HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-05-20 Budget Meeting Minutes - AMDeschutes 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 COMMITTEE MEETING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MONDAY, MAY 20, 2013 -A.M.
Allen Room, Deschutes Services Building
Present were Commissioners Alan Unger, Anthony DeBone and Tammy Baney.
Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy
County Administrator; Jeanine Faria and Teri Maerki, Finance; Dave Inbody,
Administration; Budget Committee members Clay Higuchi, Mike Maier and Bruce
Barrett; andfor a part ofthe meeting, David Givans, Internal Auditor; Susan Ross,
Property & Facilities; Anna Johnson, Communications; and several
representatives ofvarious service districts. No representatives ofthe media were
in attendance. Minutes were taken by Bonnie Baker ofAdministration.
Mike Maier opened the meeting at 9:00 a.m.
Bruce Barrett was nominated to be Chair this year; the motion was seconded and
passed unanimously.
Mr. Barrett said the budget balanced for last year and Finance received another
award for a distinguished budget. He welcomed Tom Anderson as the newest
member of the Committee.
The Bend Library County Service District
The Bend Library County Service District Budget Committee consists of the
Commissioners, Mike Maier and Clayton Higuchi.
A discussion took place regarding the debt service. This is the last year, as the
bond will be paid off; and at that time the Service District will dissolve, and will
drop off the property tax statement.
f
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20,2013 -Morning Page 1 of 16
t
I
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 2 of 16
Mr. Maier asked if there has been any thought to continuing this Service District.
They do not own the east County location. Mr. Higuchi asked if they are building
reserves. Mr. Maier said that it is its own entity and anything further is through its
own efforts. At the time of the bonds, the libraries were operated by the County.
The locations wanted to operate separately so they were voted on separately. The
Service District supported the libraries through the bonding process.
MAIER: Move approval of the Bend Library County Service District Budget
for FY 2013-14.
HIGUCHI: Second.
The motion was passed unanimously.
The hearing on this District was closed.
___________________________
Sunriver Library County Service District
Budget Committee Members are the County Commissioners.
Teri Maerki explained there are three years to go on this budget. They were not all
formed at the same time.
BANEY: Move approval of the Sunriver Library County Service District
Budget for FY 2013-14.
DEBONE: Second.
The motion was passed unanimously.
The hearing on this District was closed.
___________________________
Sunriver Service District
Budget Committee Members are the County Commissioners, Bob Wrightson, Jim
Wilson and Michael Brannan. Bob Wrightson and Michael Brannan attended; Mr.
Wilson was out of the area.
Mr. Wrightson said they are proposing to hold the budget at the same level and
anticipate no salary increases for employees. The Police Department has agreed;
they are still negotiating with the Fire Department.
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 3 of 16
Based on comments regarding PERS at the time, the expenses were anticipated
being similar to previous years. Expenses will be similar to prior years. They have
relatively minor capital expenditures planned (police vehicles). The Police
Department is involved in a lot of community affairs, and the new Police Chief and
the Fire Chief are doing a great job.
BARRETT: Move approval of the Sunriver Service District FY 2013-14 budget.
UNGER: Second.
The motion was passed unanimously.
___________________________
BARRETT: Move approval of the Sunriver Service District Reserve Budget for
FY 2013-14
BANEY: Second.
The motion was passed unanimously.
The hearing on this District was closed.
___________________________
Black Butte Ranch County Service District
Budget Committee Members present were the three Commissioners, Dave
Sullivan, Tom Mayberry and Carol Burnham.
Dave Sullivan said he is the newest member of the Black Butte Ranch County
Service District. The other members were unable to attend.
Their budget is austere, but they would like to be able to pay the police more.
They are happy with the Police Chief and Department. They get great supp ort
from the community.
Commissioner Baney asked about insurance and benefits. Mr. Sullivan said they
settled this and tried to be very fair with the employees. Most Fire Department
calls have to do with health crises. There is good mutual support from other
agencies regarding the highway and the area.
They will need a new option levy, but these usually pass with a large majority.
The values are down on properties, however, so there is less revenue.
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 4 of 16
UNGER: Move approval of the FY 2013-14 budget for the Black Butte Ranch
County Service District.
DEBONE: Second.
The motion was passed unanimously.
___________________________
UNGER: Move approval of the FY 2013-14 reserves budget for the Black Butte
Ranch County Service District.
DEBONE: Second.
The motion was passed unanimously.
The hearing on this District was closed.
___________________________
Extension and 4-H County Service District
Committee members are Chris Lawrence, Mike Schuleman, Chris Lawrence and
Katrina Van Dis, and the County Commissioners.
In attendance were Dana Martin, Katrina Van Dis and Darlene Belden; Mike
Scholeman was unable to attend.
Ms. Martin said that revenue is down. There have been some changes in
personnel, including one person leaving, so that funding was applied to a position
that was previously County funded, but now will be covered by the State. The
Volunteer Coordinator position was added back. Ms. Belden is retiring this year
and they included an amount for her retirement buyout.
The costs for materials and services are consistent. The greenhouse project is now
complete, and they are hosting a lot of vegetation classes there. The capital outlay
was $60,000, and they will transfer the balance. They hope to expand the office
area but are waiting to see what happens with the various programs. They are still
renting space elsewhere.
Commissioner Unger noted that they adjusted well when the financial situation got
lean.
BANEY: Move approval of the FY 2013-14 Deschutes County Extension and
4-H County Service District budget.
UNGER: Second.
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 5 of 16
The motion was passed unanimously.
___________________________
BANEY: Move approval of the FY 2013-14 Deschutes County Extension and
4-H County Service District reserve budget.
UNGER: Second.
The motion was passed unanimously.
The hearing on this District was closed.
___________________________
Tom Anderson opened the public hearing on the Deschutes County budget. He
said he has relied heavily on those who have been involved in previous budget
processes. He has not included anything new and the process is relatively the
same.
___________________________
There was an article in the Saturday Bulletin regarding some numbers relating to
health benefits. EBAC was asked to make recommendations regarding helping
balance the budget. They recommended reducing the employee co-payment to
25% rather than 20%. The savings would amount to around $200,000 rather than
the Bulletin’s estimate of $1.4 million.
The budget was computed on approximately the $400,000 that was originally
estimated. A change to the use of generic drugs rather than name brand drugs
would amount to about $100,000 in savings. The Board will ask EBAC to get up
to at least $400,000 in savings.
EBAC is very engaged in the process and know that the departments bear the
burden of expenses. The County can impose a change if EBAC does not come up
with solutions.
Commissioner Baney feels this was a huge mistake, going from a statement of $1.4
million in savings rather than $400,000. In addition, to impact the plan from 80/20
to 75/25 is huge, but asking employees to do even more is difficult. She wants to
be able to trust the process and keep EBAC engaged. They need to know exact
numbers for the health benefits fund numbers.
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 6 of 16
Mr. Higuchi asked if a third party provided double-check of the numbers.
Sometimes administrators are in a hurry to get some numbers to kick around. It
seems difficult for them to be accurate. Mr. Anderson stated they will not get in
this position again.
Mr. Maier indicated that going to 75/25 is a big jump; he asked if this is in the
labor agreements. Mr. Kropp said that they talked about the monthly premium co-
pay. Commissioner Baney asked how much of the cost is associated to staff.
Changing the benefit might help the plan keep the premium down. Mr. Anderson
stated that this will not mean much to most employees. David Inbody added that
there is still a maximum amount every year, $2,000. This is why the savings are
not as great as first thought.
Mr. Anderson said they could increase the monthly co -payment or raise the cap on
the maximum deductible. There is a discussion tomorrow on this issue.
___________________________
Mr. Anderson stated that the goals and objectives process has been completed,
along with the measures. They are trying to better link the proposed budgets with
the goals and objectives. (He referred to a handout, which is attached for
reference.)
The environment is changing, especially in health care. It is a moving target but
the economy is improving somewhat. This should be help ful with revenue in
various ways. PERS costs continue to rise considerably, so additional revenue will
help offset that.
There will be a little more scrutiny on the budgets this year and in the future,
especially regarding those departments that have not gone through this in the past.
He asked the Commissioners to highlight anything they feel is particularly
important.
Mr. Maier asked about performance measures; all departments show this tied to
goals and objectives except the District Attorney.
Mr. Anderson stated that gross numbers do not mean a lot since there are so many
moving parts. The trend for FTE’s is still downward, and Health and Juvenile are
down quite a bit.
___________________________
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 7 of 16
Mr. Anderson stated that about a 3.3% increase in valuation is anticipated. This is
conservative and may rise in the future as more properties increase in value.
Construction activity is up about 22% for the County and much higher in the cities.
They need to be careful about going into another phase of growing too much, too
fast as in the past, which is not sustainable.
___________________________
Transient room tax is showing a substantial increase as tourist activity escalates.
There has been talk about a room tax increase, but it is not built in to the budget.
The City of Bend is considering one this year. The cities are already charging
more than the County.
___________________________
State revenue covers a lot of things and is up slightly. The whole scene is
changing with health care issues. The Commission on Children & Families is
going away and staff was merged into other departments. Commissioner Baney
said that this will be more of a prevention office scenario. They still do not know
what this will mean long-term until the State decides how this is to be handled.
