Laserfiche WebLink
about establishing a ceiling for that bill and it was unlikely that he would sign the bill presented to him. He <br />expected that this would start to move very quickly given the time. <br /> <br />Commissioner Stewart reviewed the funding issue. He stated that the County was working on getting <br />funding reauthorized by the federal government. He stressed that at this point the only chance the County <br />had to get its budget back in order lay in the emergency supplemental bill for war funding. He asked County <br />Administrator Jeff Spartz to provide an update on the budget process. <br /> <br />Mr. Spartz reported that the current fiscal budget was funded at $540 million and the proposed budget for <br />next year would be $455 million. He stated that this was approximately an $85 million reduction, but $20 <br />million of this was a change in the way the State funded certain services. He said the effective impact to the <br />County budget was approximately $65 million, with the areas most severely affected being public safety and <br />human services. He listed some of the proposed cuts as: <br />? <br /> A substantial cut in the number of jail beds funded <br />? <br /> A reduction in staff and attorneys in the District Attorney’s (DA) office, which would reduce the <br />County’s ability to prosecute serious misdemeanors and a number of felonies <br />? <br /> A reduction in youth services, especially in secure beds and treatment programs <br />? <br /> A reduction in the methadone program <br />? <br /> A reduction in funding for the Buckley House <br />? <br /> A reduction of support for the Human Services Commission (HSC) <br />? <br /> Reductions in the Public Health Department, which will be running at the minimum allowed by <br />state law <br />? <br /> A reduction in veterans’ services <br />? <br /> Elimination of County extension services <br />? <br /> Elimination of funding for animal control services <br /> <br />He stated that this would provide a balanced budget for approximately three years but then the County <br />would face another round of cuts if it could not find additional funding for support services within this time. <br /> <br />Commissioner Stewart recommended that the Joint Elected Officials hold a conversation on short-term <br />remedies first, and then a discussion on long-term funding strategies. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sorenson said it was important to look at the General Fund budget reductions going forward <br />and to think about it as a shared responsibility. He observed that the City of Eugene had planned to transfer <br />$1.5 million from its capital budget to its road fund to address its backlog of maintenance and preservation <br />issues and Lane County had money in its Road Fund and needed General Fund monies. He suggested the <br />two jurisdictions discuss a funds “swap.” He also wondered if the City of Springfield would consider <br />engaging in this kind of a trade. He acknowledged that this would not solve the budget problems. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy noted that the City Council meeting from the previous evening had deliberated over its <br />direction to the Budget Committee. <br /> <br />Mr. Ruiz related that they had discussed several high priorities for the City of Eugene. He stated that <br />maintaining the Buckley House funding was a high priority, as was allocating some City budget funding to <br />the DA’s office and jail beds. He said animal control was a public health and safety concern. He noted that <br />they had also discussed adding four or five new police officers. He added that the City of Eugene was <br />concerned about equity; it did not want to be placed in the position of paying for services for another <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Joint Elected Officials— May 13, 2008 Page 3 <br /> Lane Board of County Commissioners and Eugene and Springfield City Councils <br /> <br />