413,076
160,242
(183)
5,276
(4,341)
7,216
42,766
(4,075)
(7,634)
23,876
25,830
(847)
300,757
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
88%
94%
90%
75%
94%
97%
88%
86%
92%
nla
e)
f)
d)
1,411,818
127,755
204,570
562,032
261,450
165,689
143,108
619,002
478,806
173,885
328,098
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
31,410
(6,024)
(1,754)
10,208
26,773
328,098
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 4,103,199 3,714,559 388,640 92% 83% 4,476,213 4,071,033 405,180
NET (Resources -Requirements) 19,150 (78,012) (97,162)
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget
Revenues 2,373,531
Expenditures 3,714,559
Net from Operations {1,341,028)
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
137,928 137,928
10,000 I
3,021,306 2,732,200 (289,106)
4,476,213 4,071,033 405,180
(1,454,907l (1,338,833~ 116,074
Page 8
ROAD
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31.2012
Year to Date
Budget I Actual I Variance IFY % I Coli. %
!
Budget
Year End
Projection Variance I
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital $3,417,158 $ 3,417,158 $ o 100% 100% $ 3,417,158 $ 3,417,158 $ o
Revenues
System Development Charge 1,617 1,617 92% nfa 1,617 1,617
Federal Reimbursements 550.000 600,000 50,000 92% 100% a) 600,000 600.000
Federal Grant (ARRA) 18.333 20,000 1.667 92% 100% b) 20,000 20,000
Mineral Lease Royalties 36.667 143,712 107,045 92% 359% c) 40,000 143,712 103,712
Forest Receipts 1,201,899 1,322.661 120.762 92% 101% d) 1,311,162 1,322,661 11,499
State Miscellaneous 458,371 500,041 41,670 92% 100% e) 500,041 1,355,185 855,144
Motor Vehicle Revenue 10,395,000 9,514.075 (880,925) 92% 84% f) 11.340,000 10,460,748 (879,252)
City of Bend 252,083 29,941 (222.142) 92% 11% g) 275,000 29,941 (245,059)
City of Redmond 320.833 4,248 (316.585) 92% 1% g) 350,000 220,000 (130,000)
City of Sisters 9,167 1,135 (8.032) 92% 11% g) 10,000 1,135 (8,865)
City of La Pine 9.167 (9.167) 92% 0% g) 10,000 (10.000)
Admin Recovery (SOC) 917 2,259 1.342 92% 226% 1,000 2,259 1,259
Miscellaneous 18,333 35,859 17,526 92% 179% 20,000 40,000 20,000
Road Vacations 917 1,500 583 92% 150% 1,000 2,000 1,000
Interest on Investments 18.333 18,513 180 92% 93% 20,000 19,731 (269)
Parking Fees 132 (132) 92% 0% 144 144
Interfund Contract 669,167 (669.167) 92% 0% h) 730,000 746,579 16,579
Equipment Repairs 183.333 244,414 61,081 92% 122% 200,000 250.000 50,000
Vehicle Repairs 82,500 (82,500) 92% 0% 90,000 78,800 (11,200)
LID Construction 9,167 (9.167) 92% 0% h) 10,000 (10,000)
Vegetation Management 65,542 2,056 (63,486) 92% 3% h) 71,500 40,175 (31,325)
Forester 22,917 4,486 (18,431) 92% 18% h) 25,000 29,000 4,000
Car Washes 3.208 4,068 860 92% 116% 3,500 5,000 1,500
Car Rental 893 893 92% nfa 1,000 1,000
Sale of Equip & Material 580,250 790,349 210,099 92% 125% 633,000 858,839 225,839
Total Revenues 14,906,236 13,241,826 (1,664,410) 92% 8W. 16,261,347 16,228,527 (32,820)
Trans In -Solid Waste 261,959 214,330 (47,629) 92% 75% 285,773 285,773
Trans In • Transp SOC 229,167 187,500 (41,667) 92% 75% 250,000 250.000
Trans In-Road Imp Res 11,000 (11,000) 92% 0% 12,000 (12,000)
TOTAL RESOURCES 18,825,520 17,060,814 (1,723,039) 92% 93% 20,226,278 20,181,458 (44,820)
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Personal Services 5,147,379 4,905,451 241,928 92% 87% 5,615,323 5,348,551 266,772
Materials and Services 9,858.853 7.665,944 2,192,909 92% 71% i) 10,755,112 9,769,205 985,907
Capital Outlay 1.133.633 75,288 1,058.345 92% 6% j) 1,236,691 85,936 1,150,755
Transfers Out 550.000 600,000 (50.000) 92% 100% 600,000 600,000
Contingency 1.850.889 1,850,889 92% nfa 2,019,152 2,019,152
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 18,540,754 13,246,683 5,294,071 92% 65% 20,226,278 15,803,692 4,422,586
NET (Resources· ReQuirements) 284,766 3,814,131 3,571,032 4,377,766 4,377,766
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted 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 from 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
i) Expenditures are seasonal and higher during summer. YTD includes $2.5 million paid to Knife River on the Page 9
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
Eleven Months Ended May 31, 2012
Year to Date
Bu Budget
Year End
Projection Variance
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
100%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
113°/0
101%
100%
0%
106%
96%
77%
63%
72%
86%
64%
92%
75%
75%
93%
92%
95%
$ 74,125
20.002
358
(28,342)
1,909
130.870
(3.580)
(1,158)
(32.840)
(11,772)
(2,534)
(8,333)
(12,472)
52,108
126,233
132,033
152,547
92
4,800
473,893
763,365
92% 87%
92% 74%
92% 0%
92% 75%
92% n/a
92% 75%
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 20,000
4,100 3,000
170,000 125,446
200,000 182,674
9,000 7,000
50,000 50,000
50,000 50,000
74,832 74,832
74,125
1,890
(30,918)
(106,706)
(4,000)
(1,100)
(44,554)
(17,326)
(2.000)
3,703,160 3,499,272 (203,888)
338,292 338.292
4,601,452 4,471,689 (129,763)
3,168,688 3,084,689 83,999
886,890 800.000 86,890
100 100
28.800 28,800
516.974 516,974
$ 560,000
199,238
3,943
28,342
11,917
2,617,686
22,000
3,758
155,833
183,333
8,250
45,833
45,833
68,596
3,394,562
310,101
4,264,663
2,904,631
812,983
92
26,400
473,893
$ 634,125
219,240
4,301
13,826
2,748,556
18,420
2,600
122,993
171,561
5,716
45,833
37,500
56,124
3,446,670
310,101
4,390,896