They will apply for funding through the hub concep t, ABHA is gone and there will
be an application through the ESD for the hub. It would be a regional approach.
Mr. Anderson said that Hillary Saraceno and Scott Johnson gave a lot of thought
about how to match up employees to the relevant groups within Health and other
areas. Their expertise will augment what is being done. The environment is still
changing at the State level.
___________________________
Sentencing reform is also in the works, and the results are not known yet. This
will impact the Sheriff’s Office, Parole & Probation, Corrections and the District
Attorney.
___________________________
Road funding continues to decline, and it will be an ongoing challenge as to how to
pay for road maintenances.
___________________________
Enterprise funds will be up somewhat for Solid Waste.
___________________________
The Family Motor Coach Association event will come back to the Fair & Expo in
2014, but the department will need to fund a gap in its revenue until that time.
Bookings are starting to come back more than previously.
___________________________
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 8 of 16
There will be a new Finance Director next year, so there may be other ideas
presented on how the budget is formed.
General fund resources have a beginning net working capital amount that is higher,
but there are more demands on the funding. They have shifted some revenue
directly into the Justice Court fund. Justice Court is not doing well at this time in
part because the Sheriff’s Office is not citing people into Justice Court.
___________________________
Regarding PERS, there is a $2.5 million increase. There are some charts
(attached) regarding the PERS reserve fund and various reserve drawdown
scenarios.
The 50% drawdown shows a reduction to the PERS reserve fund. The charges to
departments would greatly increase. Ms. Faria said it has been drawn down three
years. Mr. Maier stated that is the purpose. He asked if the PERS rates being built
in to the budget anticipate any changes at the legislative level. Mr. Anderson
responded that they do not, since no one is sure what the State will do, or when.
The plan is not to budget savings to the departments, but put any potential savings
in the reserves for next year. Mr. Maier stated it appears they will still budget this
way, and set aside any savings.
Mr. Anderson stated that the next biennium would be set for the following year.
At the end of 2013, they will look at the overall reserves. The market is the biggest
determining factor in the unfunded liability. The Board testified in the more
comprehensive PERS reform to get more relief, but this did not pass.
Ms. Faria stated there were PERS bonds in 2002 to pay down some of the PERS
debt. At the time, it was cheaper to do this. The bonds will not be paid off until
about 2028. They were taxable bonds as well. This is figured in the various
scenarios.
Mr. Anderson stated the 50% draw down rate is recommended with this budget,
but this is not sustainable and needs to be evaluated each year. The department
heads have discussed this at length, so they know there may be more costs to their
operating budgets. The departments recommend the 50% draw down at this time.
Some departments will be greatly impacted.
Mr. Higuchi thought that some were okay with doing this process this year , but
know it cannot be sustained in the future. Mr. Anderson stated they did not have to
absorb it last year, so has to be addressed this year. If the unfunded liability or
PERS reform does not happen, they will have some intense conversations next
year.
___________________________
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 9 of 16
Mr. Anderson referred to another chart regarding the impacts of the Health
Benefits Trust fund on department budgets. Originally, it was 8%; but with more
recent projections on health care costs for next year, this is insufficient.
The Board felt it is important to maintain a high balance in this fund. They
doubled the department amounts to 15%. The other sheet shows the impact to
departments. With that 15% increase, there would be the $400,000 from EBAC
recommendations ($200,000 in revenue and $200,000 reduction in costs).
David Givans is doing an audit on the Deschutes On-site Clinic to make sure it is
resulting in the savings that were anticipated.
Mr. Higuchi asked about increasing revenue through charges to d epartments. He is
concerned about the impact to County services. The County needs to look at a
different norm; and what can be done if they want to minimally impact services.
Mr. Anderson understands that they need to look at fundamental changes to
benefits. He feels the cost increase projections are higher than he anticipated, but
he does not want to reduce those since there are so many unknowns. They still
need the hard, fast evidence to be able to reduce the numbers.
Mr. Higuchi stated that the reserves are probably too high. Chair Unger stated that
they have been working towards this to bring it into equilibrium. Mr. Maier asked
what the average rise in expenditures has been. Mr. Inbody said it has gone from
between 5% and 11% over the years.
Mr. Kropp stated that they hired a consultant to come up with an average of 8% for
the coming year. Mr. Anderson stated they are undertaking ways to keep this cost
down. They do not yet have projections for next year, so they are being
conservative. The departments are aware of the 15% for next year. They also
talked about an indirect services payment increase as well.
Commissioner Baney said there is a lot of new data about wellness programs and
prevention. Essentially they are capturing those who are already well, but not that
many who need it. The benefit has to balance with the cost. At the end of the day,
they are trying to make the plan strong and sustainable. They have a direction to
follow to stave off future claims, but in the meantime it is expensive. The wellness
initiatives and prevention work can only go so far.
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 10 of 16
Mr. Higuchi stated this is not a wellness program. It is to bring efficiency to the
program. Mr. Inbody said wellness is only about $100,000 and not a big part of it.
Commissioner Baney asked about the DOC costs. Mr. Anderson stated that it
offsets the EBMS expenses. Mr. Inbody said that it saves the County about $1
million overall.
Mr. Higuchi said that some things cannot be controlled, so no matter what you do,
it is an expense that is going to happen. Other things can be controlled.
___________________________
Regarding labor contracts, Mr. Anderson spoke about bringing about consistency
in each bargaining unit. There is still some room to adjust employee contributions,
except for FOPPO.
___________________________
In regard to departmental budgets, the Fair and Expo staffing will remain flat.
There is a gap in revenue for a while, so general fund would supplement what they
need for reserves. The next year revenue should be better. The Fair Board would
like to see an increase in room tax revenue.
___________________________
Natural resources includes the weed abatement work that has been done. They are
losing some federal funding, but they are looking at other sources. It is hoped that
the FEMA 2010 grant will become active. Dan Sherwin retired, so the budget
requests part of this be handled by the Road Department if it relates to road rights
of way. The private or other public lands portion will be handled by Ed Keith, the
County Forester. There are some similarities in this work regarding forests, weeds
and use of the land. However, the Weed Board has some concerns and fears their
program will lose momentum.
___________________________
The Road Department continues to reduce staff to offset reductions in revenue, but
this can only go so far. State and Federal revenue is fluctuating, and this issue has
not been solved long-term. They may have ideas on of how to handle some of this.
___________________________
The Solid Waste Department revenue is based on volume and should increase as
building increases. There will be no additions to staffing.
There is no market for bio-fuels at this time. However, the waste to energy project
(using the gas from the landfill) is being discussed. There could be an add-on
piece for bio-fuels. Overall, things are looking more stable.
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 11 of 16
___________________________
The Assessor has budgeted conservatively and staffing is down. He may need to
increase staffing if construction significantly increases.
___________________________
In regard to Health Services and the Children & Families Commission, staffing is
declining in Health, but is up in Behavioral Health. General fund support will need
to be increased for uninsured clients. The Health Department hopes for a more
comprehensive way to assess clients to get them into all of the programs they need.
___________________________
Mr. Anderson stated that in Community Development, they hope to bring one
person back up to full-time for code enforcement, as a result of changes in
construction and permits. Revenue is up and a fee increa se is proposed. Andy
High of the Central Oregon Builders’ Association said they will not object to this.
The new permit system requires a lot of work, and management is restructuring.
The State increased the building surcharge and the County will have to pay for
some additional modules, but overall it will be stable and can be maintained by I.T.
___________________________
In regard to the District Attorney’s Office, a comparison was made with other
counties (handout attached). Due to a loss in funding for victims’ services, there
would be additional general fund support proposed. One big issue is the D.A.’s
desire to segregate I.T. services in-house rather than using the County’s system,
but asking for County I.T. support of the separate system. This may or may not be
part of the D.A.’s request. The D.A. believes this is important, but the Budget
Committee needs to know whether this should continue. The D.A. has already
converted several systems. The D.A. would like to take over the rest and eliminate
the I.T. charges. A cost comparison is needed, as the current spreadsheet may not
be entirely accurate. I.T. indirect charges are still in the proposed budget.
Mr. Higuchi wants to know what the County’s position is regarding I.T. services.
He does not want the County to be faced with departments wanting their own
system, and wants to know what the costs would be each way. He wants to hear
how having a separate system is cost-effective.
Chair Unger stated that departments will assume more responsibility of systems as
they change over. Mr. Higuchi feels that a centralized system is much better.
People will want their own I.T. person if you let them.
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 12 of 16
Commissioner Baney stated that the D.A. will bring up issues relating to
ownership and access to records; that those are the documents of the D.A. and the
County has no right to them. Essentially, he will say that some documents were
not kept as they should have been, and he has not had access to some that he feels
he should have been able to retrieve. It is somewhat different as far as he is
concerned. They have talked about using storage off-site.
Mr. Maier stated that the County has an outstanding archival facilities that they
could use for hard documents, too. However, this is not going to be solved
overnight. Commissioner DeBone said that the D.A. wants to have more control
over records, especially those relating to the State. I.T. does a good job with
certified criminal justice systems already. He wants to know what the line is that
the D.A. does not want crossed. He wants to be clear about the most cost-effective
way to do this.
