The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutM100608 District No.1 Commissioner: Phil Johnson District No.2 Commissioner: David W. Sullivan District No.3 Commissioner: John Austin Interim County Administrator: Dennis Richards Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney MINUTES Week of October 6, 2008 Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order in the presence of Commissioner David Sullivan and Commissioner John Austin. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following comments were made by citizens: two residents of South Bay in Port Ludlow expressed their opinions about the Iron Mountain Quarry Mineral Resource Lands (MRL) overlay proposal; a spokesperson for several members of National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) who were present thanked the Board for signing the proclamation designating October 5-11, 2008 as Mental Illness Awareness Week; a citizen stated his opinion on the staff recommendation to deny several Comprehensive Plan amendments on rural residential downzones; a citizen gave his opinion about the reasons for the declining economy in Port Townsend and Jefferson County; two people agreed that they would like to see the Board sponsor "county meetings" similar to the "town meetings" that Port Townsend sponsored this year; a citizen stated that he thinks the County's records retention policy regarding e-mails needs to be updated; a person stated that he doesn't think the Board should take comments regarding specific landuse decisions because they have given DCD staff the responsibility for those decisions; and two people questioned whether it is legal for political signs to be posted in automobiles parked in the Courthouse parking lot. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Sullivan moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Commissioner Austin seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 65-08 re: Naming a Private Road Orcas View Trail 2. HEARING NOTICE re: Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 20 Watershed Management Plan; Hearing Scheduled for Monday, October 27,2008 at 10:15 a.m. in the Commissioners' Chambers at the Jefferson County Courthouse 3. AGREEMENTS (2) re: 1) County Inmate Program Services; and 2) Undertake Actuarial Studies for County Inmate Program; Washington State Association of Counties Financial Services (WSAC FSC) 4. AGREEMENT NO. lAA09406 re: Family and Juvenile Court Improvement Plan; Jefferson County Juvenile Services; Washington State Administrative Office ofthe Courts 5. AGREEMENT re: Advocacy Services in the Developmental Disabilities Program; Jefferson County Public Health; Leslie Bunton 6. AGREEMENT NO. G0700097, Amendment No.3 re: Quilcene-Snow Watershed Implementation, Phase 4; Jefferson County Public Health; Washington State Department of Ecology Page 1 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 6, 2008 7. AGREEMENT, Amendment No.1 re: Consultant Services for the Jefferson County Marine Resources Committee; WSU Extension; LaRoche and Associates (Gabrielle LaRoche) 8. AGREEMENT re: Monitor and Test the Post-Closure Landfill Gas and Ground Water; Jefferson County Public Works; Aspect Consulting 9. AGREEMENT re: Transfer of Waterline Extension Ownership Serving Lower Oak Bay Park; Jefferson County Public Works; Public Utility District (PUD) #1 10. Final Short Plat Approval, Botnen Short Plat #SUB08-00001; To Divide Twelve (12) Acres into Two (2) Residential Lots Located at 10234 Rhody Drive, Chimacum; Roger and Pamela Botnen, Applicants 11. Advisory Board Appointment; Jefferson County Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SW AC); Michael Mullin, District #2 Representative, Two (2) Year Term Expires 10/6/10 12. Payment of Jefferson County Vouchers/Warrants Dated September 22,2008 Totaling $516,894.23 and Dated September 29,2008 Totaling $397,461.40 13. Payment of Jefferson County Payroll Warrants Dated September 18,2008 Totaling $95,387.72 and AlP Warrants Done by Payroll Dated September 18,2008 Totaling $17,831.98 PROCLAMATION re: Proclaiming October as Disability Awareness Month: Several members of the Developmental Disabilities Board were present when Chairman Johnson read the proclamation designating October as Disability Awareness Month. Commissioner Sullivan moved to approve the proclamation. Commissioner Austin seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Carl Hanson, Chair of the Developmental Disabilities Board, stated that he is pleased to be part of a community that values all individuals. He especially appreciates the local businesses that employ individuals with developmental disabilities and allow them to have an opportunity to be contributors to the community. CERTIFICATES OFAPPRECIATION: The Board also signed several certificates of appreciation and acknowledged local businesses that employ people with disabilities. These businesses included: · Uptown Nutrition · Evergreen Fitness · Safeway · Bad Habit · Purple Haze Farms · Swains · Henery's Hardware · San Juan Villa · Subway · Seaport Landing Page 2 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 6,2008 The Board also recognized the following businesses for providing training and trial work assessments to individuals with disabilities: True Value Hardware, Red Dog Farm, Finn River Farm, Plum Wild Farm, The Commons, The Craft Cottage, QFC, the Jefferson County Library, and PTTV/Open Media. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Sullivan moved to approve the minutes of September 22, 2008 as presented. Commissioner Austin seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. . COMMISSIONERS BRIEFING SESSION: The following items were discussed. Commissioner Sullivan reported that he will attend an orientation meeting of the Puget Sound Partnership Action Implementation Task Force this week. Commissioner Austin reported that the Puget Sound Partnership Straits Action Area Committee has been working on their action plan and the Hood Canal Coordinating Council has been working on the action plan for Hood Canal. Commissioner Austin mentioned that OlyCAP has received funding to pay down their mortgage so there will be more money available for services and programs. Commissioner Austin noted that the first of two bus shelters at Port Ludlow has been built. The second one will be done in a few weeks. Congress passed the "BailOut" Bill that included Secure Rural Schools and PIL T funding. The County will receive more information on the funding within the next few weeks. Chairman Johnson will be attending the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA) meeting this week in Olympia and a Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC) Legislative Steering Committee meeting in Ellensberg the next day. Commissioner Austin will attend a State Board of Health meeting in Yakima this week. . . . . . . HEARING re: 2009 Budget: Chairman Johnson opened the public hearing. Interim County Administrator Dennis Richards stated that the proposed budget complies with all statutory constitutional requirements and is a legal budget. However, he does not recommend adoption of the budget because more work needs to be done before the deadline for adoption. The Chair opened the public testimony portion of the hearing. Tom Thiersch, Unincorporated Jefferson County, thanked Auditor Donna Eldridge for posting the budget on the County's webpage in order for people to access it easily. Jim Hagan, Cape George, stated that he assumes there will be another public hearing on the budget after it has been revised. One area that needs to be reviewed is the Public Health budget. He questioned the $260,000 transfer in 2008 and the fact that they appear to be asking for more money next year. He stated that one of the budget goals is to "examine fee levels and ensure that all fees are set at a level that recaptures the cost of service being provided with reasonable accommodations provided to achieve other priorities." He has always been under the impression that "fee for service" is revenue neutral and he doesn't know if "achieving other priorities" is intended to charge more for the service so that the County has excess to Page 3 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 6,2008 support the General Fund. In an election year, it is good for citizens to know in advance what fees are going to be added that didn't exist previously. At the August Board of Health meeting, it was noted that discussion of any expanded fees would be delayed until after the election. Under Strategic Budget Objectives, #1 is to support Law and Justice, #2 is to support public health, and #4 is to support an effective economic development strategy. With the current national economy, the County will not receive as much grant funding as in the past and this concerns him. The Commissioners have said that their emphasis is on liveable, walkable bike trails, open space, and economic development related to home businesses and an equestrian park. He hasn't heard any talk of an aggressive pursuit of an economic development policy that is going to produce the kind of tax revenue that would support this budget. He asked if there will be another budget hearing? The Chair replied that there will. Jim Tracy, stated that a fee in excess of the cost of a service that it is attached to is an illegal tax in the State of Washington. This violates RCW 82.02.020. He thinks the best budgets communicate to the public the fundamental assumptions and changes from last year's budget to this year's budget by using a bullet summary format by department. Joe D' Amico, stated that he