2.772,598
660,436
21,600
4,601,452 3,913,489 687,9634,217,999 3,454,634
NET (Resources· Requirements) 46,664 936,262 889,598 558,200 558,200
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted 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
826
Budget
Year End
Prolection Variance
CHILDREN &FAMILIES COMMISSION
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31, 2012
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Revenues
Federal Grants
Title IV -Family Sup/Pres
HealthyStart Medicaid
Level 7 Services
State Prevention Funds
HealthyStart /R-S-G
OCCF Grant
Program Fees
Charges for Svcs-Misc
Court Fines & Fees
Interest on Investments
Donations
Interfund Grants
Total Revenues
Year to Date
Budget! Actual ! Variance !FY % ! Coli. %
$ 467,111 $ 556,143 $ 89,032 100% 119%
274,531 256,184 (18,347) 92% 86% a)
36,052 35,888 (164) 92% 91% a)b)
87,083 43,050 (44,033) 92% 45% a)c)
236,484 175,941 (60,543) 92% 68% a)b)
22,458 79,801 57,343 92% 326% d)
285,852 258,203 (27,649) 92% 83% a)b)
499,769 502,290 2,521 92% 92% a)b)
3,813 3,813 92% n/a e)
7,333 1,880 (5,453) 92% 24% f)
71,500 80,355 8,855 92% 103% g)
4,583 4,116 (467) 92% 82%
71 71 92% n/a e)
110,802 316,041 205,239 92% 261% h)
1,636,447 1,757,633 121,186 92% 98%
$ 467,111 $ 556,143 $
299,488
39,329
95,000
257,982
24,500
311,838
545,203
8,000
78,000
5,000
120,875
1,785,215
305,416
39,534
85.000
196,898
79,801
258.203
509.579
5.000
3,000
86,735
5,000
300
320,875
1,895,341
89,032
5,928
205
(10,000)
(61,084)
55,301
(53,635)
(35,624)
5,000
(5,000)
8,735
300
200,000
110,126
Trans from General Fund
Total Transfers In
250,217 250,217 92% 92%
250,217 250,217 92% 92%
272,960
272,960
272,960
272,960
TOTAL RESOURCES 2,353,175 2,563,993 210,218 92% 102% 2,525,286 2,724,444 199,158
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Capital Outlay
Contingency
I Exp. %1
554,692 542,974 11,718 92% 90% i)
1,546,397 1,210,931 335,466 92% 72% j)
92 92 92% 0%
213,664 213,664 92% n/a
605,119
1,686,979
100
233,088
589.664
1,631,476
100
15,455
55,503
233.088
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 2,314,845 1,753,905 560,940 92% 69% 2,525,286 2,221,240 304,046
NET (Resources -Requirements) 38,930 810,088 771,158 503,204 503,204
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 511,994 1
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-SIG grant expenditures added Page 11
$21.214 in expenditures added, remaining $10,000 for staff expenses
SOLID WASTE
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31, 2012
Year to Date
Budget
Year End
Proiectlon 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
Bud~et
$1,092,508
20,167
183,333
788,333
1,204,500
3,666,667
66,917
22,917
6,875
27,500
4,614,775
145,231
I Actual l Variance l FY % I Coli. %
$ 1,141,691 $ 49,183 100% 105%
17,321 (2,846) 92% 79%
207,462 24,129 92% 104%
781,414 (6,919) 92% 91%
1,179,102 (25,398) 92% 90%
3,540,614 (126,053) 92% 89%
79,401 12,484 92% 109% a)
5,318 (17,599) 92% 21% b)
9,805 2,930 92% 131%
9,494 9,493 92% nla c)
2,880 2,880 92% nla d)
16,494 16,494 92% nla e)
71,679 44,179 92% 239% f)
5,044,437 429,662 92% 100% g)
148,507 3,276 92% 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
20,000 (2,000)
210,000 10,000
860,000
1,314,000
3,883,875 (116,125)
90,000 17,000
10,000 (15,000)
10,500 3,000
10,394 10,393
2,880 2,880
16,494 16,494
77,000 47,000
5,044,437 10,137
148,507 (9.927)
Total Revenues 10,747,216 11,113,928 366,712 92% 95% 11,724,235 11,698,087 (26,148)
TOTAL RESOURCES 11,839,724 12,255,619 415,895 92% 96% 12,816,743 12,839,778 23,035
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
1,532,298
2,829,266
5,569,251
185,167
261,959
366,667
229,167
388,667
386,240
1,473,790
2,422,410
5,992,804
160,400
214,330
200,000
250.000
212,000
58,508
406,856
(423,553)
24,767
47,629
166,667
(20.833)
176,667
386,240
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
Exp, %1
88%
78%
99% g)
79%
75%
50% h)
100%
50% h)
nla
1,671,598
3,086,472
6,075,547
202,000
285.773
400,000
250,000
424,000
421,353
1,610,000
2,919,945
6,075,547
174,000
285,773
400,000
250,000
424,000
61,598
166,527
28,000
421,353
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 11.748.682 10,925,734 822,948 92% 85% 12,816,743 12,139,265 677,478
NET (Resources· Requirements) 91,042 1,329,885 1,238,843
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget
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
g) Refunding of FF&C 2003 debt
h) Transfers will be completed in June
700,513 700,513
700,513 I
Page 12
RESOURCES:
Beginning Net Working Capital
Revenues
Inter-fund Charges:
General Liability
Property Damage
Vehicle
Workers' Compensation
Unemployment
Claims Reimb-Workers' Compensation
Claims Reimb-Gen Liab/Property
Process Fee-Events/Parades
Miscellaneous
Skid Car Training
Interest on Investments
Other Interest
TOTAL REVENUES
Transfers In-General Fund
TOTAL RESOURCES
Appropriations/Expenditures
Direct Insurance Costs:
GENERAL LIABILITY
Settlement / Benefit
Defense
Professional Service
Insurance
Repair I Replacement
Total General Liability
PROPERTY DAMAGE
Insurance
Repair I Replacement
Total Property Damage
VEHICLE
Professional Service
Insurance
Loss Prevention
Repair I 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
RISK MANAGEMENT
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31,2012
Year to Date
Budget I Actual I Variance I % of FY I % Coli.
