Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-05-28 Budget Meeting Minutes - Electeds, Road Department Minutes of Budget Meeting – Elected Officials & Road Wednesday, May 28, 2014 Page 1 of 6 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF BUDGET MEETING DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2014 – Elected Officials Compensation ___________________________ Allen Room, Deschutes Services Building ___________________________ Present were Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Mike Maier, Clay Higuchi and Bruce Barrett, Budget Committee; Wayne Lowry and Teri Maerki, Finance; Danielle Fegley, Human Resources; Dave Doyle. County Counsel; and, for a portion of the meeting, Jodie Barrum, citizen. No media representatives were present. Meeting minutes were taken by Bonnie Baker. Bruce Barrett opened the meeting at 12:30 p.m. ___________________________ Erik Kropp explained the County’s compensation philosophy. Danielle Fegley provided some comparison information, from simila r counties. She said they were looking at this in a slightly different way, through percentiles. Mr. Kropp noted that the 75th percentile is the top step in the comparison counties. Ms. Fegley said that there are seven steps for management positions as well. Mr. Kropp explained that this is meant to represent experience in that job. Step 1 is much less complex. This applies to all employees except elected officials. Department heads can hire at step 2, but anything higher needs administrative approval. There are many factors to consider. Mike Maier asked if they were satisfied with the five counties they used to compare, or if they should go out of state or expand further in Oregon. Mr. Kropp stated the five are the competition, and includes some that are more urban and some that are less. They use the same for union negotiations. Ms. Fegley gave a snapshot summary of the Assessor information. The base salary information was from AOC in March 2014. Some counties are home rule, some are not; and certain positions in some counties are non-elected. All were annualized so it would be easier to compare. Minutes of Budget Meeting – Elected Officials & Road Wednesday, May 28, 2014 Page 2 of 6 Benton County’s Assessor is non-elected. Mr. Maier stated their job duties might be different because of this. Ms. Fegley said some duties are aligned differently. Deschutes County allows for longevity pay while other counties do not. This is at $65 per month for every five years of service. Deschutes County’s Assessor’s salary is $2,324 less than the median. Mr. Kropp said you can’t focus on the individual or the work product, but the value of the position itself. The Clerk’s position is similar, about $2,734 less than the median. Mr. Maier asked for Mr. Higuchi’s opinion about the value of the positions. Mr. Higuchi replied it depends on the person in the position. For some it might be too much; others should make more. Mr. Maier said it is not their role to evaluate the performance of these individuals. The voters are to do this. Mr. Higuchi stated they should look at the 50th percentile. Voters won’t know what is valuable or not. Mr. Maier said the salaries should be competitive so that qualified people will want to run for the position. It is different if it were your personal company. However, the question is, do you attempt to bring everyone to the 50th percentile. Mr. Barrett said that it was not uniform last time this was decided. Mr. Higuchi agreed that they should remain competitive and not base this on the economy. Mr. Maier thinks they should look at each position separately. Mr. Kropp feels this is the right approach. The other factor is that employees will receive a 1.6% COLA as well as management. Mr. Maier asked if they should have a formal, written policy on this. Mr. Kropp stated that the makeup of the committee could change. Mr. Maier asked if the Hay Group Study will include the philosophy of the 50th percentile. He asked if there should be a