HomeMy WebLinkAboutM041482April 14, 1982
8 2-
688
RECONVENE: The Board of Supervis.ors.reconvened at .10 :0-Q.a,m. pursuant to
recess.' Present: Supervis-ors Eultonr hlpseley~ Saraceni and
Cfiairman.Wheeler. Mike Pyeatt, nteruy ~dmi~istrative officers
Jim Johansen, auditor, and Clark A. Nelson, county clerk, by
Cathy Pitts, assistant clerk to the Board. Absent; Supervisor
Dolan.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONSIDERATION OF DEPARTMENT PROPOSED BUDGETS
The Board of Supervisors consideration of department proposed
budgets was held at this time.
Mike Pyeatt, interim administrative officer, set out the background
of where the county is with the advent of Proposition 4 and 13 and SB 154
and the effect on local government. All the counties are faced with
serious financial problems, and are facing shortfalls of from $1/2 million
to $6 million. The shortfall of $6i,million is for a much larger budget
than Butte County's budget. One of the more important aspects to look at
is evaluating of services between naw and the first of the year to pare down
the budget. A packet has been submitted to the Board. There is $12.6 million
in discretionary funding in-the four budget units: Sheriff, Fire, Library and
Public Works budgets. There are approximately $5-1/2 million in recommendations
set forth by their department for these budgets. Their department tried to
identify programs that were not mandated or less severly mandated.
.SHERIFF'S BUDGET
Mr. Pyeatt stated they did not address any major recommendations in
the jail, which is a constitutional and legal mandate placed on the Sheriff.
They did provide the Board with information on all budget units by the
responsible official and the discretionary funds available for funding the
operations.
SUPERVISOR DOLAN PRESENT AT THIS TIA~
Sheriff Gillick stated his department was here to work with the
Board and not.to challenge the Board because they knew of the critical
problems facing the county. He received this information on Friday and has
not had an opportunity to completely review the recommendations presented by
the Administrative Office. Their office did hold some sessions on this matter.
The recommended reductions in the office total around 32 personnel in all.
To implement the recommendations, it would take a complete reorganization of
the Sheriff's Department to put the recommendations into effect. He would
like to meet with two of the Supervisors, Administration and his staff before
April 21, 1982 to discuss the recommendations.
Supervisor Fulton and Chairman Wheeler appointed to meet with the
Sheriff's Department for review of their budget.
Supervisor Fulton questioned the unincorporated population information
submitted in the April 7, 1982 memo from the Administrative Office. In one
place the population figure is 5,866,158 and the other is 6,912,432.
as 1t exists for E1 Dora o ounty.
Mr. Pyeatt advised the figures had to do with the source documents
quoted from. He hoped the Board did not use these figures as absolutes. Ire
budgeting throughout the state, many of the programs included under police
protection are not the same programs as included in police protection in Butte
County. He did not feel they could apply a per capita cost for Butte County
d C ''
Cerald Lively, deputy administrative officer, stated they tried to
demonstrate that using comparisons between counties could have discrepencies
in the figures. The source for the information was from the State Controller's.
Office. In some cases the jail and jail improvements are listed as police
protection and in some counties it is not listed.
_ Page 418.
April 14, 1982
8 2-
~'
April 14, 1982
Captain Mick Grey submitted a revised schedule at this time. He
had done some work on the chart made up by the Administrative Office. He
isolated the charges for police protection and not for incarceration. The
jail budget for the county distorts the per capita cost. The revised 'figure
for enforcement is toward the bottom of the chart at about $57 per capita.
Supervisor k'ulton questioned by what-mechanism the Sheriff went
from 113 personnel in 19.79-80 to 144 personnel in 1980-81, given that
Paradise was incorporated and now has 23 police officers.
Mr. Pyeatt advised that staff was not reduced on the incorporation
of Paradise. There were approximately 15 deputies and 12 in the jail added.
They transferred the majorify of the constables from individual budget
units into the Sheriff's budget. Hughes~Heiss in their study indicated
the staffing pattern, location and post stations for the jail. The study
was completed a little over one year ago. Staffing is appropriate according
to the study.
The Sheriff's budget continued until April 21, 1982.
ADDITIONAL MATTER PRESENTED BY SUPERVISOR SARACENI DEALING WITH ENTTRE BUDGET
Supervisor Saraceni read a memo relative to the entire budget
dealing with equity in taxes and services.
Chairman Wheeler stated the suggestions were well taken. She
suggested that this memo be added to the file and considered as part of
Supervisor Saraceni's proposal to the overall economic stability plan.
