HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem A - LC Pub. Safety Dist.EUGENE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Work Session: Discussion of Proposed Lane County Public Safety District
Meeting Date: September 15, 2004 Agenda Item Number: A
Department: City Manager's Office Staff Contact: Jim Carlson
www. cl. eugene, or. us Contact Telephone Number: 682-5524
ISSUE STATEMENT
Lane County officials will provide an update on recent conversations concerning a public safety special
district and how this proposal will affect the residents of Eugene. Presenters include Commissioner
Bobby Green, Sheriff Jan Clements, and David Garnick, representing County administration.
BACKGROUND
In recent years, Lane County has experienced a number of revenue shortfalls and resulting budget
reductions. However, throughout this time public safety demands have continued to grow, thus forcing
Lane County to seek ways to provide adequate funding. A broad based public safety property tax
measure was crafted by the Public Safety Coordinating Committee; Councilor Nathanson is the City of
Eugene representative to that body. A measure creating an income tax surcharge was also placed on the
ballot. Bond measures for additional jail capacity and an enhanced emergency system were placed on
the ballot as well. All of these were rejected by the voters in Lane County.
The Lane County Board of Commissioners first discussed this item on August 25, 2004. At the request
of Sheriff Clements, the commissioners were urged to proceed with Metro Plan amendments to clarify
and provide greater flexibility in service delivery in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. A board
order to that affect is attached (Attachment C).
RELATED CITY POLICIES
While this is a county-wide proposal, the issue relates to the council goal of a safe community. The City
of Eugene is a part of the larger criminal justice system in Lane County, when the county does not have
adequate resources to fund its portions of the criminal justice system, the entire system is less safe and
citizens are at a greater risk.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
None, this is set for discussion only. No decisions are requested.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
None.
L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040915\S040915A. doc
SUGGESTED MOTION
None.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Letter to Mayor Torrey and City Councilors from Commissioner Green
B. Agenda Cover Memo for August 25, 2004, Board of County Commissioners Meeting
C. Board order initiating Metro Plan amendments
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Jim Carlson
Telephone: 682-5524
Staff E-Mail: j ames.r.carlson~ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040915\S040915A. doc
ATTACHMENT A
Lane CoUnty, Board of Commissioners
Bill Dwyer
Bobby Green, Sr.
Don Hampton
Anna Morrison
Peter Sorenson
RECEIVED
tSY CITY MANAGER
September 1, 2004 ~EP 0 ~ 200~
wP bc/bg/04017/T
Honorable Mayor Jim Torrey and
City Council Members
City of Eugene
777 Pearl Street
Eugene, OR 97401
Re: Lane County Public Safety District
Dear Mayor Torrey and City Councilors:
Lane County government has struggled for more than a decade to obtain adeqUate funding for its
services, including public safety, which consumes more than 70 percent of the county's discretionary
general fund. We have been unable to avoid reductions to our shared system of public safety services
on nearly an annual basis.
The lack of adequate funding diminishes our capacity to impose appropriate sanctions on offenders
(fewer jail beds, less rigorous prosecution of crimes); dilutes the potency of supervision (too many
offenders per probation officer); and delays or eliminates tactics that can reduce repeat offenses
(alcohol, drag and sex offender prevention and treatment). In short, when we fail to provide adequate
capacity in the county elements of our shared public safety system, cities are less safe and more at risk.
To address the shortfall in resources, we have presented the issue to our citizens numerous times. We
have tried a broad based public safety property tax measure put together by our Public Safety
Coordinating Council (PSCC). We tried a similar measure as an income tax surcharge. We tried a
propertytax measure in a specific geographic area (McKenzie Valley) seeking approval for an enhanced
level of law enforcement. We have tried capital (bond) measures tc.. expand capacity at the jail, expand
the intake center and acquire a new emergency communication system. While a few of the measures
came close, they all failed.
Sheriff Jan Clements, finding the continuing decline in public safety services unacceptable, has
proposed the creation of a public safety district to be voted on at the November 2006 general election.