different level for management and other non-represented. Ms. Fegley said that the 75th percentile is the top step. Regarding Justice Court, in some counties this person is not an attorney, so it is harder to evaluate. Mr. Barrett feels that across the board to the 50th percentile is appropriate. Ms. Fegley reminded the group that the County includes longevity pay while others don’t. Mr. Kropp said in 2012 the Commissioners were offered a 2% increase but they declined to take it. This was at a time when everyone else was taking a COLA freeze. Minutes of Budget Meeting – Elected Officials & Road Wednesday, May 28, 2014 Page 3 of 6 MAIER: Move a 3% increase across the board. BARRETT: Second. The motion died for lack of consensus. Mr. Higuchi said the District Attorney is already paid over the median. Mr. Maier pointed out that the D.A. Office is the biggest law firm here. Mr. Higuchi does not like a motion across the board. Some should get 3% and some should get zero. He asked why the Sheriff should be makin g more than most others. Mr. Maier said that some counties have a Sheriff who doesn’t cover the same type of services or at the same level. Mr. Maier would like to bring the Clerk and Assessor up to the 50th percentile first. Ms. Fegley said the Treasurer position is unique. Some others have a separate elected Treasurer. Others have a finance director with treasurer duties, not elected, with no additional stipend. MAIER: Move an increase of 3% for all elected officials, except the Assessor and Clerk. Those would be at 4%, plus the add pays for all. BARRETT: Second. The vote was unanimous. This session ended at 1:00 p.m. ___________________________ The Commissioners and Tom Anderson returned at 1:20 p.m., and others joined the meeting. Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Anthony DeBone and Alan Unger. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Mike Maier, Clay Higuchi and Bruce Barrett, Budget Committee; Wayne Lowry and Teri Maerki, Finance; Dave Doyle; County Counsel; Chris Doty, Tom Shamberger, Randy McCulley, Kristi Putschler, Susan Bailey and Kelli Candella of Road; and one other citizen. Mr. Doty gave a PowerPoint presentation said they developed a new mission statement for the department. The new mission statement is: we strive to maintain the quality and improve the experience for all users of the DC transportation system. Minutes of Budget Meeting – Elected Officials & Road Wednesday, May 28, 2014 Page 4 of 6 Mr. Doty elaborated on the main highlights of the statement: maintaining the quality and improving the experience, and for all users. They are at 52.5 FTE plus seasonal workers. There is a team effort to administer the weed control program. They are more involved in partnering with other agencies for mutual benefit, which helps to utilize some of the more specialized equipment more often. The theme of the budget this year is project development. Mr. Doty referred to the presentation for their four-point business and budget strategy. They will focus resources on maintenance and sustaining assets. Pavement management comes first. Staff operations including delivering core services, such as preventive maintenance, snow/ice response, prep work for chip seal and other projects; and contract as necessary and appropriate for products & services, keeping quality in mind. Equipment purchase/replacement/lease/sharing will be to support core services. Capital project development is to sustain quality: maintain capital reserves to leverage grant funding through match (SDC and non-SDC); and internally fund with SRS/PILT as resources become available. Regarding PILT, $500,000 was budgeted for 2013, but they unexpectedly received over $1.7 million. It is allocated on a two-part methodology, through a percentage based on entitlement land. There are two methodologies, but the payment is based on the higher amount and population. Secure Rural Schools is deducted from this amount, and that amount goes down each year. The SRS funding is