Mr. Anderson said the D.A. is a separate elected official and it is a bit different. If
he can present his proposal in a way that is cost neutral, it should be supported. At
this point they are not on the same page. He feels there needs to be more analysis
of the proposal to date, but wants to avoid a public confrontation. They cannot
remove the I.T. costs at this time without more information and a more objective
comparison. There is a big difference between one and two I.T. people. If they
get past the systems installation, it should be up to the D.A. at that point.
Mr. Maier stated that the D.A. keeps quoting the law. He is curious about other
places and what the Attorney General feels is needed. Mr. Kropp stated that
Multnomah County has more centralized functions; others do not.
Mr. Barrett said if they can show this is justifiable, the Budget Committee can
decide if it is logical. Mr. Maier noted there are a lot of loose strings. Mr. Higuchi
indicated that it needs to make financial sense. Commissioner Baney said this is
the third time this has come up, so a decision needs to be made. Chair Unger noted
that they still have not gotten all of the information that is needed and was
requested.
Mr. Anderson said that the civil commitment process will go to the D.A. in
August, and an estimate was made regarding the costs involved. He got the
impression that the D.A. feels more staff is needed there.
Commissioner DeBone said that the D.A. intends to take over child support
enforcement services as well, but this has not yet been decided.
___________________________
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 13 of 16
Justice Court is in financial difficulty in most part because the Sheriff’s citations
have dropped dramatically. Fine revenue is not enough to sustain the Court.
Without a turnaround in this, the numbers will get worse. They get citations
through the Redmond Police and a small number from OSP. Most are going into
Circuit Court because the Sheriff’s fund gets part of that fine.
The other possibility is shrinking staffing in Justice Court, although they do not
have that many staff. The Sheriff has reasons why he has shifted to Circuit Court,
one of them being he thinks the conviction rate is higher in Circuit Court.
Commissioner Baney stated the Circuit Court system has reduced staffing and it is
a benefit to have Justice Court to take over part of that load. They are already
struggling to process the case workload.
Mr. Anderson stated that the Circuit Court does not seem to be concerned about the
additional workload as much as they want the extra funding to stabilize revenue.
Commissioner Baney said that they used to meet with Justice Court regularly. Mr.
Maier feels that the Sheriff and Judge Fadeley do not agree on certain things. It
was set up to service the citizens so it was more convenient for them, so citizens
did not have to come into Bend. Initially Justice Court studies showed them all
making money. It was that way for a while.
Mr. Anderson said that if it pays for itself, the Sheriff gets any overages. However,
citations have gone down since 2008. Mr. Maier noted that it is a waste of time for
a Circuit Court to handle traffic citations, too. They also handle small claims and
other types of cases. Mr. Barrett stated that this will be a discussion during the
presentation. Commissioner Baney asked if a chart could show what kind of
activity comes through Redmond Police, too.
___________________________
The Sheriff’s Office is staffing down for now. There are some expensive projects
underway including the jail expansion and converting to a new radio system.
___________________________
Community Justice is also staffing down in Juvenile. Adult Parole and Probation
will receive some increased funding but sentencing reform may have an unknown
impact.
___________________________
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 14 of 16
9-1-1 Operations will have an answer tomorrow on Election Day. Staffing is flat.
They would utilize reserve funds if the ballot does not pass, and look at whether to
go out for another levy. Services may be pushed back to the districts.
___________________________
County Clerk revenue is up with the increase in recordings.
___________________________
The Commissioners went through a decision as to how to allocate lottery funds,
which will be prioritized for economic development. The advertising budget will
be trimmed by having departments cover some costs. The philosophy is to keep
the costs down by providing more options to departments, who can decide what is
most important.
The training budget through Personnel was reduced. Staffing is down as well, but
there will be a new director in Fiscal Year 2013-14 and some analysis of the
Human Resources system, including automation upgrades and/or outsourcing.
In regard to Finance, there is hope to automate more and get away from paper.
There is proposal to increase dog licensing fees. A new Finance Manager will be
coming on board too.
___________________________
Information Technology’s staffing is flat, but they are working on upgrades and
replacement of equipment.
___________________________
County Counsel is looking into a new case tracking system.
___________________________
Property and Facilities is working on a lot of capital projects and other issues.
___________________________
Mr. Anderson distributed a sheet with major policy questions for the Committee.
___________________________
The Bethlehem Inn is thinking long-term and working more towards fundraising to
support their vision.
___________________________
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 - Morning Page 15 of 16
Capital Improvement Programs.
Susan Ross said the Jail expansion project was scaled back from its original plan
some years ago. (She referred to oversized sketches.) The revised scope focused
on leaving the site as status quo as possible. The new housing unit will
accommodate 144 beds, a dorm area and required medical facilities. They are
working on construction documents and will begin the site work while they are
awaiting building permits. Construction should begin in September and be
concluded by next June.
It will be handled as a CMGC and the various subcontractor work will be bid out.
The same general contractor and design team will be utilized. Commissioner
Baney added that there was a public meeting regarding the CMGC and there seems
to be general support.
The North County Services Building is still unknown. They are still vetting a
couple of options that could consolidate County services and bring in other
agencies. The goal is to provide a one-stop shop for clients.
The Sisters school-based health center is on hold due to a development that was
going to come in first and provide infrastructure, but was delayed. She hopes they
will be on board in the near future. An extension was requested in the meantime.
They need to be sure there is funding available to staff it at that time.
The annex building remodel houses health services for the most part. Mr. Inbody
said that the idea is to remodel this in order to co -locate services for behavioral
health and medical health clients. Mosaic Medical will share this workload and the
cost. These are proposed for the new budget with the funding indicated.
Regarding the Courthouse and D.A. remodel, they can stay within the footprint of
the buildings. The basement was the jail a long time ago, and that space will be
utilized as offices and storage. They will convert some areas for jury assembly and
traffic court. This frees up space so the D.A. will gain some. It will be more
convenient for customers as well, as there will be one security point. There are
two phases and it will take a couple of years to complete.
Mr. Inbody stated that some of the road projects are partially funded by the
County. These include Skyliners Road, La Pine and the Tumalo Trail.
Some system upgrades are necessary, including 9-1-1 communications and the
juvenile security system. Ms. Ross stated that the system is failing in juvenile.
New technology requires internet protocols, which they are combining with the jail
project. They hope to get a better price doing these together.
Necessary purchases are a Solid Waste scale at the Negus transfer station, and an
LT. loader for backup at Knott landfill. The Road Department will make some
changes regarding equipment, extending out the service of some equipment for a
while.
Ms. Ross said that Fund 142 comes from property taxes, and is meant to help with
smaller capital projects. They budget some every year to handle control systems
and equipment upgrades.
Mr. Inbody noted that Community Development needs a software upgrade that ties
into the State system. There should be less demand on this fund in the future. The
City does not want to use this system since they have their own, and they are
unwilling to change direction at this time.
Being no further discussion , the meeting adjourned at 1 :00 p.m.
DATED this Iq~DaYOf ~ 2013 for the
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners.
Alan Unger, Chair
Ta~l chair
ATTEST:
Anthony DeBone, Commissioner ~~
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Budget Meeting Monday, May 20, 2013 -Morning Page 16 of 16
13/445
..
BUDGET COMMITTEE AGENDA
Monday, May 20 th
, 2013
9:00 AM
9:00 -9:05 AM
9:05 -9:10 AM
9:10 -9:20 AM
Program
Budget
Tab/Page
• Elect Chair
Bend Library County Service District
(Budget Committee-Commissioners, Clayton
Higuchi & Mike Maier)
• Open public meeting and introductions
• Budget discussion
• Public comment
• Motion to approve budget of $869,535 and set amount of
levy at $762,604
• Motion to be seconded
• Committee votes
• Close budget meeting
Sunriver Library County Service District 13/445
(Budget Committee-Commissioners)
• Open public meeting and introductions
• Budget discussion
• Public comment
• Motion to approve budget of $102,536 and amount of levy
at $89,878
• Motion to be seconded
• Committee votes
• Close budget meeting
Sunriver Service District (Budget Committee7/310
Commissioners, Bob Wrightson, Jim Wilson &
Michael Brannan)
• Open public meeting and introductions
• Budget discussion
• Public comment
• Motions to:
1) Approve Sunriver Service District operating budget of
$5,734,404 and set tax rate at $3.3100 per $1,000 of
assessed valuation (Fund 715)
2) Approve Sunriver Service District Reserve budget of
$902,508 (Fund 716)
• Motions to be seconded
• Budget Committee votes
• Close budget meeting
Page 1
BUDGET COMMITTEE AGENDA
Monday, May 20th , 2013
9:20 -9:30 AM
9:30 -9:45 AM
9:45-10:00 AM
10:00-11:30 AM
11:30 AM -Noon
Black Butte Ranch Service District
(Budget Committee-Commissioners, Dave Sullivan,
Tom Mayberry & Carl Burnham)
• Open public meeting and introductions
• Budget discussion
• Public comment
• Motions to:
1) Approve budget of $1,658,700 and set tax rate at
$1.0499 per $1,000 of assessed valuation
2) Set local option operating tax rate at $.5500 per $1,000
of assessed valuation
• Motions to be seconded
• Budget Committee votes
• Close budget meeting
Deschutes County Extension and 4-H Service
District
(Budget Committee-Commissioners, Chris
Lawrence, Mike Scholeman & Katrina Van Dis)
• Open public meeting and introductions
• Budget discussion
• Public comment
• Motions to:
1) Approve Deschutes County Extension & 4-H Service
District operating budget of $69'6,093 and set tax rate at
$.0224 per $1,000 of assessed valuation (Fund 720)
2) Approve Deschutes County Extension & 4-H Service
District Reserve budget of $355,400 (Fund 721)
• Motions to be seconded
• Committee votes
• Close budget meeting
Break
Deschutes County
• Open public meeting
• Deschutes County Budget Proposal
Capital Improvement Program
Program
Budget
TablPage.