On August 25, 2004 we approved the initiation of that process which has four distinct steps. In the
Eugene-Springfield area, we need to amend the 'Metro Plan. We then need to apply and hopefully obtain
approval from the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission. In the Boundary
Commission process, we need to submit resolutions from the city councils of those cities that wish to
have the district apply within their city's incorporated limits. Finally, we need voter approval.
PUBLIC SERVICE BUILDING / 125 EAST 8TH AVENUE / EUGENE, OR 97401 / (541) 6824203 / FAX (541) 6824616
Page 2 -- Letter re: Lane County Public Safety District
WP bc/bg/04017/T
To help shape the district, we will involve the public and local government leaders. We started the
process on August 26, 2004 when we presented the concept of a public safety district to the PSCC. The
development of the district will now be a standing agenda item for the PSCC.
The purpose of this letter is twofold. First, we wanted to make sure as elected officials you were
informed about the district early. We share a mutual need to help maintain our communities' public
safety, we share the property tax general government $10 cap, and it is essential we collaborate for the
benefit of our citizens. Second, and equally important, we need your input. We are seeking your
thoughts on such issues as scope of services, boundary, governance, tax rate, etc.
To that end, the Sheriff, County Administrator and I are available to attend a city council meeting of
your convenience to discuss this matter and hear your comments. In addition, Zoe Gilstrap in our office
is just now scheduling our annual joint meetings, which could be suitable forums for such a discussion.
We look forward to working with you on this important matter.
Sincerely yours,
Bobby Green, Chair
Lane County Board of Commissioners
cc: City Manager Dennis Taylor
encl August 25, 2004 agenda packet
ATTACHMENT B
AGENDA COVER MEMO
DATE: August 25, 2004
TO: Lane County Board of Commissioners
DEPT.: Lane County Sheriff's Office
Lane County Administration
PRESENTED BY: Jan Clements, Russ Burger- Sheriff's Office
Bill VanVactor -County Administrator
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: ORDER ·/IN THE MATTER OF'CONSIDERING
CONCEPTS OF A PUBLIC SAFETY SPECIAL DISTRICT
AND INITIATION OF METRO PLAN AMENDMENTS TO
CLARIFY AND PROVIDE GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN
SERVICE DELIVERY IN THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD
METROPOLITAN AREA
I. MOTION
MOVE TO APPROVE ORDER NO._ _ DIRECTING FURTHER STAFF WORK
NECESSARY TO INITIATE FORMATION OF A PUBLIC SAFETY SPECIAL
DISTRICT AND INITIATING METRO PLAN AMENDMENTS TO CLARIFY AND
PROVIDE GREATER FLEXIBILITY FOR SERVICE DELIVERY IN THE EUGENE-
SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA
II. ISSUE OR PROBLEM
There are two related issues for the Board to consider. The first issue'is the concept of a
countywide public safety special- district. The second issue is.to consider initiating non-site
specific text amendments to the Eugene,Springfield MetrOpolitan Area General Plan
(Metro Plan) in order to provide greater clarity in the formation ora public safety special
district while retaining consistency With the fundamental growth management principles of
~ the Metro Plan.
IiL DISCUSSION
A. Background
Many county public safety services are funded primarily with property tax revenue, which
flows to thc county's general fund. Local property taxes are subject to constitutional,
statutorial, and political and practical constraints. TheSe revenue constraints are
increasingly pressuring local governments to make difficult choices of either thinning
BCC Agenda Coy. er Memo - County SpeCial Service District Page 1 of 6
August 25, 2004
service capacity or foregoing some services in order to maintain others. County residents
and visitors continue to expect at least adequate and in many cases improved services from
county government.
Lane County is faced with.the challenge of straggling to keep rapidly escalating costs
balanced within modest revenue growth. In the discretionary general fund this meant
cutting $2.7 million from county services for FY 04/05, primarily because the cost of
contributing to PERS and medical coverage for employees and retirees has increased by six
per cent per year, while voter-approved property tax limitation measures cap property tax
increases to three per cent annually.