restricted to roads; the PILT money is not restricted in that manner. The Board allocated 85% to Roads and 15% to natural resources development. This is how it was budgeted for this year, and funding apparently has been reallocated for one more year. There has been some positive growth in the state highway tax allocations to the County. This may be a 2% increase overall. It is difficult to anticipate the cost of asphalt, but it has remained fairly stable for some time. Minutes of Budget Meeting – Elected Officials & Road Wednesday, May 28, 2014 Page 5 of 6 The Capital Project Reserves program was developed to handle some of the revenue. It projects out revenue and projects for five years. The pavement management program is felt to be sustainable. They get grants when possible, especially when working on roads owned by other agencies. They plan to chip seal about 118 miles of road this coming year. This is the first year in some time when they have not had to reduce FTE’s. He feels they are at the minimal level in most areas of operation. Personnel expenditures are quite manageable. If staff is removed, more overtime is necessary, but they are at a good balance at this point. Mr. Doty said they work in close partnership with Solid Waste regarding equipment and the removal and re-use of rock. Commissioner DeBone asked about the biggest, most expensive things that are expected. Mr. Doty said that they will work away at it. The City of La Pine gets about $70,000 a year in gas taxes. They have a small staff that works on utilities mostly. They partner with the County on plowing within the City limits. Mr. Doty went over the paving schedule for next year, in various parts of the County. Most of their goals revolve around a healthy economy, and they promote policies and actions that will help stimulate economic vitality. They hope to maintain roads to the pavement condition index, before the road gets to the point where the road might have to be reconstructed. Mike Maier would like to see this at 85 rather than at 80. Mr. Doty stated that it is expensive to bring all up to this level. Commissioner DeBone pointed out that this is an average overall; some will be better than others. The trend is from 68.6% in 2010, increasing to 86.4% in 2013, and Mr. Doty hopes to get to 90% or better in a year or two. They also have to take into account all parts of the system. They also plan to update the Board on the capital program and schedule, as well as their fleet equipment program within the department and the work they do with fleet maintenance for other departments. Chair Baney asked what happens if the $298,000 does not get transferred from Solid Waste to Road. Mr. Doty said it would affect capital projects. Chair Baney said they made this difficult choice when people were driving less and gas tax was lesser, and SRS and PIL T were unknown. They did not have a chance to determine when this transfer should stop and the departments are to be holistic. Mr. Doty went over the additional funds to the department from various sources. Mr. Higuchi asked if a developer pays a fee for a certain location, if that money remains to address needs at the location. Mr. Doty stated that it does. Commissioner Unger said he is proud at the strides the department has made, and how well they manage their assets. Being no further discussion, the session ended at 2:15 p.m. DATED this Day of 2014 for the q f!