There are areas that should be researched.
Supervisor Saraceni felt that some of the issues were effecting
the county's ability to pay for the services. He felt the Board should
immediately get into rectifying the city=county inequities so they could
pick up the increased costs relating to the overall county services that
the unincorporated county people are paying for.
RECESS: 10.:35 a.m.
RECONVENE: 10:52 a.m.
PUBLIC WORKS BUDGET
Mr. Pyeatt stated the Board had received an update on the Public
Works budget from their office. The funds from SB 215 will not be forthcoming.
There will be an impact on tf-e Public Works budget relative to discretionary
funds.
Jim Johansen, auditor, set out the background of the SB 215 funds.
He referred to the budget and the memo of April 7, 1982 on page 3 regarding
Public Works budget.on the road budget. Their office missed the fact that
the $330,000 of SB 215 money was included in the $1-1/2 million. They
projected the revenue for SB 215 on top of that amount. The state included
the $330,000 in the restricted funding so there will be $330,000 less in
discretionary revenue required to fund the total Public Works budget.
Clay Castleberry, public works director, stated that the 5B 215
money was for state highway purposes. This is SB 215 money for county
funding.
Mr. Pyeatt stated that basically the restricted revenue instead
of being the $4.g million figure indicated on page 3 is actually $4.6 million.
Looking at the overall Public Works budget there would be an additional
$330,000 in additional discretionary revenue needed from some source to
fund the entire budget. In the Apraa 7, 1982 memo there is a. summary
Page 419.
April 14, 1982
8 2'-
b
_ _ Apri_114_, 1982 __ ______
a = _ _ _ _ ~ - - - _ _ - ~ - _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ ~ _ - - - - - - - - -
explanation for eacYt^of the sub-budgets within the PublicWorks Department.
Tn the decision package they have discussed three alternatives. Decision
No. 1 would he if the Board decided to fully fund the General Fund money
needed, the general consequences is that upwards of $2 million in county
services will need to be reduced or eliminated. Decision No. 2 is that
if the Board funds equal to projected reveliue it will be necessary to
delete projected and planned road projects within the road project budget
as set out in appendix 2. Decision No. 3 would mean the Board would fund
some, but not all, of the road projects out of general revenue.
He asked that the Board not only consider if the Board was to just
fund the budget out of total restricted revenue or using some discretionary
revenue but also to review each road project on an individual basis and to
prioritize them. He did not think there was' any FAS or FAU funds involved
in the projects.
Steve Musselman, administrative analyst, responded there was
$317,000 of FAS funds and also some for an HCD project.
Mr. Pyeatt advised there were no specific recommendations relative
to this budget. The Board in the past authorized or not authorized specific
road projects on recommendation of the Public Works Director. Once'ahe Board
address and sats,.the;.amount of money for road maintenance program, they can
consider the road construction program. The recommendations in the decision
package could be a mix of both construction and maintenance programs. Under
decision No. 2 there would be reductions in, the road projects within the
Mr. Musselman set out appendix No. 2 at this time. He recommended
that the Board considered other and SB 325 revenue as discretionary revenue.
The Board could then use the SB 325 and restructed revenue for construction
or maintenance.
Mr. Pyeatt advised there would also have to be an amendment
through BCAG for any projects deleted or reduced.
Mr. Castleberry spoke to the budget at this time. He understood
the Board's concerns and the concerns of the county. He did not feel they
could fund all the projects due to the present fiscal condition of the
county. He hoped the Board was serious with the other departments as far
as reductions.--:His department was anxious to help. During the Paradise
incorporation, Public Works reduced their staff by eight employees. They
further recommended the reduction of three or four employees this year.
Before adoption of the final budget, he will be recommending reduction of
four to eight additional employees. They will be proposing less construction
and therefore, less engineering staff. There are eight or ten positions
vacant and at least five or six could be reduced. That will amount to
approximately $100,000 reduction in cost. The budget submitted is a bare
budget. He hoped the Board would also do this with the other departments.
He would like the Board to tell him what to plan on as far as discretionary
funding, one-half or one-third, and he could bring a budget back to the
Board for consideration. He hoped to give the county the best mix of
construction and maintenance for the money. He hoped the Board would
allow for some use of discretionary funding for roads. The engineering
staff will be down 45 percent. He hoped to bring back the best budget
he could based on the policy statement that tells him the level of service
the Board wants.
He has proposed blowing snow on the main roads only. He sent
an Attorney General's opinion to Supervisor T~heeler and County Counsel
relative to the fact that county service areas can he formed for snowplowing.