7/299
7/304
8/315
Page 2
BUDGET COMMITTEE AGENDA
Monday, May 20th
, 2013
Noon -1:00 PM
1:00 -1:30 PM
1:30 -2:00 PM
2:00 -3:00 PM
3:00 -3:15 PM
3:15 -4:15 PM
4:15 -4:45 PM
4:45 -5:00 PM
Lunch -Discussion
Fair and Expo Center
• Introductions
• Budget discussion
Natural Resource Protection
• Introductions
• Budget discussion
Road
• Introductions
• Budget discussion
Break
Solid Waste
• Introductions
• Budget Discussion
County Assessor
• Introductions
• Budget Discussion
Public Comment
Cont inue the Deschutes Co unty budget m e eting to
Tues day, May 21S t , at 9:00 AM
Program
Budget
TablPage
4/144
4/164
4/152
4/169
4/117
Page 3
'" '" ~
"0
I
"0 Ico-.co
E
I cu
I I ::te:
I I I g
I S: 1
VI
Q)
co
~
.5::
0..
~
~ ~
.....
0
~ -.;::.
~
Q)
co
0..
M
5
N
c5
N
>~10< ~,
>10
1Jc:
0
~
.5...
OJ
OJ
~ ...
OJ
"'0
~ co
Budget Committee
Major Policy Questions
1. PERS -Confirm 50-50 split to pay for FY 14 charges
• Action:
2. HBT -Confirm/modify proposed balance of 15% departmental charge increase/$400K EBAC
• Action:
3. Fair & Expo Center -Confirm/modify General Fund transfer to support Reserve Fund
• Action:
4. Natural Resources -Confirm support for Weed Abatement program
• Action:
5. Road -Confirm support for FTE decrease
• Action:
6. Solid Waste -Support no fee increases
• Action:
7. County Assessor's Office -Confirm support for staffing decrease
• Action:
8. Health Services/CFC -Confirm support for consolidation
• Action:
9. Health Services -Confirm support for staffing modifications, General Fund transfer increase
• Action:
10. Community Development - Confirm support for staffing increase, General Fund transfer, fee
increase
• Action:
11. District Attorney's Office - Confirm support for General Fund transfer increase (VAP), IT
proposal, civil commitments
• Action:
12. Justice Court -Confirm support for General Fund subsidy I,• Action:
f
\
13. Sheriffs Office -Confirm support for 1145 split, staffing decrease, jail debt
• Action:
14. Community justice -Confirm support for General Fund transfer, staffing decrease, 1145 split
• Action:
15. 9-1-1 Operations-Identify any changes to proposed budget
• Action:
16. County Clerk's Office -Confirm staffing decrease support
• Action:
17. BOCC/Admin - Confirm support for staffing increase (Veteran's), video lottery distribution,
advertising decrease
• Action:
18. Personnel-Confirm support for staffing reduction, training budget reduction
• Action:
19. Finance -Confirm support for staffing change, dog license fee increase
• Action:
20. Information Technology -Identify and changes to proposed budget
• Action:
21. Legal -Identify and changes to proposed budget
• Action:
22. Property & Facilities -Identify and changes to proposed budget
• Action:
5/19/2013
DESCHUTES COUNTY
FY 2013-14
PROPOSED BUDGET
May 20,2013
Presentation to the
Deschutes County Budget Committee
FY 2014 Proposed Budget Goals
1. Budget Toward County Objectives
2. Reflect Changing Environment
3. Address Labor Cost Increases
a. PERS
b. Health Care Costs
4. Budgetary Scrutiny
5. Mitigate Impacts on Reserves
1
5/19/2013
FY 2014 Deschutes County
Goals and Objectives
Safe Communities
• Promote targeted prevention, diversion and
intervention programs to reduce recidivism and future
demands on County services
• Respond to, investigate and prosecute criminal activity
to ensure the guilty are held accountable
• Protect the community by providing safe, secure and
humane detention facilities for adults and juveniles
• Provide for the supervision for adults and juveniles
who have participated in criminal activity through
parole, probation, post-prison and diversion a -.2 'b ~E A
" -\C <
FY 2014 Deschutes County
Goals and Objectives
Healthy People
• Ensure children, youth and families are protected, healthy
and successful
• Support physical, mental and social well -being through
partnerships, prevention and access to quality, affordable
health care for the most vulnerable populations
• Assess, preserve, promote and protect the basic health and
wellness of residents
• Provide behavioral health treatment and support for
community members with the greatest need
• Promote preventative health through community
education, outreach and advocacy
2
5/19/2013
FY 2014 Deschutes County
Goals and Objectives
Economic Vitality
• Provide safe and effective infrastructure that supports
local economic opportunities and livable communities
• Support land use policies that promote beneficial
utilization of land for economic growth
• Support beneficial management and access policies of
publicly owned natural resources to promote tourism
and recreational activities
• Pursue inter-jurisdictional cooperation to enhance
service delivery and the cost effectiveness of public
service
8
-.!'1"fi ~....~
FY 2014 Deschutes County
Goals and Objectives
Healthy Environment
• Support sound forest and public land management
practices and oversight
• Enhance and protect air, land and water resources
3
5/19/2013
FY 2014 Deschutes County
Goals and Objectives
Effective Service Delivery
• Support employee development, productivity and safety
through training, technology, resources, and tools necessary to
deliver quality public services
• Support and promote Customer Service "Every Time" Standards
• Provide evaluation of employee performance, job satisfaction
and wellness
• Provide comprehensive support services in an effective and
efficient manner
• Ensure accurate, secure and timely delivery of public service
""i ER• Moni~or, ~nalyze and report on the financial health of the ,/
organization ~
FY 2014 Budget Summary
FY 2012-13 FY 2012-13 FY 2013-14
Original Current Proposed
Adopted Budget Budget Budget
Total Budget $276,220,160 $289,878,440 $287,161,996
FTEs 808 819 809
4
5/19/2013
FY 2014 Budget Summary
FTEs
860 "r--------------
8S0 -!--------------
840
830
820 ~-----_4 ~6~_=~----
819
810
800
790
FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13
Revenues -Property Taxes
County General Fund
• Assessed valuation estimated +3.5%
• Projected revenue +4.2%, +$880,000
-Current and Prior Year
• Construction Activity:
-Deschutes County +22%
-City of Bend +57%
-City of Redmond +61%
• Home values steadily increasing
5
5/19/2013
Revenues -Transient Room Tax
• Current year revenue projections 10% over
budget
• Proposed Budget -$3,423,000, +11.7% over
current year budget
• Healthy tourism sector
• Does not include tax rate increase
-Discussions ongoing -Bend/Redmond
-Possible consideration of County increase
Revenues -State Revenues
• Slight 0.4% increase projected
• Changing health care/social service direction
- Health Services/Children & Families Commission
consolidation
• Community corrections funding
• Declining Road maintenance funding
6
5/19/2013
Revenues -Enterprise Funds
• Solid Waste
-Revenue up $200,000 over current year budget
• Commercial and franchise disposal
-No tip fee increases proposed
• Fair & Expo Center
-FY 14 Gap in major events
• Motor Coach Association -August 2014
-General Fund bridge support
Revenues -Interest Earnings
• Remain very low
-Current return 0.55% -0.6%
-Budget at 0.4%
• Optimism for future
• New investment strategy possible
-New Treasurer
-Consideration of hiring consultant to assist with
investment decisions
7
5/19/2013
General Fund Resources
• Beginning Net Working Capital up $800,000
-Property tax collections higher than budgeted
• Shift of Justice Court revenue ($440,000)
Countywide Expenditures
• PERS
-State charges increased $2.65 million
-Cost absorbed primarily by departments, Reserve
Fund continued FY 13 subsidy, plus $430K . Total
of $2,230,000 from Reserve Fund (see chart)
-Legislative action -SB 822, Other?