$2,100,000 $2,039,937 ($60,G63) 100% 97%
229.950
285.664
163,451
1.351.115
231,397
4.583
18.333
1.375
46
16,500
13,750
46
2,316,210
183.333
4,599,544
435,417
275,000
91,667
1,100,000
229,167
4,594,827 (4,717) 92% 95%
1% EXQ. I
121,514
201,605
5,677
131,591
5.517
465,905 (30,489) 92% 98%
116,418
69.277
185,695 89,305 92% 62%
157
376
14.194
81.908
96,635 (4,969) 92% 97%
886.591
5.000
105,997
49.182
32,959
1,079,729 20,271 92% 90%
184,953 44,213 92% 74%
2.131.250 2.012.918 118.332 92% 87%
269.827 252,389 17,438 92% 86%
155.306 125.985 29.321 92% 74%
92 92 92% 0%
425.225 378,374 46.851 92% 82%
6,600 5,400 1.200 92% 75%
2,563,075 2,396,692 166,383 92% 86%
2,036,469 2,198,135 161,686
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget
* Contingency is $2,030,693. Page 13
Budget
Year End
Projection Variance
$2,100,000 $2,039,937 ($80,063)
250.855 250.855
311,633 311.633
178.310 178.310
1,473.944 1,473.944
252,433 252,433
5.000 1.000 (4.000)
20.000 70,000 50,000
1.500 2.000 500
50 50
18,000 14.000 (4,000)
15.000 15.000
50 50
2,526,775 2,569,275 42,500
200.000 200.000
4,826,775 4,809,212 (17,563)
475,000 475,000
300,000 200,000 100,000
100,000 100,000
1,200,000 1,159,729 40,271
250,000 184,953 65,047
2.325,000 2.119,682 205,318
294,357
169,425
100
463.882
294.357
169,425
463,782
100
100
7.200
2,796,082
7,200
2,590,664 205,418
2,030,693 2,218,548 187,855
I 2,000,000 I
229.951
285,664
163,451
1.351,115
231.693
548
64,807
1.980
12.950
12,732
2,354,890
200,000
0
0
(0)
0
296
(4.035)
46,474
605
(46)
(3,550)
(1,018)
(46)
38,679
16.667
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
11%
324%
132%
0%
72%
85%
0%
93%
100%
DESCHUTES COUNTY 911
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31,2012
Year to Date
Actual Variance Variance
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital $6,400,000 $ 7,559,639 $ 1,159,639 100% 118% $6,400,000 $7,559,639 $ 1,159,639
Revenues
Property Taxes -Current 5,485,125 6,220,939 735,814 92% 104% 5,983,773 6,260,939 277,166
Property Taxes -Prior 183,333 274,558 91,225 92% 137% 200,000 284,558 84,558
Federal Grants 184,578 184,578 92% n/a 203,958 203,958
State Reimbursement 49,500 26,500 (23,000) 92% 49% a) 54,000 35,995 (18,005)
Telephone User Tax 687,500 579,221 (108,279) 92% 77% 750,000 750,000
Grant -Sunriver Serv Dist 22,500 22,500 92% n/a 22,500 22,500
Data Network Reimb. 24,933 34,698 9.765 92% 128% b) 27,200 34,698 7,498
Jefferson County 32,083 28,338 (3,745) 92% 81% 35,000 35,000
User Fee 47,667 6,469 (41,198) 92% 12% c) 52,000 54.127 2,127
Police RMS User Fees 182,417 131,687 (50.730) 92% 66% d) 199,000 276,509 77,509
Contract Payments 29,333 33,061 3,728 92% 103% b) 32,000 33,061 1,061
Miscellaneous 8,250, 10.232 1,982 92% 114% 9,000 11,750 2,750
Contracted Training 2,369 2,369 92% n/a e) 4,745 4,745
Interest 32,083 50,413 18,330 92% 144% 35,000 55,000 20,000
Interest on Unsegregated Tax 733 621 (112) 92% 78% 800 800
Donations 750 750 92% n/a 750 750
Total Revenues 6,762,957 7,606,933 843,976 92% 103% 7,377,773 8,064,390 686,617
TOTAL RESOURCES 13,162,957
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures
Personal Services 3.887,431
Materials and Services 1,766,743
Capital Outlay 1,040,068
Transfers Out 458,333
Contingency 5,477,049
15,166,571
3,496,003
1,637,516
556,336
500,000
2,003,614
391,428
129,227
483,732
(41.667)
5,477,049
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 12,629,624 6,189,856 6,439,768
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
110%
% EXP.j
82%
85%
49%
100%
n/a
f)
g)
450/.