Page 420.
April' 14, 1982
B 2-
3''
April 14, 1982 _
He felt the department had saved money by prudent management. The SB 325 funds
are not discretigna~'y and have-to be used fox transporY.ation. The money is
discretionary only within their department. Their present budget is being
operated with the budget that was given to them: He could help some as far
as cutting back. ten percent for the next two months. He would feel extremely
bad because they have operated prudently. They have held off purchasing of
spring material for repairs. He hoped the. Board would not reduce their budget
by ten percent over the remainder o~ the budget year.
Supervisor Saraceni asked if the Public Works Director would help
if the county in looking for ways to come ug with a carry over asked for
ten percent from each department?
Mr. Castleberry stated they certainly would Help but the carryover
for their department will be more than the ten percent, than anticipated,
and that will help to fund the budget for next year. He will be bringing
the postponement of a $60,000 item to the Board next week,. They have to
do some things since they were cited by OSHA for violations. He is
proposing to purchase the maintaiaace material to patch up the roads.
Mr. Pyeatt felt there were a couple of issues to discuss. He knew
Public Works had some regular maintenance activities. He felt the Board might
want to address the approval of the $177,000 chip and seal during budget
session. There are also materials for on-going maintenance and not chip
and seal. -1
Mr. Castleberry advised that something should be placed on the
roads for repair. He is willing to postone some-gAajor equipment purchases
in the amount of $80,000 to $90,000 worth. He did not want the Board to
postpone items that go directly on the road to hold them. He has saved
to purchase the material this spring and if he found he was being penalized
on the pruchase of the material he would feel badly. He has ten positions
which are vacant which is another $50,000, $60,000 or $80,000.
Mr. Pyeatt suggested that he would like to discuss the budget
with Mr. Castleberry as to the funding for the department to try to identify
discretionary funds and the other aspects having to do with this information.
The Board would have to instruct Mr. Castleberry how much they want in his
budget for the information to be provided to the Board.
Chairman Wheeler stated that the roads on the East Coast are in
very bad condition and that is why the federal money is being spent in
that area. She had friends visit from the East who felt that the road
systems in this area were tremendous.
Supervisor Saraceni noted the letters that had been ,sent in the
past thanking the Public Works Department for the good work.
Mr. Castleberry knew the public relations came as a result of his
employees. He would be willing to meet wlth.the Administrative Office on
his budget. He hoped they could allow him enough:to provide a good program.
He would be willing to revised the program for the Board's consideration.
Supervisor Dolan questioned priorities two and three. Under
priority two they would decide to fund the program only with restricted
revenue and under priority three there would be some level of discretionary
revenue. She looked at the 3anuary 15, 1982 final projection for road
construction at $2 million which was the same as last year: Was that
figure including discretionary money? Does alternate two effect that money?
Page 4210
April 14, 1982
8 2-
~',
aa=_=a====== A~zi114~ 1~8~=a=c==e======____
Mr. ,Johansen stated that given-the figures to fund $3.4 million,
that total budget would require $2.7 milli~on~nd looking at the budget in
terms of whatever the Board proposes with. the budget. Whatever the Board
takes from the $3.4 million will come off the $7 3/4 million deficit.
Supervisor Saraceni asked i:f the budget was above or below what
last year's budget was depending on the alternative that would be used for
a comparison. .
•'Mr. Castleberry stated the road maintenance was lower. If they
did not have.-anyJCOnstruction, they would probably make adjustments in the
maintenance at a later date.
Mr. Johansen stated the overall budget was more than proposed
Faith the increase of the two percent in salary increases. Considering
discretionary funding the figure is more for the proposed Budget than
last year's budget. The motor vehicle in-lieu is $l.b million this year
and was $2.7 million last year.
Mr. Castleberry advised they budgeted the full amount figuring
on a miracle and he knew the entire budget could not be done. He would
like for the Board to direct him to bring back a budget setting out the
amount of in-lieu funds that he would be allowed to use for the preparation
of that budget, hopefully 20 or 30 percent 'of the motor vehicle in-lieu funds.
He would be willing to put the road projects in priority form.
Chairman Wheeler suggested that each Board member be given an
opportunity to review the information that has been presented. The
suggestions and proposals for the Public Works Department will be taken
under submission. She hoped each Board member would meet with Mr.
Castleberry to discuss this budget.