-Improving stock market
• December 2013 unfunded liability will drive FY 16/FY
17 state PERS rates
8
5/19/2013
Countywide Expenditures
• Health Care Costs/HBT Fund
-Departmental rates increased 15%
• See impact chart
-$400,000 employee "contributions"
-HBT projected fund balance
• See chart
- Onsite Clinic/Pharmacy
• Savings subject of internal audit
Countywide Expenditures
• Salaries -Labor contracts
Proposed FY 2013-14
Union Contract COLA Health Insurance
Sheriffs Office Association July 2013 -June 2016 1.6% (CPI: 1.5% -3.5%) Up to 7.5% cost (up to $140)
expired June lOll. 2.9% retro. July 2012;
9-1-1 binding arb. 0% July 13 Up to $95
AFSCME July 2011 -June 2014 1.6% (CPI: 1.5% -3.5%) Up to 9.5% cost
IUOE (Public Works) July 2012 -June 2015 1.6% (CPI: 1.5% -3.5%) Up to 9.5% cost
expired June 2012,
FOP PO bindlnll arb. 1.6% Up to $65
Deputy DAs Jan. 2011 -June 2015 1.6% (same as non-reps) Up to $140
9
5/19/2013
FY 14 Proposed Budget
• General Fund departments &departments
receiving General Fund transfers
-Instructed to budget flat -PERS/Health costs
• Internal Service departments
-Additional review step/FY 14 objectives
• FY 14 operational philosophy
-Recession mind set
-Build reserves
-New Finance Director
Department Budgets
• Major Issues
• Policy considerations
10
5/19/2013
Fair & Expo Center
• Staffing flat
• No major FY 14 events
-Smaller bookings increasing
• Loss of sponsorship revenue
• General Fund bridge funding FY 13 & FY 14
-FY 13 +$100K, FY 14 +$200K
• Reserve Fund decreasing
• Consideration of TRT tax rate increase
• DSL Land
Natural Resources
• Staffing flat
• Future funding uncertain
-Title III expiration
• FEMA 2010 grant
• Senior Advisor (Stutler) Cohesive Strategy
investment
• Absorption of (non-right of way) Weed
Abatement program
11
5/19/2013
Road Department
• Continued staffing decreases (3.75 FTE)
-Balance achieved?
• State & Federal revenue fluctuations
• Focus on existing infrastructure maintenance
• Absorption of (right of way) weed abatement
• Regional shared resources MOU
• Skyliners Road project -Spring 2015
Solid Waste
• Staffing flat
• Revenue increasing +4.4%
• No rate increases proposed
• Market declining for bio-fuels
• Recycling contracts
• Waste to Energy project
12
5/19/2013
County Assessor
• Staffing down 1.0 FTE
-Down 5.5 FTE since FY 09
• As construction increases, staffing may need
to increase in coming years
• Continued impact of tax appeals
Health Services
Children & Families Commission
• Staffing overall up 2.55 FTE
-Public Health down 5.05 FTE
-Behavioral Health up 9.1 FTE
• CFC Consolidation
• Health care reform/Consolidated Care
Organizations (CCOs),OHP member expansion
• Increased PH General Fund support
$394,000 (offset $245K state decrease)
• Other-Access Team, Annex expansion
13
5/19/2013
Community Development
• Staffing up 0.4 FTE (Code Enforcement)
• Projected permit revenue up $850,000
• General Fund transfer down $300,000
• 2.5 -3.5% fee increases proposed
• New Permit System
• Management re-structuring
District Attorney's Office
• Staffing flat
• Increased Victims' Assistance General Fund
support +$100,000
• Information Services proposal
• Transfer of Civil Commitment program
• Future Issues:
-Child Support Enforcement
-Veterans' Court
14
5/19/2013
Justice Court
• Staffing flat
• Fine revenue transferred from General Fund
• Significant financial issues
-Decrease in Sheriff's Office citations (see chart)
-State changes to unitary assessment amount and
payment priority
-$142,000 FY 14 General Fund subsidy
Sheriff's Office
• Staffing down 2.0 FTE
• No cha nges to Dist. 1/2 tax rates proposed
• TRT revenue up $200K, General Fund transfer
down $200K
• 7.1% Increase in state corrections funding
• Jail Expansion project
• Radio communications system replacement
15
5/19/2013
Community Justice
• Staffing down 4.8 FTE (Juvenile)
• Juvenile:
-Reduction to one detention pod
-General Fund transfer up $50K (labor cost)
• Adult Parole & Probation:
-Increase in 1145 revenue -$200}OOO
• Same Sheriff split -65%/35%
-Sentencing reform legislation pending
• Could result in increased state support
9-1-1 Operations
• Staffi ng fl at
• Levy vote Tuesday 5/21
• Budget predicated on levy passage
• Levy reduces tax rate 3 cents
-Long term problems without permanent levy
• Labor contract issues
16
5/19/2013
County Clerk's Office
• Staffing down 0.5 FTE
• Recording fee revenue projected up $125,000
BOCC/Admin
• Staffing up 0.25 FTE (Veterans' Services)
• Video Lottery funds re-prioritization
• Reduced advertising budget
17
5/19/2013
Personnel
• Staffing down 0.25 FTE
• Training budget reduced
• New Director in FY 14
• Scoping of new Human Resources system
Finance
• Staffing down 0.5 FTE
• Increased dog licensing fees
• New Director in FY 14
• Scoping of new financial management system
18
5/19/2013
Information Technology
• Staffing flat
• Pending retirements/last legacy system
replacements
• Email software upgrade
Legal
• Staffing flat
• Transfer of civil commitments to DAIs Office
• New case tracking system
19
5/19/2013
Property & Facilities
• Staffing flat
• Energy efficiency
• Continuing project management of major
capital projects
• Redmond large lot industrial process
20
JUSTICE COURT
Sheriffs Office citations through Circuit Court and Justice Court.
Gross fine revenues resulting from Sheriff's
Office citations-by court handling
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$
• Justice
Court
• Circuit
Court
Source : Justice Court distribution reports and Circuit Court fine revenue (after unitary assessment deduction)
Expense/pop
FY 2013 Expense per County Resident
$35 .00
$30.00
$25.00
$20.00
$15 .00
$10.00
$5 .00
$-
Deschutes $ 32,94
Marion S 30.58
Lane S 30.31
Clackamas $ 27.49
Multnomah $ 25 .74
Jackson $ 24.06
Yamhill S 20.19
Umatilla $ 18.73
Washini/ton $ 17 .97
Douglas $ 13 .73
Josephine $ 12 .83
Personnel Expense per FTE Personnel Exp/m
$140,000
$120,000
$100,000
$80,000
$60,000
$40,000
$20,000
$
Lane $ 121,768
Multnomah $ 113,140
Clackamas $ 111,003
Washington $ 109,433
Deschutes $ 103734
Marion $ 99 ,656
Jackson $ 91,541
Josephine $ 85,258
Yamhill $ 79,255
Umatilla $ 72 ,487
Douglas $ 63 ,023
Felony Cases/Prosecutor
Felony Cases per Prosecutor
120.00 .,--------------------------
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20 .00
0.00
Lane 109 .93
Umatilla 101.84
Jackson 90 .32
Josephine 86.55
Douglas 85.97
Multnomah 82.35
Marion 82 .20
Washir~l1ton 73 .76
Deschutes 72.31
Clackamas 56.48
Yamhill 55 .36
Misdemeanor Cases per Prosecutor Misdemeanor Cases/Prosecutor
300.00 ~------~--------------~---Multnomah 264 .41
Jackson 202.48
Josephine 197 .88
Washington 15 9.0 3
Deschutes 155.78
Clackamas 132.84
Umatilla 124.03
Douglas 123.95
Marion 120.94
Yamhill 112.64
Lane 74.39
",.,~"""'_'I""Iv""''''''''''\.t,;_<·",_"",~~~~Jk~~
District Attorney Comparative Data
Pop 2012 DAExpenses
DA Personnel
Exp
FY 2011-2012
Assessed Value
(billions)
FY 2011-2012 Real
Market Value
(billions)
Felony
cases/Prosecutor
(2008)
Misdemeanor
cases/Prosecutor
(2008)
DAStaff
(FTE)
I
Multnomah 748.490 S 19,265,981 S 16,610,062 S 61.0 S 124.7 82.35 264.41 146.81
Washington 542.860 S 9,755,783 S 8,869,555 S 46.8 S 65.3 73.76 159.03 81.05 •I
Clackamas 381,685 S 10,492,783 S 8,158,728 S 37.1 S 48.8 56.48 132.84 73.5 Reduced by 5.10 FTE
Lane 354,210 S 10,737,546 S 9,010,866 $ 26.0 S 45.2 109.93 74.39 74 Reduced by 11.0 FTE
Marion 320,550 S 9,801,734 S 8,134,918 $ 19.6 S 35.0 82.20 120.94 81.63 Reduced by 1.00 FTE
Jackson 204,645 S 4,923,373 $ 4,165,128 S 16.3 S 24.6 90.32 202.48 45.5
Deschutes 160,140 S 5,274,667 S 4,247,908 $ 17.7 S 23.5 72.31 155.78 40.95
Douglas 108,200 $ 1,485,755 S 1,373,905 $ 7.6 S 14.8 85.97 123.95 21.8
Yamhill 100,550 S 2,029,622 $ 1,727,764 $ 6.7 S 10.2 55.36 112.64 21.8
Josephine 82.780 S 1,062,000 $ 956,600 S 6.1 S 8.4 86.55 197.88 11.22
Umatilla 77,000 S 1,442,186 S 1,286,641 $ 5.8 $ 6.2 101.84 124.03 17.75
Oregon Average 58.83 133.55
Data based on the following:
2012 PSU Population Estimates
FY 2012 County Budget Documents
2012 Oregon Blue Book
Department of Justice
Cost Projections if this P I is DENIED
FY 2011 (Act) FY 2012 (Act.) FY 2013 (Bud.) FY 2014 (Bud.) FY 2015 (proj.) FY 2016 (Proj.)
