MINUTES OF THE METRO COUNCIL

BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING

Monday, April 1, 2002

Council Chamber

Members Present:  Rex Burkholder (Chair), Susan McLain, Rod Monroe

Members Absent:  Bill Atherton, David Bragdon (Vice Chair)

Chair Burkholder called the meeting to order at 1:36 p.m.

1.  Ordinance No. 02-940, For the Purpose of Adopting the Annual Budget for Fiscal Year 2002-03, Making Appropriations, and Levying Ad Valorem Taxes, and Declaring an Emergency

Budget Issues

Parks Funding

The committee reviewed budget items that it had identified for further discussion. Chair Burkholder began by asking Charlie Ciecko, Director of Parks and Greenspaces, and Jeff Tucker, Parks Budget Analyst, to address several questions related to the $1 per ton increase in excise tax for Parks funding.

1)  How is the shift in program goals from land acquisition to land stewardship and access reflected in this year’s budget, and how does it tie in with the Green Ribbon Committee’s recommendations?

Mr. Ciecko responded that the Parks Department is in a transition period, winding down on the land acquisition effort and significantly expanding stewardship and land management responsibilities. The excise tax ordinance (Ord. 02-939A) that was adopted by the Council accomplishes two things:

•  It provides additional funding for the care of new land by funding an additional park ranger position, which will be involved in day-to-day care and management of approximately 6,800 acres.

•  It slows the depletion of the Parks Department fund balance by about $500,000 per year for a two-year period.

Mr. Ciecko referred the committee to a partial summary of Regional Parks’ FY 2002-03 work plan efforts related to Green Ribbon priorities (a copy of which is attached to this record). He said that as a result of Ordinance 92-939A, they are able to continue progress working with partners on Green Ribbon priorities by providing financial and technical resources and by maintaining a lead role on several projects, such as Smith & Bybee Lakes, Fanno Creek Trail, and Portland Traction Company Trail, as well as acquisition projects such as Beaver Creek Canyon Trail and East Buttes-Butler Ridge Trail.

2) Could you have accomplished this work plan without the funding from the excise tax increase?

Mr. Ciecko responded that they would not be able to do the same amount of work as in the past and would have to consider a variety of cuts.

3)   What steps is the Parks Department taking on the Green Ribbon Committee recommendations?

Mr. Ciecko responded that, with the help of local partners, the department is better able to take care of the land it has and at the same time is taking limited steps on the Green Ribbon Committee recommendations.

Chair Burkholder stressed the need to communicate with the Green Ribbon Committee to keep it apprised of progress on its recommendations.

4)  How will the Parks Department address its long-term funding needs?

Mr. Ciecko said he didn’t have a full answer at this time, but that he thinks an initial part of the answer will involve members of the Council, the Parks Department, and the Executive Office looking at the various possibilities that exist for funding. The questions for the Council, and ultimately for the citizens of the region, are what are their priorities and how much are they willing to dedicate to these priorities.

Chair Burkholder said that the Budget and Finance Committee is scheduled to look at funding for Metro as a whole in the fall of 2002 and that possibly the Natural Resources Committee will look specifically at the Parks Department relative to long-term funding.

Councilor Mclain suggested that the Natural Resources Committee look at various vision documents that have been developed to see what has already been decided about long-term funding and to take into consideration charter responsibilities and commitments that have been made.

Mr. Ciecko said that it is not his intention to start at the beginning to determine long-term funding, but that there is a need for Council discussion about where the focus should be.

ASD Add Packages 1 and 2

Chair Burkholder asked Jennifer Sims, Administrative Services Director, and Scott Moss, Business Services Manager, to explain the differences between ASD’s Add Packages 1 and 2.

Ms. Sims provided the committee with information about both packages (copies of which are attached to this record) and said that although they differed in scope and cost, both had merit.

Mr. Moss identified four areas to which they would like to direct additional resources: 1) Organization-wide safety and loss control, 2) emergency management, 3) building security and visitor management, and 4) additional assistance with employee benefits. He then summarized each add package as follows.

ASD Add Package 1 would employ a staff member to work in the areas of safety, security and emergency management. The person in this position would be trained to handle medical emergencies and would be available to respond to emergencies in the building. In addition, this position would release one-half FTE currently assigned to risk management to work full time on benefits administration.

Ms. Sims added that this position could be funded from the Risk Management fund balance the first year but would become an allocated position beginning with year two.