Discussion of the amount of motor vehicle in-lieu split for the
department held at this time. In the past the .amount has been about
60 - 40 percent and now is about 30 percent using $900,000 for Public Works
from the $2-1/2 million received. For years Public Works Department
received 100 percent of the motor vehicle in-lieu funding.
The matter was continued to April 21, 1982 at 1:30 p,m.
DISCUSSION OF SETTING AMOUNT FOR EACH BUDGET AND REQUIRING DEPARTMENTS
TO COME UP WITH BUDGET WITHIN THAT FIGURE
Supervisor Fulton stated he did not .feel comfortable in
picking the budgets apart piece by piece ,when the department heads spent
years learning the departments. There should be a certain amount of money
alloted to certain departments and the department heads should come in with
a budget that meets that figure.
Chairman Wheeler stated that was what the Board had been asking
for. The budgets when they come forward to the Board do not came with
a specific figure.
Supervisor Saraceni stated that was why he was suggesting a bench
mark of last year so the Board would know what they had to do.
Mr. Pyeatt advised that there is restricted money in Public
Works that cannot be used in other departments but have to be used for road
purposes. He felt Mr. Castleberry could establish priorities within his
department and the Board could evaluate that information. Theix office
could run a percentage of what was allotted last year and apply a cost
of living to that figure.
Page 422.
April 14, 1882
82-
b
A~r~.114, 1982 __ _ _______
Supervisox f'ulton did not knots as much. about each department
as the department heads knew. -He knew how much the Board could .give each
department to spend. He felt it was the Board's job to determine how
much each. department would receive and then the department heads could
establish abudget-within that amount. If the department heads needed some
consultation with the Board that would be fine. He discussed the percentage
applied to each department budget in order to evaluate discretionary money
with the.~A,uditor. He had asked the Auditor to substantiate, quantify or
modulate those figures. That would give an equitable way for allotting
the money that is available. He felt the Board was doing the department
heads' jobs and doing it badly.
Supervisor Saraceni felt there ware points that might have to
be looked at by the Board relative to the numbers of how many were in the
department versus how much was expended. It was true the department head
should realize what they do. He felt the Board's job was to relate the
funds available with what is in the budget and it would be their job to
put together a department with priorities to do the job the best they can.
That was the cooperation they were asking for.
Supervisor Dolan felt the Board was missing a piece of information.
It-was alluded to. She questioned the amount of money. The Board does not
give the amount of money to be reduced but they do have the figure of
$7-3/4 million. If this were across the Board some departments could come
in with zero to help them out.
Chairman Wheeler stated that in the past when this discussion
has been held, staff has come back with the response that they cannot give
a figure because of the mandated programs and legal restraints. There is
one area of discretionary funding, which is Welfare, with $2 million. If
they reduce by a certain amount of money, then the state cuts off the
subvention funding.
Supervisor yulton understood the state subvention funding. The
Auditor, Administrative Office and the Board are°aware of that fact. That
is what the chart would do. If they could get a quantification, they could
apply a reasonable figure to the departments. He felt that would be more
productive than the way the Board is handling the budgets at this time.
They probably would not be able to do anything about the Welfare budget.
He knew where the cuts would come and the Board has to establish a figure.
He felt it might be profitable to ask the Administrative Office and the
Auditor's Office to try to develop departmental figures for the total budgets.
Supervisor Dolan felt the Board would also have to have a
quantification of what percentage of the budget would be allocated for
what type of service. She questioned whether they could use and work with
the figure of available revenue and a percentage of that available revenue
will be allocated. There are two known figures. The Board knows the
levels of services, the budgets the Board can control and those they
cannot control. If the Board knew that over a course of years, there
was ten percent of general government, they could develop a figure within
that ten percent of the avai1a61e revenue. It is the Board's responsibility
also.
Supervisor Moseley felt they had to start working on this now
because there is not much time. At the beginning of the year, the Board
discussed this same thing. Mandates do not make things easier.
Mr. Johansen stated he would be working on coming back to the
Board next week with some figures.'
Page 423.
April' 14, 1982
B 2-
a
_~_-_______= A~ril_14,~982 =__-_____----_____-
Chairman Wheeler stated that if _the county had a financial management
system implemented it would not take one week but one day to come up with the
figures. Thep have staff looking now at the possibilit~r of implementing that.
If this were done now, was .the suggestion that staff take the grojections.•-
and send them to each administrator for review with. them and instead of the
Board continuing to review the individual budgets not to review them until.
reanalysis of the budgets.
Supervisor Fulton stated he had no plan in respect to the budgets.
