MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING

Wednesday, April 8, 1998

Metro Council Annex

Chair McCaig called the meeting to order at 3:33 PM.

1.  CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF APRIL 1, 1998

2.  ORDINANCE NO. 98-724, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADOPTING THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998-99, MAKING APPROPRIATIONS, CREATING FUNDS, LEVYING AD VALOREM TAXES, AUTHORIZING INTERFUND LOANS, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY

Chair McCaig opened a public hearing.

• Judie Hammerstad, Clackamas County Chair, appeared before the committee to address the Regional Environmental Management Department and Growth Management Department budgets. She distributed a set of letters she received from local jurisdictions that reported what their costs will be to implement Metro’s Functional Plan. She also distributed a copy of a letter dated November 17, 1997 from the MPAC Growth Management Services Department Budget Advisory Committee to Mike Burton, Executive Officer. The letter set forth MPAC subcommittee recommendations and advice on the Growth Management Department budget for 1998-99. Copies of these documents are included as part of the meeting record.

Commissioner Hammerstad said Metro’s primary responsibility is planning for growth. She said the time has come for local jurisdictions to implement the policies that Metro has developed for regional growth management. She believes most local governments have bought into regional planning goals. She said the Clackamas Regional Center Plan has accumulated a cost of nearly $1 million. Clackamas County is funding these changes through its renewal agency. Because the Clackamas Town Center is in the urban renewal district, the county is in the unique position of having the necessary funding available. She believes other jurisdictions will have problems to come up with planning and implementation funds. Regional dollars will be needed to help, more than the $140,000 proposed.

Chair McCaig asked if these regional dollars would come from throughout the region, or substantially from the Metro budget. Commissioner Hammerstad said MPAC realizes the Metro budget is constrained. She recommended that any money arising from the “scrounge factor” be used to aid in local planning if that local planning is directly in compliance with 2040. She said local jurisdictions are looking for incentive grants. They will have difficulties going back through the public process on Title 3; so anything dealing with Title 3, including the endangered Steelhead, should be dealt with at one time. She hopes to receive assistance in funding this at the regional and state level.

Chair McCaig then summarized MPAC’s recommendation, stating they: 1) support the Growth Management budget, 2) would like more money for grants, 3) would like any accumulated moneys found during Metro’s budget process be devoted to implementation and technical assistance, and 4) will also look around the region for funds. Commissioner Hammerstad agreed with Chair McCaig’s summary. She said MPAC would have supported an additional increase in the excise tax and to be dedicated to the Growth Management budget, however, they did not have an opportunity to suggest this when the increase took place in last year’s budget process. She said the timing now is not right, but it is part of their recommendation as set forth in their November 17, 1997 letter.

Councilor Morissette asked Commissioner Hammerstad if preliminary calculation had been done with regard to the ten percent in the excise-tax funded departments. Commissioner Hammerstad said she understood that last year the Budget Committee asked for this to occur. She said she does not know what the figure is. Following discussion, it was determined that MPAC had expected the figure would be about $450,000. Councilor Morissette asked if these would be matching funds with local jurisdictions, and Commissioner Hammerstad said they would. Councilor Morissette asked, and Commissioner Hammerstad agreed, that the $450,000 would be in addition to the current proposed amount. Councilor Morissette asked Commissioner Hammerstad if she would be willing to recommend changes to the Metro budget to accommodate this need, and she said she could do so.

Commissioner Hammerstad then addressed the Rossman Landfill, which needs to be reclaimed. She said Metro is in the solid waste business, and has the dollars to reclaim the landfill. She said there is no private money to do so. Metro obligated itself when it accepted tipping fees into that landfill for a period of time. Commissioner Hammerstad said she does not have a personal interest in the landfill. Her main concern is that it is valuable property within the UGB that cannot be used at its highest and best use. She said Metro needs to budget for this expense, either currently or at a future date.