> W­ Deschutes County Board of Commissioner ~ Anthony DeBone, Vice Chair ATTEST: Alan Unger, Commissioner ~~ Recording Secretary Minutes of Budget Meeting -Elected Officials & Road Wednesday, May 28,2014 Page6of6 DESCHUTES COUNTY Summary Elected Officials Survey May 20, 2014 This survey includes the following elected positions: Assessor Clerk Commissioner District Attorney Sheriff Justice of the Peace Treasurer Salary data was collected from the following Oregon Counties: Population Benton 87,725 Clackamas 386,080 Deschutes 162,525 Jackson 206,310 Lane 356,125 Marion 322,880 DESCHUTES COUNTY SALARY SURVEY for ELECTED OFFICIALS May 2014 Annual Compensation Percentile (excludes Treasurer) Percentile 2: Percentile 1: I County ~ Assessor ~ ~Clerk ~ _Commissioners_ _ DA -==-Sheriff, _ _Justice _ II Base Salary Total Pay Base Salary Total Pay Base Salary Total Pay Base Salary Total Pay Base Salary Total Pay Base Salary Total Pay I Benton $104,400 $113,984 $104,400 $113,984 $79,428 $86,719 $23,691 $25,866 $104,259 $113,830 Clackamas $99,356 $111,921 $89,125 $100,396 $84,133 $94,773 $39,163 $44,116 $152,255 $171,509 $91,831 $103,4441 Jackson $88,858 $94,189 $86,694 $91 ,896 $93,309 $103,708 $21,819 $23,128 $132,683 $140,644 $71,981 $76,300 Lane $101,520 $116,543 $100,441 $108,597 $74 ,292 $87,105 $33,675 $43,189 $123,492 $140,300 $50,930 $55,066 1 Marion $92,518 $105,424 $79,447 $90,530 $76,606 $87,293 $25,646 $29,224 $119,746 $136,451 $75,255 $85,753 --­-- Deschutes $97,032 $105,940 $86,391 $94,322 ~$79 1 720 $87 ,038 $27.424 $29,942 $134,678, $147 ,041 $89,.490 $97,705 50th percentile $99,356 $111,921 $89 ,125 $,100,396 $79.,428 $87.293 $25 ,646 $29,224 $123,492 $140,300 $73,618 $81,026 DCtomedliln , -2 .40% -5 ,6SO/a -3 .16% -6 .44% 0.37% -0 .29% 6.48% 2 .40% 8 .31% 4.59% 17.74% 17.07% ---­-­--­ 76th percentile $101,520 $113 .984 $100,441 $108 ,597 $84 ,133 $94,773 $33 ,675 $43 ,189 $132 ,683 $140,644 $79,399 $90,176 DC to 76th P -4 .63% -7 .59% -16.26% -15 .13% -5.541)/0 -8.89% -22 .79% -44.25% 1.48% 4.35% 11.28% 7.71% Notes: Salary and comp is current as of March 31 , 2014 . For non-elected pOSitions with a base range , the top step of the range is presented . Justice salary is annualized based on full-t ime and 2072 hours per year . DESCHUTES COUNTY SALARY SURVEY for ELECTED OFFICIALS May 2014 Assessor -Annual PERS 401 (K)/457 Other Add County Annual Salary Contribution Contribution Pay Total Pay Benton (non-elected) $104,400 6.00% 3.00% $113,984 Clackamas (elected) $99,356 6 .00% 6 .27% $111,921 Jackson (elected) $88,858 6.00% 0.00% $94,189 Lane (elected) $101,520 6.00% 2.00% $6 ,780 $116,543 Marion (elected) $92 ,518 6.00% 7 .50% $105,424 Median $99,356 $111 ,921 Deschutes County (elected) $97 ,032 6.00% 3.00% longevity $105,940 Difference in $ -$2,324 -$5,981 DC Compared to Median -2.40% -5.65% Notes: Lane receives a car allowance of $565 per month , included as Other Add Pay . Salary and camp is current as of March 31 , 2014. For non-elected positions with a base range , the top step of the range is presented. Desch utes County officials receive longevity pay based on leng t h of service . DESCHUTES COUNTY SALARY SURVEY for ELECTED OFFICIALS May 2014 Clerk -Annual PERS 401 (K)/457 Other Add County Annual Salary Contobution Contribution Pay Total Pay Benton (non-elected) $104,400 6.00% 3 .00% $113,984 Clackamas (elected) $89,125 6 .00% 6 .27% $100,396 Jackson (elected) $86,694 6.00% 0.00% $91,896 Lane (non-elected) $100,441 6.00% 2 .00% $108,597 Marion (elected) $79,447 6.00% 7.50% $90,530 Median $89,125 $100,396 Deschutes Coun~ (elected) $86,391 6 .00% 3.00% longevity $94,322 Difference in $ -$2,734 -$6,074 DC Compared to Median -3.16% -6.44% Notes: Salary and camp is current as of March 31 , 2014 . For non -elected positions with a range , the top step of the range is presented. Deschutes County officials re ce ive longevity pay based on length of service . DESCHUTES COUNTY SALARY SURVEY for ELECTED OFFICIALS May 2014 Commissioners -Annual PERS 401 (K)/457 Other Add County Annual Salary Contribution Contribution Pay Total Pay Benton $79,428 6 .00% 3.00% $86,719 Clackamas $84,133 6.00% 6.27% $94,773 Jackson $93,309 6.00% 0.00% $4,800 $103,708 Lane $74,292 6 .00% 2.00% $6 ,780 $87 ,105 Marion $76,606 6 .00% 7.50% $87,293 Median $79,428 $87 ,293 Deschutes County $79,720 6.00% 3.00% longevity $87,038 Difference in $ $292 -$254 DC Compared to Median 0,37% -0,29% .. Notes: Jackson receives a car a llowance of $400 per month , included as Other Add Pay . Lane rece ives a car allowance of $565 per month , included as Other Add Pay . Salary and