The Board might want to stop the current process until after the figures
have been received. He felt the Board was really doing the work of the
department heads with the process that is nova-being done. ,
Supervisor -olan did not want to suspend the pxocess for having
the Board involved in developing the proposed budget-. This is a good process.
She felt they Board was doing the only thing they are able to do because they
have not quantified and come up with a figure. They have not dealt with the
amount of money they want to, allocate to the departments. The Sheriff has
said he will meet withJthe committee and come back. Public Works-has said
they will come back and work with the Board if they are given the figure to
do so. If the Board does not have the figure to present to the departments,
they have no recourse but to become involved in the process.
Supervisor Fulton felt this was the process of taking testimony
,N, of the concerns of the department heads, employees and public. He did not
think they should be expected to approve any budget until there are some
guidelines.
Chairman Wheeler advised that prior to the adoption of Proposition 13,
the administrative heads were told to put together a budget they deemed nec-
essary to provide services for running of general government and if there was
not enough.money then the tax rate was set accordingly. The legislative
bodies had the ability to legislate those tax increases where they do not
have the ability now.
Supervisor Fulton saw Proposition 13 as a directive to the Board
that the people would give them a figure and the Board is to bring government
within the figure. He felt the Board should turn around and give that figure
to the department heads and tell them to bring the Board a budget with a
set figure amount. It seemed to him that Proposition 13 simplified things.
Supervisor Saraceni stated that one of the things he had been trying
to implement and spoke to this at the end of last year's budget session was
the putting together of a task force. This is the key to putting together
what they are looking for. He felt the task force should.be an intrical
part of the process in ox der to work with the Auditor and staff.
Supervisor Fulton saw the task force as a more intermediate range
to use. The Board cannot go out and put together a committee of private
individuals and expect them to know as much as the Board knows about this
matter. He felt the task force would be a long range tool. He felt they
could get input from the public element.
Supervisor Saraceni stated that many of the suggestions he is putting
together are coming from an overall task force. This is input from the
people in the county. The Board should not neglect the fact there are
experienced people who can give their time to help. They could work along
with the Board to give them an alternative in how spendings will be equalled.
He felt this was a resource that could be used. This would give people in
..the county a voice in the government. His appointment would be ready to
go to work.
Page 424.
April 14, 1982
8 2-
April 14, 1982
Chairman Wheeler stated that the plan presented last week was
part of the total future plan.- The citizens' group. would help with redesigning
of the situation the Board is dealing with today.- They-could not possibly
calk in tomorrow. They are working with staff to quantify the entire proposal.
She asked each Board member to jot down each of their thoughts and review
the plan and submit comments to staff to formalize-the proposal.
RECESS: 12:04 p.m.
RECONVENE: 1:30 p.m.
RECESS: 1:31 p.m.
RECONVENE: 1:45 p.m.
FIRE DEPARTMENT BUDGET
Mr. Pyeatt advised they had sent the Board a memo dated April 5,
1982 relative to the Fire Department budget. Butte County contracts with
Califarnia Department of Forestry for the Fire Department and fund the
volunteer fire department through another budget. unit. The regular fire
protection is covered in the Schedule A contract with Schedule C covering
the operating expenses for the fire budget. This department is total
discretionary funding. There are no mandates. This is a valuable service,
not only what':'the'"state provides, but what is supplemented by the volunteer
fire departments. He set out the recommendations as far as reductions are
concerned at this time. These reductions would place a real burden on the
volunteer fire companies. The Board might want to consider some other
alternative to explore to perhaps alleviate the situation, particularly
during working hours.
Bill Teie, fire warden, presented the Board with a handout
relative to station and volunteer company activities, authorized strengths
with positions funded by the county, departmental organization and which
positions are funded by county and which are funded by state, how the
stations are staffed, the areas of responsibility and station location,
value of the fulltime person, where the county dollars are spent, where
is the fat in the department, and population protected by station. With
the reduction in service, the insturance rates will increase for the property
owners and he would estimate the cost to the individual house would be
approximately $50 to $100 .for a good average. If the Board would give him
a money amount, he will provide the best service for the money available.
Fire Department budget taken under submission to be brought
back for reconsideration on April 21, 1982 at 1:30 p.m.
RECESS: 2:02 p.m.
RECONVENE: 2:14 p.m.