13,777,773 15,624,029 1,846,256
4,240,834
1,927,356
1,134,620
500.000
5,974.963
3,800,000
1,927,356
1.134,620
500,000
440,834
5,974,963
13,777,773 7,361,976 6,415,797
NET (Resources Requirements) 533,333 8,976,715 8,443,382 8,262,053 8,262,053
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 8,000,000 I
a) GIS/MSAG monthly billings to Oregon Emergency Management--Projection revised to $35,995 to reflect outstanding receipts for Apr-Jun
b) Invoiced annually; all expected revenues received
c) US Forest Service invoiced $2,156.25 quarterly. Crooked River Ranch invoiced annually FY 2012 = $47,658
d) City of Bend and Sunriver Service District billed and $77,509 payment expected
e) Training occurred first of June -Total receipts of $2,376 are outstanding
f) Projects pending with partnering agencies
g) Entire amount budgeted transferred to reserve fund in September
Page 14
Health Benefits Trust
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31,2012
RESOURCES
Beg. Net Working Capital $15,500,000 $15,829,888 $ 329,888 100"1. o $15,500.000 $15,829,888 329.888
Revenues:
Internal Premium Charges 11,014,402 11,064,143 49,741 92% 92% 12,015,711 12,070,000 54,289
PIT Emp -Add'! Prem 45,833 28,716 (17,118) 92% 57% 50,000 31,000 (19,000)
Employee Prem Contribution 577,500 549,690 (27,810) 92% 87% 630,000 595,000 (35,000)
COIC 1,155,000 1,201,514 46,514 92% 95% 1,260,000 1,300,000 40,000
Retiree I COBRA C~Pay 458,333 765,797 307,464 92% 153% 500.000 800,000 300,000
Fees for Clinic Services 200 200 92% nJa 200 200
Federal Payment (ERRP) 150,431 150,431 92% n/a • 150,431 150,431
Prescription Rebates 107,502 107,502 92% n/a 107,502 107,502
Claims Reimbursements 36,297 36,297 92% n/a 36,297 36,297
Vending Machines (Wellness Rebate) 51 51 92% nJa 51 51
Interest 73,333 93,184 19,851 92% 116% 80.000 100,000 20.000
Total ReY8I1ues 13,32 •• 402 13,997.526 673,12. 92% 96% 14,535,711 15,190,482 654,771
TOTAl RESOURCES 28.82•••02 29,827 •• 1. 1,003,012 92% 103"10 30,035,711 31,020,370 984.659
REQUIREMENTS
Expenditures:
Personal Services 138,617 130,802 7,815 92% 86% 151,218 151,218
Mlltettals '" ServiCIIS
Claims Paid-MedicallRx 11,434,761 11,832,520 (397,759) 92% 95% a) 12,474,284 13,063,051 (588,767)
Claims Paid-DentalNision 1,708,642 1,750,998 (42,356) 92% 94% a) 1,863,974 1,933,394 (69,421)
Refunds (92,133) 92,133 92% n/a (92,133) 92,133
Insurance Expense 320,833 325,481 (4,648) 92% 93% 350,000 350,000
State Assessments 137,500 155,263 (17,763) 92% 104% 150,000 155,263 (5,263)
Administration Fee 293,333 291,931 1,402 92% 91% 320,000 320,000
PPOFee 45,833 44,799 1,034 92% 90% 50,000 50,000
Health Impact 50,417 47,294 3.123 92% 66% 55,000 55,000
Other -Administration 57,125 101,403 (44.278) 92% 163% 62,318 95,000 (32,682)
Other -Wellness 72,274 24,429 47.845 92% 31% 78,844 78,844
Admin &Wellness 1.,259,335 1.,612.787 (353.453' 92% 94% 15,555,638 16,159,637 (603,999)
Deschutes On-site Clinic
Healthstat 877,433 564,729 312,705 92% 59% 957,200 857,200 100,000
MedicationslOrugslVacc 297,917 127,241 170,676 92% 39% 325,000 225,000 100,000
Medical Supplies 2,750 22,481 (19,731) 92% 749% 3,000 30,000 (27,000)
Equipment 3,667 150 3,517 92% 4% 4,000 1,000 3,000
Miscellaneous 4,996 10,030 (5,034) 92% 184% 5,450 10,000 (4,550)
Total DOC 1,186,763 72.,631 462,132 92% 56% 1,294,650 1,123,200 171,450
Deschutes On-site Pharmacy
Remodeling Costs 128,373 (128,373) 92% n/a 128,373 (128,373)
Total Pharmacy 128.373 (128,373, 92% nlll 128,373 (128.373)
c.p;talOutlay 183 183 92% n/a 200 200
Contingency 12,086,454 12,086,454 92% n/a 13,185,223 -13,185,223
TOTAL EXPENDIREQUIREMNTS 27.671.352 15,465.791 12,074,759 92% 51% 30,035,711 17,.11,210 12.624.501
NET (Resources -Requirements) 1,153,050 14,361,623 13,077,771 13,609,160 13.609.160
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 13,800,000 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 48 weeks of claims paid. YTO actual is $281,071 per week
Page 15
1
Deschutes County -Fair and Expo Center
YTD.Budget Basis Commissioners
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31, 2012
Year to Date
Budget (11/121
of annual) Actual I Variance 1 FY % ICoil. %
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
Interfund Contract
Miscellaneous
Total Receipts
Transfers In
General Fund (001)
Room Tax (160)
Welcome Center (170)
Annual County Fair (619)
Reserve Fund (617)
Total Transfers In
GF Appropriation Transfer
TOTAt RESOURCES
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures:
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Debt Service
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
Transfers Out -Reserve Fund
Contingency
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS
$ 75,000 $ (40,601) $ (115,601) 100% ·54% $ 75,000 $ (40,601) $ (115,601)
554,583
1,375
53,167
5,500
27,500
201,667
102,667
43,083
6,240
995,781
493,965
155
37,072
19,240
21,714
135,031
124,000
46,833
10,266
888,276
(60,619)
(1,220)
(16,095)
13,740
(5,787)
(66,635)
21,333
3,750
4,027
(107,505)
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
82%
10%
64%
321%
72%
61%
111%
nfa
100%
nfa
82%
605,000
1,500
58,000
6,000
30,000
220,000
112,000
47,000
6,807
1,086,307
543,965
155
37,072
19,240
30,714
138,031
130,000
33,424
47,000
10,416
990,018
(61,035)
(1,345)
(20,928)
13,240
714
(81,969)
18,000
33,424
3,609
(96,289)
155,833
23,599
75,900
201,667
92
457,090
1,527,872
305,837
23,595
75,900
220,000
625,332
1,473,007
18,333
(92)
18,242
(54,865)
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
180%
92%
92%
100%
0%
86%
170,000
25,744
82,800
220,000
100
498,644
47,295
1,707,246
370,000
25,744
82,800
220,000
698,544
1,647,960
200,000
(100}
199,900
(11,991)
1 Exp. %1
775,517
674,722
105,479
92
1,555,809
754,860
591,233
113,695
1,459,788
20,657
83,489
(8,216)
92
96,021
92%
92%
92%
92%
89%
80%
99%
0%
846,018
736,060
115,068
100
1,697,246
816,959
723,497
113,695
1,654,151
29,059
12,563
1,373
100
43,095
9,167 10,000 (833) 92% 100% 10,000 10,000
92% nfa
1,564,976 1,469,788 95,188 92% 86% 1,707,246 1,664,151 43,095
NET (Resources -Requirements) (37,104) 3,219 40,323 (16,190) 31,105
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 46,373
Page 16
rJj
u ~
~
0
~
~
~
<
~
~
~
<
U
CFJ
~
0
E ro
U
>.....
c
~
0
U
..c:
1::
0
Z
•
c c .....
E
Il) ..c:
Il) ........
..c:....
Il)
CO
•
,.