comp is current as of March 31 , 2014 . All Commissio ners are Elected Officials. Deschutes County offic ials receive longevity pay based on length of serv ice . DESCHUTES COUNTY SALARY SURVEY for ELECTED OFFICIALS May 2014 District Attorney, County Portion -Annual PERS 401 (K)/457 other Add County Annual S-ala,y Contribution Contribution Pay Total Pay Benton $23 ,691 6.00% 3.00% $25,866 Clackamas $39,163 6 .00% 6.27% $44,116 Jackson $21,819 6.00% 0.00% $23,128 Lane $33,675 6.00% 2.00% $6,780 $43 ,189 Marion $25,646 6 .00% 7 .50% $29,224 Median $25,646 $29 ,224 Deschutes County $27,424 6.00% 3,00% longevity $29,942 Difference in $ $1,778 $718 DC Compared to Median 6.48% 2,40% Notes: State portions for D.A. base monthly salary increased 2% f rom 2013 to $109,572 , except Benton which is $92 ,340 . Jackson County elected a new DA and the salary went down from last year . Lane receives a car allowance of $565 per month , included as Other Add Pay. Salary and comp is current as of March 31 , 2014. All District Attorney's are Elected Officials . Deschutes County officials rece ive longevity pay based on length of service . DESCHUTES COUNTY SALARY SURVEY for ELECTED OFFICIALS May 2013 Sheriff -Annual Annual PERS 401 (K)/457 Other Add County Sa lary Contribution Contribution Pay Total Pay Benton $104,259 6.00% 3 .00% $113,830 Clackamas $152,255 6 .00% 6 .27% $171,509 Jackson $132 ,683 6 .00% 0.00% $140 ,644 Lane $123,492 6 .00% 2 .00% $6,780 $140,300 Marion $119 ,746 6 .00% 7.50% $136,451 Median $123,492 $140 ,300 Deschutes County $134 ,678 6.00% 3.00% longevity $147,04 1 Difference in $ $11,186 $6 ,742 . DC Compared to Median 8 .31% 4,59% Notes: Lane receives a car allowance of $565 pe r month , included as Other Add Pay . Salary and comp is curren t as of March 3 1, 2014 . A ll Sheriffs are Ele ct ed Offi c ials . Des chutes County officials rece ive longevity pay based o n length of service . DESCHUTES COUNTY SALARY SURVEY for ELECTED OFFICIALS May 2014 Justice of the Peace -Annual PERS 401 (K)/457 Other Add , County Annual Salary Contribution Contribution Pay Total Pay Benton (no position) Clackamas $91,831 6 .00% 6.27% $103,444 Jackson $71,981 6 .00% 0.00% $76,300 Lane $50,930 6.00% 2.00% $55,066 Marion $75,255 6.00% 7.50% $85,753 Median $73,618 $81,026 Deschutes Coun1¥ $89 .490 6 .00% 3.00% longevity ~97,705 Difference In I $15,872 $16,679 DC Compared to Median 17.74% 17.07% Notes: Lane, Marion and D~schutes are part-time . All salaries are annualized based on 2072 hours per year . County FTE Hourly Clackamas 44.32 Jackson 34.74 Lane 0.75 24.58 Marion 0 .6 36.32 Deschutes 0.61 43.19 Salary and camp is c urrent as of March 3 1, 2014. All Justice of the Peace official s a re Elected Officials. Des chutes County officials receive longevity pay based on length of service. DESCHUTES COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT BUDGET COMMITTEE PRESENTATION MAY 28, 2014 Introductions New Mission Statement Exceptionally Brief Department Composition Department Overview Business Element Review Budget Strategy PILT Overview Revenue (10 -year Operating) Capital Improvement Program Overview Budget Review: Revenues Expenditures Performance Measures – how they relate to County goals . Other Funds Q/A (But don’t wait until the end!) ROAD DEPARTMENT BUDGET PRESENTATION AGENDA We strive to maintain the quality and improve the experience for all users of the Deschutes County transportation system. NEW MISSION STATEMENT We are Asset Managers We are System Operators Maintenance Professionals DEPARTMENT COMPOSITION THE FOUR DIVISIONS OF THE ROAD DEPARTMENT Operations and Maintenance Fleet and Equipment Engineering, Surveying, and Traffic Safety Administration 52.75 Full Time Employees (FY 15) and 15 +/- Contract Seasonal Employees Primary Objective: Maintain and Operate County Road Network Other Services: County Vehicle Fleet and Maintenance Services (Non -Sheriff) County Surveyor Services Noxious Weed Control – Continued support of Natural Resources Department