91ST Annual Conference
Montana Association of Counties
September 25 - 27, 2000
I
have enjoyed working with our Hill County Commissioners. When I first became mayor, Kathy Bessette
and I had a long talk because we knew that mayors and county commissioners were
notorious for not getting along. We
decided that if we didn’t agree, we would put that aside and move on to the
next project, without carrying any animosity over. That’s why it’s been wonderful working together and I really do
appreciate them.
Recently,
we had lions and tigers being abused and being hauled around town. We finally settled that and it happened to
be the wettest year we ever had. The
beavers were coming in and chewing down all the trees and making dams. Homeowners were complaining because they
were loosing the new saplings they had just planted. When fall came, in came the skunks. They started digging up lawns and there were comments about what
we would do about the skunks. One day I
answered the phone and this irate voice said, “What do you plan to do with the
bobcat that’s in my alley?” I said, “Is
he on a leash or under somebody’s control?”
He said, “Lady, I don’t know anything about that. All I know is he is hauling my gravel down
to his lane.“
I
hope you enjoy our community and that we see you back again soon.”
Roger Barber “In my title, “Provost”
means “protector of” the Chancellor.
Provosts work
MSU Northern most
closely with the faculty and also stand-in for the Chancellor. So, he asked
that I welcome you to Northern. Some of
you have been here before. As many as
eight commissioners are alums of this institution. It is a special pleasure to welcome you back. If this is your first visit here, I hope
that you have time to get to know our campus.
People who come here the first time often have had an image of one
building sitting on a hill, with maybe a tree.
They are surprised to see a complete campus with many buildings and
wonderful, wonderful programs. We are proud of this institution because it is vital
to the health of this State.
Our education and teacher
graduates are the most important source of teachers for small rural
schools. Our nursing graduates are
literally the heart and soul of most hospitals and nursing homes in Eastern
Montana. If we didn’t have a nursing
program, most of them say they would have to close up because they depend on
the students from Northern. Our
business students are an important source of new business start-ups in Eastern
Montana. Our special niche in the
University system is technology programs.
Our technology students actually are placed all over the United States
and the world. We find, though, that
they deeply miss Montana, this warm, friendly and caring place.”
RESPONSE ”On behalf of MACo, the County Commissioners and the MACo
staff, we
Gary Fjelstad thank
the City of Havre and the mayor. I am
sure you will find that this fine group
1st Vice President of people very seldom say a discouraging word; they
hardly say anything. Everything will be
so quiet all the people will hardly know that we are here. We also thank the University for working
with the Commissioners to allow us to have this conference here and we look
forward to a great time. Also, we
thank the Hill County Commissioners and the Blaine County Commissioners for
being the fine hosts for the convention.
With that, we will get started.”
ROLL CALL Fiscal Officer Allan Underdal conducted roll call and
announced quorum
was
present with 49 of 55 member counties answering the call.
WHEREAS, the members of the
Montana Association of Counties, with great sorrow and a deep sense of loss,
wish to remember and honor those members who have been taken by death since the
last annual convention of our Association; and
WHEREAS, each of these
county commissioners has rendered innumerable public services to his or her
respective county, to the State of Montana, and to the people thereof; and
WHEREAS, the absence of
these persons is keenly felt as a great personal loss to their families,
friends and colleagues;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED by the Montana Association of Counties in convention duly assembled in
Helena, Montana, this 25th day of September, 2000, that the
Association does hereby pay tribute to the memory of Commissioners:
Donald Gibson, Dawson County
Ezra Grover Rickman, Jr.,
Stillwater County
Vern Ballard, Golden Valley
County
Melvin Bakken, Richland County
and on behalf of its members and the citizens of the
State of Montana does hereby express gratitude for their achievements and
contributions to the public good of their counties and to Montana.
____________________________________
______________________________________
L. HAROLD BLATTIE, PRESIDENT GORDON MORRIS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
CONGRESSIONAL Dwight
Mackay, representing Senator Conrad
Burns, presented a
PRESENTATIONS video
from the Senator, who discussed PILT, timber
county school bill,
Senator Conrad Burns CARA, economic development and transportation infrastructure, farm
Rep. Rick Hill income
protection and estate tax,
telecommunications, rural health care,
Senator Max Baucus and high
tech and biotech industry/jobs in Montana.
Dwight presented a United States flag which had flown over the nation’s
capitol.
MACo President Blattie introduced a video from Representative Rick Hill, who discussed the recent summer’s fires, forest funds for schools, PILT, CARA, and other issues.
On Wednesday, Senator Max Baucus
outlined his work on behalf of counties and discussed Montana statewide
economic development, highway reconstruction funding, PILT and CARA, local
government funding for a variety of services provided to Federal lands, and
fire disaster funding. He invited
visitors to his weekly Wednesday breakfasts, when visiting Washington DC.
I
would like to say thank you to the Resolutions Committee: Gail Jones, Mike Murray, Carol Kienenberger,
Albert Brown, Al Ryan, Donna Sevalstad, and Tom Bennett.
You
are receiving right now the list of the resolutions that have been reviewed by
the Resolutions Committee. There were
27 new resolutions and 16 reaffirmed resolutions. You should have received a packet at your District meeting and a
packet of supplemental resolutions which was sent out about two weeks ago. Then, voting delegates can pick up the five
additional resolutions that were acted upon last night at the Board of
Directors meeting at the Registration Desk.
So, that’s 27 Resolutions, plus 5, plus 16 reaffirmed. All of those should be color coded except
the five which you will pick up today.
They are color coded according to the priority--high, medium or
low. You will also find in your
registration bag the Legislative Guidelines, a yellow-colored sheet, and the
Delegate Assembly Rules, salmon colored sheet.
Take
a look at these this evening and run through the resolutions. If there are any that you wish to debate,
the protocol is that those will be segregated out of the packet on
Wednesday.”
You
will notice the new 2001 budget is less than last year. Last year the budget was $1,107,908; this
budget is $909,816. That is a little
misleading, because there was $219,000 in last year’s budget to pay for the new
building. If you take that out, we did
have an increase of this year’s budget of 4.6%. We ended up the year with $172,415 and with the projected revenue
for this year, we would have $107,000 in cash reserve at the end of FY 2001.”
A
motion to adopt the report was seconded and passed unanimously.
Harold Blattie Second
Vice President Victor Miller,
Blaine County
Second Vice President Howard Gipe, Flathead County
President
Blattie called for further nominations from the floor. Hearing none, President Blattie invited the
candidates to speak.
CANDIDATE Howard Gipe, Flathead County
PRESENTATIONS “When I started at the Highway
Patrol, I spent eight years in Chinook.
I spent a lot of time on this campus working with the programs. I have to say no people are friendlier, nicer
and more pleasant to work with than here.
I
am in my fourteenth year as a County Commissioner. I have four years left before I retire. I represent various boards; I’ve worked with mental health; I’ve
spent time before the legislature. I’ll
continue that whether I’m elected or not.
I’m certainly a strong supporter of MACo. Since I’ve been here, the Worker’s Comp. program is certainly
something I’m very proud of. I am not
the Lone Ranger out there. We need to
work together. I would appreciate your
support.”
Victor
Miller, Blaine County
“I was seriously considering leaving
the County Commission to work for the Forest Service, but Blaine County also
had devastation this year. I am sorry
to announce that I will not be head ranger at Lone Pine. Two teenagers got drunk and cut the tree
down. So now I plan on serving for a
very long time.
I
often get in discussions with my oldest son.
I do not understand Generation X--no more than my Dad understands us
Baby Boomers. I asked the same
question of my son that my Dad asked of me, “What the hell’s wrong with
you?” Frankly, he came up with a better
answer than I ever did. His answer was
quite simple, “Our diversity is our unity.”
That’s my message.
County
Commissioners may argue back and forth, but that is the message I will
carry. Your second VP will go through
two legislative sessions. I look
forward to working with the team and doing what we can to make sure that
government is served best at the local level.
I would appreciate your support.
If you vote for Howard, that’s fine, too, because either way this
organization will be served well.”
President Blattie announced that the Urban
Counties would be meeting later in the day to make their selection for the
Executive Committee.
“Before
I introduce the two sales directors from our hotels interested in having you
come to Cascade County, we welcome you to Cascade County. We are in the midst of Lewis and Clark
heritage celebrations and this would be a very fitting place for you to place
your convention.”
Sales
Directors from Heritage Inn / Budget Inn and from Holiday Inn presented
advantages for their sites.
Ted
Coffman, Madison County
“On
behalf of Madison County and Gallatin County we invite you to come to Big Sky,
Montana. The Holiday Inn in Great Falls
says the “Best of Big Sky hospitality.”
Well, we’ll give you the best of Big Sky-Big Sky hospitality. The upper portion of Big Sky, the skiing
area, is in Madison County. The golf
course is in Gallatin County and the sewer runs downhill into Gallatin
County. We have a written confirmation
of $55 for the rates. We have been
working with the management for three years to get this and it came in on
Wednesday. Please consider it. Mike, over there, was talking about dancing
girls. We’ll take a past commissioner
from Madison County, Marie, she’s our dancing girl.”
Jennifer
Smith Mitchell, Gallatin County
“We have
spouses who want to go shopping in Bozeman.
We are going to see if we can get bus service so that they can go into
town. It may even be an alternative
vehicle. That’s something else to look forward to.”
A video of
the Big Sky facility was presented.
Harold Blattie fill it
out, especially the comments. When the
leadership is trying to determine the direction of the organization, the
comments are really valuable.
MACo currently provides an array of “administrative services” such as answering
questions on budget, personnel, procedures, and other general governmental
issues to assist member counties in dealing with the day-to-day operations of
County government.
I think
that this certainly tells the Executive Board that the administrative services
are something that the membership finds to be valuable and need to have some
focus.
MACo currently provides
legislative services for counties, such as lobbying, legislative alerts,
legislative impact analysis and interim committee monitoring and reporting for
MACo and local government program purposes.
49 27
1 1
From the
comments, one thing that really came through is that we need to have commissioners present at the
hearings and interacting with the legislators.
So, during this next session there will be more effort to let you know
when hearings are going to be, to afford you all an opportunity to get there.
MACo endeavors to provide
continuing liaison with the Executive Branch and various State Agencies and
provides Counties with status reports and periodic updates
37 38 1 2
This is
seen as important, but not as important as some other areas.