Deschutes County
North County Services Building
Inception through May 31,2012
ACTUAL I
RESOURCES:
Beginning Net Working Capital 300,000
Loan Proceeds, net of issuance co 2,000,000 3,400,000 1,400,000 3,400,000
Resources from Fund 140 1,402,013 1,402,013 a) 1,402,013 1,402,013
Resources from Fund 142 25,000 25,000 b) 25,000 25,000
Transfer in 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 100,000
Interest Revenue 3,460 3,460 3,460 3 ,460 10,000
Total Resources 2,030,473 2,030,473 4,027,013 5,430,473 1,403,460 3,810,000
EXPENDITURES:
Materials & Services
Architectu re/Desig n 45,075 4,925 50,000 b) 100,000 100,000 25,000
Engineering 10,000 10,000 75,000
Planning
Interfund Charges 1,524 1,524 1,663 1,663 11,639
Fees, Permits & SDCs 84 84 60,000 60,000 75,000
Utilities 7,872 7,872 2,000 2,000 10,000
Travel -Meals/Mileage Reimb 3 3 3 .0
Total Materials & Services 54,559 4,925 59,484 173,663 173,666 (3) 196,639
Capital Outlay
Land and Building 1,402,013 1,402,013 a) 1,402,013 1,402,013
Remodel 230 230 2,451 1337 3,851,337 (1,400,000) 3,300,000
Total Capital Outlay 1,402,243 1,402,243 3,853,350 5,253,350 (1,400,000) 3,300,000
Contingency 313,361
Total Expenditures 1,456,802 4,925 1,461,727 4,027,013 5,427,016 (1,400,003) 3,810,000
Net 573,672 (4,925) 568,747 3,457 3,457
PROJECTION
Project
Budget Projected Variance
FY 2013
Requested
Budget
Received and Encumbrances Project to
Expended & Commitments Date
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 May 31, 2012
Vendor Description
Commitment
Amount Amount Paid
Balance
Due I
BlRB/GGl Architects Architectural Services 50,000 45,075 4,925
50,000 45,075 4,925
----------
Deschutes County
Bethlehem Inn (Fund 128)
Eleven Months Ended May 31. 2012
Budget Actual Variance I FY%I CoiL %1 Budget I Projection I Variance
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 2.568,341 -(2,568.341 ) 92% 0% 2.801.827 -(2,801,827)
Lease Payments 22,374 24,408 2,034 92% 100% 24,408 24,408
Total Revenues 2,590,715 24,408 (2,566,307) 92% 1% 2,826,235 24,408 (2,801,827)
TOTAL RESOURCES (120,520) (2,692,173) (2,571,653) 92% -2341% 115,000 (2,692,173) (2,807,173)
REQUIREMENTS: Exp. %1
Expenditures
Debt Service:
Interest Expense 13,750 16.674 (2.924) 92% 111% a) 15,000 18,000 (3,000)
Interest Payment 91,667 91,667 92% 0% 100.000 100,000
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 105,417 16,674 88,743 92% 14% 115,000 18,000 100,000
NET (Resources -Requirements) (225,936) (2,708,847) (2,482,911) b)==-=-=-=__(~2=,7=10=,1=7=3)==(2=,7=0=7,=17=3=)
Beginning Net Working Capital per Approved Budget (2,710,000)
a) Interest on May 2012 negative cash balance: $1,339.30.
b) Inception through May 31, 2012
Revenues -Lease Payments
Expenditures:
Land/Building (Amertitle) -July 2007
Hickman Williams
City of Bend -May 2008
KN EX CO
Kleinfelder
Total expended on facility
Interest on Negative Cash Balance
Total expended
$ 48,816
2,241,313
17.578
250,000
5.289
3,732
2.517.913
239,750
2.757,663
Net $ (2,708,847)
Deschutes County
General Support Services -SOCC
Conference/Seminar, Educationffraining and Travel Expenditures
and
BOCC -County College Expenditures
FY 2012
eocc Conference & Travel
Tammy Baney Ic()nfl~e"!~Eclucll"rainirlg .
Travel Meals
Accommodations
Airfare
Mileagerelmbursement
··Ground Trans-Po-rt/Pai1<ing
Io!,!1 ~imel_
Alan Unger
cOnf/Sem& Educffrainlng .
Travel Meals
Accommodations
Airfare
Mileage reimburseiment
·Ground Transport/Parking
Total U.!1ger
Tony DeBone
·Corlflsem&-Educffraining
. Travel Meals. ... .. .... .
Accommodations
Air-fare
-.' MiI~age_reimbursement
Ground Transport
TotaiOther ....c.:..~._.__
Totar=-ErOCC Department
-COr1f1Sem& EduclTraining
Travel Meals ....... .
Accommodations
Airfare
Mileage Reimbursement
. Ground ·Transport --.-
-·-Total=BoCc Departme-nt
FY 201 is.uclQe! ..
Tota/SOCC County College
Jul .1. Aug --I Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
665 i • -I 220~961 211 --,
305 15 75
-30 90 I -II 40
4291 : .. 1,2651 84
~ ·-30~jr -529 204794
H50
1,661 1,375 ---n41 .. 722 139911'~70 204 702
665 ~051 45 -I
- I
4575 -3D
322
Apr I May I YTD Total
I
[
1,Q60
380
2,985I_.+-
- I 3,090
- I 150
-7,665
45 I 195 1,405
I
-1I -I - -
,-,-----c---~. f :;;j :301 :.J :.-.. ;..1 2,851
1..~5~.
~.I -1,796-L
665
908
300
----!~!
1;573r-354j-
1,995
3,034
5,029
300
54
354
. -
~~
220
211
794
150
1,375
627-
305
429
146
880-
915
1,179
146
2,240
535 30 30
159 -[' - I ;631~jf~12=11. 10;"
45 1~631'1;;461-·.i..2"·· 4:~
105
30 +
677,
812
90 1__
472
562
685
1,265
573
668
3,191
60 1_-,~~I_45
84·
50f
676
____ 682 1
83
1,173
195
195
1!~05
159
j;337
623
1,264
137
5,325·
390 I 4,270
. ·539 -;--5;774.