In previous discussions with Darlene Hooley, Councilor McFarland determined that there is a certain level of liability with old landfills, and she recommended that the Council reexamine this issue. She asked for confirmation that there is no longer a methane gas problem at Rossman, but there could be a leachate problem into the Willamette River. Commissioner Hammerstad said she believed this to be the case, however, she stressed that no one has examined the landfill as yet.

Councilor Naito said the landfill was discussed in last year’s budget process. Councilor McLain said Metro has an interest in being a good partner, but needs to know what the liability means for the agency. She said she believes the REM Director and the DEQ have been working to resolve some of these issues, and asked that a report be made to Council.

Chair McCaig said following last year’s budget discussion, the matter had been referred to the REM Committee for further review.

Chair McCaig closed the public hearing.

OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER BUDGET

Mike Burton, Executive Officer, appeared before the committee to present the Office of the Executive Officer budget. He reviewed the Office of the Executive Officer Budget Overview, a copy of which is included as part of the meeting record. John Houser, Senior Council Analyst, reviewed his analysis of the Office of the Executive Officer budget, a copy of his analysis is included as part of the meeting record. Mr. Houser pointed out an error in the executive’s budget for the Executive Officer salary.

Mr. Houser brought to the committee’s attention, a 26% increase in the executive administrative assistant position, associated with its reclassification. He reported that a position was transferred from ASD to the Office of Public Affairs and Government Relations, that is performing similar functions to the position that was eliminated in last year’s budget when two positions in the executive’s budget were eliminated in order to create the Council Office of Public Outreach.

Councilor Morissette said his concern with the executive’s budget revolves around not what the executive himself has proposed, but what Council has proposed for his budget, that being the affordable housing technician. He said he supports affordable housing, however, he does not support the inclusionary zoning as a vehicle for achieving the goals of affordable housing. He said the factors that will bring affordable housing are an adequate supply of land, regulatory relief, and providing options.

REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BUDGET

Bruce Warner, Director of Regional Environmental Management, appeared before the committee to present the Regional Environmental Management (REM) budget. He reviewed the REM Department Budget Overview, a copy of which is included as part of the meeting record. John Houser, Senior Council Analyst, reviewed his analysis of the REM department budget; a copy of his analysis is included as part of the meeting record.

Chair McCaig asked Mr. Warner to address some of comments made by Commissioner Hammerstad earlier in the meeting. Mr. Warner said there is no money in the budget for the Rossman Landfill. He said additional investigation has taken place with DEQ on that facility. As a result of the investigation, Metro has discovered there are no health, safety, or welfare problems with the public; therefore, Metro has elected not to participate. However, he said it would be beneficial to have further follow up in the REM Committee. He said the long-term picture of the county being able to use the closure fund at Rossman should be reviewed. He says the county has money in a closure fund, and the problem is that it is running out of money.

Mr. Burton agreed with Mr. Warner’s report. Regarding Commissioner Hammerstad’s comments that she has no interest in Rossman, Mr. Burton stated that the county’s closure fund is intended to close landfills like Rossman, however, that fund is running out of money. Chair McCaig asked if what is primarily driving Commissioner Hammerstad approaching the Council with this matter is her concern about the value of the land in the UGB. Mr. Burton said potentially the land could evolve into what Oregon City would like to see as part of The End of the Oregon Trail. However, the land owner has no money or intent of reclaiming the land. He said the potential uses for this land need to be explored. He said the situation at Rossman is not as serious as the current situation at St. Johns Landfill, and reclamation will not be as expensive. Chair McCaig asked whether any other jurisdiction is looking into reclamation of the landfill. Mr. Burton said there is a legal requirement from DEQ, and the state will require something be done in the long-term. If there is leachate there, the state will step in. Mr. Burton said Rossman is not currently part of the work program, and if Council wishes to include this project as part of the work plan, it should direct the executive to do so.