The MACo NEWSLETTER, which is
published monthly, is
36 32 1
The
Newsletter has grown a bit. Jane
Jelinski, the Assistant Director, has changed the format of it. There were some fine comments and Jane has
taken direction from them and really strives to provide the best publication
that she possibly can.
Counties have a need for uniform
accounting and taxation software and technical assistance when it comes to
acquiring hardware. Should MACo play a role in this area by providing this as a
service?
Yes 51 No 19
This leads
us to believe is that there certainly is a need for technology assistance to
the counties. It is difficult for many
of you to obtain information and technical expertise. Last year I appointed an ad hoc committee to study these issues,
and I’m hopeful of having a report done in the next few weeks. The Ad Hoc Committee met most of the time
with the IT Committee. There is no
proposal or any great solutions, but maybe ways of helping you get the services
you need.
·
County Employee Health Insurance
It comes
as no big surprise that Personnel Services ranked very high and is something
that you find to be very valuable. I
know those member counties which use Jack on a regular basis understand what an
asset he is. When you go out and
purchase insurance, you simply won’t get service like how Jack has saved a
number of counties from some employee lawsuits.
MACo hosts and organizes several meetings throughout
the year, they are:
• MID WINTER MEETING
Commissioner
Orientation was the highest ranked and appropriately so. When someone comes into the job for the
first time, they haven’t a clue. We
will be having another one in December after the election. All new commissioners will be invited. If you have a new commissioner in your
county, encourage them to attend and fund their way to do it.
Next,
to nobody’s surprise, you found the DES Governor’s Conference to be the least
valuable. It would be interesting to
ask the question again now, with all the calamities we’ve had in the State this
year.
DES
asked if we could hold a statewide meeting on basically about three days’
notice. All of you would have had to
travel to Helena, so we had the METNET Conference. The cost of $1,000 was funded by DES. I hope you found that a satisfactory way to get the information
to you, because it was very worth the effort to get the information out as soon
as possible.
The
Conference Planning Committee and the Executive Board appreciate your taking
the effort to fill the survey out. The
information which you provided will help in the direction of the Association in
the future.”
INTERIM LEGISLATIVE “This is a
draft proposal. I think
the Committee did a great job. If
you
COURT FUNDING have any of these people in your area, contact them and tell them what you
AND STRUCTURE think about this. Besides myself, the other members of the
Committee were:
COMMITTEE Senator
Walter McNutt, Chair
Mike Hutchin Senator
John Tester
Lake County
Representative Ron Erickson
Representative John Witt
Judge Kenneth Neil, Cascade
County
Judge Joe Hegel, Custer
County
Kevin Hart, Justice of
Peace
Jim Nugent, Missoula City
Attorney
Lori
Maloney, Clerk of Court from Butte Silver Bow
The
first unofficial draft copy got to me Saturday afternoon. The draft is about 56 pages. We can get this copied for you or you can
call Judy Paynter at Department of Revenue. .
In
my eighteen years of being a commissioner I think this proposal is one of the
most important decisions for this session, if not the most important in the
last several years. As you all know, it
is always hard to go to the Legislature to figure out ways to fund the district
court system.
The
primary mission of this committee was to bring the responsibility for the
district courts into one government body--the State. We have a MACo resolution that supported that concept. So, as a representative of MACo I held that
position, even though I must tell you, I would not support part of it. The decision was made to have the district
court funding placed with and funded by the State, with one exception. It allows the clerks of court and employees
to remain as county employees and not bring them into the state system. The clerks, also, felt that they should be
left on the county system.
That’s
where I disagree. However, I
represented MACo in that effort. Early
on, the Committee, except those of us who voted opposite, voted to support the
concept that the clerks of court should be funded through the state. Lori Maloney, a clerk of court, and I made
the position very strong that there would be opposition from Montana
Association of Counties and the clerks of court to put the clerks into a
state-funding bill. As a result of
this, the clerks were left out of that draft.
We followed the MACo resolution.
The
Committee has recommended that this be accomplished immediately after the
session. Should this proposal pass,
effective July 1, 2001, the district courts would be with the State of Montana.
The
Committee also recommended that there be a judicial council to run this system,
made up of district court judges, an attorney and some other individuals. If you are interested, I would get this
information to you.
The
district court costs would be submitted as part of the judiciary budget
request. Counties would continue to
provide office space at no cost to the state.
Most of you I talked to agreed that we should continue to fund the space
in the courthouse. The committee wants
local governments to be able to supplement the state’s judiciary budget, of
course, if necessary. So this proposal
is intended to keep our ability to levy district court costs up to whatever
level you are--first class county, second class county and on down, six mills
per class. Revenue assumptions are that
there was $25 to $26 Million of district court costs around the state of which
counties bore about $5 Million directly.
In terms of the clerks of court, it was all the counties’. So the clerk of court dollars we are
spending we will continue to fund. The
balance of that $26 Million (about $20 Million) will be funded by the state
district court system. Some of that
will be through the current fees which will continue to go to the state and
transfer to that program. (Harold might
give a little more detail about that.)
In summary, the state general fund costs would be $23.3 Million in
Fiscal 2002, and $24.6 Million in 2003.
The funding transfers would take care of most of that. The net cost to the State general fund as
being considered by the Legislature, would be $1.7 Million in 2002 that they
would have to come up with and $2.4 Million in 2003.
We will have a public hearing on Thursday, November 16 in Helena at
Carroll College at the campus center, 9:00 am. to go through this unofficial
draft to come up with official draft legislation for the next session. If you
cannot make that meeting, you could submit something through MACo or myself or
submit it to Sandy Lang of the Court Funding and Structure Committee, Box 5805
in Helena.
Who would
be responsible for public defenders?
The State of Montana. That proposal clearly lines out that there
would be offices of public defenders with each district, funded by the State.
Did you
say that the counties would still be responsible for supplemental budgets?
Yes.
Missoula County is an example.
They were levying six mills and chose to provide more for the district
court system than any other county chose to do. So they supplemented district court costs with their own
funding. You can choose to do
that. If you feel that your district might
needs something for while or needs to do something different, you as a county
can choose to supplement the state funding of that court system. You are not obligated, but you can.
Do you
anticipate the state taxes to the local taxpayer be increased, decreased or
stay the same under the new system?
I really couldn’t answer that. It depends on whether the Legislature funds
this or not. We are assuming it will
come from the State general fund and each session would wrestle with those
numbers.
All tax dollars
come from some place and my question is how much is it going to cost to fund
the system under state guidance compared to local?
We tried to keep it revenue neutral. The local system would stay as we know it
today. There would still be 22 judicial
districts, except there would be 8.5 FTEs added to the state budget to
administer the program, instead of all the clerks and payroll clerks we have
throughout the state. It’s intended to
be close to revenue neutral, no increases, just coming from different pockets.
Are public defenders included in this assumption?
They are.
The public defenders would be employees of the State.
What
about, then, their services to justice courts?
I just got this on Saturday
afternoon. I don’t if they would be
responsible to JP courts or not. I will
have to look that up.
It’s an
interesting question, because in our JP system, those PD services always go to
district court and the justice court.
If it’s still the case? I can’t tell you if that’s in this draft.
In the
various places where the district court judges have apparently ordered
commissioners to do A-B-C or D, does that mean that we deal simultaneously with
the state assumption and those rules?
No.
I doubt that. I assume that
ability exists with the judges; if they can’t fund it through the state system,
they may go after the state for that--to have a court order for the state to
have additional funding. I’m not sure
that the proposal clearly defines that.
The
district court funding sources on page 12 are based on the FY 98 values.
That’s correct. That’s the most current data that they had available.
I’m
looking particularly at local option tax.
If we change this significantly, will we take those local option taxes
out of the court system?
I don’t know that we have the answer to
that. Harold’s committee may have a
little more details in terms of the funding and where it’s going to come from,
the impacts and how to apply to the votes this fall.
In the
draft, what was the impact and reaction from the judges?
There was a rumor floating around that the
district judges had opposed, based on court reporter positions. The court reporters can be in three
categories right now--employees, independent contractors or a combination. That was in the proposal because each
district was quite unique. Judge Joe
Hegel, Miles City, has seven counties in his judicial district. That makes a difference in how he runs the
court system and how he uses court reporters.
In the discussions with the committee, we wanted to leave all three
options available to each judicial district for court reporters.
Judge Larson had a draft bill that wasn’t
anywhere close to this. There were 26
pages. This proposal is the only one I
know of in this area that you can get a copy of. It’s 56 pages. This is
the unofficial draft copy. As of
Thursday this should turn into the official draft.
You
indicated that clerks would be the responsibility of local government. Would the clerk of courts be elected
officials still?
Yes. The district clerks of
court remain exactly as they are today.
The keeper of the records within
courthouses would be a local function and a local expense.
What will
happen with juvenile detention? Will
the state take over all juvenile detention?
All of the duties and responsibilities of
the chief probation officer and staff would be under the state.
As you all know, there will be companion
legislation. The juvenile probation
officers have a bill to go into a different category of pay. It would hurt all of us locally to be able
to fund it, because the pay matrix would go up substantially. The court reporters also have legislative
proposals. So this bill can be tugged
every which way in terms of interests.
I think we can probably eliminate at least two of the political problems
with state assumption of this cost--the counties and the clerks of courts. I’m not sure we can do that with the
judges. Judge John Larson out of Missoula
has had a problem with this. So we will
see this pulled apart and that’s what we want.
We want to come out with the best thing possible and hopefully it will
pass. MACo has been working on district
court funding for many years.”
INTERIM LEGISLATIVE “Both of
these committees were created as a result of SB 184. The court
LOCAL GOVERNMENT committee
looked at the court structure issue but
really didn’t delve into the
FUNDING AND finance
part of it. It
deferred that to the Local
Government Funding and
STRUCTURE Structure Committee. The Committee started
meeting over a year ago but
COMMITTEE bogged down during the special legislative session because it relied heavily
Harold Blattie on
Department of Revenue
staff to provide the numbers. We ended a couple
of months
behind. The amount of information that
this committee has had to digest is absolutely enormous.
The committee members were:
Representative
Robert Story Rep. Maryanne Guggenheim
Senator
Linda Nelson Senator Lorentz Grosfield
Susan
Nicosia, city council person Patricia Cook, Lake County
Treasurer
John
Lawton, city manager, Great Falls County Commissioner Sue Olson
Mary
Bryson, Director of Department of Revenue and myself.