With expenses outstripping revenues, public safety activities are impacted more so than
other services, because those services use approximately 70 percent of the county's
discretionary general fund.
The five-year general fund forecast predicts the revenue/expenditure gap to grow each year.
Additional reductions leave Lane County's law enforcement, corrections programs
(including the jail), juvenile justice programs, the District Attorney's prosecution services,
and parole and probation services with very little capacity to meet the criminal justice
system demands in this region. Continued reductions in the law enforcement arena create a
substantial public safety risk for the commtinity.
To address the chronic financial problems and to focus on the "First Priority" of the
County's Strategic Plan, which calls for allocating resources to services addressing critical
life &health safety needs, a countywide public safety district has been suggested. This
proposal is a strategy that would provide stable, dedicated funding for necessary public
safety services that have historically been provided by the county. Because a special
district typically has its own permanent property tax rate, it may provide sustainable
· funding of its particular services. Each proposal for use of a special district requires careful
fiscal and legal analysis, and extensive intergovernmental and community input. This
agenda item does not provide this level of analysis, but presents a launching point for the
Board of County Commissioners to. discuss a draf~ outline of public safety special district
components and direct further staff development of necessary information to formally
initiate formation of such a district. It also provides an opportunity for the Board to
consider initiating Metro Plan amendments to clarify and provide for greater flexibility in
the provision of services in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area to facilitate the
formation of a public safety special district consistent with the fundamental principles of
the Metro Plan.
B. Analysis
,Special Districts
Revenue ,
Cities and counties are unable to maintain the services they provided in the past, much less
meet increased demands. Special districts can be used as a strategy to provide revenue for
I~CC Agenda Cover Memo - County Special Service District Page 2 of 6
August 25, 2004
necessary countywide or specific services. Each type of special district is authorized by
State statutes to prOvide particular services funded by its own independent revenue sources.
A special district may provide more stable and adequate funding for the district's particular
services than can be provided within the county's permanent property tax rate limit because
a special district tYPically has a voter-approved permanent property tax rate limit dedicated
for its purposes and not shared with other programs and services or with other time-limited
local option levies.
Formation
Each plan for use of a special district requires fiscal and legal analysis and extensive
intergovernmental and community involvement. Since the concept of a proposed
countywide public safety special district would include both unincorporated areas as well
as incorporated cities, the formation documents must include approval by resolution from
the governing body of each city within the district.
County service districts are established under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 451 and.
formation of a countywide public safety district is governed by ORS 198.705 to 198.955, as
well as the provisions of ORS chapter 199 governing the Local Government Boundary
Commission. There are two options .for formation ora county service district. One is by
petition, the other by resolution or order of the Board of County Conunissioners. The
Board may initiate formation of a district, to be located entirely within the county, by an
order setting forth:
* The intention of the Board of County Commissioners to initiate the formation of a
district and citing the principal Act;
· The name and boundaries of the proposed district;
· If any part of the territory of the proposed district falls within a city, the order shall
be accompanied by acertified copy of the city approval; and
· The county shall bear the cost of formation of a district, except costs for
preliminary engineering studies and surveys in connection with the district shall be
· reimbursed by the new district.if formation is ultimately successful.
A county'service district is allowed by its principal Act to provide law enforcement among
other services.
Local Government Boundary Comnflssion
The State Legislature f'trst required comprehensive local land use plans in 1963. In 1973, the
Legislature adopted Senate Bill 100, adjusting planning requirements and providing for
detailed statewide land use planning goals. Boundary Commissions were intended by the
Legislative Assembly to establish policies and exercise powers in order to create a
governmental structure that promotes efficiency and economy in providing the widest range
of necessary services in a manner that encourages and provides planned, well-ordered and
efficient development patterns.
Boundary Commissions were formed to guide the creation and growth of special service
districts and were intended to reduce fragmented approaches to service delivery by
BCC Agenda Cover Memo - County Special Service District Page 3 of 6
August 25, ~004
encouraging single agency service delivery over service delivery by several agencies.
The Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission was created under ORS Chapter
199, and has jurisdiction over local government boundary changes for many special· districts.
Today, the Lane County Boundary Commission is the only local government boundary
commission still existing in the state.
The Boundary Commission policies regarding efficient delivery of services do not prohibit
the use of special districts, The local comprehensive plan is the primary tool employed to
express legislative policy about local service delivery needs. Part of the requirement for
Boundary Commission action is a determination that the proposal is consistent with the
comprehensive plans of the involved area. In this ease, only the Eugene-Springfield
Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) Was adopted with specific expressions of what
entity should provide services under these policies.
However, the Metro Plan was developed and acknowledged before voter-approved property
tax limitations, Measures 5 and 50, restricted local government's ability to finance services
via property tax increases.
Me~ro Plan
The Metro Plan is the official long-range general plan of metropolitan Lane County and the
cities of Eugene and Springfield. Its policies and land use designations apply only within the
area under the jurisdiction of the Plan. The Metro Plan sets forth general planning policies
and land use allocations and serves as the basis for the coordinated development of programs
concerning the use and conservation of physical resources, furtherance of assets, and
development or redevelopment of the metro area.
Any proposed new special district within the area of the Metro Plan must be consistent with
the Plan. Depending on the content of a public safety service district, the Metro Plan does
appear to contain policies and perhaps definitions that might act as obstacles to formation of
anew district. All other adopted and acknowledged comprehensive plans within Lane
County do not seem to preclude formation cfa public safety service district but will need to
be carefully reviewed and analyzed to ensure consistency if the proposed public safety
special district concept proceeds.
The Metro Plan, Growth Management, Policy #15 addresses creation of new service districts
and states that service districts areeomidered "interim" service delivery methods. The Metro
Plan calls for annexations to occur over time and existing service districts within the urban
growth boundary to be dissolved. The Metro Plan does recognize that Lane County provides
a variety of public services to unincorporated portions of the Eugene-Springfield
metropolitan area. Currently, Lane County provides countywide public safety services such
as corrections, juvenile justice, prosecution, and parole and probation, in incorporated as well
as unincorporated areas of the county.
The Metro Plan, Growth Management, Policy # 8 states ':land within the urban growth
boundary may be converted from urbanizable to urban only through annexation to a city
BCC Agenda Cover Memo - 'County Special Service District Page 4 of 6
August SS, 2004
when it is found that:
a. A minimum level of'key urban facilities' and services can be provided to the
area in an orderly and efficient manner."
The Metro Plan Glossary defines minimum level of "key urban facilities and services" to
include "police protection" as well as other services including but not limited to stormwater
service, solid waste management, water service, fire and emergency medical services and
public schools. "Police protection" is not further defined and may Present an interpretation
issue when trying to form a public safety special district.
Lane County was and is the logical provider of many of the countywide public safety
services for urban, suburban, and rural Lane County. It was not anticipated that cities would
provide these s~rvices once any region or area reached an urban density level and thee
services do not encourage or promote growth or development. In addition, historically, there
have been other mutijurisdictional law enforcement s~rvices such as drag interdiction,
SWAT, and domestic violence investigation services provided by Lane County, within and
outside of Eugen~Springfield's urban growth boundary. The emphasis of the Metro ?lan
and the land use planning goals it supports reduce the fragmented approach to service
delivery by encouraging single agency service deliwry over service delivery by sewral
agencies. None of thc public safety services currently or historically provided by Lane
County outside the urban growth boundary have discouraged compact growth or augmented
sprawl.