LIBRARY BUDGET
Mrr Pyeatt stated the recommendations call for a reduction in
the size of the Library budget by 25 percent from $1.2 million to a little
over $319,000. He summarized the effect on services the reduction would
create. There would be the closure of the Durham and Biggs Libraries. The
building .in Durham would be sold and the building in Biggs is owned by the
city. The bookmobile will be eliminated and the hours in the branch libraries
would be reduced. There would he a reduction in the appropriations for
purchase of books. This service is 100 percent funded by discretionary funds.
Jo.Terxy, librarian, stated that public libraries were unique. The
Administrative Office was vexy thorough. in their job relative to the recommen-
dations. She did not agree with many of the ideas. What she presented in
her decision packages was not to hit at an amount of money but to present
different alternatives for different types of services. One of the options
was that if the Durham and Big~s Libraries were closed that the bookmobile
age 425.
April 14, 1982
April 14, 1982
8:
a
be allowed to service the areas. She set out the ipeigo she had submitted
to the Board relative to the Library service since `1968. She also set out
the nine-month circulation statistics. If the proposal is to send all the
people from the outlying areas into the four major outlets, this will strain
the program even more. It will he very difficult to provide any kind of
services. She understood the need for reducing the costs. She wanted to
cooperate. They will have a very difficult time even with the volunteer
staff. The extra help is very important due to the smaller branches. Her
proposal is five-day per week service with varied hours. The advantage of
having uniform hours for all libraries is sa that the outlying areas can
call the headquarters library when needed. .
Supervisor Saraceni commented on the library located in Feather
Falls and the fact that the library is fully paid for with regard to lights
and gas by Louisiana Pacific. There is no paid staff located at the library
now.
Ms. Terry dd~not feel there could be a comparison in the level
of professional service between Oroville and Feather Falls. In some of the
smaller communities this same type of thing could be done. That is why the
bookmobile has been so valuable. It provided a good level of service to
the small communities. Her office would only be able to handle a volunteer
program on a limited basis. They do hold orientations for people wanting
to volunteer their time.
i"~.
When they move into the new building in Chico both the branch
libraries in Chico will be closed. By closing the two libraries and
moving into the new libraries, this will make for a more efficiently run
operation in Chico. They are not able to charge fees for libraries. They
can charge fines and postage.
Supervisor Saraceni questioned whether they could draw on
funds to support the libraries from the community such as is done with the
educational television stations. He would donate his time to help with
something of this type. There could be an auction to bring infunds to
help support the libraries with funding.
Ms. Terry advised there were Frieds of the Library in Chico and
Paradise and a citizens group in Gridley who do help support the libraries.
She hoped the county would not exclude people who could not afford the
services of the libraries and that the fees if any would be on a voluntary
basis.
Chairman Wheeler commented on the furnishings and landscaping
for the Chico and Gridley Libraries. There has been several comments
that there will be libraries closed so they can furnish other libraries.
She did not like those comments and did not want one library being used as
an excuse for closing another library. The Board has received donations
to pay for the landscaping. She has received calls from interested citizens
who are going to put the money up to Help support the purchase of they
furnishings and interested in being active participants in the landscaping.
The community of Chico is very generous as it pertains to the buildings in
that area and they are willing and doing their share and contributing.
Ms. Terry advised that the building in Durham was built with
federal revenue money. If the library is closed and sold, they are going
to need to build another one that will take much more money than was paid
for the current building. She felt the closure and selling of the Durham
building should be removed from the recommendations.
page 426.
April' 14, 1982
', April 14, 1482 _ _ _ _ _ _ _
82- Jan Holman, Durham, spoke regarding the Durham Library. The citizens
v' of Durham are concerned about the loss of their library and also, recognize
the lack of Funds the county is dealing with-. Durham .receives littile in
the way of direct services .from the county. She-felt the closure of the
;; smaller libraries will leave all libraries. in the cities and none in the
', county areas. If there is not enough money to go around, she offered the
proposal that the county consider working with. the school district for
library services, and possibly run the school and public library as one.
This would cut down on the hours needed by the county to maintain the library.
She felt this could hopefully reduce duplicate services at no increased costs.
', She set out the history of the Durham Library at this time.
Staff was directed to look into the possibility of working with
school district in Durham with regard to the library.
ON TO REDUCE REMAINING FUNDS FROM CURRENT BUDGET IN ALL DEPARTMENTS
It was moved by Supervisor Saraceni, seconded by Supervisor Moseley
a ten percent reduction in all departments of the funds that are
fining in all departments take effect immediately to create a carryover
next year.
Chairman GTheeler thought that was iehat the Board had been doing.
y have done away with some positions and frozen hiring, restricted usage
vehicles and frozen equipment purchases. She thought this had been
cussed in the Bast.