thinks the Board needs to support law enforcement and not cut funding for training. Funding for better security for the Courthouse is needed. The County spends a considerable amount of money on outside legal services and the Board may want to look at hiring someone to do this work in house. Mike Belenski, stated that the Board never questions contracts that are listed on the Consent Agenda. He suggested that the County should put all contracts out to bid to see if more money could be saved. He doesn't think there is accountability in the way that money is spent. He has concerns about the lack of documentation about where surplus property goes. Why does the County send the Washington State Association of Counties every year when they are lobbying against open government? Auditor Donna Eldridge stated that the 2009 Equipment Replacement List is included in the 2009 Budget proposal. The Board authorizes replacement of equipment each year as part of the budget process. The County Treasurer handles the disposal of other surplus equipment. The State Auditor just finished the audit ofthe County's capital asset plan and there was only one comment. She is interested in improving the format of the budget that is posted on the County's webpage. She also reviewed the contract review process that all contracts must go through before the Board approves and signs them. Hearing no further comments, the Chair closed the public hearing. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S BRIEFING SESSION: The following items were discussed. · Joint Clallam County/Jefferson County WRIA 20 meeting in Forks. · The 2009 Budget process. · A resolution regarding Title II and Title III funding. · Request for funding to keep the Mountain View pool open until the end ofthe year. Page 4 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 6, 2008 . Thank You Letters to Legislators re: Support/or Secure Rural Schools/PILT Funding: Commissioner Austin moved to send a letter of appreciation to the Congressional Delegation thanking them for their work on the approval of the Secure Rural Schools legislation. Commissioner Sullivan seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Sullivan moved to adjourn the meeting at 2:20 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Commissioner Austin seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ~2~JC~C Deputy Clerk of the Board J%l~ Page 5 Page 1 of 1 .-' Leslie Locke From: Phil Johnson Sent: Tuesday, October 07,20081:32 PM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: Comment Period on the County's Proposed Budget Importance: High Attachments: response to sep9adjust.pdf HEAR\NG RECORD From: Mike Brasfield Sent: Tuesday, October 07,20081:31:51 PM To: Dennis Richards Cc: David Sullivan; John Austin; Phil Johnson Subject: Comment Period on the County's Proposed Budget Importance: High Auto forwarded by a Rule Dennis, I recognize that this has been an unusual budget preparation process for the county for a number of reasons With Allen Sartin's departure, the "change of command" in your position, no Departmental Budget Hearings. and the revenue issues all combining to alter the customary process. I sent the attached 2 page spread sheet to Mr. Sartin on September 22nd It gives the detail on $79,000 in routine, year in - year out, line items that the Sheriff's Office moved within the budget submittal to better reftect actual cost centers and to assist the Auditor's Office. They were not increases to our annual budget, just transfers to different line items within our budget to better describe the funds. Mr. Sartin indicated that his instructions were to cut any new line items. He acknowledged after seeing the spread sheet that these were not "new" items. They contain such things as ballistic (commonly referred to as bullet proof) vests, ammunition, etc. However Mr. Sartin indicated that he was under instructions not to revise the overall draft budget. He also informed me that unlike the previous years, there would not be any scheduled budget meetings with elected officials or department heads. I need to go on record that there is a $79,000 shortfall that will have to be addressed in either the final county budget this fall, or through supplemental appropriations next year. Please consider this as the Sheriffs Office part of the Public Comment described in yesterdays "BOB", and that it has arrived prior to the Friday, October 10th deadline. Thanks, Mike Sheriff Michael D. Brasfield Jefferson Sheriff's Office - 79 Elkins Road - Port Hadlock. WA 98339 PH. (360) 385.3831 - FAX (360) 379-0513 mbrasfielg~e:fferson.w~.us - WVfoN.ieffer~onsheriftQIg 10/7/2008 .-. JEFFERSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE RESPONSE TO SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 BUDGET REQUEST ADJUSTMENT 001180000 ITEM DESCRIPTION REQUEST ADJUSTED JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST MIN REQ. 52110.48.0032 ACCESS 9000 o Reauired Law Enforcement Service Provided 9000 Bv WSP (formerlv oaid for bv Jeffcom and shared bv SO, now SO has its own aeet.) 52122.31.0000 LAW ENFORCEMENT 18,000 o EXDense moved from 52110.31.0020 to 8000 OPERATING 52122 to better reflect actual cost center YTD 2008 eXDense is 29,500 52122.31.0020 AMMO 7 RANGE 12000 10000 Adiustment acceoted 10000 SUPPLIES 52122.31.0035 BULLETPROOF VESTt 6400 o formerlv charoed as Dart of 52110.31.0020 6400 Moved to a 01: rODriate cost center for and separate line item for better trackinn of eXDenses for Qrant renortinn. Reimb Iff) 50% 52122.35.0000 SMALL TOOLS AND 4000 o budeet under 52110 reduced and new line 2000 MINOR EQUIPMENT item added under 52122 cost center to better reflect source of exoenditures. Amount is based on vtd 2008 exo of 3315. Need to retain budoet of at least 960 to eaual 2008 bud et. Reauestina a minimum 2000 52122.41.0030 VIPS PROGRAM 1000 o 2008 budoeted orooram moved from cost 1000 center 52110 to 52122 to better reflect source of excenditures. The volunteer oroaram fundine is still reauired. Volunteer oroaram is essential to the ooeration of the Sheriffs office 52122.49.0015 GUN CLUB 2500 o Fonnerlv charaed under 52110 and under- 2500 MEMBERSHIPS funded, this item has been moved to the more 8Dorooriate cost center and is crucial in maintainina officer orofficiencv since the SO does not have it's own oun ranae 52122.93.0010 NON ER&R COSTS 18,000 o Costs for maintaininn vehicles owned bv 8000 FOR SPECIAL SO and not covered under ER&R have VEHICLES been charaed to ER&R budaet line in the oast. This new line item allows for assianment to aooro date cost center and better trackina This includes the volunteer vehicles and installation into oatrol vehicles of non ER&R enuioment .- JEFFERSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE RESPONSE TO SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 BUDGET REQUEST ADJUSTMENT 001180000 ITEM DESCRIPTION REQUEST ADJUSTED JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST MIN REQ 52170.93.0010 TRAFFIC SAFETY 3000 o Costs for maintainina the Traffic Safety Van 3000 VAN owned bv the SO is not cart of ER&R costs This new line item allows for assionment to aDl)"rooriate cost center and better trackin(]~ These expenses were formerlv charaed to the traffic safety vehicle lease line 52520.930040 SAR FUEL 1000 o Fuel for SAR vehicle needs to be tracked 1000 52520.98.0010 SAR VEHICLE 5000 o $5,000 was moved from 52520.48.0010 to 5000 MAINTENANCE this line item. Keeo this $5,000 and delete the $5,000 still showina under 52520.48.0010 Costs for maintainina the Search and Rescue vehicles owned bv the SO have not been adenuatelv funded in the nast. Much of the eauioment was auctioned off in 2008 and remainina eQuioment needs considerable maintenance which must be funded Reoeated reauests for new eouipment.have been denied in recent budcet vears increas- inn costs to maintain old eauioment 52520.48.0010 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE should have been zeroed out when it -5000 was moved to S2S20.98.0010 79900 10000 50900 cc :l3cX'C ? ) Cft ~ iOj/O 0'6' jeffbocc Page 1 of1 From: jim hagen Uchagen@donobLnet] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 9:01 AM To: jeffbocc Subject; Fw: 2009 Budget Comment ur-AR'~IG R;"'.....""RD nt ,Il~ ~ /t\"UI ! ---- Original Message ----- From: iLrnh"gfO'n To: jeJf.bQc:c:@gQje!fer$Qn~wa.us. Sent: Friday, October 10, 20088:46 AM Subject: 2009 Budget Comment Commissioners, The public hearing on the 2009 county budget held on 10/6 was sadly lacking in the kind of background presentation that normally precedes public comment. The commissioners primary responsibility is to manage the budget, the lion's share of which is provided by citizen contributions. This is your single most important function. Considering the budget shortfalls the county has faced the last two years, exacerbated by the national and global financial crisis's, the attention paid to and decisions made pertaining how this will be managed is crucial. Typically, a public hearing is opened with staff presentation summarizing the background and intent of a given proposal, which provides members of the public with valuabie information they can use to inform their comments. This background information is especially important with understanding a subject as complex as the budget. I commend the county auditor for all the work her office has done in providing the preliminary budget online, but how many people know that's available and, if they do, are able to decipher the information? The introduction to last Monday's budget hearing consisted of a roughly one minute presentation by the county administrator