MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE

Tuesday, June 19, 2001

Council Chamber

Members Present:  Susan McLain (Chair), Carl Hosticka (Vice Chair), Bill Atherton, David Bragdon, Rex Burkholder, Rod Monroe, Rod Park

Members Absent:  None.

Chair McLain called the meeting to order at 12:04 p.m.

1.  Consideration of the Minutes of May 30, 2001, Budget and Finance Committee Meeting.

2.  Communication from the Chief Financial Officer.

Jennifer Sims, Chief Financial Officer and Director of the Administrative Services Department, reported that in May four people from Metro attended the Government Finance Officer’s Association (GFOA) annual conference and they would be bringing new and fresh ideas forward over the next months. Regarding the next agenda item on bonds, she said she and Tony Mounts (Financial Planning Manager), together with Metro’s financial advisor, Mr. Chip Pierce of Clancy Gardner and Pierce, LLC, participated recently in a telephone ratings presentation to both Standard and Poor's and Moody’s rating agencies. She said she thought the presentation went well, and hoped for a continued good rating for Metro. Ms. Sims reported that PERS recently formed a local government pool; they received 203 local employers wishing to participate, representing 18,000 local government employees. PERS reported they have a surplus to start the pool; they initially had given an estimated rate of 8.62% as Metro’s employee rate, and the rate came in at 8.61%. Metro will be in that pool effective July 1.

3.  Resolution No. 01-3076 – Authorizing General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 2001 Series A.

Ms. Sims explained that this was an opportunity for Metro to refund the current outstanding bonds issued to build the Oregon Convention Center (OCC). She spoke to the staff report and quoted the savings mentioned there.

Chair McLain asked staff to pass along to John Donovan, Public Outreach Coordinator, that this was a piece of good news that showed Metro’s good financial planning and should be reflected in a press release.

Responding to a question from Councilor Monroe, Ms. Sims said the bonds were initially sold in 1987 with a 7% rate; Metro did an advance refunding in 1992, and this request is for a regular refunding. There are no other outstanding bonds at this time on which Metro could take advantage of the favorable interest rates.

Councilor Burkholder asked where the savings go and how it affects Metro’s budget. Ms. Sims explained that none of these savings accrue to Metro as the bonds are paid through property taxes. The debt service on the bonds will be less, however, which makes the property tax levy lower.

Councilor Monroe agreed that this agency directly saving the tax payers money is something Metro doesn’t have to do, but with Ms. Sims being on top of the market and having the fiduciary responsibility, he felt Mr. Donovan should make every attempt to get the media to report this action, this good news.

4.  Resolution No. 01-3078 – For the Purpose of Replacing the Current Classification of Paralegal I with a Job Series Classification of Paralegal I and Paralegal II at Metro.

Lily Aguilar, Human Resource Director, and Pam Harpster, Classification/Compensation Manager, spoke to the staff report, saying this classification was determined based on the Classification/Compensation Review conducted in the Office of General Counsel.

Chair McLain said this was fairly straightforward. Ms. Harpster, responding to a question from Councilor Monroe, said the Paralegal I salary range was $34,147 to $47,807, and the Paralegal II salary range was $35,855 to $50,197.

5.  Committee Work Plan Status.

Peggy Coats, Senior Council Analyst, gave an overview, referencing the memo of June 12, 2001, included in the agenda packet, and the attachment to that memo of the committee’s work plan.

Chair McLain said she and Councilor Atherton were going to be meeting soon regarding the long-term funding and long-term capital renewal and replacement needs, and the work of the systems performance task force and what that would focus on. She then asked the committee for their response, reaction or comments on the tasks that were before them, adding that some timelines need to be outlined now and she would like to get to that as soon as possible. She asked Presiding Officer Bragdon if he would send a memo, with her, to the rest of the council by early the following week. Presiding Officer Bragdon added that in a recent Natural Resources Committee meeting, July 11^th was given as a date to discuss some of the Park’s funding issuing, referencing Mr. Jim Zehren’s report. Presiding Officer Bragdon said he would work to dovetail these efforts with the budget discussions. Councilor Hosticka added that Mr. Zehren’s report indicated a number of responsibilities, assignments, etc., for Metro and had some indication of cost and potential revenue sources. Since MPAC had now passed that on to the Metro Council, he thought the Natural Resources Committee would review that report at their July 11^th meeting, would look at the action steps required, and then start a process in motion which would allow the council to identify just what the funding needs were, based on that report, and perhaps engage some more members of the public in that discussion to come to some determination of what it is this council was committing itself to undertake and to fund, and to look at ways of doing that.