Sue Olson “It was a
privilege to serve on this committee,
even though we got brain-
Musselshell County
overload most of the time. In answer to the
question on district courts, the
county
will keep the property tax mill and the local vehicle option tax. The basic question is why the State needs
8.5 FTEs for the administration of this.
We talked about changing the
fiscal year and decided to leave it as it is.
We talked about auditing some of our
smaller districts that are less than the $200,000. We need to have some kind of audit but we need a good idea on how
they can afford to do that. We did
think that the tax commissions could do it and it could be placed under the
budgetary process of the commissioners so that everyone would know what was
going on.
The Committee wants to improve relations
between the State and government subdivisions and so we had a committee to
review that--two from the house, two from the senate, two from the cities, one
from the county and one from the school boards.
We had a request from Senator Stang to
consider funding for local growth policy.
He supported an increase of 1% in the bed tax. It is an option and perhaps something MACo needs to look at.
The Highway Trust is loosing money and
will go to the Legislature to get that appropriated. Highway Trust needed $2.8 million.
The reality transfer tax is one thing that we would like to see
happen. They met with the realtors to
see if they could get along with it.
We worked to follow entitlement funds and the requirements.
I brought my notebook that gives an analysis of what we considered and
for some of the proposals.”
Robert Story “It
was time to take a look at this situation to see if we can
rearrange
Representative financing for state and
local governments so that they won’t have problems. These two committees considered that the State could take over
some responsibilities from local government--use that money that we are now
sending back to fund those programs, leave the property tax money at county and
city levels to fund programs that remain there, instead of having it go 360
degrees before it’s even spent. We are mainly looking at the State to take over
some programs like district courts and at the counties to retain their programs;
and along with that lifting the statutory mill caps so that those mill levies
that are now being used to fund the district court and the welfare system are
available to fund county and city programs.
Counties have different sources of money, like forest receipts, which
had a lot of discussion. But every
county is short of money because of things like the business equipment tax
cut. The State takes some portion of
the general fund and makes that the statutory appropriation, so again counties,
cities and miscellaneous districts are on hold. That’s where this entitlement share comes, which would set dollar
amounts with some type of growth factor.
That money would be sent back to local governments.
At the same time we may go back to SB 184 and make some adjustments on
caps on spending. I think most counties
did a really fine job with setting mill levies. We’re looking at leaving decisions with local governments on how
much money they are going to spend.
This is very complex and difficult.
Not a lot of legislators know about it and understand it. So if it’s going to proceed, it must proceed
with the support from the Montana Association of Counties. If your members are not behind this, then
with the legislators it will be a tough sell.
Once pieces start falling off this program, we can’t do any of it,
because it’s all a big balance. It
would be hard to take over district courts and not do the rest of these
things.
We will have a big meeting on the 6th to finalize where we are
going. We are going to hold our
hearings on METNET with 13 sites in the State so that you folks can have a
chance to participate without having to come all the way to Helena to do
that. They will be in November, around
the 14th or 16th.”
Harold
Blattie “One of the guiding
principles we adopted early on was an attempt to eliminate these big
transfers. Obviously the more
transactions that take place, the bigger the possibility for error. Literally, I chased money around in circles
with tax dollars sent to Helena, sent to schools through the mill levy matrix,
and back to Helena again. So I feel
quite strongly that we need to eliminate all possible steps. There are $800 Million in transfers between
state and local governments annually.
We cannot eliminate all of that, but I hope that there will be at least
a standardization of the reporting. One
of the challenges the committee had was to find numbers and verify their
accuracy.
Another of the principals was to de-earmark funds. For every project that came along, we’ve had
to find a funding mechanism. So a
funding mechanism has been attached to each program. Several years ago there were so many earmarked funds that it was
very difficult for the Legislature to deal with the budget. We really tried to de-earmark and eliminate
a lot of those earmarked funds. Now,
the programs will be handled differently.
As funds are collected, we need to be flexible and make some transfers. The overall principle is that every entity
will be held harmless.
We wanted a county-by-county and municipality-by-municipality
breakdown. To the State, when one is a
half million dollar loss and one is a half million dollar gain, overall there
is no change. So from that came the development of the entitlement share. The entitlement share will be a statutory
appropriation. The legislature doesn’t
even look at it. It’s not a specific
part of HB 2. That gives us a great
deal of stability and lot higher level of trust that the Legislature won’t
tinker with it. It doesn’t mean that
they can’t; but it certainly raises the level of difficulty for them to do
that. The proposed growth factor is to
provide a stable source of revenue with some growth potential. It allows the counties and municipalities to
participate in the economic condition in the State of Montana. Lately, the economic activity and the tax
receipts were substantially greater than they have been.
However, it doesn’t make any difference for property taxes. We were able
to include SB 184 reimbursement program, but that ends at this session. It was required to be in the governor’s
proposed budget for this next year. There is information on the Department of
Revenue home page. I know you’ve had difficulty
accessing that and I think they have everything fixed.
The next meeting will be October 6 and I urge you to attend if
possible.
You
indicated the junk vehicle would stay in the county where it was
generated. Is it the same for
refunds--they no longer go to the weed fund?
It’s
the other way around. All motor vehicle
funds will go to the State. The junk
vehicle program would be an appropriation in the Legislature.
In
the transfer of funds from the State to the county and the county to the State,
the State’s transfer is getting worse.
Do you think this will help?
Without
a doubt it will help. All of those
problems with the Department of Revenue in receiving transfers were generated
by the Department’s inability to audit.
They are having a very difficult time in securing qualified personnel to
do that.
Some
of the transfers that we have not received are Taylor Grazing. Isn’t it a matter of splitting out the money
from the Department and sending a check?
It took them six months to do that.
Also, for our sanitarian inspections of establishments last year, they
were many months late. They had some
personnel leave, but they seemed to not bother trying to find someone to
accomplish that task.
I
can tell you right now that they have eight vacancies within that department
for auditors. The vacancies have been
there for quite some time because of the salary level that the Department of
Revenue is authorized to pay. In fact,
they’ve lost employees to the Department of Transportation. I hope the Legislature will be able to
figure out some way of resolving that problem.
I very strongly believe that the majority of the problems are personnel
related. They need to come up with some
mechanism to provide the Department the means to get that done. I think all of us here are experiencing the
same frustrations.
The
entitlement share program is almost parallel to school equalization, where you
get a base amount and then it’s finished on population. Many of us in the rural communities feel
that equalization definitely is not equal because it is based on population and
not classrooms. We still have to fund classroom costs, which are a basic
cost. This is parallel for those who
are struggling to provide the minimal level of services for the people left
there.
I agree with you, having spent nearly twenty years as a school board
member. The details of this program are
still being worked on. I will tell you
that population is a factor but it is the intent that the basic entitlement be
there for that amount of time. Then,
whatever that base may be, the automatic growth factors, based on the economic
activity of the county, and a portion based somewhat on population, is part of
the proposal.
I would
like to remind everybody that the same people who have to replace that general
fund money are now funding us at the county level. I think some of what we are trying to do here is to address that,
but I don’t want to get into a position where we are saying to farmers,
ranchers and businessmen that we are in this to keep the transfer. What I am saying is that the closer you keep
your dollars to home the more efficient it’s going to be.
The committee has been very, very
cognizant of the overall picture through the process, so that no one is going
to receive a great windfall. The intent
is to keep the overall effect as neutral as possible.
(Hutchin)
I think everybody here knows that in the State of Montana, almost everybody
pays taxes one way or the other. As a
County Commissioner I would pay more in income taxes than I do in property
taxes, so I support the state with more than I am my own local government. As a farmer and a rancher I would pay a lot
more in property taxes than I am paying in income taxes. So it is different and I think we need to pay
attention to that. A taxpayer is a
taxpayer even if it does come from a different source.
(Story)
In the income tax system, about 50% of the people paid 25% of the income
taxes, 25% paid 25%, and then about 10% of the people in the State paid
50%. It’s really a progressive system,
so 40% of the State general fund is paid by about 9,000 people in the State.
From the
Department of Revenue there seems to be an overall view of local governments as
one big lump, so that if cities are gaining on something and counties are
loosing, or visaversa, they say it’s neutral for local government. Or if five or six counties gain revenue and
the rest all loose, it’s neutral for local government. A snapshot in time might not be too bad if
change is very slow. But in some
counties, things change in a big hurry, like loss of a couple of gold mines as
in my county. I’m concerned that the
Committee stay aware that it may end up with some big winners and some big
losses and that is not neutral for local governments. I hope that the Committee would pay attention to the figures
county-by-county and city-by-city and not just say at the bottom it looks
neutral.
That is
exactly why we have demanded a full breakout detail of the jurisdiction to make
every entity whole, not just the net bottom line. As we have seen in the past years, we do not have a revenue
source that is secure. The value of our
property tax base has been repeatedly cut, virtually in every session. If we do things the same way that we’ve
always done, we are going to get the same thing we always have. I really am optimistic that we will be able
to recommend some changes that will provide stable, reliable funding source
well into the future.”
HEALTH AND “The Health
and Welfare Committee members are
Dale Sheldon, Milt
WELFARE
ISSUES Markuson,
Ken Engellant, Jack Atthowe, Kathie Bailey, and Cliff Bare.
Bill Kennedy Resolution-wise, we
have solid waste
charges and funding
for local
Yellowstone Co. board of health inspections. The Committee worked with the Department of
Health and Commissioner Tom Bennett from Harlowton, who owns a restaurant, will
be working with us. We invited the
restaurant association to be involved.
We also have opposition to the state mandated assumption of welfare,
which we passed two years ago, just in case we have new legislation. We also have the county curfew for minors
with Hill County working with us.
We
have a resolution for funding the summer employment program. We heard from many counties, HRDCs, schools,
and non-profit providers all over the State about funding for the summer youth
program. We wrote to the Governor for
supplemental funding of the TANF program.