stating he thought the budget met legal requirements and that he didn't recommend passing it in its current form. I'm not faulting our interim administrator for this less than comprehensive introduction; it's the commissioners job to make sure the proper information is made available to the people. Why wasn't the budget being recommended? Why is there a $1.5 million shortfall? Which departments are on target and which are problematic? What about a concise summary of revenues, expenditures, future trends, and alternative courses of action? I have witnessed comprehensive, ten minute staff presentations that opened public hearings related to land-use decisions. Why can't the same be done for something as important as the budget? i urge the commissioners to resolve the budget in a timely manner that avoids additional hearings held late in the year when people are in a holiday mode and decisions are made ten days before Christmas. You have consistently said in the past how public participation noticeably drops around the holidays. You have known since the passage of last year's budget there would be increased challenges this year and there was a need to start early, but this hasn't been done. There is a strong likelihood the most important decision you make this year will be overshadowed by the December timeframe. Having to attend a budget meeting nine days before Christmas is the public participation equivalent of getting a chunk of coal in your stocking. One area I urge the commissioners to really focus on is not simply a spending freeze but consideration of additional cuts. At the state level, the governor has announced 1 % cuts in certain departments in both spending and staffing. Similar proposals are recommended in King County and other states faced with budget shortfalls. Commissioner Sullivan has commented on how hard it is to attract good county workers, and that we need to maintain the county workforce in anticipation of future economic recovery, but we really need to deal with present realities that many other municipal corporations are recognizing as necessary. (Interesting, this attention to maintaining the county workforce, when I rarely hear a corresponding concern for our private workforce, who may very well be asked to pay increased fees to help sustain county services). Also, there have been several news stories that are reporting on the reduced ability of municipalities to obtain funding for captial projects. Rather than planning for sunny days in the distance, the realities of today's financial crisis should take precedent in adopting the 2009 budget. Jim Hagen 150 Maple Dr. Port Townsend, WA 10/10/2008 jeffbocc CC '. Y!ifCfollolc8 Page 1 of 1 " From: Georgette Semick [gsemick@yahoocom] Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:25 AM To: jessbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us; jeffbocc Cc: Karen Bednarski Subject: comments on the 2009 Budget Attachments: BOCC 2009 budget Itr to Comm_Co Admin (1 0-1 0-2008).doc H~API~li('; R , ~;-.ll ..~\.~'J .~. ..w <" Please accept the attached document as commentary on the 2009 draft budget. My compliments to the Auditor's Office and especially the Chief Accountant for making the detailed documents available on the web site. I remain available to discuss the matter with anyone. Georgette Semick Cape George 344-4283 Georgette <gsemick@yahoo.com> 10/10/2008 '- GEORGETTE SEMICK 31 N.. Rhododendron Or. ~ PORT 1(JWINiS~I/J,O, WA .98368 "/ftfJ4rtE. PH.ON: 360.34A,4283 October 10, 2008 Delivered via email Jefferson County Commissioners County Administrator Subject: Comments on the 2009 Draft Budget Dear Sirs: The PDN reported that the new County Administrator said he would welcome help and that the Commissioners welcomed comments on the budget. I can see how wading through 320 pages of inflated numbers would be a daunting task for anyone, yet alone someone just coming onto the job, The only way to approach this is from the standpoint of reviewing and cutting expenses, Unfortunately, it takes a lot of wading through a quagmire of details to even see where those might be inflated. I base my comments on the Budget Narrative and the 2009 Budget Report detail dated September 23, 2008 found on the Auditor's portion of the web site and on almost 30 years of developing and overseeing large budgets for private corporations and government projects. As a note, I applaud the Auditor's office and Chief Accountant for making these records available for pUblic review; although the lack of subtotals may mean I have quoted some erroneous numbers below. My concentration is on expenses, not income balances since we all admit the County and taxpayers will be in for hard times and should not take for granted normal revenue projections. May I suggest a few basic principles which would get the