ITO Hours 1,011.4 1,036.15 1,382.6 1,692.5 1,143.4 1,143.4
ISF Hours 74,318 76,022 101,397 130,733 90,966 93,615
ISF Hardware 104,789 107,387 105,324 100,189 103,195 106,200
ISF Dept. Dist. 14,500 5,122 15,733 24,641 25,380 26,119
Reserve 16,471 15,860 15,504 15,492 15,957 16,422
IT Total 210,078 204,391 237,958 271,055 235,498 242,356 •
DA Hardware 16,039 38,891 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000
DA Software 4,271 3,470 25,000 25,000 .25,000 25,000
DCDA Total 20,310 42,361 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
1 Total Co. Cost 230,3881 246,7521 297,9581 331,0551 295,4981 302,3561
Cost Projections if this P I is APPROVED
FY 2011 (Act.) FY 2012 (Act.) FY 2013 (Bud.) FY 2014 (Req.) FY 2015 (proj.) FY 2016 (proj.)
lTD Hours 1,011.4 1,036.15 1,382.6 1,692.5 1143.4 50
ISF Hours 74,318 76,022 101,397 130,733 90,966 4,094
ISF Hardware 104,789 107,387 105,324 100,189 103,195 0
ISF Dept. Dist. 14,500 5,122 15,733 24,641 25,380 26,119
Reserve 16,471 15,860 15,504 15,492 15,957 0
IT Total 210,078 204,391 237,958 271,055 235,498 30,213
DAHardware 16,039 38,891 35,000 68,500 48,000 48,000
DA Software 4,271 3,470 25,000 35,000 35,000 35,000
DA Services 0 0 0 22,128 22,128 22,128
New Personnel N/a N/a N/a 88,000 90,640 93,359
DCDA Total 20,310 42,361 60,000 213,628 195,768 198,487
I Total Co. Cost 230,3881 246,7521 297,9581 ·484,6831 381:351 I 229,5551
Health Benef~ust -Fund 675
Budget and \,. ,Year Forecast
FY 2014 through FY 2018
Projections
FY 2013
Proposed
Budget (15%)
_~Yl0~ _ FY ~0!§_1
Annual Forecast
yY_2016 _ J _ FY 2017 I FY 2018
Revenues :
Insurance Premiums -Interfund Charges
Additional Premiums -Part-time employees
Employee Monthly Co -Pay
COIC
Retiree I COBRA Health Insurance
Medical Services and Rx Rebates
HBT .B.ecommendations -increase in revenues
Interest
$12 ,871,238 $
33 ,000
638,000
1,400,000
930,000
67f~_
73.000
14,783,379
40,000
880,000
1,592,750
958,333
..2,0,493
60,000
$ 17,000,886
46,000
1,012,000
1,831 ,663
1,102,083
50,493
200,000
60,000
$ 19,551,019 $
52,900
1,163 ,800
2,106,412
1,267,396
50,493
200,000
60,000
22,483 ,672 $ 25,856,222
60,835 69,960
1,338,370 1,539,126
2,422,374 2 ,785,730
1,457,505 1,676,131
50,493 50,493
200,000 200,000
60 ,000 60,000
Total Revenues
Appropriations
Personnel Services -all departments
HT8 Recommendallons (10 75125 from 80120)
rnendallona '
Materials & Services
Claims Paid (EBMS)
Deschutes On-Site Clinic
DOC Pharmacy
Other Materials & Services (inc'l. Wellness)
Materials & Services
Total Appropriations
Increase I (Decrease) in NWC
Beginning Net Working Capital
16,012,737 18,364,955 21,303,125 24,452,019 28,073,248 32,237/662
200,772 210,823
14,651 ,688 15 ,512,015
842,432 963 ,580
1,933,223 1,800,893
1,148,415 1,166,928
18,575,758 19,043,416
18,776,530 19,254,239
(2,763 ,793) (889,284)
14 ,551 ,028 11 ,700,000
219,256
20,566,889
20,786,145
516,979
10 ,810,716
228,026
22 ,212,240
22,440 ,267
2,011,753
11,327,696
237,147 246,633
23 ,989,220 25,908,357
24,226,367 26,154,990
3,846,882 6,082,671
13,339,449 17,186,330
Ending Net Working Capital $11,787,235 $ 10,810,716 $ 11 ,327,696 $ 13,339,449 $ 17,186,330 $ 23,269,002
Annual Charge to Departments per FTE 15,086 17,349 19,951 22,944 26,386 30,344
# of Months of Next Year's Appropriations
in Ending Net Working Capital 7.35 6.24 6.06 6 .61 7.89 9.89
Percentage of Expenditures covered
by Revenues 85% 95.38% 102.49% 108.96% 115.88% 123.26%1
Assumptions for FY 2015 through FY 2018:
Annual increase in Charge per FTE to Departments 15%
Annua l increase in Personnel Appropriations 4%
Annual increase in Materials & Services ----"~- - -- - - --- - - - -
Projected PERS Increases by Department
(Utilizing FY 2013 Subject Wages)
Scenarios for Increase in PERS Charges
25 % Depts/ 50% Depts/ 90% Depts/ 100% Depts/
75 % PERS Rsv 50% PERS Rsv 10% PERS Rsv 0% PERS Rsv2
02-Assessor 35,795.15 71,590.30 128,873.87 143,180.60
05-Clerk 10,064.58 20,129.17 36,232.87 40,258.34
08-BOCC 16,308.40 32,616.79 58,722.37 65,233.59
09-lnformation Technology 30,544.15 61,088.30 109,969.77 122,176.59
10-Building Services 25,206.45 50,412.91 90,754.04 100,825.81
11-District Attorney 59,863.36 119,734.34 215,546 .75 239,461.06
12-Law Library 783.26 1,566.51 2,819.72 3,133 .03
14-Finance 23,335.18 46,670.37 84,009.12 93,340.74
15-Children & Fam Comm 7,814.20 15,628.41 28,133.72 31,256.82
16-Juvenile 67,137.99 134,275.98 241,716.67 268,551.96
Sheriff-All Depts 349,108 .01 697,725.81 1,256,140.72 1,395,014.40
20-Public Health 71,593.06 143,190.63 257,789.66 286,376.75
22-Behavioral Health 137,882.56 275,765.11 496,468.63 551,530.21
23-Veterans' Svcs 1,824 .62 3,649.24 6,570.94 7,298.48
26-Grant Projects 1,675.11 3,350.23 6,030.41 6,700 .46
27-Legal Counsel 10,763 .77 21,527 .55 38,754.44 43,055.10
31-Personnel 11,426.46 22,852.92 41,136.32 45,705.84
36-CDD 40,077.88 80,155 .76 144,292.04 160,311.52
50-Road 68,085.66 136,171.32 245,130.61 272,342.64
50-Forester 2,470 .61 4,941.24 8,895.79 9,882.46
62-Solid Waste 21,740 .64 43,481.28 78,273.79 86,962.56
71-Risk Management 3,737 .28 7,474.56 13,454.21 14,949.12
74-Extension/4-H 1,784.14 3,568.27 6,423 .60 7,136.54
75-DC 9-1-1 57,805.05 115,610.11 208,118.81 231,220.22
81-Justice Court 5,107.19 10,214.38 18,388.35 20,428.75
82-Parole & Probation 41,105.08 82,128 .56 147,868.20 164,233.14
96-Fair and Expo 13,176.10 26,352.20 47,436.03 52,704.40
Totals 1,116,215.94 2,231,872 .25 4,017,951.45 4,463,271.13
Deschutes County
Annual Premium per FTE
Requested and Proposed Budgets
FY 2014
I Base 8% Inc $ w 15% Inc I Add'17%$ w 80/0 Inc
I A
Charge per FTE $ 15,086
General Fund
Assessor 460 ,120
Clerk 120,435
BOPTA 7,794
District Attorney 629,836
Tax 72,412
Veterans' 45,258
Property & Facilities 25,646
Grant 15,086
Total General Fund 1,376,588
Behavioral Health 2,167,841
Public Health 982,846
Juvenile 727,140
Adult 487 ,274
COD 437,491
F&E 133,883
CFC 82,973
Justice Court 75,429
Victims' Assistance 60 ,344
Dog Licensing 15,388
Total wI GF Support 5,170,609
Internal Service Funds
Building Services 359 ,045
Admin 96 ,549
BOCC 45,258
Finance 109 ,976
Legal 90,515
Personnel 88 ,252
IT 251,934
TotaiiSF 1,041,529
Sheriff's Fund 3,281,180
Road 792,009
DC 911 656,236
Solid Waste 316,803
Risk 49,029
GIS 42,240
Extension 36,457
HBT 28,663
Annual Fair 16,976
Natural Resource 15,086
Healthy Start 9,052
Law Library 7,543
SO Communication 7,543
TRTlWelcome Center 5 ,884
Video Lottery 1,508
Total 5,266,209
Total Premium 12,854,936
B
$ 16,293
496,933
13 0 ,0 71
8 ,4 18
880,228
78 ,206
48,8 79
27,698
16,293
1.-,726
2 ,341 ,286
1,061 .481
785,317
526.260
472.4 94
144.695
89,81 1
8 1,484
66,172
16819
U84.28I
381,771
104.214
48879
118,775
97757
95313
272,091
1,124,880
3 ,543.701
865,376
708.740
342,160
52.952
46,620
39374
30,956
18334
16,293
9 ,776
8 ,146
8,146
6 ,3 55
1,629
5,887548
13 883.433
C 0 E
$ 1,207 $ 17,349 $ 1,056
36,813 529,145 32,212
9 ,636 138,503 8,432
624 8,964 546
50,392 724 ,321 44,093
5,794 83,275 5,069
3,621 52,047 3,168
2,052 29,493 1,795
1 ,207 17,349 1,056
110,138 1,583,097 96,371
173,445 2,493,052 151,766
78,635 1,130,289 68,808
58 ,177 836,223 50,906
38,986 560,373 34,113
35,003 503 ,121 30,627
10,712 153,968 9,373
6,638 95,420 5 ,809
6,035 86,745 5,281
4,828 69,396 4,224
1,231 17 ,349 730
413,690 5,945,936 361,637
28,726 . 412 ,906 25,135
7,725 111 ,034 6,760
3 ,621 52 ,047 3,168
8,799 126,474 7,699
7,242 104,094 6,337
7,061 101,492 6,179
20,157 289 ,728 17,637
83,331 1,197,775 72,915
262,521 3,773,407 229,706
63,367 910,823 55,447
52,504 754 ,682 45,942
25,347 364.329 22,179
3,923 56,384 3,432
3,380 48,577 2,957
2,917 41,927 2,553
2,293 32,963 2,007
1,358 19,522 1,188
1,207 17,696 1,403
724 10,409 633
603 8,675 529
603 8 ,675 529
471 6,767 412
121 1 ,735 106
421,339 6,056,571 369,023
1,028,497 14,783,379 899,946
C. Additional charges to departments with an 8% increase (B less A)
D. Charges to departments for FY 2014 with a 15% increase in rates. Rate used for
Proposed Budget.