Mr. Johansen advised that the mechanics for putting this into
motion would be complex. They could take the budget statement as of March 31,
1982 to determine how much is left in the budget and could take ten percent
of that. How-the department head would effect that savings of ten percent,
particularly in salary savings, would be hard to do.
Jim Rackerby, personnel director, advised that if the Board were
to make a short term reduction in staff by ten percent, there would be a
lay off of people and those people would go down and collect their unemployment.
The people would be paid for vacation and sick leave. The~_ people may or may
not be rehired. The cost of that would have to be looked at department by
department. There could be a situation in a small department where the layoff
would cost more because of the buyout of benefits and subsequent reinstatements.
Supervisor Saraceni stated he was talking about ten percent of
what was left in the budgets and not ten percent of the total budget as app~wed.
It might be travel or other ways of savings that could be made to make up that
ten percent. The department head would then be furnishing two months in
this year with ten percent less than what they had figured they had.
Supervisor Dolan did not want to vote on the motion as a blanket
motion for all departments when they might be jeopardizing federal or state
subvention funds or lay offs. She felt the motion should reflect where ever
possible the ten percent reduction should be made. She did not feel they
should lay off people now and then rehire them in July. There is a freeze
on hiring and there will be no more hiring except where necessary. They
have frozen everything else. Maybe the Board has instituted a ten percent
savings with the actions previously taken.
Supervisor Saraceni stated the intent of the motion was to say
to the department head that in looking at .the budget there is so much money
to work with and if the Board cannot direct the departments to save ten
percent of the amount that is left, then they will not be able to get
thxough the process for adoption of the budget. They should try to
bring in a carryover. There may:be some ways to cut down without taking
people from the department. Page 427,
Agri:1~14, 1982
82-
b
*~~
_ _ _Ap_ril 14, 1982
Supervisor Fulton suggested that the motion be amended to include
that if the ten percent reduction would endanger some kind of funding, then
it could not take place but otherwise the ten percent reduction would take
place within the department.
Time spent discussing whether this ten percent reduction would
effect any of the subvention funds. Mr. Johansen advised that it could
in the areas of Welfare and Mental Health.
Mr. Rackerby set out the vacancy factor on positions, which is
88.75 fulltime positions or eight percent of the total allocated positions
from past year. Many have been vacant since the first of the year.
Motion amended to reflect that if there will be an effect on monies
coming into the county, the budgets would be adjusted for that amount..
Discussion of possible increased costs due to the buyout of
benefits for employees held at this time. Supervisor Saraceni did not
feel that the situation would be any different in two months than it was
at this point. If they did not reduce now, there could be further reductions
in July.
Mr. Pyeatt felt that with the implementation of this motion, it
might have a tendency to penalize the departments who are holding the line
already. If a department has been managing their department and are now
asked to put ten percent on top of that,.it would be a double amount.
Supervisor Fulton stated they could list anyone who'had not done
so. There are a great number of departments where money is not expended
which goes in and that becomes the fund balance for funding next year's
budget. He felt that the departments who overexpended their budget
every year could be set out in a list.
Mr. Johansen stated there was a monthly budget statement produced
every month. That is available every month. Three fourths of the year has
gone by. There are some dangers. Public Works is coming into a heavy
season and have saved for that purpose. The Board could take the March
statement, with three fourths of the year gone.by, and whatever that
portion of the budget was, they could look at the unencumbered budget and
tell the departments not to spend ten percent of the unencumbered balance.
Ten percent of the budget could include salaries and benefits, which is
sometimes 40 - 90 percent of the budget. In order to get the full ten
percent a department could end up getting into salaries and benefits. Was
that the intent of the Board.
Supervisor Saraceni stated that in two months, when the Board
has to consider 80 percent, they will do the same thing. By taking this
action, the Board might not have to take the entire 30 percent in two
months because of the carryover. He was tr}ring to have some effect now with
this budget so the impact will not be quite as great next year..
Chairman Wheeler stated that by taking all recommendations
brought forward by staff would take the Board three fourths of the way to
the balancing of the budget.
Supervisor Dolan was sure that some of the department budgets
when looking at the monthly statement will show they have an expenditure
pattern of only spending 80 to 85 percent of the budget and savings 20 to
25 percent of the approved amount. There could be departments who have
expended 90 percent of their budget. If the Board directed that each budget
save ten percent of the remaining there wou13 be a difference in those budgets.
Page 428.
April 14, 1982
8'.