department heads and budget analysts back to basics and a semblance of reality in these very tight and likely to get tighter times, namely, deal with the escalating requests for expenses: . Recognizing that there are contracts outstanding with certain labor unions or perhaps even individual contracts guaranteeing increases and benefits, no one beyond those covered by contracts deserves or should receive any increased compensation unless or until we can show that they have taken on more responsibility. . Any departure of a department head or supervisor should be reviewed as an opportunity to rethink or reorganize a department to cut back on staff, facilities and perhaps consolidate at least administrative jobs. . Any open positions should be frozen and replacements should be justified to the County Administrator. . Travel, training, information systems, and expansions should all be frozen at 2008 levels if not cut. . No new programs and certain programs and community facilities might be closed for the year to reduce maintenance and utility costs. . Lead by example in the Administrators/BOGG/Miscellaneous budget, as I will detail below. . Require that the departments, especially those with larger staffs, like Health, Parks and '- 2009 Budget Comments October 9, 2008 Page 2 Recreation and Community Development start from a zero base to justify their staffing levels based on the current demands for service, rather than just the plusses and minuses from 2008 levels. Pay particular attention to the vast number of financial analysts, clerks, administrative assistants, information specialists and similar administrative positions that seem to be scattered across these departments. "Administration" including managers and supervisors should use the business rule of thumb of no more than 10% FTE on top of the service positions. To be more specific, I have reviewed these 320 detail pages plus the "narrative" that was on the web site. Here are some examples of where requests for increases appear worth of more scrutiny and the unfortunate but necessary tool of management - "N-O". In these times of 7%+ unemployment and no medical benefits, it is time for the county government employees to share the need for serious belt tightening. The General Fund appears to request a 5.0% increase but that masks a myriad of places where additional cuts can be made. Senefits appear to project a 17.3% increase across the board; that would say to me that it is time to reconsider insurance carriers and plans to get a more competitive rate. Some more detailed examples include: County Administrator/SOCe/Miscellaneous: . The departure of the County Central Services Director should be seen as a place to cut back by reorganizing or at least postponing the filling of this position. . The request for a 7 month overlap for a new person to be "trained" is ridiculous. A month is normal and two months at most would be more than any competent new hire should need. . Commissioners for Districts 1 and 2 have given themselves a 13.5% increase. If they would bring their salaries in line with the Commissioner from District #3, they would receive a 3.7% increase and could lead by example for the rest of the increases throughout the workforce. . The number of administrative staff in this office seems excessive: 2 Exec. Secretaries II plus a request for a New Clerk? A Clerk of the Soard plus a Deputy Clerk of the Soard? I would question whether that hire to replace the leaving position is needed at all under these circumstances. . Professional Services in this budget has increased. Other General Fund Increases - a sample: . The Appraisers office includes increases for staff of as much as 9.1 % for the Sr. Appraiser and 13.3% of the Property Tech III; other staff positions include 5.2%. Again, unless some of these are covered by contractual obligations, that appears to be too much. Office supplies, travel and school/seminars request increases of 38%, 5 times, and 71.1 %, respectively. Guideiines of what each department can/should budget needs to come from the top. . Public Health has been lauded in the papers for their willingness to cut back their staff hours to 36 per week. That is a noble and positive step. What I do see, however, are several areas bearing the need for more scrutiny. The number of financial positions scattered throughout their budget to handle the billing and grant monies of this department seems excessive: a Financial Operations Coordinator, a Finance and Administration Manager, and 3 Finance Support Specialists. Even at 36 hours, this is still ~. 