City/County Road Partnership & Proposed County Capital Project Partnership

New Search

cash poses a dilemma • ~~{• ®Spending: Possible levy approval and an influx of forest funds has commissioners asking for advice. By JOE MOSLEY ~ah~~~~ The Register-Guard Staring down a potential double barrel of cash infusions,. Lane County commissioners are- resisting an urge that comes naturally after more than a decade of fiscal belt•tightening: to spend. Commissioners have set a Dec. 5 public hearing to sample constituents' preferences on w=hat to do in the event voters approve a .four-year, $40 million property tax levy on Nov. ~e='~ XS 7 - exactly a week after . ~ • President Clinton is ex• ~,~,, y ~,, petted to sign a bill that "i .~ `~ M~. will increase federal fund- '~~ ing to Lane County by $18.3 million in the first year of a six-year, inflation-adjusted pay- - meat plan. Options range from re• "We may nOt inforcing programs pared even have+to during the years of issue the> budget-cutting to holding levy, but 1 the line and offering tax- payers abreak. would not "We may not even prejudge , -have to issue the levy, but any of this:' I would not prejudge any of .this," says Commis- PETER SORENSOtJ stoner Peter Sorenson, eoard charrman ' chairman of the five- member board. "The one thing I have a commit- ment to is that we would have an open process to get the views of the people." The levy proposal, which would be used primarily to increase operating levels at the county's Forest Work Camp and Juvenile Justice Center, was put on the ballot this summer when the fate of the federal payments-to-counties bill remained in doubt. Some commissioners said at the time they would seek a proportionate reduction in taxes actually col- lected under the levy, in the event the levy and the federal funding both came through. But the board as a whole agreed only to seek public input before assessing the county's overall financial situation =which also could be Turn to MONEY, Page 15A lil®~~ 1 Continued from Page 1A dramatically affected by any of sev- eralstatewide ballot measures to be decided next month. Commissioners remain hesitant to make promises about the levy, even after this month's final con- gressional approval of the bill that will increase federal payments to timber counties across the country. There is the fiscal uncertainty surrounding the bevy of state tax- limitation and government- reduction measures, and thet•e is also a learning curve to be over- come in determining exactly ltow the federal cash can be spent, the}r say. "Our ears are open as to how we can allocate this money," Soretson says. Straightforward increases The most unambiguous element of the federal funding package is a $4.1 million increase in guaranteed funding to Lane County that replan es annual payments historically de- rived from logging on farmer Ore- gon & California Railroad land managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. That money goes into the cover ty's discretionary general fund, urhich commissioners can spend as they please. A majority on the board have said they would use $2.8 million to cover a deficit that had been projected for the budget year that begins next July 1. The property tax levy - assum- ing it is approved by voters - would then be reduced front $10 million per year to $Z2 million be- cause its total also includes more Y to address the deficit. Commissioner Bill Dwyer has proposed putting the remainder of the 0&C increase -about $1.3 mil- lion next year - into a "rainy day" fund as a hedge against future bud- get shortages. Du_yer has support for the idea from at least a couple of his colleagtaes. "I don't want to spend the mon- ey just because we have it," Dtvyer says. "I twould rather save it for the lime twe don't have ii. I think that's prudent.,, Next, the federal bill will give Lane County a probable increase of $5.4 million in guaranteed funding that replaces annual timber receipts from logging on national forest land within the county's border. That money must be used far road projects and road maintenance throughout the comtty. But the actual amount that goes to the county's road fund is depen- dent ott how the 2001 Legislature decides to divide U.S. Forest Ser vice payments between county gov ernments and the state's Common School Fund. Congress requires that the mon- ey be split, but leaves it up to htdi- vidual states to decide how much should go to counties and holy much to schools. The sharing in Oregon has traditionally been- 55 percent to county road funds and 2ii percent to schools, but scale mem- bers of Congress have sent letters urging Oregon legislators to alter the fot•mula. "That's another reason for us not to run around hatching chicks before the eggs are actually laid," Sorenson says. Forest project money And now the come to the tricky stuff. The guaranteed federal pay-' ntents derived from bath nationa] ' forest and 0&C Railroad land eacit ' include incentives for camtties to reinvest in the federal land within their borders. And the guidelines . allow a fair amount of discretion over how to spend the so-called' "project money," and holy much of ii to spend. Using Lane County's 0&C t.,ay-' went as an example, the total amount available to the comity in 2001 will be $1G.4 million - up tlrom the current $9.II million. 