April 14, 1982
_ _ _ _ - _ _ ~ ~ ~ _ - _ _ _ _ _ = T = - _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ -
Ms. Terry advised there was a difference between the March 31,
1982 resume and the books they keep in their own office. They have a system
for emcumbered books. This type of thing ss' possible for other departments.
Supervisor Fulton suggested that the Board cons ider taking the
total figure for the approved budget for this. year and taking ten percent
of two twelfths. That would take care of the departments that have expended
a big portion of their .budget and those departments that have not. A vacant
position in May or June could be used as credit but not a vacant position
before that time.
Mr. Pyeatt asked how they were going to be able to control all
that. Perhaps this is placing a burden on the department heads to.` ';::.:.
ultimately-control the whole thing. Does their office prepare a budget
transfer and'pu11 the money away?. Perhaps what is being asked is for a
voluntary situation. They could explain the concern over the present level
of expenditures and ask the departments to make an effort to reduce ten
percent of the remaining two months of budget appropriations.
Chairman Wheeler felt that asking them to make~an effort was
not enough.
Supervisor Fulton suggested they could ask for a report at the
end of May to see where the five percent reduction was made.
Tony Gehringer, assessor's office, felt that generally there
is an impossible problem of measuring what is left. The Assessor's Office
has~only about five percent discretion over the budget because of the
budgeting for housekeeping etc. If they have to reduce ten percent of
the budget, they are into personnel.
Supervisor Saracens questioned Mr. Gehringer about the possibility
of asking the department in July to go back to last year's budget and
reducing it by twenty percent. He wanted to know what their office would
be facing.
Mr. Gehringer stated they would be faced with what the Board is
faced with in not providing mandated services due to their inability to
do so. There is a certain job their office has to perform.
Supervisor Saracens stated the Board had a job to do. This was
to prove a point that if they cannot take ten percent for two months, then
in two months they will be taking more and will be hearing the same thing
from departments.
Mr. Gehringer stated that over the years the department had never
made an effort to spend a great deal of money in the budget. If they had
the time to consider the matter fox a full year this could be handled better,
but to say do without ten percent of the budget for the last two months,
they are into personnel.
Supervisor Saracens stated it was business as usual. It will be
the same answer in two months as what the Board is hearing from departments
now. They will be further in debt and what ever has to be done, it will
mean more people in two months.
Supervisor Dolan asked-that Supervisor Saracens allow the Board•
to take credit for what they have done. Tt is not business as usual. They
have a freeze on hiring and fixed assets. She, saw some progress and something
happening. She wanted to work out enough. of the bugs, in the motion so the
Board is not told next month that the savings have not happened.
page 429.
April 14, 1982
April 14, 1982
82- Supervisor Saraceni felt they all suffered last year. What he
"F1 ' was trying to do was show the little things.. There have been changes in
wording but they have not accomplished a carryover, This motion would put
in place a hold over of ten percent for two months.
Chairman Wheeler felt the Board had done a great deal. The wheels
of reductions have been placed in motion by reducing the Board`s salary.
', She agreed with wfiat Supervisor Saraceni was saying. She talking about this
', last January.
Supervisor Saraceni felt there would have to be cuts all th e
way around. He would not vote to cut vital services, Sheriff 'arid Fire
', Departments, to the point of complete devastation. He wanted to see amounts
reduced all the way around.
Vote on motion:
AYES: Supervisors Dolan, Fulton, Moseley, Saraceni and Chairman
Wheeler
NOES: None '
Motion carried.
Mr. Rackerby assumed that the direction was to cut ten percent
out of the budget. He had a question on the federal funds for a pz"ogram,
since he administers that federal program.
Mr. Pyeatt advised that the motion reflected reduction unless
there was a danger of losing subvented funds.
Supervisor Moseley stated that this is a frugal county. She did
now know how many people had retired. From October of 1981 through March,
1982, they hired 54 people in the county. She knew that would balance out.
There are 88 current vacant positions and with the 56 hired, this shows a
balance.
1:30 p.m.
Mr. Rackerby advised that during that time, there were 122 vacancies.
The consideration of budgets was continued to April 21, 1982 at
ADJOURNMENT
There being nothing further before the Board at this time, the
meeting was adjourned at 3:32 p:m. to reconvene on Tuesday, April 20, 1982
at 9:00 a.m.
ATTEST: C1ARK A. NELSON, COUNTY CLERK;
RECORDER and ex-officio Clerk
of the Board of Supervisors
f/C/ /wvw
`rman, Board of Supervisors
By
Page 430.
April 14, 1982