The Governor wrote back that the money was already encumbered and he
couldn’t look at those dollars. During
the special session, we had over a hundred legislators sign a letter to the
Governor asking for his support for funding the summer youth program. It never got off the ground and so we have a
resolution. The mental health resolution is to try to make some sense out of
mental health funding. It’s more of a
general resolution. Senator Bob Keenan
has been working on legislation, talking to others around the state. We may go into partnership for a piece of
legislation on adequate funding for mental health services or we may come with
our own legislative bill. The governor
has agreed to an $11,000,000 supplemental to bail out the mental health system
this year. We heard reports of being anywhere from $15,000,000 to $30,000,000
over the biennium short. Elected
officials have an obligation to take care of citizens who incapable of caring
for themselves. So we wrote a letter to
the Governor with four recommendations on the 15th of September and
we are waiting for a response. (Letter
attached.)
The Local Government Interim Committee has
recommended that the State fund the welfare program. We suggest that all counties pay a set dollar amount to the State
for public assistance services based on the average level of dollars paid by
the county for the past five years, ’95--’99.
The payment would be stable for five years, 2001--2005, and would sunset
to provide an opportunity to adjust funding.
This does not preclude the county from operating a medical or general
assistance program. The Department and
each county commission will enter into an annually renewable cooperative
agreement outlining the level of services to be shared by the State for
programs within our counties. Standards
for information sharing and reporting will be established in the Department’s
agreement. County commissioners will be
responsible for hiring the county director (I think we’ve settled on a
four-person hiring panel.). A committee
consisting of two county commissioners and two department staff will be formed
to mitigate disputes between the State and the county. We are still talking about who will be the
arbitrator if we cannot settle.
Community advisory committees and community operating plans will have a
county commissioner involvement. We
wanted to make sure that counties are working cooperatively with the State and
it is not just a state-run program. We
have a resolution titled, “Public Assistance Cost and Administrative
Authority”. Kathie Bailey helped draft
this in a meeting with Hank Hudson and Jack Atthowe.
The resolution leads to the next letter we
wrote to the Governor on August 8. It
goes into costs that were an unpaid fiscal obligation. We have yet to hear from the Governor.” (Letter attached)
REGION (WIR) that coalition. There were over 600 members; now the effort
is going to switch to
using that coalition for
further legislation that supports our Western values.
NACo PUBLIC The CARA legislation is still in
the Senate. A letter signed by 63 senators
LANDS is
encouraging the leadership to
bring this legislation to the
floor. Agreement in
Connie Eissinger the leadership is that PILT will
be fully funded and that there would be
protection
McCone County of private property rights. Those
two are very important to Public Lands.
The Public Lands Committee asked that I write to the Committee
supporting CARA, but as part of our support added consideration for the forest. The Public Lands Committee may be adding an
amendment for the fire season this year.
As a result of the fires, we are going to see a spread of noxious weeds,
so we would like to have some funding established for that.
I
am leaving Wednesday for the WIR Board Meeting in Jackson Hole and I would be
glad to carry any resolutions that you would like to present.”
Blattie
announced that Yellowstone County will host the Western Interstate Region (WIR)
Conference in Billings in May of
2002.
The General Session concluded until Wednesday.
GENERAL SESSION
President Harold Blattie,
Stillwater County, called the session to order.
RESOLUTION OF MACo Vice President
Fjelstad presented a Resolution
of Appreciation to
APPRECIATION Hill
County and Blaine County
Commissioners, spouses and
staff for
Gary Fjelstad sponsorship
of this Conference. The motion to
accept the Resolution as
Rosebud County read passed unanimously.
ROLL CALL Roll call
indicated that quorum was present.
Allan Underdal
Fiscal Officer
Committee Chair The following resolutions were
segregated for debate:
2000-02 2000-19 99-9
2000-05 2000-24 99-4
2000-07 2000-25
2000-15 2000-28 98-17
Additional
Resolutions from Board of Directors meeting
2000-29 2000-32
2000-30 2000-33
2000-31
Motions to
reconsider were seconded and failed for: 2000-22
2000-26
2000-27
“We discussed in our Taxation, Finance and Budget Committee
meeting. I move to amend the
“Now, therefore, be it resolved” section to take out that last sentence and
insert into section 2 ”upon passage and approval”.
After second was received, the motion to amend carried.
Resolution 2000-02, as amended, passed.
Resolution
2000-05: County Auditor Duties
Allan Underdal, Toole County,
MACo Fiscal Officer
“Our Tax, Finance and Budget
Committee discussed this at our meeting yesterday. I move to amend to put in another sentence in the end of
the Resolution. In the “Now, therefore,
be it resolved”, under 2, add a sentence, “If a majority of the county
commission orders payment of a disapproved claim, the auditor may appeal the
decision to District Court.” This
allows the auditor to come back and appeal the decision. This affects seven counties.”
Bill Murdock, Gallatin
County
“I move to amend further, add
“within seven (7) working days; otherwise the disapproved claim will be
paid.” Sometimes you have claims that
are held up, a vendor should be paid, and this sets a time frame so we can get
the approval or disapproval officially.
Alicia Pichette, the auditor from Lewis and Clark County, and I both
feel this is a very workable solution to the situation”
The seconded motion to amend
the amendment passed.
Dean Harmon, Roosevelt County
“If this is a litigated situation,
is the County fighting the County?”
Bill Murdock, Gallatin
County
“I believe
the district court would still have the final say. It would be reasonably little different than it was originally,
except the auditor takes it to district court instead of the county
commission.”
Alicia Pichette, Lewis and
Clark County Auditor
“As it was originally written, I had
concern that it would remove the internal controls. If a claim were disallowed, that appeal is taken to the district
court, and the district court orders the payment of the claim. If the board of county commissioners orders
the payment of a claim and overrides the auditor, it is my opinion that you
have removed your internal controls.
You left the board of county commissioners in a vulnerable position. So, by taking it back to the district court
in an appeal situation, you reinstate the check and balance.”
The amended amendment was seconded and passed.
The vote to adopt Resolution 2000-05, as amended,
passed.
Resolution
2000-07: Distribution of BLM Royalty
Payments
Kyle
Butts, Powder River County
“Public Lands Committee recommended
and I move this be high priority because it affects all
counties. These payments would come as
royalty payments down to the counties and they would be classified as prior
year receipts so it would increase the PILT.
It would be a larger pot back to the State which would be divided among
all the counties by their formulas.”
The seconded motion to move
to high priority passed.
The vote to adopt Resolution 2000-07 as prioritized
passed.
Resolution
2000-15: Extending Time for Publication
Notices
Jennifer Smith Mitchell, Gallatin
County
“Our fiscal officer said that this
notice period should be left open. It
should say “not less than 21 days before the action”. Bids need 30 or 45 days to respond. So the 28 days is way too limiting, that we are limited to 28
days. We just want to make sure we have
a long period of time for a longer project.”
Bill Kennedy, Yellowstone
County
“The 21 days was not enough time so
we extended it to 28 days. We wanted to
make sure there is some closure. If you
have it open-ended, you are going to have no definite timeline at all. We were looking for a week more because our
finance director felt we would get it all handled in 28 days.”
The vote to adopt Resolution 2000-15 carried.
Resolution
2000-19: Residency
Requirement for County Commissioners
Todd Devlin, Prairie County
“How would you like me to come to
your county, stay there for a year and run for county commissioner? We ought to kill this resolution and lobby
to change the legislators’ requirement to two years like ours is.”
Gordon Morris
“The
current law requires that you live in the county for a period of two years
prior to general election and live in the district on the day that you
file. There’s no date-certain for how
long you have to live in the district.
In Granite County the candidate who is running against Jim Waldbillig
moved into Waldbillig’s district and filed on the same day. This would make county processes consistent
with other elected positions by changing the requirement to living in the
county one year preceding the general election. It changes from two to one year and eliminates residency in the
district. This comes up all the time.”
The vote to adopt Resolution 2000-19
carried
Resolution
2000-24: Railroad Crossing Closures
Gary Fjelstad, Rosebud County
“We are working on a
different approach with the railroad companies. We will be meeting at the MACo office to do a little more study
on this, so I move this resolution “do not pass”.”
The seconded motion for “do not pass” on
Resolution 2000-24 passed.
Resolution
2000-25: Detention Costs for DOC
Inmates
Dan Gutebier, Park County
“The
Justice and Public Safety Committee recommends and I move that the priority
be changed to high priority. The
Department of Corrections reimburses all counties on those held in jails from
the date of conviction. Sometimes they
are in the jail for a lengthy time before conviction. This would move the reimbursement back to the date of
incarceration upon a conviction. I
assume that the rating was because not all counties have jails. However all counties participate with their
prisoners in regional jails or their own jails.”
The
seconded motion to move to high priority carried.
The vote to adopt Resolution 2000-25 carried.
Resolution 2000-28: “Full Entitlement” Share
Art
Kleinjan, Blaine County
“I’m not here to oppose this
resolution, but I would like clarification.
I attended several of the Local Government Funding and Structure
Committee meetings but we do not know the formula for the entitlement
program. The minute that a formula for
entitlement comes up in the Legislature that doesn’t agree with any of us,
there we are. I want to know if anybody
else has a problem with that entitlement, even though it says “full entitlement”. We don’t know the formula or how the
entitlement money is broken down to the counties.”
Todd Devlin, Prairie County
“Our district brought this
in. It seems like in this State it’s so
easy to vote for reduction in taxes, especially property taxes. The counties have to be whole and if it’s
going to be that easy to get something on the ballot statewide, then we’d
better have the Legislature take their responsibility to make sure that we
still can run these counties.”
The vote to approve Resolution 2000-28 carried.
2000-04 Solid Waste Service Charges
2000-08 Weed Management Funding and Liability
2000-09 Amendments for County Noxious Weed Control Act
2000-10 Prevailing Wage Rate Requirements for Local
Government
2000-11 Bidding Requirement for Local Governments
2000-12 Return School Tax Collections to Localities
2000-13 Complying with County Personnel Policies and
Procedures
2000-17 Repeal County Classification
2000-18 Funding for Growth Policies
2000-20 State or Federal Recreation Site Access and
Maintenance
2000-21 Excluding Optional Work from Overtime
Compensation
2000-23 State Restoration of County Roads
A seconded motion to adopt these resolutions as
high priority carried.
Low
Priority 2000-6 Herd
District Fencing
2000-16 Repeal Appointment of Counsel in Paternity
Cases
Re-affirmed Resolution 99-4: State Funding for District Courts
Resolutions Jim
Deckert, Dawson County
“have
some questions about this in relation to the funding. We have good relationships with our judge and we have never
denied court funds or anything like that.