Maintenance Services for Other Agencies Paved Centerline Miles: 700+/- Non -Paved Centerline Miles: 200+/- Roadway Asset Value: $400,000,000+/- Registered Vehicle Count in DC: 200,000 +/- Department employees: 52.75 (4.0 Surveyors Office) DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW Maintenance Pavement Management Program Signing/Striping Vegetation Management Shoulder Maintenance Bridge Maintenance Operations Snow/Ice Roadside Hazards Event/Incident Response Fleet/Equipment Project Development Capital Projects Major Maintenance Safety Improvements Modernization MAJOR BUSINESS ELEMENTS OF THE ROAD DEPARTMENT 1. Focus resource investment on maintaining and sustaining existing asset quality. 2. Staff operations with the minimum FTE necessary to deliver core services : Implement aggressive Preventative Maintenance program (chip seal, etc). Provide adequate snow/ice response. Deliver shoulder season projects, especially prep work in advance of chip seal program. Utilize contracting as necessary for products and services which are easily bid with quality assurance. ROAD DEPARTMENT 4 -POINT BUSINESS/BUDGET STRATEGY Road Operations Snow/Ice Operations and Special Projects Fall Shoulder Season Projects Aggressive Chip Seal Program Spring Shoulder Season Projects 3. Equipment purchase/replacement to support core services. Maximize fleet/equipment utilization and graduation . Lease/rental of specialty equipment . Shared services – COPWP IGA 4. Capital Project development through availability of resources exceeding that necessary to operate and sustain quality. Maintain Capital Reserve (SDC and non -SDC) to leverage grant funding (match ). Internally fund with SRS/PILT as resources become available. ROAD DEPARTMENT 4 -POINT BUSINESS/BUDGET STRATEGY, CONT. The County received an unexpected surprise upon receipt of the annual PILT funds in the June 2013: Budgeted: $500,000 Received: $1,735,135 Question: Why the increase in PILT? Answer: PILT is calculated based on a 2 -part methodology in which funding is allocated to an agency based on the HIGHER of the following: PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES (PILT) Methodology A Methodology B $2.54/acre of Entitlement Land (USFS/BLM) $0.35/acre of Entitlement Land (USFS/BLM) Capped at $3.42M Less previous federal land related payments (namely SRS) PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES (PILT ), CONT. Conclusion: DC shifted from Methodology B to Methodology A. Methodology shift resulted from decreased SRS payments to DC. Within Methodology A, SRS decrease is offset by a dollar -for -dollar increase in PILT. July 2013: BOCC directs allocation of the PILT revenue (exceeding that of the budgeted “Methodology B” revenue) to Road and Natural Resource Departments in accordance with typical SRS allocation (85% Road/15% Natural Resources) FY 15 Budget: Continuance of FY 14 PILT allocation and assumption of SRS continuance. OPERATING REVENUE 10-YEAR CYCLE Operating Revenue: State Highway Fund, STP Funds, SRS, PILT, Solid Waste Transfer, Mineral/Geothermal FY 14: New PILT revenue, SRS continuance and positive growth in SHF (gas tax). OPERATING REVENUE VS CPI VS ASPHALT (FACTORED GROWTH FROM 2004 BASE YEAR) Since FY 12, the Road Department has developed Capital Project Reserves via funding sources as follows: Transfer of STP funds previously allocated to 19 th Street ($1.2M). Unbudgeted continuance of SRS in FY 13 and FY 14 ($1.7M). PILT allocation in FY 14 ($1.0M). System Development Charge Revenue ($1.6M). CIP PROGRAM •Sustained PCI (5-year) •Equipment reserves maintenance sustainability •Accumulated CIP Reserves •PILT/SRS viability capital funding availability •Utilizing CIP Reserves •SDCs •PILT/SRS 5-year CIP Total Resource Obligation: $27.71M ($20.97M in FY 14) Significant carryover (Beginning Working Capital) from FY 14 Unbudgeted Revenue: PILT/SRS (received in FY 14, +$1.9M) Improved State Highway Fund Allocation (+$0.5M over FY 14 projection) Additional partnership revenue (+0.5M from chip seal, vegetation management program) $0 in budgeted CIP expenditures Other Revenue Observations: Budgeted Revenue for FY 15 PILT and SRS (+$1.9M) Full expenditure of SDC revenue (from 336 Fund, +$2.0M ) Estimated 2% growth in State Highway Fund Allocation (gas tax, DMV fees, etc ) BUDGET REVIEW: RESOURCES (+$) Pavement Management Program: Total investment = $4.135M to County System (91.8% sustainable – full system) Chip Seal: 86 miles (County system). 