Chair McLain said she looked forward to working with the Natural Resources Committee on this. Councilor Monroe added, in Councilor Atherton’s absence, that the Solid Waste and Recycling Committee might be involved as well. There had been some conversation that if, in fact, the solid waste becomes the revenue source for this purpose, their committee is already looking at some changes in the fee structure through the whole system, and may be able to piggyback right into that if conventional wisdom is that this would be an appropriate revenue source.

Councilor Park suggested a multi-year goal setting, adding that he realized that future councilors could not be bound by it but that it could be a guide. He mentioned this because of the two-year program laid out for the LCDC for Periodic Review being done in the Community Planning Committee, and said that was useful because it helped the committee know what they have to accomplish and when, and it also helped in the Natural Resources area for them see what needed to be done, as well.

Chair McLain said she welcomed his thoughts, and said he reminded her to ask the committee to commit to attending the meetings and doing the work to plan these goals and visions. Any other comments were welcome, she said, and she asked that they please pass them on to her or to Ms. Coats.

6.  Substantive and Technical Amendments to FY 2001-02 Budget.

Mr. Tony Mounts, Financial Planning Manager, explained that the list of Technical Adjustments was inadvertently omitted from their agenda packed and asked that the committee use the handout (included as a part of this record).

•  Technical Adjustments. Chair McLain suggested the six technical adjustments be considered as one group. Mr. Mounts briefly explained each amendment.

Mr. Bryant Enge, Director of Administration, MERC, distributed an explanation sheet for Proposed FY 2001-02 Budget Amendment on MERC #3 Technical Adjustment (a copy of which is included in this record), as it was not included in the agenda packet. There was some discussion regarding MERC Adjustment #4. Mr. Mounts and Mr. Enge explained that the Oregon Convention Center expansion project was a capital project and the appropriation for anticipated expenditures needed to be in the correct line item. The money stayed within the same fund but would be moved from Materials and Services line items into a Capital Outlay line item. Ms. Sims added, in explanation, that since there was no policy change, no change in the total project cost and no change in direction, this was a technical adjustment. This change would reflect how the spending would proceed, and that it was her understanding that the council had already approved what the project would be, what work needed to be done and how much it would cost, so it was not seen that moving the appropriation from one line item into another, within the same fund, was a substantive action.

Chair McLain asked that staff include with any future budget adjustments or amendments the information showing exactly where the funds will go and where they will come from.

Presiding Officer Bragdon reminded staff, regarding Planning #10 adjustment, that the Unified Sewerage Agency had changed their name to CleanWater Services and the appropriate correction to the Intergovernmental Agreement should be made.

•  Substantive Amendments. Mr. Mounts explained that changes had come in on the substantive amendments since the agenda packet went out, so he asked that the committee use the handout dated June 19, 2001 (a copy of which is included in this record). He briefly explained each amendment. There was an additional handout on General Fund #2 (a copy of which is included in this record).

General Fund #2

Council #17

Councilor Burkholder spoke to the Amendment and urged the committee to approve it. Presiding Officer Bragdon said he also supported this Amendment, and when Councilor Monroe verified that these funds would not be spent without further action of the council, he said he was very supportive of the Amendment, as well.

Planning #8

Planning #9

Parks #19

MERC #3

Mr. Mounts referred in his explanation of this Amendment to the June 18, 2001, memo to Presiding Officer Bragdon and Councilor McLain from Ms. Sims regarding the Response to the Tax Supervising and Conservation Commission (TSCC) Certification Letter (a copy of which is included in this record).

Mr. Mounts said he had received approximately 16 responses to his questionnaire on the Budget Process Debrief memo he’d sent out on May 21^st. He asked those councilors who had not yet done so to please complete and return them. Chair McLain added that if any of the councilors had anything they wanted to tell the chair of the Budget and Finance Committee (which she would gladly pass on if she was not chair the next budget year), or anything they wanted to change in the budget process, anything they liked or didn’t like, this was the time staff had the opportunity to make sure the process was in place to make those changes.

7.  Councilor Communications

There being no further business before the committee, Chair McLain adjourned the meeting at 12:59 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Rooney Barker

Council Assistant

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF JUNE 19, 2001

The following have been included as part of the official public record:

i:\minutes\2001\budget&finance/061901bdm.doc