Councilor Kvistad said he had just heard a County Commissioner say that because of 2040, Metro had to take on a dump. He said he does not want Rossman in the work program, and he does not want to fund its clean up. He said it sets a precedent that could require Metro to fund clean ups and improvements to landfills that it had nothing to do with other than as a customer.

Councilor McFarland said she had had discussions on this matter and had been led to believe that certain parties are looking to Metro to the deep pockets in this clean up. Mr. Burton said Commissioner Hammerstad’s view is that since Metro collected fees from garbage deposited at Rossman, and that some of the garbage Metro dumped came from outside the area, therefore, Metro has some culpability. He said the decision is a policy matter for the Council.

Councilor Morissette said he had participated in a number of conversations on this matter, but he did not remember if there has been a review by legal staff about whether Metro has a potential liability. Mr. Burton said a legal review has not been undertaken. Councilor Morissette said the Council needs to know the liability answer before taking a position.

Councilor McLain said the Rossman issue has been before the Council under three different scenarios. The first scenario was with the End of the Oregon Trail. At that time, Oregon City said this could be a facility with regional significance. Second, Metro has a transfer station right across the street; and whether that transfer station is saved under our ownership, or is enlarged on that footprint, Metro should have some interest in knowing what our neighborhood is like and what kind of environmental issues affect that neighborhood. Third, she understood the Council had received a preliminary view from Daniel Cooper, General Counsel, that Metro is not legally accountable for the clean up of Rossman. Mr. Burton said he believed the legal review pertained to whether Metro would become liable if it took over the management at Rossman. Councilor McLain said she would not be prepared to give an answer at today’s meeting, that there are issues that first need to be resolved.

Councilor Kvistad said we did have this discussion four years ago. He remembered clearly that the Council talked about liability and that they had no liability. Since that time, he has maintained this stance.

As a friendly amendment, Chair McCaig recommended that staff provide a limited legal review, and that REM staff provide a report to the REM Committee on the existing information they have on the methane gas and other issues. She said this would prevent staff from having to conduct a new study, when there is existing information that Council has not yet seen. Councilor McLain agreed to this friendly amendment, as long as it included language requiring staff to identify the issues and to provide Council with the information they have.

Councilor Kvistad asked for a definition of the Regional Waste Characterization Study. Mr. Warner responded that periodically, Metro examines the region’s waste to examine what the nature of the waste is. It assists Metro in meeting reporting required by state law.

Councilor Kvistad asked about the generator study. Mr. Houser said RSWMP has a schedule for Metro to do waste generator studies in broad classes such as multi-family, commercial, business. This money is in the budget to fund the most current study required by RSWMP. Mr. Houser brought the issue up because this was the first year the study has been described as a “generator study” and he thought it might be something different than had been historically done, however, it is the same.

Councilor Kvistad asked about the process capacity enhancement, and the $200,000 organics line item. Mr. Warner said he would ask Doug Anderson, REM Waste Reduction and Outreach Manager for an answer to this question. Mr. Warner said one of the priorities of the RSWMP for achieving waste reduction is trying to figure out a way to address organics in the waste stream. He said there are some pilot programs going on right now that is providing staff with a lot of valuable information. The work is identifying a number of concerns about how to collect this waste and get it to a processing facility. The project will identify processes to control odors; and other practices to help prepare yard debris and other waste for composting at these facilities. Mr. Houser said for the $200,000 item, one of the things staff may be considering is the development of a pilot program at an existing yard debris processing facility. Part of that facility would explore options for creating compost from organic materials. With regard to the options for delivering food waste, he said the idea is to assist local governments with technical and monetary assistance.

Councilor Kvistad said the committee used to get the three budget notebooks, and now they don’t get them. He said it is very hard for them to get in and really review programs in depth. He said he was not clear if there is actually a program in place to expend the $200,000. Mr. Warner said there is a program in place.