Based on the premise that the further away from home we get, the less
efficient government becomes, we all are concerned about where the money will
come from. If they do try to attach
some of our non-tax revenue that would affect us. I think we should have a little more thinking going into this.”
The vote to reaffirm Resolution 99-4
carried.
Resolution
99-9: Increase Local Elected Officials
Salaries
Mike
Murray, Lewis and Clark County
“The Resolutions Committee proposed
the following changes:
Page 1, 74-2503, “fiscal year 2005”,
District One proposed 2006. The
rationale is that someone taking office this coming January would not have to
implement the changes.
Page
1, in the last underlined section the proposed change would add “with no fewer
than two commissioners concurring.”
Ultimately the county commission will have control over the salaries
that are set for elected officials.
The
bottom of page two states, “salary and benefit increases…are to be funded as a
tax liability outside of the calculations of local government authority….” With this, these raises will be outside of
the caps on the budget.”
Carol Kienenberger,
Phillips County
“District One had come in with a
radical change to this. We met with the
Resolutions Committee and these are the changes that we thought we could live
with. Adding another year on to the
term of it would take us off the hook if we were running now. We’re really not sure some of the counties
in Eastern Montana can reach that level by 2005 or by 2006; but if by 2006 it’s
not working, we could come in and amend it again, if it does pass.
We were ready to take out the entire
county compensation board. The way
salaries are calculated now, with a spreadsheet to figure out on all the base
salaries, this would remove all of that and you could figure your COLA on the
previous year’s salary. By adding the
language you did, it would still be up to the commissioners to decide on
increases, with help from this compensation board.”
Glenna Obie
“The Council of County Officials
consists of the President or Chairman or lead person for each of the
associations--Clerks and Recorders, Magistrates, Treasurers, Sheriffs and Peace
Officers, etc. and of course MACo itself.
The Council of County Officials did the research and proposed /
recommended this.”
The
seconded motion to add “2006” and “with not fewer than two commissioners
concurring” passed.
Milt Markuson, Carter County
“Where is the money going to come
from? You all need to remember that
this is going to tax real property. I
believe it’s our business as county commissioners not to add any more taxes on
real property. I am very much against
this. I want you to think about where
the money will come to pay this.”
The vote to reaffirm amended Resolution 99-9 carried.
Resolution
98-17: Clarification of Deputy Sheriff
Salaries
Jennifer Smith Mitchell,
Gallatin County
“In the
sentence “Beginning on the date of the first anniversary of employment”, I
move to insert “as a deputy sheriff with the department”. The existing language, without that addition,
will allow detention officers, clerks, dispatchers or anybody else to count
their time in this compilation. Also
there is a suggestion to grandfather current employees and possibly a cap at 15
or 20 years. I don’t have any language
on that. I did check this out with Jack
Holstrom, too, and he said that was a good suggestion.”
The motion to amend was
seconded and adopted.
Carol Kienenberger,
Phillips County
“Phillips county disagrees with
the proposed strike-out of the “years of service during any year in which the
salary was set at the same level as the salary of the prior fiscal year may not
be included in any calculation of longevity increases”. I move to remove this strike-out.”
Ted Coffman, Madison County
“I believe that’s consistent with
what we lived with in Madison County a couple of years ago, when we froze the
salaries at prior year level.”
The motion
to remove strike-out was seconded and passed.
The vote to re-affirm Resolution 98-17 as amended
passed.
The motion to reaffirm the following high priority
resolutions from previous years passed: 99-1 99-6 99-7 99-10
99-11 98-18 98-26
The motion to reaffirm the following medium priority
resolutions from previous years passed:
99-2 99-5 99-8 98-2
The motion to reaffirm the following low priority
resolutions from previous years passed: 99-3 98-22
LATE RESOLUTIONS SUBMITTED FROM BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Resolution
2000-29: Funding for Regional Mental
Health Centers
The
seconded motion to adopt Resolution 2000-29 at High Priority passed.
Resolution
2000-30: County Offices of Public
Assistance; Costs
The
seconded motion to adopt Resolution 2000-30 at High Priority passed.
Resolution
2000-31: Funding Summer Youth
Employment Programs
The
seconded motion to adopt Resolution 2000-31 at High Priority passed.
Resolution
2000-32: Limitation on County Road and
Bridge
Depreciation
Reserve Funds
The
seconded motion to adopt Resolution 2000-32 at High Priority passed.
Resolution
2000-33: Mobile Home Recycling
Bill Kennedy, Yellowstone
County
“The Health and Human Services
Committee met yesterday and presents the motion to move from Low to Medium
priority”
The seconded motion to move to
medium priority carried.
The seconded motion to adopt Resolution 2000-33
passed.
The motion to suspend the rules to introduce a
late resolution was seconded and passed with the required 2/3 majority.
Resolution
2000-34: Removal / Restoration of Damaged Forest Resources
Alan
Thompson, Ravalli County
“We would
like to see re-forestation and restoration.
This would have tremendous economic impact not only in Ravalli County
but those counties which were adjacent to us. Counties that have sawmills
(Lincoln, Sanders, etc.) have said they would like to be able to harvest some
of this. We would like to present this
resolution to the State Land Board. We
have approximately 50 million board feet of damaged timber on our State Lands. We would also like to hand carry it to the
Secretary of Agriculture and to the Secretary of Interior.
The
impetus for this was the second week of the fire. Friends within the Bitterroot filed a suit in District Court that
said, “When the fires are over, we want EISs, etc. etc. taken care of before
any salvage logging takes place.” Quite
frankly, that takes a couple of years; the timber rots and there is no way to
do anything with it. We have suffered
about $8 Million in economic problems in Ravalli County. I think it would be an economic benefit to a
lot of counties.”
Mary Sexton, Teton County
“This
should address State forests, too. I move
to amend to add State forests so that it reads national forests and
state forests as well.”
The
motion to amend to add Montana State forests and Montana State
government was seconded and passed
A motion to adopt amended Resolution
2000-34 with a high priority was seconded and carried.
2002
ANNUAL Conference
delegates voted to hold the 2002 Annual Conference
CONFERENCE in Big Sky, hosted by Madison and
Gallatin Counties.
ELECTION
OF A unanimous
ballot was cast
to elect Gary Fjelstad, Rosebud
OFFICERS County as MACo President and Dean Harmon, Roosevelt
County as First Vice President.
Victor
Miller, Blaine County was elected Second Vice President.
Outgoing
President Harold Blattie announced that Urban Representative Mike Murray of
Lewis and Clark County was elected by Urban County members and that Allan
Underdal will enter his second year as Fiscal Officer.
The
call for further business had no response.
The meeting was adjourned.
JOINT
OPENING SESSION
WORKERS
COMPENSATION INSURANCE POOL
JPA Chair
Harold Blattie opened the Joint Session.
Gordon Morris conducted the roll call and noted a quorum was present for
each insurance pool.
JPA Chair Blattie introduced the
JPA Board of Trustees:
Gary
Fjelstad Harold
Blattie Janet
Kelly Allan
Underdal
Dean Harmon Howard Gipe Gordon
Morris
JPIA Chair Vern
Petersen introduced the present JPIA Trustees:
Vern
Petersen, Chairman Mike
Murray Gary
Fjelstad John
Prinkki
Don
McDowell Harold
Blattie Gordon
Morris
TRUSTEE “The JPA Work. Comp. side
is straightforward, but it’s a little
more complicated
NOMINATIONS on the JPIA side.
In the Work. Comp. program, I refer to our By Laws, Article III:
Gordon Morris The Board shall be comprised of seven
persons who are representatives of members in the Trust and the Montana
Association of Counties. The Board
shall be the Executive Committee members of the Montana Association of Counties
as elected and designated at the annual meeting of the Montana Association of
Counties and the Executive Director of the Montana Association of Counties
designated and employed by the Board shall be a trustee.
It goes on to say in Subsection iii”
In the case where
an elected member of the Executive Committee is from a county that is not a
member of the Trust, said position will be filled by nominations from the floor
at the annual meeting, to be voted upon by the members present…
So, for Work. Comp. you do nothing
until after the election of the Executive Committee. For Urban Counties rep.,
the only Urban County that is not a member of the JPA program is Missoula. An Urban Rep. from Missoula would not be
eligible and on Wednesday you would nominate from the floor to fill that
vacancy. In the election of the second
VP, you have two candidates for second vice president. One is not eligible to serve as a JPIA trustee. Commissioner Howard Gipe is from Flathead
County, which is not a member of our insurance authority. Commissioner Vic Miller is. So, if Howard wins, the Fiscal Officer would
automatically move into that position.
If Victor is elected, then he will serve as a Trustee.
A
few years ago we had a similar provision with JPIA, the property-casualty
program. In 1997 we amended it and it
says:
The Board shall consist of the President, the First Vice President and
the Executive Director of the Montana Association of Counties. The remaining four members shall be elected
by the members at the MACo/JPIA Annual meeting for a term of three years each…
If the President or the First Vice President is from a non-member county, the
trustee position shall immediately be filled by a member of the MACo Executive
Committee Officers, in the following order:
the Second Vice President, the Fiscal Officer, the Past President, the
Urban Representative.
We don’t have to do any nominating
today. On Wednesday we will be taking
nominations because we have two positions that have to be elected for at-large
membership. Current Trustee John
Prinkki is ending a three-year term begun in 1997 and Commissioner Don
McDowell, is serving out the one year left on that position. Don’s position has also expired in terms of
its three-year term. Both positions
will be subject to nominations from the floor, either of whom could be
re-nominated and other nominations could be made on Wednesday.
I
have copies of both the By Laws of the JPIA program and the JPA program. If you would like a copy, I would be happy
to hand one over to you.”
COMPENSATION This year in February we
retired the bonds at mid-point. We were supposed to go
REPORT an additional ten years, but then
came the first call date and they were gone.
Ray Barnicoat In
April, the actuarial report recommended a reduction of 7% off of your quarterly
premium--a great reduction. This is on top of what you have for experience
modified, adjusted after that. Very significant!
My
opinion is that we are at the point where rates are either going to level off
or we are going to see slight increases.
I’ve some reasons to think this way.
It’s easier to talk about it now than further down the road.