Add Package 2 would continue an existing pilot program by adding a permanent full-time position to serve as receptionist at the security desk in the main lobby, which would release security staff for other security functions such as patrolling the building and responding to incidents.

John Houser, Council Analyst, described the two packages as different approaches to handling security. He said that one of the advantages identified with Add Package 2 was that it would allow security staff to leave the front desk while the receptionist remained to greet and screen visitors.

Pete Sandrock, Chief Operating Officer, added that he thought it was more important to have a staff person to provide staff training on an on-going basis, which Add Package 1 would provide, than to free up security staff to patrol the building.

Chair Burkholder said that if councilors would like to propose amendments to one or both of these packages, they would be considered at the budget and Finance Committee meeting on April 9.

Planning Department Budget Issues

The Committee and Andy Cotugno, Planning Department Director, discussed the Planning Department’s four add packages (Planning/Stormwater Management; Uplands Planning; Affordable Housing Implementation; and Performance Measures Data) and their importance relative to projects included in the budget. Chair Burkholder reviewed the process the Committee went through to prioritize projects in light of budget constraints, and he said that the Committee felt comfortable that periodic review took precedence over the add packages. Councilor McLain said that this discussion would occur again in the fall when the Committee talked about long-term funding. She added that these proposals were important and in fact some were charter responsibilities and/or part of the regional framework plan, and that it was important to continue to look for ways to begin these projects.

Chair Burkholder said that Metro has received feedback from the community that it would be much better to accomplish these projects all at once. He suggested that Metro explain to the community that resources only allow projects to be done a piece at a time. He said the committee would look at whether Metro was meeting its charter requirements and whether it could accomplish its goals sequentially rather than all at once in the fall.

Budget Amendments

John Houser gave a brief overview of five budget amendments that he drafted, one on behalf of Chair Burkholder and four on behalf of Councilor McLain. Copies of the amendments are attached to this record.

Amendment #1

Provides $80,000 for implementation of Metro’s adopted affordable housing policy. $50,000 would be dedicated to providing technical assistance through a consultant to local governments that need to develop and implement affordable housing strategies. A second element of the amendment would provide $30,000 to update affordable housing needs data.

Councilor McLain said that, because of the wide range of jurisdictions’ needs, it would be important to develop specific criteria for the consultant, who would be hired under a personal services contract to provide technical assistance.

John Houser suggested that one way to accomplish this would be to have the bid document reviewed by the Council before it was released to the public.

Amendment #2

Would adopt a portion of Human Resources Add Package 1 related to the development of an agency-wide training program by providing $35,000 to hire an outside consultant to conduct an assessment and inventory of Metro training needs. This would be the first step in the original add package, which proposed $75,000 for the purpose of adding one FTE to do this work and then institute a training program after the initial assessment and inventory was completed.

Amendment #3

Would enhance the capability of the Planning and Regional Parks departments to pursue grant opportunities by providing them with a total of $15,000 to procure outside grant writing assistance.

Amendment #4

Would adopt ASD Add Package 2 for $36,500 to provide a receptionist at the Security Desk as the preferred alternative between ASD Add Package 1 and 2.

Councilor Monroe said that he would like the committee to consider both ASD Add Packages 1 and 2.

Amendment #5

Would add $3,000 to the Special Appropriation line item for the Water Consortium to share in the cost of the Regional Water Supply Plan update.

Chair Burkholder said that two additional amendments might be added before Committee deliberations on April 9, one in support of ASD Add Package 1 and one to restore the Auditor’s budget to current staffing and program levels.

2.  Councilor Communications

Chair Burkholder said that additional deliberations and a public hearing opportunity would occur on April 9 and, if needed, on April 10, 2002, with another public hearing opportunity at the April 11 Council meeting at Pacific University in Forest Grove. He said the committee would vote on Resolution 02-3181 to transmit the approved budget to the Tax Supervising and Conservation Commission on either April 9 or April 10 and that the budget would come before the Metro Council on April 25 for approval.

Council McLain requested that an executive budget summary be made available to the public at the upcoming public budget hearings.

Chair Burkholder noted that the current budget translated priorities that were put in place during the fall of 2001, and he raised the question of how to involve the public in a meaningful way during the fall of 2002 to raise priorities they think Metro should be working on.

There being no further business before the committee, Chair Burkholder recessed the meeting at 2:59 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Claudia Wilton

Council Assistant

ATTACHMENTS TO THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR THE MEETING OF APRIL 1, 2002