Councilor Kvistad asked what the fiscal impact will be of the ordinance coming before the Council to implement SWAC recommendations and update the regulatory code; and he asked whether it is pre-budgeted. Mr. Warner said the ordinance will authorize major changes in the way Metro regulates and administers solid waste facilities in the region. The code update will take effect this fiscal year. There will be increased regulatory presence in the field to implement the new code, and there are three vacancies in business and regulatory affairs area that are being reserved for the new code requirements. He said the proposed budget contains the necessary resources. Councilor Kvistad said his concern is that the committee has not seen the ordinance yet, and yet it is being pre-budgeted as if it has already been approved. He said he wants the impact of the code in the current budget to be broken out. Mr. Warner said the current budget is adequate to administer the new code, and is adequate to administer the existing code. He said the ordinance and staff report will be before the Council in the next couple of weeks.

Chair McCaig said since the fiscal impacts have all been factored into the budget before the committee today, and since staff has done an analysis of what the code will cost to implement, it should be possible to determine its fiscal impact. She suggested these adjustments may have been scattered throughout the budget, so that there is no single place, beyond the three vacant positions, that can be pointed to as being specifically attributable to the new code. Councilor Kvistad said if the budgetary impacts of the ordinance have been determined, he should be able to find out what they are. Chair McCaig said the two things we know is that 1) the budget for none of the departments has substantially increased, 2) there are three vacant positions which will be restructured to implement the new code, and 3) there are some additional costs that will be detailed in the staff report to the ordinance.

Mr. Warner said the new code may impact Metro in that there is less tonnage coming through the transfer stations, and that is the issue he believed Councilor Kvistad is most concerned with. He said this will be set forth clearly in the staff report. Councilor Morissette said this is the discussion that will determine whether the ordinance is adopted. Councilor Kvistad said his area of discomfort is that the budget already reflects this ordinance being adopted, when Council has not even seen it. He said he will vote in favor of the budget, however, he wanted his concern placed on the table for discussion.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT BUDGET

Chair McCaig said action would not be taken on the Growth Management Department budget at today’s meeting, and asked Elaine Wilkerson, Director of Growth Management Services, to report on the proposed FY 98-99 Growth Management Department budget. Ms. Wilkerson gave an overview of the proposed budget. A copy of the Growth Management Department Budget Overview is included as part of the meeting record.

Councilor McFarland asked about the reduction in grant revenues of $382,000. She asked what grants will be this year, and she asked for clarification about the overview document where it referred to $4.5 million for excise tax expenditures. Ms. Wilkerson said the $4.5 million figure is a combination of items. Councilor McFarland said she needs to know how much is excise tax money and how much will be pass through grants from state and federal agencies. Ms. Wilkerson said of the total, $3.173 million will come from excise taxes. The balance is from other funding sources. She said although the grants are shrinking, in some cases there are carry overs, so the reductions in grant revenues are not as bad as they look.

Meg Bushman, Council Analyst, reviewed her analysis of the Growth Management Department budget. A copy of her memorandum detailing this analysis is included as part of the meeting record.

Chair McCaig asked if the purpose of tomorrow’s MPAC meeting will be to make recommendations on how to best use the money set aside for technical assistance to local governments for planning and functional plan compliance. Ms. Wilkerson said local jurisdictions had been asked by MPAC to report on their shortfalls in funding and to suggest reasonable priorities for funding.

Chair McCaig said there is a $4.8 million budget. She asked whether, of the existing allocations that have been detailed in the budget, and excluding the discussion of the $500,000, Councilors had any substantial amendments they planned to bring forward to redirect existing moneys within the proposed budget.

Councilor McLain said she and Councilor Morissette are looking for $75,000 to $100,000 for direct technical assistance for Urban Reserve planning. Chair McCaig asked if this amount is in addition to the $140,000 within the $500,000, and Councilor McLain agreed it was. Chair McCaig asked if the committee had questions about the rest of the Growth Management budget. She said it would be helpful to know in advance of next week’s meeting if there will be any major discussion items to plan for.