2009 Budget Comments October 9, 2008 Page 3 4.5 FTEs for a $4.6 million budget (or is it $9+million as on page 1677) - way too much. Also, the number of medical records staff found throughout the different departments is excessive. This is an area that has reasonably been handled by hourly and contract employees who are paid by the record to handle fluctuations in claims not as fully benefited staff. Similarly, information services staff are especially prevalent in the Public Health budget despite the already large department found elsewhere in the budget; some rationalization of overlap is needed here. I also question the number of department heads within Public Health and wonder why the administration of several of these departments cannot be shared to reduce administrative costs. . Communitv Development has reduced their staff from 25.9 to 23.3 FTEs, but again, it does not appear that this budget balances, so one would question staffing based on reduced service levels caused by building slow-downs. Sased on page 204 of the budget detail, they are still requesting a 11.1 % increase in their expenses despite staff cutbacks. . Auditor's O&M (pq 89 of the detailed budqet) If I am reading this correctly, this is a request for an unprecedented 147% increase over the amended 2008 budget, which was already a big jump from any prior year. I suspect that this is funding some new project, but in an election off-year, I doubt that this is the time for such an expenditure. . Information Services is requesting a $911 ,000 increase or 37.1 % according to page 320 of the budget detail. That should obviously be scrutinized. This is compounded by REET Technoloqv Fund, whatever that may be, that is more than doubling their budget request. . Facilities Manaqement is requesting an almost $400,000 increase (page 263) or 21.5%. While much of this could be the result of increased costs of materials and utilities, I believe it is time to look seriously at cutting back on the number of facilities and consolidating programs into fewer facilities so these costs can be contained. . Parks Improvement: One word: "don't" especiallY with an increase of over $100,000. Hold the line at the 2008 amended budget level. . Solid Waste: A doubling of the budget? Unheard of. . Parks and Recreation: The Commissioners have been big supporters of this department but a 22.9% increase is way too much support. . Cooperative Extension Proqrams' increase of 15.1%; let's ramp back. . Affordable Housinq; $280,000 to $737,722? An example of another expanding program that the county cannot sustain at these levels, regardless the expected sources of the funds. We all know that new programs whether funded by grants or taxpayers tend to have a life of their own; down the road it will be the property taxpayers who will be asked to sustain these "well intentioned ideas." . Water Qualitv: And speaking of new programs with a life of their own. When the Clean Water District was discussed, the budget for that was expected to be $500,000. Is the $804,000 (62.1 %) increase in the Water Quality budget request the result of that inflated new program pushed and adopted by the Commissioners? If so, it exceeds stated levels and given the latest news on the improvements in water quality in Discovery Say, the whole program should be reconsidered. . Mental Health and Chemical Dependencv is a problem that the County has stepped up to help address, but I am certain that the citizens who supported the concept were unaware that that would cost an additional $446,000, or 54.5% increase, in 2009. . E-911 Telephone is requesting a $2.6 million or 92% increase over 2008 budget. Unprecedented and unwarranted, even if there is a big upgrade project in there. . And let's not let the smaller departments get away with 75% and more increases just c 2009 Budget Comments October 9, 2008 Page 4 because the absolute requested amount is smaller, e.g., Public Defense Funding., the Law Library, Sheriff's Drug Investigation, Jefferson County Drug Fund, Courthouse Facilitator, Boating Safety, 4H Afterschool The good news is there are many areas to look into that would significantly cut expenses and get this budget back on track. The bottom line is that it is time for the Commissioners and County Administrator to take out the red pencil. Those of you who are running for reelection are touting budget prudence - this is the time to show it and to do it now would provide voters with some reassurance that you do mean it this time. It is easy to blame budget deficits on declining tax revenues and cutbacks in grants, but this year the name of the game is the hard work of holding the line on expenses, cutting back or freezing program expansions and a few judicious reductions. After all, "that's why they pay you the big bucks." I would be happy to speak with or meet with any of you to discuss this further. Hopefully, some true reductions can be made in the budget before the next public meeting on the topic. Very truly yours, ~r~~ Georgette Semick Cc: Karen Bednarski, Chief Accountant