First
of all, we are seeing the start of trends nationally. I’m in the process of preparing our Workers’ Comp. excess
insurance. That has consistently gone
down for us over the past 5, 6, 7 years.
This year it went up $9,600. In
the private sector market, the rate increased.
Others were telling me this morning about businessmen in their
communities experiencing significant increases.
During
this past interim there has been a Workers’ Compensation study committee. They have seven bills to bring to this next
legislative session. Just about all of
those bills are for inflation. Maybe
that’s not a bad deal because in the early ‘90’s there were a number of reforms
that did come on the backs of workers and now it’s time to adjust some of
that. But how much money can Montana
employers cough up to make Work. Comp. a better system for the injured
worker? That falls right through to our
programs and the State government as well.
In
addition to that, there is a Work. Comp. Coalition which has a dozen bills they
call, “The Dirty Dozen”. Every one of
those bills are inflationary bills for Work. Comp.. Some may get through; some may be not and so we negotiate before
we get to the hearings.
Twice
this past year there have been decisions through the Montana State Supreme
Court which have the potential for conditional exposure and thus an increase in
our Work. Comp. system.
As
a risk manager we can enjoy the successes and really appreciate the savings we
had over time, but there is a time for change.
That time is coming on us now and it’s easier to talk about it here than
have to explain why things happened later.
What
can we do to help ourselves? I think
it’s very basic and I’ve got to ask for your help on this. Please, every one of you just really work on
reducing frequency of workplace injuries.
Then the costs will take care of themselves. If we don’t have the claims, we won’t have the costs. We know we are not going to get rid of all
the claims but our frequency sits too high to be overly comfortable. The way that we can get there is savings X
3: savings, savings, savings. Work on the people through education and
motivation. Your safety committees have
been lax. Let’s get some training done
to make sure that we are meeting some of the requirements in the Safety Culture
Act. You’ve been good team players,
participating in training. Our Boards
of Trustees is interested in seeing that people enroll in those training
sessions and participate. Those are the
things that create the teamwork and make the program successful.
As
we are going into the Legislative Session, let’s not forget the Work. Comp.
bills either. We are going to need
folks like you there as business owners, as commissioners, to testify on those.
I
ask Emelia McEwen to stand. She has worked with a number of you over the past
years. It’s very common to find her in
a nursing home assisting people with lifting techniques, body mechanics, and
analyzing lifting equipment. And it’s
very common to find her in a courthouse environment doing ergonomic assessments
and training sessions, assisting people to avoid repetitive motion injuries to
hand and shoulder.”
Harold Blattie “I would like to introduce Larry
Zanto who handles our claims through Willis.
I also introduce Jack Holstrom, who is the personnel services
administrator for JPIA. The ratings on
the workshops show that everybody just loves what he does for us. I thank them.”
Gordon Morris “In your
packet are the Work. Comp. report and the JPIA report. We also provided the latest financial information
for this period ending June 30. I think
it’s significant to note the $13 Million in Work. Comp. in investments. That takes into account that we called the
bonds in February--some $6.78 Million worth.
That’s $13 Million that’s accruing interest in the pool for the benefit
of the members.
As
of August, the JPIA program has invested in excess of $5 Million. If you go back even three years ago, we
weren’t over a million dollars. With
the program changes in the overall structure of the program, I think you can
really see the growth as a result of that.
This
is going to come to you as a surprise, but in thinking of how we have done this
now for fourteen years, it might be time to change our By Laws. Our By Laws for both programs require that
we have this meeting at the annual MACo convention. That’s why we are meeting this afternoon and why we will meet
again on Wednesday to conclude our general business session after the election
of MACo officers. Is it time to
consider amending the By Laws to have a separate insurance meeting, totally
outside of the context of MACo’s annual convention, not at the same time, but
at a different specified time? I know
that you find it very confusing. We
interrupt the MACo meeting to bring you the JPA / JPIA program; and when we are
done with that, we go back to MACo.
Should we consider having meetings of the membership at a time specified
in the By Laws, removed from the MACo annual convention?”
Ted Coffman “This is a good time
because this is when we are all together.
I think we
Madison County have a good Board, but I’m interested in what goes on and this is a good time to
get the information out.”
Dean Harmon “I concur
with what Ted says. Not all counties are members, so I think
Roosevelt County having it here at this time would encourage
them to participate, even as listeners.
Hopefully
they will become a member of the organization.
The other way would isolate and
have less knowledge for those non-member counties.”
Allan Underdal “I don’t
think we want to change.
Not everytime is a good time to
have
Toole County us traveling.”
Glenna Obie “Would it be more helpful
to have the meeting all on Wednesday morning
Jefferson County or all at one time, instead of having this
insertion in the middle of this day and then another insertion in the middle of
that day. Have it all together and have
an opportunity to ask a few more questions and talk a little bit more about the
program, the rates, problems some of us have had. When Greg and the folks come to see us, we frequently have a lot
of questions and he ends up saying, “Well, that’s decided by the Board of
Directors.” We could have time to ask
the Board of Directors why they made those decisions.”
,
Gordon Morris “Thank you. I want to thank every body for allowing me
this digression. It’s good feedback not
only for myself, but also for the Trustees.
For example, we could eliminate the opening session on Monday. We could combine everything into an opening and
closing session on Wednesday morning, be done with MACo on Tuesday evening and
just continue the next morning with the insurance programs. The Convention planning committee could take
a look at it.”
Janet Kelly “It’s a plus to consider
a different time frame. When it’s the
last thing on
Custer County the agenda, we have lost people,
depending on the weather. Let’s not
change from the annual meeting, but rather where it’s slotted on the schedule.”
Vern Petersen “When you need nominations for the Trustees, now you
know that on
Fergus County Monday and it gives you two days to
line up somebody that you think might be good in that position. It’s an extremely important position. So to come in and have a half-hour meeting
and nominate somebody from the floor that you haven’t even talked to would be a
mistake. I think that’s something we
need to consider.”
Janet Kelly “Perhaps we could
consider a way for information to come out during fall district meetings, so
possible candidates could be identified a little bit earlier. That may eliminate the problem of trying to
do it all in one executive meeting.”
Gordon Morris “I want to thank you
all. This has been interesting and I
like the feedback. If you have any
other comments or if you have any questions about the Work. Comp. brochure that
is in the packets I would be glad to visit with you. Everything that we see in terms of the finance of both the JPIA
and the JPA programs speaks well of the programs. Doing it this way at least we have opportunity for non-members to
get the benefit of listening to a conversation and maybe to consider the
programs in the future.”
Glenna Obie “I want to ask about the
officer situation, because people find that very confusing. Could we revise the By Laws so that any
officer elected, who is a member of whichever pool, automatically becomes a
member of that board, but we still elect people from the body as a whole? The number on the board might fluctuate from
year to year depending on who the officers are.”
Gordon Morris “Once, the JPIA was
identical to JPA. The Executive
Committee, as long as they’re from a member county, was automatically
trustees. We went to this because a few
of years ago, with seventeen counties in the program, the odds were never in
your favor that the full Executive membership was eligible. As a result we changed the By Laws. If you have four members elected at large
and two members that come from the Executive Committee, it just goes down
through the chairs. So it provides
stability. If Howard is elected, then
we have to drop down to the Fiscal Officer, who is eligible. We have the four that were elected. It happens that two of the three-year terms
expire this year. So we are really
electing only two. My point is that
they were exactly the same ten years ago.
In the Property-Casualty program we have four officers elected at large
with two Executive Committee members.
For the Work. Comp. program, six of them are the Executive Committee.”
CASUALTY POOL Then we’ll have the
opportunity to discuss and
review some coverage changes.
REPORT Second,
the series of policy-holder
seminars start next week for 2 ½ weeks in 9
Greg Jackson locations throughout the state. If you haven’t sent in your registration
forms yet, please do so. There are a
couple of locations where we have minimal numbers. We will have four evening sessions that are designed specifically
for your appointed board members and also for special district board
members. This is an opportunity for you
as a policy-holder to come in. We will
try to get the information out to everybody.
There is no fee associated with the seminars. They are open to non-member also. A list of the locations is available.”
15TH
ANNUAL CONFERENCE
MACo JOINT
POWERS AUTHORITY
WORKERS’
COMPENSATION TRUST
Wednesday,
September 27, 2000
Havre,
Montana
ROLL CALL JPA Secretary Gordon Morris called the
roll.
A
quorum was present.
President Harold Blattie called
the Annual Meeting of Joint Powers Authority for the Workers’ Compensation Pool
to order.
“The
By Laws indicate that the MACo Executive Board shall be the Trustees for the
Work. Comp. pool as long as the individual counties are member counties. The situation is that all of the Executive
Board members do belong to the Joint Powers Authority.
OFFICERS Authority carried: President Gary Fjelstad
First
Vice President Dean Harmon
Second
Vice President Victor Miller
Fiscal
Officer Allan Underdal
Urban
Representative Mike Murray
Past
President L. Harold Blattie
MACo
Executive Director Gordon Morris
Calls for further business
went unanswered and the meeting was adjourned.
14TH
ANNUAL CONFERENCE
MACo JOINT
POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY
Wednesday,
September 27, 2000
Chair Vern Petersen called the meeting to order.
ANNUAL REPORT “I want to update
the membership on the JPIA program and marketing
Greg Jackson efforts
for the year.
JPIA Marketing We now offer excess liability
coverage or additional limits on
federal and
Director out-of-state
claims. Right now we have 21 that
purchased that coverage and we hope to have all the counties with those
additional limits in the next year.
We
also added a new property re-insurance company, Regis. As a result of seminars we had a couple of weeks
ago, they are offering other property coverage too, and it looks like we have a
good commitment with them over the next two or three years.
Also,
the Trustees may consider options for caps for the re-insurance on the
liability side. Currently we have
Signet Star providing that coverage.
I
am pleased to announce that we have two new members in the program. We welcome Judith Basin County and Custer
County effective July 1. Also, we have
preliminary commitment from Sheridan County to come into the program effective
October 1. So, I’d like to welcome
those three new members.
We have 77 Districts in the program
and their overall loss ratio is currently about 30%, so they have been good
members. It looks as if we are adding
close to 15 districts a year.
The financial status of the program
has improved tremendously since we restructured the program in ’96. We started by funding the self-funding part
at about $2.7 Million. That dropped to
$2.5 Million and now we are down to $2.4 Million. If we continue with the positive claims trend, then we can drop
that even further. This is a Trustee
option to look at enhancing the program.