Councilor Naito asked what is involved with the Goal 5 Natural Resources Analysis. Ms. Wilkerson said there is money for “?”.2 FTE because Metro staff will be actively involved in such efforts as mapping. She said significant fish and wildlife habitat areas in the region will be identified, public policy alternatives will be developed, information will be provided to the public, and review of committees such as WRPAC will be facilitated. Ms. Wilkerson said Goal 5 is part of the next phase of the watershed plan.

Councilor McFarland said she will not agree to approve the existing proposed budget before she has attended the MPAC meeting tomorrow to listen to their discussion on the matter. Chair McCaig acknowledged there will be discussion at MPAC tomorrow, however, she pointed out there are huge items in the proposed Growth Management budget adding up to $4.4 million that are not new money, not the $500,000, or not the grant; and she is looking for assurance that there will not be any huge restructuring in the portion of the budget that is a public policy issue or philosophy. Chair McCaig asked whether Council is comfortable moving ahead with the budget generally, while holding the discussion about the $500,000 in new excise tax General Fund to be dedicated to Growth Management until next week. She asked whether discussion could focus on the $500,000, or whether there are other items she is unaware of that will require significant discussion.

Councilor Morissette said he would prefer to ask Ms. Wilkerson to review her budget to try to raise the amount from $140,000 to $240,000 without raising the excise tax. He recommended creating a matching grant program with local communities for master planning of Urban Reserves. He said he would not make the restriction that the $100,000 all come from the Growth Management department budget. He said he did not wish to tell Ms. Wilkerson the best way for her to find savings in her budget.

Mr. Burton said he had asked Kathy Rutkowski, Principal Administrative Services Analyst, to report on what portion of the Growth Management and Transportation Planning budgets is excise tax. He said this report will be presented to MPAC, and volunteered to copy Councilors on it.

Councilor McLain said the committee is looking at bottom line contingencies, and whether the expectation for revenues from REM may be larger due to actual tonnage figures. Councilor Morissette said the committee may wish to redirect priorities from other budgeted projects.

Chair McCaig said there will a report will be available on the amount of money that was saved through budget cuts. She said she wants to know the amount of these savings before she decides where she believes the money should go. She asked for Councilor input on how to proceed. She asked whether they wished to direct Ms. Wilkerson to find the money in her budget. Councilor Naito said she was concerned about having the committee go back to budgets that the committee has already reviewed and approved. She said she does not want to spend a lot of time on these approved budgets. Chair McCaig agreed that the committee does not intend to revisit approved budgets.

Councilor McFarland said if scrounge money is found in the Growth Management Department budget, she would be willing to say it should be allocated to the technical assistance funding. She said she would not be willing to say that whatever money has been found in the entire process will go toward this funding.

Councilor Kvistad said we have overstepped our mandate in terms of what Metro does in growth management. He says Metro is intrusive, has gone too far, and he does not support where we are. He said he would support a move to cut the department back in terms of what it does. He says Metro has done some things that is going to harm the community. Simply providing this funding does not address his concerns. Councilor Morissette said he agrees that the densities are too high, and that not enough housing choices are permitted. However, he said Metro is mandated to meet certain requirements. If you look at the large size of the budget, very little of it is going to meet the laws that Metro is obligated to operate under.

Mr. Burton said he does not believe there will be any “found money,” however, Council could decide to redirect priorities as a policy decision. He said his excise tax listing will assist the councilors toward this end.

Chair McCaig said there appear to be at least four people who would like to see more money go into the grant program, that the first choice would be finding that money within the Growth Management Department budget, that partners should be involved in deciding how to redirect priorities. There is not consensus of the committee that those funds saved from other budgets will necessarily destined to go into this fund.

There being no further business before the committee, Chair McCaig recessed the meeting at 5:15 PM until Wednesday, April 15, 1998 at 2:30 PM.

Prepared by,

Lindsey Ray

Senior Council Assistant

C:\Micro Focus Content Manager\WebDrawerWorkpath\TEMP\HPTRIM.1068\t02A5RP8.doc