118 miles total (Bend/Redmond) Overlay: $2.25M investment; 10 ± miles ($1.1M overlay reserve) Projected PCI: 80 (currently 80) Personnel: No reductions in FTE Count (first time since FY 06 – 67.5 FTE) Personnel expenditures held at overall +3.16% Health Insurance, COLA Overtime increase (sensitivity due to lower FTE count) From $60k to $95k BUDGET REVIEW: EXPENDITURES (-$) Equipment Investment: Total Transfer to 330 Fund in FY 15: $600,000 Per long term replacement schedule Total investment in FY 15: $453,500 Sustained reduction from FY 13 (-25%) Supports primary business elements Safety and efficiency BUDGET REVIEW: EXPENDITURES (-$) NEW EQUIPMENT Light Plant (2) $16,000 Variable Message Signs (2) $38,000 Wing Plow $15,000 Belly Plow $8,500 REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT Vehicles / Pickups (2) $56,000 Wheel Loader (used, from Solid Waste) $55,000 Powered Broom $50,000 Excavator $160,000 Yard Fork Lift $55,000 Total $453,500 FY Obligation Project 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Skyliners Road Reconstruction (10.27% local match portion) FLAP to fund 89.73% $ 928,000 Tetherow Bridge Replacement Project (10.27% local match portion) ODOT Local Bridge Program to fund 89.73% $ 100,000 $ 150,000 Fall Creek Bridge (10.27% local match portion) FLAP to fund 89.73% $ 60,000 $ 60,000 Powell Butte Highway/Neff Road-Alfalfa Mkt Road Intersection Improvements $ 2,250,000 $ 250,000 La Pine Downtown Stormwater Improvements at Huntington Road/Third Street $ 200,000 Burgess Road/Day Road Turn Lane Improvements $ 650,000 Huntington Road/Deer Run Paving Improvements $ 1,800,000 S Canal Boulevard (Old Bend-Redmond Hwy)/Helmholtz Way Turn Lane Improvements $ 650,000 Rickard Road Paving Improvements $ 800,000 Traffic Safety Improvements (annual) Various intersections $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 TOTAL BY YEAR $ 3,588,000 $ 1,160,000 $ 1,850,000 $ 700,000 $ 850,000 5-Year Total CIP Investment (Capital and SDC Resources) $ 8,148,000 BUDGET REVIEW: EXPENDITURES (-$) CAPITAL PROJECTS PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND COUNTY GOAL RELATIONSHIP County Goal: Robust Economy – Promote policies and actions that stimulate economic vitality. County Objective #3: Provide cost -efficient and innovative infrastructure that supports local economic opportunities and livable communities. Performance Measure #1 – Pavement Condition Index (Quantitative): Report the overall average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of the county paved road network. The PCI is a measure of the quality of pavement ranging from 0 (completely failed) to 100 (new surface). A PCI greater than 70 is considered “good” and optimum maintenance efficiency occurs within the low to mid-80s range. FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Target 76* 80* 78* 80 80 80 Relating to Goals: Robust Economy, Healthy People, Safe Communities. Note: * = Alternative measurement technique utilized by the Road Department: 2010-2012; compare with caution. PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND COUNTY GOAL RELATIONSHIP Performance Measure #2 – Percent of roads rated good or better (Quantitative): Reports the percentage of roads with a PCI of 70 or better. This measure, in concert with the overall PCI rating, provides another metric by which to measure the quality of the pavement asset and whether or not improvement, sustainability, or regression is occurring across the entire system. FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Target 