623
4,355
287
6/6/2012
FY2012-13
ProjectionBudget
~012-13 I I Diffe!ence IDiffe~ence
1 General Fund 8 /700/000 8 /823 /946 123/946 1.4%
2 CJ -Juvenile l,010A15 1/024/869 14A54 1.4%
3 Sheriff --701 4 /507,352 5,650/941 1,143/589 25.4%
4 Sheriff --702 2,859,915 3/236,770 376/855 13.2%
5 Public Health 1,336,051 1,364/931 28,880 2.2%
6 Behavioral Health 3,320,968 3,355,750 34,782 1.0%
7 COD 10/000 137,928 127,928 1279.3%
8 Road 4,719,551 4,377,766 (341,785) -7.2%
9 Parole & Probation 570,000 558,200 (11,800) -2.1%
10 CFC 511,994 503,204 (8,790) -1.7%
11 Solid Waste 700,513 700,513 0.0%
12 Risk Management 2,000,000 2,218,548 218,548 10.9%
13 911 8 /000,000 8,262,053 262,053 3.3%
14 HBT 13,800,000 13,609/160 (190 1 840) -1.4%
15 Fair/Expo Center* 46,373 83 /810 37A37 80.7%
* Includes transfer in June
Deschutes County· Fair and Expo Center
YTD-Budget Basis Commissioners
Statement of Financial Operating Data
Eleven Months Ended May 31 , 2012
Year to Date
Budget (11/121
of annual) Actual 1 Variance 1 FY % 1 Coil. %
RESOURCES:
Beg. Net Working Capital
Receipts:
Special Events Revenues
Interest
Storage
Camping at F &E
Horse Stall Rental
Concession % -Food
Rights (Signage, etc.)
Grants
Interfund Contract
Miscellaneous
$ 75.000 $ (40.601) $ (115,601)
554,583
1,375
53,167
5,500
27,500
201,667
102,667
493,965
155
37,072
19,240
21,714
135,031
124,000
(60,619)
(1,220)
(16,095)
13,740
(5,787)
(66,635)
21,333
43,083
6,240
46,833
10,266
3,750
4,027
100% -54%
92% 82%
92% 10%
92% 64%
92% 321%
92% 72%
92% 61%
92% 111%
92% n/a
92% 100%
92% n/a
Budget
$ 75,000
605,000
1,500
58,000
6,000
30,000
220,000
112,000
47,000
6,807
$ (40,601) $ (115,601)
543,965 (61,035)
155 (1,345)
37,072 (20,928)
19,240 13,240
30,714 714
138,031 (81,969)
130,000 18,000
33,424 33,424
47,000
10,416 3,609
Total Receipts 995,781 888,276 (107,505) 92% 82% 1,086,307 990,018 (96,289)
Transfers In
General Fund (001)
Room Tax (160)
Welcome Center (170)
Annual County Fair (619)
Reserve Fund (617)
Total Transfers In
GF Appropriation Transfer
TOTAL RESOURCES
155,833
23,599
75,900
201,667
92
457,090
1,527,872
305,837
23,595
75,900
220,000
625,332
1,473,007
18,333
(92)
18,242
(54,865)
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
92%
180%
92%
92%
100%
0%
86%
170,000
25,744
82,800
220,000
100
498,644
47,295
1,707,246
370,000
25,744
82,800
220,000
100,000
798,544
1,747,960
200,000
99,900
299,900
88,009
REQUIREMENTS:
Expenditures:
Personal Services
Materials and Services
Debt Service
Capital Outlay
Total Expenditures
775,517
674,722
105,479
92
1,555,809
754,860
591,233
113,695
1,459,788
20,657
83,489
(8,216)
92
96,021
lliijd
92% 89%
92% 80%
92% 99%
92% 0%
846,018
736,060
115,068
100
1,697,246
816,959
723,497
113,695
1,654,151
29,059
12,563
1,373
100
43,095
Transfers Out -Reserve Fund 9,167 10,000 (833) 92% 100% 10,000 10,000
Contingency 92% n/a
TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 1,564,976 1,469,788 95,188 92% 86% 1,707,246 1,664,151 43,095
NET (Resources -Requirements) (37,104) 3,219 40,323
Beginning Net Working Capital per Adopted Budget 46,373
Page 16
DESCHUTES COUNTY LEGAL COUNSEL
DATE: June 21,2012
TO: Commissioner Anthony DeBone
Commissioner Tammy Baney
Commissioner Alan Unger
RE: Amendment to Deschutes County
Dog Board Ordinance, Chapter 6.12
JOHN E. LAHERTY d
Assistant Legal Counsel
ir541-330-4645
DATE: June 20, 2012
FILE NO.: 29/1-005
Pursuant to Oregon law and Chapter 6.12 of Deschutes County Code, the Deschutes
County Board of Supervisors, acting as the "Dog Board," is responsible for adjudicating matters
in which dogs are accused of chasing, injuring or killing livestock. Specifically, the Dog Board
is required to decide the following issues: (1) disposition of the dog (i.e., return to owner, place
for adoption, or euthanize), (2) assessment of fines and costs to the dog owner, and (3) payment
of compensation to the livestock owner.
At this time, it appears some provisions of Chapter 6.12 do not clearly track state law, do
not clearly set out appropriate procedures for Dog Board cases, and/or impose impractical
obligations upon the County. For these reasons, I believe it appropriate that the Board consider
adopting certain revisions to Chapter 6.12.
I have prepared a matrix setting forth the specific sections of Chapter 6.12 that appear
appropriate for revision. That matrix is attached to this memo.
cc: Erik Kropp, Interim County Administrator
Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel
Bonnie Baker, Recording Secretary
w/attachment
-----
DCC Chapter 6.12 --Proposed Issues For BOCC Review
----~---qr Code Section Staff Recommendation Issue O~tions
6.12.020 As written, unclear as to Clarify section to either include StafThas no
-whether un-caged chickens recommendation on this
livestock. • from definition of livestock.
or exclude un-caged chickens
issue.
6.12.040 Add exception language
own or keep any dog that has
Makes it a Class A violation to • Add exception language
for dogs returned by
killed or injured livestock.
for dogs returned to
court or Dog Board.
Board; or
owner by court or Dog
• Leave language as-is.
--~--~ --~..
Amend section to require
evidence must be received
6.12.050(A) As written, unclear as to what • Clarify language; or
receipt of written
from a complainant in order
• Leave language as-Ls
complaint (under penalty
for law enforcement to of perjury) from
impound dog. complainant.
6.12.050(B)
Amend to make testing
veterinary testing of dog if
Requires County to conduct • Leave section as-is; or
wholly within County's
there is reason to believe such
• Amend section to make
discretion.
testing would provide
testing wholly within
County's discretion
• "substantial further evidence."