So, the financial aspect of the program is on a very, very positive
trend.”
Don McDowell “I thank you for that flip of the
coin last year. Carol will enjoy
serving. It is interesting and she is
going to be working with hard-working people who are trying to make this work
for our counties. It has a bright
future.”
Harold Blattie “I
extend my thanks to the other Trustees of the JPIA Pool. After being elected as Second Vice President
three years ago, I suddenly found out I was in an insurance company. Quite honestly I hadn’t realized that during
the course of my crusade for VP. It
really is a challenge to become the insurer rather than the insured. Greg has done a wonderful job of marketing
and to those counties who are not members of the Pool, I urge you and encourage
you to consider joining. We are pooling
our overall risks between all member counties to share and share alike. Hence, the coverage that you get and the
services that are provided simply can’t be equaled, especially in the area of
personnel with Jack Holstrom. I don’t
know if you could be fair about how much money he saved us.”
The
meeting was adjourned.
ANNUAL
MEETING
MONDAY
SEPTEMBER 25, 2000
CHAIR “Welcome
and thank you for letting me be here this afternoon. It is time for the
Jim Hunt Balance of
State Job Training Consortium annual meeting. This time is provided during
Park County the MACo
Annual Conference. Montana has two
service delivery areas--CEP, the Concentrated Employment Program, with its 10
counties and the Balance of State with the remainder of 46 counties. We are charged with distributing dollars for
services in Montana for the Federal job training program.
First
I want to introduce, the CEP Council of Commissioners:
Dave Beatty Anaconda Deer Lodge County Charles Lucas Ringling--Meagher County
Tim Clark Butte Silver Bow County Mike
Murray Helena--Lewis &
Clark County
Tom Hatch Helmsville--Powell County Frank Nelson Virginia City--Madison County
Jim Hohn Townsend--Broadwater County Sam Samson Boulder--Jefferson County
Mike Kahoe Philipsburg--Granite County Donna Sevalstad Dillon--Beaverhead County
The
BOS Council of Commissioners are:
Kathie
Bailey Lewistown District 6 David Reinhart Glasgow District 1
Carol
Brooker Thompson Falls District 10 Joan Stahl Forsyth District
3
Adam
Dahlman Choteau District
5 Judy Stang Superior District 11
Connie
Eissinger Brockway District 2 Jim Hunt Livingston District 9
Bill
Kennedy Billings District 7 Gordon Morris MACo
Victor
Miller Chinook District 4
Next
are Sue Mohr, director for Montana Job Training Partnership and Frank
Kankleborg, the program specialist.
The purpose of this meeting is to
let you know what is happening statewide and nationally on the job training
program.
Sue Mohr Whether she
agrees with him or not doesn’t matter.
MJTP, Inc. I am going to take a whirlwind
tour of the Workforce Investment Act passed in 1998. If you’re not exactly bowled over by the changes that have been
occurring in this business in Montana, it’s because you shouldn’t be. We are moving at a glacial pace because this
Act requires huge changes in our system and integration of programs at both the
state and local levels that are turning into painful processes for all of
us.
Each
of Montana’s two areas appoints a Workforce Investment Board, so there’s a
Balance of State Workforce Investment Board and a CEP Workforce Investment
Board. Currently funds flow to each
area and they have the authority over what is called “one stop system”, which
must be customer-friendly and easy to get into.
Many
times in your communities people wander in for services and they only hear
about what is offered at that particular office. Now all those programs are to be integrated together, so that
people can walk into any of those offices and get help to know what’s going on
everywhere. Everyone has access to
“core services” just by walking in the door; and for those who can’t get
employed, we have training dollars.
Previously our system was designed for people who had problems, who were
poor, or who couldn’t find work because industry had shut down. Now under the one-stop vision, it’s open to
all adults, with services which result in self-sufficiency. The summer youth funds have been dedicated
to a year-round program, thus eliminating the big summer program that many of
you were familiar with, where you had kids going to work in schools and in your
parks systems, etc.
Both
areas were required under the Federal law, as a condition of receiving funds
this year, to designate two one-stops in each of their areas. The CEP designated the Butte Job Service
Office and the Balance of State designated the Lewistown Workforce Center,
which has some co-located offices in it.
After
we designated those two one-stop centers we really didn’t have the plan to
integrate the rest of the State. So 25
people volunteered to go on a one stop tour to places all over the United
States to look at truly integrated, effective, well-run one-stop centers which
were located in areas similar to Montana.
They were rural and they had many of the same kinds of issues we have
here politically. We sent folks to
places like Alaska, Northern Minnesota, rural Nevada, northern California and
Pennsylvania. They came back and spent
two days putting together the “One Stop Tour Group Proposal”. We will be rolling this out next week at our
annual leadership conference in Missoula.
We greatly appreciate Connie Eissinger who will be on the road in
meetings like this until the conference in Missoula.
The
proposal itself has lots of elements to it.
These are the basics:
Requires
at least three programs or agencies which are co-located. The vision is to eventually achieve full
integration of all the partners. The
idea is similar to Walmart. When
someone walks in, a guide can very quickly assess what the person needs and
direct the person where to go.
Shared
services and information
Build
in continuous improvement--whatever gets developed by communities needs to have
ways to improve at all times.
This
brings us to the Community Workforce Planning Conference in Billings, November
15 and 16. This is a huge project that
we have been putting together with the State for the last few months. This is our hand up to the communities. We have invited all the local management
teams who are operating in some 24 communities around Montana to come in to this
conference. Each of those teams has a
local facilitator that to help them develop a business plan for their
community. We already spent a day
training those facilitators. They will
also come to Billings and everyone will go out for a day and half to develop a
business plan, based on the tour group proposal, which they can then roll out
in each of their communities. It’s a
big project. Please urge members of
your committee to attend this conference.
If you can attend it, all the better.
County
commissioners select and appoint Workforce Investment Board members. Our Workforce Investment Boards are 35 to 40
members, a majority from the private sector.
Every BOS district has a private sector rep. and every county in the CEP
has a private sector rep. That means
you need to be always on the look out for people who you think would be good to
serve on the Boards. We have an open
enrollment process. You contact us
anytime to send in resumes and names of people you think would be good. We also have representatives from education,
labor, community based organizations, rehab. organizations, economic
development, job services. If you see
people in your communities who you think would be good, please encourage them
to serve on the Board. People who do serve
will tell you that it is very good, very productive work. The Boards receive money and figure out how
to distribute it throughout the State.
What
you can do is to spread the word, visit offices in your communities, see if
they are doing what we just described to you.
Be there and be interested--that’s the most important role you can
serve.
I
want to thank MACo for the incredible support they have provided to our system,
to my organization, the Montana Job Training Partnership. For years, I have come to you and talked
about Federal funding of workforce programs and about how difficult it is to
get support in Congress. Finally about
a year ago, at the National Association of Counties level, we were able to hire
an advocacy firm in Washington DC. We
tied in our work with them, so they are now advocating for funds both through
the National Association of Counties and through USAWorks. The annual fee could not be paid out of
Federal funds, so through MACo’s generosity we are covering that. We want to thank you for that support. We think this will be a huge help in
obtaining funds for our system, particularly as we move forward under a new
administration. I want to personally
thank the members of this organization and the Board of Directors, Gordon, Jane
and all our partners here.
I
am so excited to be able to do this. A
couple weeks ago I learned that this was Jim Hunt’s last meeting. He has provided such great leadership for
our Balance of State commissioners over the last 12 years. When Jim was a newly elected county
commissioner, those District 9 commissioners were looking around and thinking,
“Who’s new?” So they elected Jim. He is one of those commissioners who rolls
up his sleeves, gets right into the action.
Whenever we have needed support from Commissioners, he was always
there. Throughout the last ten years or
so, we have been very, very lucky in our system to have the county
commissioners like Don Valiton, Don McClain, Bud Miller, Ann Mary Dussault,
Jane Jelinski, Sherm Doucette, Blake Wordell, etc. Our system would not be the kind of local delivery system that
you have, which is responsive to what you and what your people need, if your
commissioners and your representatives hadn’t come forward and done what they
needed to do. Jim is right out of that
mold.
It
didn’t take long for the Balance of State commissioners to make him the head,
because they could see that he had that very low key, quiet leadership style
that served the needs. When he needed
to meet with the Governor or when he needed to meet with Department staff in
State government to get his message across, he was always very effective. He is very even-handed and very clear in
advocating for local areas and not in any other political sense. It’s just been a great tenure for Jim, and
so I’m very happy to give him this. It
reads:
“In grateful appreciation for twelve years of service to the Balance of State Council of Commissioners and dedicated service to the customers of Montana’s workforce development system.”
We
did this because every time Hunt goes to one of those national conferences, he
always comes back with a bunch of cups.
So now he has a cupboard.”
JIM HUNT “I am going to miss being here at
MACo and I am going to miss being chair of the
Outgoing Commissioners for the Balance of
State. All of us, after we have been
involved in any of
BOS Chair this, have a sense of
ownership. It’s awfully hard to let it
go. I’ve dealt with a lot of good
commissioners throughout my tenure in both the Balance of State and in
MACo. I’ve always made it a point that
I wanted to be here because of our associations at so many of the different
meetings that we all have to attend. I
attend many different meetings with a lot of different commissioners throughout
the State of Montana who are dedicated.
I sure appreciate it and I know the people of our counties also
appreciate it. I am going to miss this
very much. It was a hard decision for
me not to run this year, but my wife and I have wanted to do some traveling. I sure didn’t feel comfortable taking all
the time out that we wanted, so I didn’t run this time. I do thank you for your support and I will
always support MACo and the commissioners in the State of Montana. This is my home. I want to thank my fellow commissioners
in Park County and Gallatin County who I represent on the Balance of State
Council. They have always been
supportive. Thank you.”
The meeting was adjourned.
MONTANA ASSOCIATION OF
COUNTIES
BY‑LAWS
ARTICLE
I
NAME, MISSION AND
OBJECTIVES
Section 1. NAME:
This organization shall be known as the
Montana Association of Counties (MACo), hereinafter referred to as the
“Association”. The principal office shall be in Helena, Montana.
Section
2. MISSION:
The
general purpose of this organization is to promote the voluntary cooperation
and coordination of the sovereign counties of the State of Montana.