68.6%* 73.4%* 72.0%* 86.4% 90.8% 93% Relating to Goals: Robust Economy, Healthy People, Safe Communities. Note: * = Alternative measurement technique utili zed by the Road Department: 2010-2012; compare with caution. Performance Measure #3 – Percent system resurfaced (Quantitative): Reports the percentage of system receiving a pavement maintenance treatment in a fiscal year. This metric assists with comparison of actual maintenance work performed versus ideal maintenance intervals (ie, chip seals last 7 years, therefore 1/7 th (or 14%) of the network should be treated annually). FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Target 11.3% 10.9% 13.6% 11.5% 13.5% 14.0% Relating to Goals: Robust Economy. PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND COUNTY GOAL RELATIONSHIP BOCC “updates” in FY 15: Capital Improvement Project Delivery Goal: Robust Economy Fleet/Equipment Program Goal: Effective Service Delivery Performance Measure #4 – PCI Sustainability Ratio (Outcomes): Reports the ratio of pavement preservation investment divided by the “system needs” investment required to sustain the PCI at its current level. The FY 14 PMP model estimates an annual average “system needs” of $4.5M investment necessary to sustain the PCI over a 5-year to 10-year period. The FY 14 preservation investment was $4.1M (91.1% sustained). The PMP model estimates a 0.1 PCI point degradat ion (or increase) for every $235 ,000(+/-) subtracted (or added) to the annual pavement preservation investme nt (outcome measure). The goal of this PM is 100%, the target is improvement or upward trajectory. FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 Target n/a n/a n/a 83.5% 91.1% 92% Relating to Goals: Robust Economy. # Title Purpose Function 328 County Surveyor Fund Survey Fee Collection NOTE: PROPOSED SURVEYOR FEE ADJUSTMENTS Transfers to 325 Fund for County Surveyor related expenses 329 Public Land Corner Preservation Filing/Recording Fee Collection Transfers to 325 Fund for County Surveyor related expenses 330 Road Department Equipment Fund Repository for annual capital outlay contributions and purchasing. Accepts Transfer from 325 Fund. Budgeted capital outlay procurement (equipment) 335 Road Improvement Reserve Holds development contributions for future road improvements Transfers to 325 Fund when specific projects are constructed. 336 Transportation SDC Repository for Transportation SDC Collections Transfers to 325 Fund when specific SDC eligible projects (per CIP) are constructed. 340 Vehicle Maintenance and Replacement Accepts County Department contributions for annual vehicle maintenance and replacement. Transfers to 325 Fund as necessary to maintain and procure fleet. 430 Local Improvement District Funds design/construction of Local Improvement Districts Transfers to 325 Fund when LID projects are initiated and constructed. ADDITIONAL DEPARTMENT FUNDS Rationale: Achieve cost recovery. Fees previously adjusted in FY 08. Comparables : Lower than average of 10 -agency peer group. Stakeholder outreach: Favorable or non - oppositional comments received from 5 of 39 local survey company and agency groups. SURVEYOR’S OFFICE FEE ADJUSTMENTS Fee Category Fee Details 10-County Average (total fee) Deschutes County Existing Deschutes County Proposed Percent Increase Subdivision (standard) Assumed 18- lot subdivision $2,779 Base: $780 Per Lot: $80 Total: $1,860 Base: $900 Per Lot: $85 Total: $2,070 11.3% Subdivision (post monumented) Assumed 18- lot subdivision $3,656 Base: $1,200 Per Lot: $80 Total: $2,640 Base: $1,380 Per Lot: $85 Total: $3,080 11.7% Partition 2-lot $1,022 Base: $500 Per Lot: $20 Total: $540 Base: $625 Per Lot: $85 Total: $795 47% Condominium 10-unit $2,139 Base: $780 Per Lot: $80 Total: $1,580 Base: $900 Per Lot: $85 Total: $1,750 10.8% Property Line Adjustment Per line adjusted n/a $270/line adjusted No change 0% Record of Survey 2-sheet $249 $165 flat fee Plus $12 per addl. Sheet, over 2 $185 flat fee Plus $50 per addl. Sheet over 2 10.1% QUESTIONS