6. 12.060(A)(1) Does not require dog owner to Amend section to include
request hearing. Instead, gives
• Amend section to include
provisions ofORS
impression that hearing is
provisions of ORS
609.156 reo notice and
automatic. Does not comport
609.156 reo notice and
request for hearing; or I request for hearing.
with state law. • Leave as-is.
6.12.060 Does not set out applicable Amend to include
-~--
evidentiary standard for Dog
• Amend to set forth
standards from 0 RS
Board hearings.
evidentiary standard; or
609.158(3) "reliable,
probative and substantial
. evidence."
6.12.060(C)
• Leave as-is.
Allows Board to charge Sta11' has no
._
complainant for impound
• Leave as-is; or
recommendation on this
expenses if dog found not
• Eliminate this section to
issue.comport with historical
guilty. Board practice.
6.12.060 Does not require County to Amend section to include • Amend section to include
micro-chip dogs (as required language ofORS
by ORS 609.168). Does not
language of ORS
609.168; or i 609.168.
IP' with state law. • Leave as-is. -.. -~-
Code Section : Issue
6.12.060 Does not address mailing
notification to dog owner of
Board's decision, as required
by ORS 609.156(4). Does not I
comport with state law.
6.12.080 Permits livestock owner to
request compensation from
Dog Board for damaged/killed
livestock.
6.12.090 Requires any compensation for
damaged/killed livestock to be
paid directly by County to
livestock owner
6.12.100 Subrogates County to rights of
livestock owner after paying
compensation; requires County
counsel to file suit against dog
owner to recover amounts
i. paid.
6.12.110 Provides that livestock
owner's right to recover
compensation from Dog Board
does not prohibit livestock
owner from pursuing civil
I remedies (i.e., legal action for
damages). i
Ol2tions
• Amend section to include
language ofORS
609.156(4); or
• Leave as-is.
• Remove this provision;
or
• Leave as-is.
• Remove this provision
and require livestock
owner to pursue
compensation via civil
court action; or
• Leave as-is.
• Remove this provision;
or
• Leave as-is.
• Amend this provision to
state that Dog Board
does not have authority
to award livestock owner
compensation; or
• Leave as-is.
~-...•---.
Staff Recommendation
Amend section to include
language ofORS
609.156(4).
Remove this provision.
..--~....~
Remove this provision
and require livestock
owner to pursue
compensation via civil
court action.
Remove this provision.
-.. ...---...~~--
Amend to expressly state
thal Dog Board does not
have authority to award
livestock owner
compensation.
I
Recruitment Schedule, Deschutes County
County Administrator
June 25,2012
June 27,2012
Monday
Wednesday
Stakeholder Interviews
Send Profile to Deschutes for review
Yes, Prothman travels t0112:30 _5:00 pm
Deschutes County
NONE N/A
July 2,1012 Monday Post Profile & Start Advertising NONE N/A
August 12, 2012 Sunday Application Close Date NONE N/A
Weeks of Aug 6 & 13
Aug 20 or 24?
Sept 11 -14?
N/A
Monday or Friday?
Tue, Wed, Thur, Fri?
Prothman interviews top 10 -15
candidates
Work session to review semi-finalist
interviews and pick finalist
NONE
Yes, Prothman travels to
Deschutes County
Final Interviews, usually includes an IYes, Prothman travels to
evening reception and next day interviews Deschutes County
N/A
TBD
TBD
DESCHUTES COUNTY
ORE G 0 N
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
$xxx,XXX -$XXX,XXX
Plus Excellent Benefits
Apply By
XXX XX, 2012
(First Review, Open Until Filled)
DESCHUT ES COUNTY, OREGON
WHY ApPLY?
Located in the heart of
Central Oregon, De
schutes County
serves as the outdoor
recreation capital of
the state. Both resi
dents and visitors en
joy skiing, snowboard
ing, fishing , hunting, hiking , camping , rock climb
ing, bicycling, rafting, kayaking, and golfing, as
well as a variety of annual festivals and sporting
events. Deschutes County is financially sound
and offers the right candidate a challenging and
rewarding career opportun ity . The natural beauty
of the area , its mild climate, and diverse recrea
tional opportunities make Deschutes County a
great place to live , work , and play .
THE COMMUNITY
For the past decade , the Central Oregon region
has been recognized nationally and internationally
as one of the best places to live. Deschutes
County is conveniently located within a three hour
drive to Portland , Oregon and within one hour to
the Cascade Mountain Range. With an average
elevation of 3,600 feet , the area enjoys a dry, high
desert climate with cool nights and sunny days.
Annual precipitation averages 11 .7 inches.
The countywide population is 158,000 spread over
3,055 square miles . Tourism brings approximately
1.5 million visitors annually to Deschutes County.
The Mount Bachelor ski resort brings in tourists
from all over Oregon , Washington, and California.
The nearby Cascade Lakes are also a large draw
for tourists and the area boasts a concentration of
29 world-class golf courses. Recreational
activities including include downhill and cross
+ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
country skiing, hiking, biking, rafting, golfing,
camping, fishing, picnicking, rock climbing, and
general sightseeing .
Other local features include a vibrant visual and
performing arts community, outstand ing restaurant
scene , extensive and respected health care net
work, and a high quality education system . The
combined infrastructure investment totals in the
billions of dollars and acts as a magnet for profes
sional talent from across the U.S. and abroad .
The cities of Bend , the county seat, Redmond, La
Pine, and Sisters are the four municipalities in the
County . Roberts Field Redmond Municipal Airport
connects the county to other major US western
cities. In addition to excellent public and private K
12 schools, Bend is home to Central Oregon
Community College (COCC) and Oregon State
University's Cascade Campus.
THE COUNTY
Deschutes County is one of the largest employers
in Central Oregon and the largest municipal gov
ernment in the region . The County has 816 FTE
positions and a $267 million annual budget. The
County prov ides public safety, public health and
behavioral health , community development, road
construction and maintenance, elections, assess
ment and taxation, solid waste , social services,
and operates a large fair/expo center. Indirect
services that support county operations include
finance, personnel , property and facilities man
agement, internal auditing, information technology,
legal counsel , and public information .