E. Charges to departments for the additional 7% ( 0 less B)
----
PERS Reserve Draw Down Scenarios
Projections Utilizing Rates Effective 7/1/2013
FY2014 Rates
PERS
PERS/
Debt
Employee Service Reserve
OPSRP Rate lAP Rate Rate Rate
OPSRP General Service 11.10 6.00 1.72 (6 .32)
OPSRP Police & Fire 13.83 6.00 1.72 (7 .05)
PERS General Service 13.18 6.00 1.72 (8.40)
PERS Police & Fire 20.02 6.00 1.72 (9.14)
Total Rate
Charged
to Depts
12.50
14.50
12.50
18.60
% Rate
Increase FY
2013 to FY
2014
-
-
-
-
FY 2014
Subject Wages
(Requested
Budget)
17,873,814
4,733,647
24,473,098
10,330,238
PERS/OPSRP
(Charges to
Depts)
1,983,994
654,663
3,225,554
2,068,114
7,932,325
Estimated Charges (Payments)
IEmployee lAP Debt Service
(Charges to (Charges to PERS Reserve Fund I
Depts) Depts) Offset Total Charges I
100% Draw Down
1,072,429 307,430 (1,129,625) 2,234,228
284,019 81,419 (333 ,722) 686,379
1,468,386 420,937 (2,055,740) 3,059,137
619,814 177,680 (944,184) 1,921,424
3,444,648 987,466 (4,463,271) 7,901,168
OPSRP General Service 11 .10 6.00 1.72 (4 .74) 14.08 12.64 17,873,814 1,983,994
OPSRP Police &Fire 13.83 6.00 1.72 (5 .29) 16.26 12.14 4,733,647 654,663
PERS General Service 13.18 6.00 1.72 (6.30) 14.60 16.80 24,473,098 3,225,554
PERS Police &Fire 20.02 6 .00 1.72 (6.86) 20.89 12 .31 10,330,238 2,068,114
7,932,325
75% Draw Down
1,072,429 307,430 (847,219) 2,516,634
284,019 81,419 (250,292) 769,809
1,468,386 420,937 (1,541 ,805) 3,573,072
619,814 177,680 (708,138) 2,157,470
3,444,648 987,466 (3,347,454) 9,016,985
50% Draw Down
OPSRP General Service 11 .10 6 .00 1.72 (3 .16) 15.66 25.28 20,776,002 2,306,137 1,246,560 357,347 (656,522) 3,253,522
OPSRP Police & Fire 13 .83 6.00 1.72 (3 .53) 18.02 24.28 5,442,348 752 ,677 326,541 93,608 (192,115) 980,711
PERS General Service 13.18 6.00 1.72 (4 .20) 16.70 33.60 22,080,836 2,910 ,254 1,324,850 379,790 (927,395) 3,687,499
PERS Police & Fire 20.02 6.00 1.72 (4 .57) 23 .17 24.57 9,942,640 1,990,516 596,558 171,013 (454,379) 2,303,708
7,959,584 3,494,509 1,001,758 (2,230,411) 10,225,440
0% Draw Down
OPSRP General Service 11.10 6.00 1.72 18.82 50.56 20,776,002 2,306,137 1,246,560 357,347 3,910,044
OPSRP Police & Fire 13 .83 6.00 1.72 21.55 48.62 5,442,348 752,677 326,541 93,608 1,172,826
PERS General Service
PERS Police & Fire
13.18
20.02
6.00
6.00
1.72
1.72 r 20.90
27.74
67.20
49.14
22,080,836
9.942,640
2,910,254
1,990,516
1,324,850
596,558
379,790
171,013
4,614,894
2,758,087
7,959,584 3,494,509 1,001,758 12,455,851
Health BenefH'. ust -Fund 675
Budget and \ j Year Forecast
FY 2014 t h ro ugh FY 2018
Projections
FY 2013
Proposed
Budget (15%)
FY 2014 FY 2015 I
Annual Forecast
FY 2016 I FY 2017 I FY 2018
Revenues:
Insurance Premiums -Interfund Charges
Additional Premiums -Part-time employees
Employee Monthly Co-Pay
COIC
Retiree I COBRA Health Insurance
Medical Services and Rx Rebates
HBT Recommendations -increase in revenues
Interest
$ 12 ,871,238
33,000
638,000
1,400,000
930,000
67,499
73,000
$ 14,783,379
40 ,000
880,000
1,592,750
958,333
50,493
60,000
$ 17,000,886
46,000
1,012,000
1,831,663
1 ,102 ,083
50,493
200 ,000
60,000
$ 19,551,019 $
52,900
1,163,800
2,106,412
1,267,396
50,493
200,000
60,000
22,483,672 $ 25,856,222
60,835 69,960
1,338,370 1,539,126
2,422,374 2,785,730
1,457,505 1,676,131
50,493 50,493
200,000 200,000
60,000 60,000
Total Revenues 16,012,737 18,364,955 21,303,125 24,452,019 28,073,248 32,237,662
Appropriations
Personnel Services -all departments 200,772 210,823 219,256 228,026 237,147 246,633
HTB Recommendations (to 75125 from 80120)
HBT Recommendallons ($100 K Labl$100K TBD
Materials & Services
Claims Paid (EBMS)
Deschutes On-Site Clinic
DOC Pharmacy
Other Materials & Services (inc'l. Wellness)
Materials & Services
14 ,651,688
842,432
1,933,223
1,148,415
18,575 ,758
(200,0001
15,512,015
963,580
1,800,893
1,166,928
19,043,416 20,566,889 22,212,240 23 ,989,220 25,908 ,357
Total Appropriations 18,776,530 19,254,239 20,786,145 22,440,267 24,226,367 26,154,990
Increase I (Decrease) in NWC (2,763,793) (889,284) 516,979 2,011,753 3,846,882 6,082,671
Beginning Net Working Capita l 14 ,551,028 11,700,000 10 ,810,716 11,327,696 13,339,449 17,186,330
Ending Net Working Capital $11,787,235 $ 10,810,716 $ 11,327,696 $ 13,339,449 $ 17,186,330 $ 23,269,002
Annual Charge to Departments per FTE 15,086 17,349 19,951 22,944 26 ,386 30,344
# of Months of Next Year's Appropriations
in Ending Net Working Capital 7,35 6,24 6.06 6.61 7.89 9.89
Percentage of Expenditures covered
by Revenues 85% 95 .38% 102.49% 108.96% 115.88% 123.26%
Assumptions for FY 2015 through FY 2018:
Annual increase in Charge per FTE to Departments 15%
Annual increase in Personnel Appropriations 4%
Annual increase in Materials & Services 8%
Deschutes County
Annual Premium per FTE
Requested and Proposed Budgets
FY 2014
Charge per FTE
General Fund
Assessor
Clerk
BOPTA
District Attorney
Tax
Veterans'
Property & Facilities
Grant
Total General Fund
Behavioral Health
Public Health
Juvenile
Adult
COD
F&E
CFC
Justice Court
Victims' Assistance
Dog Licensing
Total wI GF Support
Internal Service Funds
Building Services
Admin
BOCC
Finance
Legal
Personnel
IT
TotaiiSF
Sheriffs Fund
Road
DC 911
Solid Waste
Risk
GIS
Extension
HBT
Annual Fair
Natural Resource
Healthy Start
Law Library
SO Communication
TRT/Welcome Center
Video Lottery
Total
Total Premium
I Base $w 8%lnc 8% Inc $ w 15% Incl Add'17%
I A B C 0 I E
$ 15,086 $ 16.293 $ 1,207 $ 17,349 $ 1,056
460,120
120,435
7,794
629,836
72,412
45,258
25,646
15,086
1,376,588
2,167,841
982,846
727 ,140
487,274
437,491
133,883
82,973
75,429
60,344
15,388
5,170,609
496,933
130,071
8,418
880.228
78.206
48.879
27.698
16.293
1.488.726
2,341286
1061 .481
785317
526,280
472,494
144595
8t,e11
81 .464
86172
16.619
UMi281
36,813
9,636
624
50 ,392
5,794
3,621
2,052
1,207
