HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinancial Assistance Advisory Committee Final RecommendationsSouth County
Financial Assistance Advisory Committee
Final Recommendations
May 5, 2009
Committee Members: Robert Ray, Vicky Jackson, Pam Luettich, June Ramey,
Martha Bauman, Roger Conard
Staff: Tom Anderson, Todd Cleveland
The following is a summary of recommendations from the Financial Assistance
Advisory Committee offered during:
• The original meetings held by the committee in answering specific
questions from the Board of County Commissioners
• Two follow-up meetings held in Fall, 2008
• E-mail communications between the committee and staff
Recommendations:
1) Property owners with existing homes are the priority for financial
assistance. Financial assistance funds should not be used to subsidize
new construction.
2) Although all income levels should have access to financial assistance
funds, assistance should be targeted to low income households.
3) Funds should be available for feasibility studies for sewers.
a. The county should investigate cost sharing for the community
requesting the feasibility study.
b. Specifically on the Sunriver sewer system expansion feasibility
study, if any future major development (such as, but not limited to,
destination resorts) should benefit from the study, then they should
be made to reimburse the financial assistance fund equal to that
benefit.
4) Funds should be targeted to high nitrate areas, which typically are areas
with older homes in higher density concentrations.
5) Assurances or guarantees must be provided by the County that funds
generated by the New Neighborhood in the City of La Pine will be
dedicated to future actions tied to groundwater protection and property
owner financial assistance.
6) A comprehensive plan should be developed that accomplishes the
following things related to use of funds.
a. Identifies who will administer grants and loans (should not be the
Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council (COIC).
b. Funds should not be used to validate nitrate loading model
predictions.
c. Provides for an oversight committee on the use of funds.
d. How much of assistance should be grants versus loans.
e. Would address the long term adequacy of funds.
7) Long-term, cost deferred loans (no payments) are a good use of funds.
8) Assistance associated with 'time of sale' upgrade requirements is not
recommended.
9) Funds should not be used for groundwater protection education programs.
10) Purchase of Pollution Reduction Credits (PRCs) from property owners
who have installed nitrogen reducing systems is recommended.
11) Proceeds from the sale of high groundwater ("red") lots should accrue to
the financial assistance fund.
12) Financial assistance funds should definitely not be used to pay county
staff.
13)The exploration of a System Development Charge (SDC) that would
require new construction to contribute to the financial assistance fund.
This would include expansion or construction of properties located on
Destination Resorts in the study area. If determined to be viable and
equitable the assessment should be enacted.