Deschutes County is a General Law County which
enables the County to write ordinances on any
subject not preempted by the state. The Board of
County Commissioners is the governing body of
the County and is comprised of three commission
2
DESCHUT ES COUNTY , OREGO N. C OUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
ers elected at large. The Board's duties include
executive, judicial (quasi-judicial) and legislative
authority over policy matters of countywide con
cern. The executive duties consist of establishing
the budget, with the aid of a three lay member
Budget Committee.
The Board's charge also includes creation and en
forcement of county ordinances and, in general,
the resolution of any problems arising between the
citizenry and various county departments. The
Board of Commissioners also acts as the govern
ing body for other local public entities such as the
Sunriver Service District, the 9-1-1 Service District,
and the Extension/4-H County Service District. To
implement policy and manage the day-to-day op
erations of the County, the Board appoints the
County Administrator.
Deschutes County has a reputation for innovation,
pilot programs, and successful collaboration with
its regional partners. The State of Oregon often
looks to the County to implement new programs or
demonstrate new ways of providing services , such
as the creation of a coordinated care organization
to deliver health care services to residents on the
Oregon Health Plan .
Despite the national recession, Deschutes County
has remained financially sound. Due to strategic
budget reductions made in prior years, strong fi
nancial reserves, and a history of conservative fis
cal management, Deschutes County has largely
maintained services during an extended period of
decreaSing revenues. In fact, Moody's Investors
Service has assigned Deschutes County an Aa3
rating for full faith and credit obligations and an
Aa2 rating for outstanding general obligation debt.
Well-funded reserves in the County's Publ ic Em
ployee Retirement System (PERS) fund have off
set increases charged by the State of Oregon
which administers the program.
The County is self-funded for health insurance and
to help control health care costs, recently opened
an on-site clinic for employees and dependents
covered by the health plan. Strong reserves in the
Health Benefits Trust fund have allowed the Coun
ty to increase departmental charges for health in
surance costs only 1.6 percent over the last four
fiscal years.
THE POSITION
The County Administrator is appointed by and
serves at the discretion of the Board of County
Commissioners. The Administrator is the Chief
Administrative Officer and is responsible for :
~ General operations of the County
~ SuperviSion and management of all non
elected department directors
~ Administering the County's personnel system
and rules
~ Conducting short and long term planning
~ Implementation of the Board's goals and poli
cies
~ Administering the County's public contracting
and purchasing processes
3
DESCHUT ES COUNTY, OREGON. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
~ Acting as the organization's Budget Officer and
developing the County's proposed annual
budget
~ Ensuring compliance with state laws, ordin
ances, service contracts , and all orders, and
resolutions, policies , rules, procedures, and
regulations adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners .
Mr. Erik Kropp is currently the Interim County Ad
ministrator . He will not be a candidate for this po
sition.
OPPORTUNITIES & CHALLENGES
Deschutes County is currently involved in a wide
variety of innovative activities and initiatives de
signed to improve operations and increase public
access to services, use resources more effective
ly, and manage finances in a challenging econom
ic climate . Examples of just some of the many is
sues being addressed include:
~ During the past biennium, the Oregon State
Legislature passed major reform legislation in
the areas of health and education . As a result,
Deschutes County is involved in developing an
innovative coordinated care system and a pub
lic/private Central Oregon Health Council to
develop a regional health improvement plan .
In addition , the impending creation of a new
Oregon Education Investment Board and Early
Learn i ng Council is expected to impact county
services provided to women, children , and
families .
~ In conjunction with its successful on-site em
ployee health clinic, the County is planning to
open an on-site phannacy. The phannacy will
serve employees, retirees, and dependents
enrolled in the county benefits plan and is in
tended to result in significant health benefit
cost savings over time .
~ Deschutes County recently purchased a
40,000 square foot office building in the City of
Redmond to serve as a North County campus
which will increase accessibility to a wide va
riety of public and social services . In addition
to housing several county departments, parts
of the building will be leased to other govern
ment agencies and local non-profit organiza
tions. The North County campus will open in
2012 .
~ Despite its relatively healthy financial situation ,
Deschutes County , like all local and state gov
ernments , will continue to face challenges re
lated to reduced revenue . Many county func
tions are mandated by the State of Oregon and
the County is reliant on state funding to provide
such services. Securing a permanent tax rate
for the Deschutes County 9-1-1 Service District
and addressing the loss of revenue from Fed
eral Forest Payments under the Secure Rural
Schools (SRS) and Community Self
Determination Act are high priorities. SRS
funds are set to expire in July 2012 and pro
vide a major funding source for road construc
tion and maintenance.
~ In May 2010, the County proposed a bond
measure to fund jail expansion which was not
approved by voters . As a result, the Sheriffs
Office is challenged with managing growth in
the adult jail inmate population within the exist
ing inmate capacity.
~ As in much of the country, the local unem
ployment rate and number of foreclosures in
Deschutes County remain high. The Board of
Commissioners has placed a priority on assist
ing with economic development and job crea
tion and has developed a fund to support these
efforts.
IDEAL CANDIDATE PROFILE
The County is seeking a County Administrator
with .... .
4
DESCHUTE S C OUNT Y , OREGON. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
EXPERIENCE &EDUCATION
Successful candidates for this position will have a
bachelor's degree from an accredited college or
university in public administration, business admin
istration, political science, or a related field, and at
least eight years of progressively responsible ex
ecutive or management experience obtained at the
senior level of a medium or large public or private
organization, agency, or association. A master's
degree in public administration is preferred .
Possession of or ability to obtain a valid Oregon
Driver'S License within 30 days of hire date is re
quired. The employment offer will be contingent
upon an acceptable and verifiable driver's license
and driving history . The candidate selected for
this position will be required to pass a drug screen
ing and a thorough background, employment, and
criminal history investigation.
COMPENSATION &BENEFITS
» $XXX,XXX to $XXX,XXX DOa
»
Deschutes County
www.deschutes.org
Deschutes County actively recruits persons from various ethnic and cultural backgrounds to enhance ser
vice to its diverse communities. Deschutes County is an equal opportunity, affirmative action employer.
All qualified candidates are strongly encouraged to apply by xxx xx, 2012 (first review, open until filled).
Applications, responses to the supplemental questions, resumes and cover letters will only be accepted
electronically. To apply online, go to www.prothman.com and click on "submit your application" and fol
low the directions provided. Resumes, cover letters and responses to supplemental questions can be
uploaded once you have logged in.
www.prothman.com
371 NE Gilman Blvd., Suite 350 Issaquah, WA 98027
206.368.0050
5