110,138
173,445
78,635
58,177
38,986
35,003
10,712
6,638
6,035
4,828
1,231
413,690
529,145
138,503
8,964
724,321
83,275
52,047
29,493
17 ,349
1,583,097
2,493,052
1,130,289
836,223
560,373
503,121
153,968
95,420
86,745
69,396
17,349
5,945,936
32,212
8,432
546
44,093
5,069
3,168
1,795
1,056
96,371
151,766
68,808
50,906
34,113
30 ,627
9,373
5,809
5,281
4,224
730
361 ,637
359,045
96,549
45,258
109,976
90,515
88,252
251,934
1,041,529
3,281,180
792,009
656,236
316,803
49,029
42 ,240
36,457
28 ,663
16,976
15,086
9,052
7,543
7,543
5,884
1,508
5,266,209
12,854,936
387771
104.274
48:87a
118.776
97.757
95.313
272,091
1124._
3.543 .701
~376
708.740
342,150
52..952
45620
39.374
30958
18.334
1e~
9776
8 .148
8.146
6.355
1.629
5,887,648
13.883.433
28,726
7,725
3,621
8,799
7,242
7,061
20,157
83,331
262,521
63,367
52,504
25,347
3,923
3,380
2,917
2,293
1,358
1,207
724
603
603
471
121
421,339
1,028,497
412 ,906
111,034
52 ,047
126,474
104,094
101,492
289,728
1,197,775
3,773,407
910,823
754,682
364,329
56,384
48,577
41,927
32 ,963
19,522
17,696
10,409
8,675
8,675
6,767
1,735
6,056,571
14,783,379
25,135
6,760
3,168
7,699
6,337
6,179
17,637
72,915
229,706
55,447
45,942
22,179
3,432
2,957
2,553
2,007
1,188
1,403
633
529
529
412
106
369,023
899,946
A. Charges to departments for FY 2014 FTE at FY 2013 rates
to ants with an lncraase. R 8
C. Additional charges to departments with an 8% increase (B less A)
D. Charges to departments for FY 2014 with a 15% increase in rates . Rate used for
Proposed Budget.
E. Charges to departments for the additional 7% ( 0 less B)
------
PERS Reserve Draw Down Scenarios
Projecti ons Utilizing Rates Effective 7/1/2013
FY2014 Rates Estimated Charges (Payments)
% Rate FY 2014
Debt PERS Total Rate Increase FY Subject Wages PERS/OPSRP Employee lAP Debt Service
PERS/ Employee Service Reserve Charged 2013 to FY (Requested (Charges to (Charges to (Charges to PERS Reserve Fund
OPSRP Rate lAP Rate Rate Rate to Depts 2014 Budget) Depts) Depts) Depts) Offset Total Charges
100% Draw Down
OPSRP General Service 11.10 6.00 1.72 (6 .32) 12.50 -17 .873.814 1.983.994 1.072,429 307.430 (1.129.625) 2.234,228
OPSRP Police & Fire 13.83 6 .00 1.72 (7.05) 14.50 -4,733,647 654,663 284.019 81,419 (333,722) 686,379
PERS General Service 13.18 6 .00 1.72 (8.40) 12.50 -24,473,098 3,225.554 1,468,386 420,937 (2,055.740) 3,059,137
PERS Police & Fire 20.02 6 .00 1.72 (9.14) 18 .60 -10,330.238 2,068,114 619,814 177,680 (944,184) 1,921,424
7.932.325 3,444.648 987,466 (4,463 ,271) 7,901.168
75% Draw Down
OPSRP General Service 11.10 6.00 1.72 (4 .74) 14 .08 12.64 17,873,814 1,983.994 1,072,429 307,430 (847,219) 2,516,634
OPSRP Police & Fire 13.83 6.00 1.72 (5.29) 16.26 12.14 4,733,647 654,663 284,019 81 ,419 (250,292) 769,809
PERS General Service 13.18 6.00 1.72 (6 .30) 14.60 16.80 24,473,098 3.225.554 1,468.386 420,937 (1.541,805) 3,573,072
PERS Police & Fire 20.02 6 .00 1.72 (6.86) 20.89 12.31 10.330,238 2,068.114 619,814 177,680 (708,138) 2,157,470
7.932,325 3,444.648 987,466 (3 ,347,454) 9,016.985
50% Draw Down
OPSRP General Service 11 .10 6.00 1.72 (3 .16) 15.66 25.28 20,776.002 2.306.137 1,246 .560 357,347 (656,522) 3,253,522
OPSRP Police & Fire 13.83 6.00 1.72 (3.53) 18.02 24.28 5,442,348 752,677 326,541 93,608 (192,115) 980,711
PERS General Servi ce 13.18 6.00 1.72 (4 .20) 16 .70 33.60 22 ,080,836 2.910,254 1,324,850 379 ,790 (927,395) 3,687,499
PERS Police & Fire 20 .02 6 .00 1.72 (4.57) 23.17 24.57 9,942 ,640 1.990,516 596.558 171,013 (454,379) 2,303,708
7,959.584 3,494,509 1,001,758 (2,230,411) 10,225,440
0% Draw Down
OPSRP General Service
OPSRP Police & Fire
PERS General Service
PERS Pol ice & Fire
11.10
13.83
13 .18
20.02
6.00
6.00
6.00
6.00
1.72
1.72
1.72
1.72 I 18.82
21.55
20 .90
27.74
50.56
48.62
67 .20
49 .14
20.776,002
5,442,348
22,080,836
9,942 ,640
2,306 ,137
752,677
2,910.254
1,990,516
1,246,560
326.541
1.324 .850
596,558
357,347
93 ,608
379,790
171.013
3,910,044
1,172,826
4,614.894
2,758,087
7.959,584 3,494,509 1,001,758 12,455,851
Projected PERS Increases by Department
(Utilizing FY 2013 Subject Wages)
Scenarios for Increase in PERS Charges
25% Depts/ 50% Depts/ 90% Depts/ 100% Depts/
75% PERS Rsv 50% PERS Rsv 10% PERS Rsv 0% PERS Rsv2
02-Assessor 35,795 .15 71,590.30 128,873.87 143,180.60
05-Clerk 10,064.58 20,129.17 36,232.87 40,258.34
08-BOCC 16,308.40 32,616.79 58,722.37 65,233.59
09-lnformation Technology 30,544.15 61,088.30 109,969.77 122,176.59
10-Building Services 25,206.45 50,412.91 90,754.04 100,825.81
11-0istrict Attorney 59,863.36 119,734.34 215,546.75 239,461.06
12-Law Library 783.26 1,566.51 2,819.72 3,133.03
14-Finance 23,335.18 46,670.37 84,009.12 93,340.74
15-Children & Fam Comm 7,814.20 15,628.41 28,133.72 31,256.82
16-Juvenile 67,137.99 134,275.98 241,716.67 268,551.96
Sheriff-All Oepts 349,108.01 697,725.81 1,256,140.72 1,395,014.40
20-Public Health 71,593.06 143,190.63 257,789.66 286,376.75
22-Behavioral Health 137,882 .56 275,765.11 496,468.63 551,530.21
23-Veterans'Svcs 1,824.62 3,649.24 6,570.94 7,298.48
26-Grant Projects 1,675.11 3,350.23 6,030.41 6,700.46
27-Legal Counsel 10,763.77 21,527.55 38,754.44 43,055.10
31-Personnel 11,426.46 22,852.92 41,136.32 45,705 .84
36-COO 40,077.88 80,155.76 144,292.04 160,311.52
50-Road 68,085.66 136,171.32 245,130 .61 272,342 .64
50-Forester 2,470.61 4,941.24 8,895.79 9,882.46
62-Solid Waste 21,740.64 43,481.28 78,273 .79 86,962 .56
71-Risk Management 3,737.28 7,474.56 13,454.21 14,949.12
7 4-Extension/ 4-H 1,784.14 3,568.27 6,423.60 7,136.54
75-DC 9-1-1 57,805.05 115,610.11 208,118.81 231,220.22
81-Justice Court 5,107.19 10,214.38 18,388.35 20,428.75
82-Parole & Probation 41,105.08 82,128.56 147,868.20 164,233.14
96-Fair and Expo 13,176.10 26,352.20 47,436 .03 52,704.40
Totals 1,116,215.94 2,231,872.25 4,017,951.45 4,463,271.13