..Public SaferF Special District
There are several public safety services traditionally provided by, or statutorily mandated
for, Lane County. These include, but are not limited to corrections (both youth and adult),
parole and probation, prosecution, and unincorporated patrol. The decline in the county's
financial resources has led to system degradation as indicated by: · A reducti6n in jail beds
· A 'matrix' system at the jail that releases inmates into the community on a daily basis
· More than 100 parolees per parole officer to manage
· Fewer and fewer crimes prosecuted by the District Attorney's Office
· A youth detention facility operating at minimal capacity
· Rural and suburban police patrol minimized to unacceptable levels
· The elimination ofinteragency drug team participation
· The elimination ofinteragency special tactics teams to deal with critical incidents
.The goal of creating a countywide service district is to provide a separate funding source for
public safety services. The goal of the diStrict would be to make available the kinds of public
safety services the county currently is under authority or mandated to provide, not to displace
any other jurisdiction or create a duplication of services.
The timeline goal is to put the proposal on the November 2006 general election ballot. The exact
description ora Lane County public safety district is in the preliminary stages. A district of this
type will need input from a variety of sources and comprehensive analysis before decision
makers can finalize the details and outline the specifics of the district's components.
llCC Agenda Cover Memo - County Special Service District Page 5 of 6
AUgust 25, 2004
Creation of some form of a public safety district in 2006 will help close the expense/revenue gap
of the county general fund and at the same time help sustain a rapidly deteriorating public safety
system. This is a strategy that allows the organization to move forward in a time of fiscal stress.
C. Alternatives/Optlon.~
1. Move approval of the Board Order to direct more staff work on forming a public safety
special district and initiating Metro Plan amendments in order to provide greater clarity in
the formaton of a public safety special district consistent with the Metro Plan.
2. Do not approve the Board Order at this time. If the Board decides to pursue special
district formation at later date, the timeline for putting the issue on a November 2006 ballot
is shortened and compromises the timeframe for getting the necessary work completed.
D. Recommendations
Staff recommends Alternative 1, above, to move approval of the Board Order.
E. Timine
In order for a special district proposal to be placed on a November 2006 ballot, work
needs to begin promptly following Board Order approval.
IV. IMPLEMENTATION/FOLLOW. UP
Staffwill begin work immediately to put together a work plan for formation of a special
district to be voted on in the November 2006 general election. Staff.will also complete
work on analyzing the Metro Plan in order to process specific amendment
recommendations consistent with the Board Order.
V. ATTACttMENTS
1. Board Order
BCC Agenda Cover'Memo - County SPeciaI SerVice DiStrict Page 6 of 6
August 25, 2004
ATTACHMENT C
rN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF LANE cOUNTy, oREGoN
) PUBLIC SAFETY SPECIAL DISTRICT AND INITIATION OF
) _M~TRO PLAN AMENDMENTS TO CLARIFY AND PROVIDE
) _G__R~__ATER FLEXIBILITY IN SERVICE DELIVERY IN THE
) EUGENE-SPRINGFIIgLD METROPOLITAN AREA
WIIEREAS, revenue constraints are increasingly pressuring local governments to malco
difficult choices; and
WREREAS, Lane County is faced with the challenge of stmggIing to keep escalating
costs balanced with modest revenue growth; and
WHEREAS, the Lane County Strategic Plan calls for allocating resources to those
services that are effective in addressing immediate and critical life and health safety needs as a
fa'st priority; and ' '
WHEREAS, special districts can be used as a strategy to provide revenue for certain
necessary countywide services; and
WHEREAS, any proposed special district within tho area of the Eugene-Springfield
Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) must be consistent with the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Metro Plan appears to contain policies and definitions that make it
unclear whether formation of a new public safety special district would be consistent with the
Metro Plan; and
W}IEREAS, Lane County is the logical provider of many countywide public safety
services for urban, suburban and rural Lane County; and
WIIEREA~, these public safety services do not encourage or promote growth or
development.
NOW TIIEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners directs further staffwork necessary to alIow the Board to formally initiate
formation of a public safety special district.
IT IS IIEREBY FURTHER ORDERED, that tho Board of County Commissioners
initiates Metro Plan amendments to clarify and provide greater flexibility in service delivery in
the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area.
· ~)u~ Boar rnmissioners
^PpRov o ^s
~L'~E OFL~dAL C~UNSEL '