'l'ilt; Recisr+:r GuAitu • SUNDAY, OCC013LIt 29, 2000 The comtty first must decide whether to a-ithhold 15 percent ar 'l0 percent of the total for use as project money -the obvious pref- ei•ence being 15 percent to leave a .larger balance for the county's gen- eralfund. Then counh~ commissioners must. choose whether to allocate the project money themselves or leave approval. of spending proposals to a "Resource Advisory Committee" made ttp of representatives of labor. recreational groups; the timber in• dustry, envirountental organi~a- fionsand public officials. if the conunittee option is cho~ sea, veto power goes to the L'.S. secretary of interior - or, for na- tional forest project money, the sec- retary ofagriculture. "The idea is to make sure the resource (timber) is going to be there. and mane sure u-c're not go- ing to lose it," says Commissioner Anna ,1-lorrison, u~ho aclatou~ledges the practicality of allocating the money in-house but also sees value in a collaborative process. She also points out that federal adminisu'ators will be monitoring how counties spend the project money, even if the county govern- ments choose the projects them- sehres, and could be in a position to block an extension to the l.~ayments ta~hen they expire iu 2000 if counties abuse their discretion. "'the question could still be asked -are }you pushing the cave' lope; or are you going beyond the bounds of how that money can be spent?" itiIorrison says. Assuming the county decides to malie its clan project spending deci• lions; the federal legislation lays out six categories far which the munev can be authori•red: search, rescue and emergency services; community service work comps; easement I~nschtscs; forest-related educational oppottmtities, fire prc- ventinn and county plantthtg: and convnunit7 forestry. More generally, the legislation slates that project money should be used for "protection, restoration ~tnd enhancement ot• fish and wild- life habitat, and other resource ob~ jectives ... on federal laud and on nonfederal land a-here projects would benefit the resources on fed- eral land.'', If' conunissirn,ers choose the 15 percent option far prnjeci money front the 0&C payment and 'LO per- rent from the Forest Service pay- ment -which would keep more money under county control rather than state control -the board of connnissioners could divvy up al- most $8.8 million in forest project money next year. NlaiEing iIStS So county oftcials could be LANE COUt~i'Y FEDERAL FUNDING 15A Federal #undirg for LaneCounty government would increase substantially under legislation approved by Congress and awaiting .President Clinton's signature on Tuesday. The-fiscal-year 2001 funding would vary depending on the percentage of money allocated to ' "forest-related" projects: ~ 2000 payments ' For former Oregon & California Railroad land: $9.82 million .For U.S. Forest Service and: $14.88 million ®Tota12000payments ' $24:7 million ~ 2001 base payments For 0&C land: $13:12million to $13.94 million For Forest Service land: $18.95 million to $20.14 million u 2001 payments for "forest-related",projects For 0&C land` $2:46 million to $3.28 million for Forest Service land: $4.74'million to $6.32 million ~ Combined funding increases for 2001 For 0&C land: $5.75 million fo $7.39 million For Forest Service Iantl: ~10.f7 million to $13.32 million it Total 2001 increase $15.92 million to $20.71 million -Lane County govemmenl cre~tlve, bath in using the project maite~~ and in reducin; the amount of ahe property tax levy to be col- lected - if voters approve it. "My preference urould be to h•}~ to back-till as mach of the levy as tae can, so we don't 3;ave to levy it," Dtayer says. For instance, operation of the Forest Vt~ork Camp at its full capaci- ty of 120 inmates is budgeted.af$2.5 million in the levy proposal. County officials say the federal- project money should cover at least the portion af• the camp's operation that relates to work on fedet°al land, and inmate crews have in the past perforated about 70 percent of their work there -everything from trail utaiuteuance to creathtg fish habi- tat to fire(ighiing. Covering 70 per' cent: of the urorlc camp budget with project money would whittle $L7 million frmn the property tax levy. `l'he sheriffs search and rescue program isn't among the operations that would be funded by the levy, but if some or all of the progt•ant's $293,833 annual budget could be coy erect by the forest project money, funds could be freed up far other levy-supported or general fund uses. Sheriff Jan Clements says an ar- guotentcould even be made for pay' ing a portion of existing or en- hanced rm•al patrols from the pool. of forest project money. A substan- tial amount oP his patrol deputies' time is spent on roads that pass through or rwt adjacent to federal forests, he says, and many of the area's methantphetamine produa tiou and marijuana growing opera- tions are located on federal forest land. "It .would be nice if that qualified, and if everyone saw it my way in terms of the priorities," Clements says. "But I think maybe there are more questions than an- swers at this point." The line forming fm• portions of the project money goes beyond the sheriffls office. Jahn Cole, manager of the coun- ty's land management program, says his department is designed to run almost entirely iltdependent of the general fund, relying instead on user fees for planning services and building permits. But Cole says lmtg•range plan' Wing =which costs about $300,000 per year -may be more ptroperlp paid from a fund that isn't cmutect- ed to the developers it is intended to regulate. °I5n starting to-,get asked ques• tions that get at Clint point, from members of the public,"-he says, "So I'm getting ready to make a pitch to the comtty connnissioners that they should fund longiange planning activities out of general. ftutd revenues. "I'll be kind of taking my place in line and submitting my request at the proper dine," he says. The connnissioners are antici- atin~ tent ~ of su r restions and P c P } ~~ .even formal requests for use of the money by the time they open things up at the December public hearing. The time and place of the hearing have yet to be set. "I think we just have to remenr bey, this begins asix-year process to show that this money was used correctly," Sorenson says, "and that we are entitled to the future use of it." The negister-Guard Inmates are supervised at the cpuuty's Foresfl~'ork Camp, a likely beneficiary of a property tax levy.