Section 3. OBJECTIVES:
The objectives of the Association will
be to:
a) Do all things necessary and proper for the benefit of the
counties of this state;
b) Provide
a forum for discussions of subjects vital to the operation of county
government;
c) Establish
and maintain lines of communication with the executive and legislative branches
of both the state and federal government;
d) Present
and promote legislation which county officials believe to be beneficial to
citizens, counties, and the state and oppose legislation which county officials
believe to be detrimental thereto;
e) Maintain
a permanent organization dedicated to securing cooperation among counties;
f) Maintain a statewide central office, with
staff to coordinate the programs of the association;
g) Collect,
compile, and distribute information about county government to county, state,
federal officials and Montana League of Cities and Towns;
h) Initiate litigation in the name of the
Association and its members to determine rights or liabilities of county
officials under any constitutional provision or statute, and appear as a friend
of the court (amicus curiae) in any court proceedings wherein such rights or
liabilities are to be determined;
i) Appoint
or employ counsel for the purpose of furthering any of the objectives of this
Association mentioned herein.
ARTICLE
II
MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. MEMBERS:
Members shall be the elected officials
of those counties which have paid their annual dues in accordance with a
schedule of dues or assessments adopted by the Board of Directors and ratified
by the membership. Members shall be
entitled to all services offered by the Association.
Section 2. VOTING
Each member county, pursuant to Section
1, has one vote. The Board of County
Commissioners shall appoint one county delegate and one alternate to have the
authority to vote for that member county at membership meetings of the
Association. The voting delegate and
alternate must be elected county officials.
Section 3. AFFILIATE MEMBERS:
Affiliate members are individuals,
businesses and organizations that make proper application to the Executive
Director and pay dues adopted by the Board of Directors and ratified by the membership. Affiliate members shall be entitled to
receive services as determined by the Board of Directors. They shall have no floor or voting privileges.
Section 4. TERMINATION:
Any member county that fails to pay its
annual dues or assessment within 45 days of the billing date, July 1, shall
have its membership terminated, unless prior written request for payment at a
later date has been approved by the Board of Directors.
ARTICLE
III
OFFICERS AND EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE
Section 1. OFFICERS
The officers are the President, First
Vice President, Second Vice President, Class 1A County Representative, Fiscal
Officer and the Past President, all of whom must be qualified and acting
commissioners of member counties. The
officers shall serve as the Executive Committee. These officers will be elected at the annual conference by the
membership. They shall hold office
until their successors are elected and qualified, so long as they shall
remain in county office as county commissioners.
Section 2. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE
OFFICERS
a) PRESIDENT
The President shall:
1) preside
at all general and special meetings of the Association, the Board and Executive
Committee;
2) provide
the general supervision of all business of the Association in conjunction with
the Executive Committee;
3) appoint
all committee members that shall serve during his/her administration;
4) serve as an ex-officio, non-voting member
of all committees.
b) VICE PRESIDENTS
The Vice Presidents shall consult with,
counsel, and advise the President; and, in the absence of the President, his or
her duties shall be performed successively by the First and Second Vice
Presidents.
c) FISCAL OFFICER
The Fiscal Officer shall:
1) oversee
the financial affairs of the Association;
2)
make
a complete report to the membership at each conference;
3) make monthly reports available to members
on request;
4) recommend
appropriate investments for the Association's idle funds;
5) counsel with the Executive Director
and the budget and finance committee on the framing of the Association’s
budget;
6) review proposals for public or
private grants to assure that the fiscal needs of the Association are met. The fiscal officer shall be elected to a
two-year term following nominations and elections in odd numbered years.
d) CLASS 1A COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE
The Class 1A County representative
shall consult with, counsel and advise the president. The current class 1A
county representative shall call a caucus of the Class 1A counties (counties
with over 35,000 population) during the annual conference, for the purpose of
selecting a Class 1A Representative.
Section 3. OFFICERS’ VACANCIES
a) PRESIDENT - A vacancy in the
Presidency shall be filled by the First Vice President. The First Vice President shall serve out the
unexpired portion of the previous president's term plus the year representing
that in which he or she would have succeeded to the Presidency; or
If the First Vice President declines the appointment, then the
past president shall make an appointment to fill the vacancy subject to the
approval of the Board of Directors.
Said appointee shall serve out the unexpired portion of the President's
term and then move into the past presidency.
The First Vice Presidency shall be filled by the appointment of
the Second Vice President. The Second
Vice President shall serve out the unexpired portion of the previous First Vice
President's term plus the year representing that in which he or she would have
succeeded to the First Vice Presidency; or
If the Second Vice President declines the appointment to First
Vice President, then the Past President shall make an appointment to fill the
vacancy subject to the approval of the Board of Directors. Said appointee shall serve out the unexpired
portion of the First Vice President's term.
Said appointee may be nominated and run for the office of the President
at the next annual conference.
The Second Vice Presidency shall be filled by an appointment by
the Past President subject to the approval of the Board of Directors. Said appointee shall serve out the unexpired
portion of the Second Vice President's term.
Said appointee may be nominated and run for the office of the First Vice
President at the next annual conference.
b) FIRST
VICE PRESIDENT - A vacancy in the First Vice Presidency shall be filled by
the Second Vice President. The Second
Vice President shall serve out the unexpired portion of the First Vice
President's term and then move into the Presidency; or
If the Second Vice President declines the appointment to First
Vice President, then the President shall make an appointment to fill the
vacancy subject to the approval of the Board of Directors. Said appointee shall serve out the unexpired
portion of the First Vice President's term. Said appointee may be nominated and
run for the office of the President at the next annual conference.
The Second Vice
Presidency vacancy shall
be filled by
appointment by the President subject to the approval of
the Board of Directors. Said appointee
shall serve out the unexpired portion of the Second Vice President's term. Said appointee may be nominated and run for
the office of the First Vice President.
c) SECOND
VICE PRESIDENT - A vacancy in the Second Vice Presidency shall be filled by
appointment by the President, subject to the approval of the Board of
Directors. Said appointment may be
nominated and run for the office at the next annual conference.
d) FISCAL
OFFICER - A vacancy in the office
of Fiscal Officer shall be filled by appointment by the President, subject to
the approval of the Board of Directors.
e) PAST
PRESIDENT - A vacancy in the Past
Presidency shall be filled by the appointment by the President of the next most
immediate Past President.
f) MEMBER
RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENTS - All
of the above referenced appointments are subject to approval at the next annual
conference by the membership of the Association.
g) CLASS
1A COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE - A Class
1A County Representative vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the
President subject to a recommendation made by a majority of the Class 1A
Counties.
Section 4. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
a) The
Executive Committee shall have general supervision, management and control of
the business and property of the Association subject to the by‑laws and
to the policy established by the Board of Directors and the voting membership.
b) The
Executive Committee shall have the power to determine Association policy on all
legislative matters of concern within the guidelines established by the voting
membership or the Board of Directors.
c) The
Executive Committee shall serve as an Evaluation Committee for purposes of
annually evaluating the performance of the Executive Director. Such evaluation shall be reported to the
Board of Directors.
Section 5. EXPENSES
The members of the Executive Committee
shall receive their necessary expenses incurred in their attendance of meetings
approved by the President, with the exception of the meetings held at the
annual conference or special meetings of the full Association.
ARTICLE IV
BOARD
OF DIRECTORS
Section 1. MEMBERS
a) The
Board shall consist of the four elected officers, the Past President, the Class
1A Representative and the elected chairperson from each of the twelve regional
districts specified in Article VIII.
b) In
addition to the members identified in Subsection (a), other county elected
official associations with no less than 29 county members may each designate a
member to serve as their representative on the Board.
Section 2. MEETINGS
The Board shall meet at least semi‑annually
on a date and at a time and place set by the Board, or on the call of the
president. The Board may meet upon the
written request of any five members of the Board. The request must state the purpose of the meeting and be mailed
to all other Board members two weeks prior to the date for the meeting. A
majority of the voting Board shall constitute a quorum.
Section 3. DUTIES
AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The Board shall have the power to:
a) develop
the policies of the Association within the guidelines set by the voting
membership;
b) establish
a central office;
c) employ an Executive Director, and to set
his/her salary;
d) conduct an annual
evaluation of the Executive Director; remove the Executive Director
at any time after allowing adequate due process;
e) view and approve annually the Executive Director’s Staff Policy and Procedures Manual;
f)
review
and approve annually a budget sufficient to meet the anticipated needs of the
Association;
g)
prepare a schedule of services for members and
affiliate members with recommended dues and assessments for each;
h)
present recommended dues increases and
assessments, if any, to the membership at the annual conference for approval
and adoption;
i)
authorize an annual independent audit of the
Association by a firm of certified public accountants;
j)
function as the nominating committee and select
at least two candidates each for the office of Second Vice President and Fiscal
Officer. Nominations may be made at
district meetings of county commissioners and submitted to the Board;
k) amend the approved budget by a majority
vote of the Board of Directors.
Section 4. EXPENSES
The Board members and designees shall
receive their necessary expenses incurred in their attendance of meetings, with
the exception of those meetings held at the annual conference or special
meetings of the full membership.
ARTICLE
V
EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR
Section 1. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The Executive Director shall perform
such duties as are assigned by the Board of Directors for implementing
Association policy, and shall be responsible to the Board. The Executive Director
shall supervise the Association office and staff. The Board of Directors shall be responsible for an annual
evaluation of the Executive Director
The Executive Director shall compile,
publish and maintain a Staff Policy and Procedures Manual, which shall be
reviewed annually by the Board of Directors. The Staff Policies and
Procedures Manual shall include a detailed job description for the Executive
Director and such other staff positions as may be created.
The Executive Director shall be responsible
for the hiring and termination of staff personnel consistent with the Staff
Policies and Procedures Manual.
ARTICLE VI
Section 1. RESOLUTIONS AND LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE
The Resolutions and Legislative
Committee shall consist of at least five members. Members (one of whom
shall be a member of the Board of Directors) are appointed by the President,
subject to approval of the Board of Directors. The Committee members
shall select the chairperson from their own number. It shall be the duty
of the Committee to develop resolutions and to receive resolutions from the
Regional Districts. The Committee may consult other elected county
officials to determine resolutions beneficial to county governments, and work
with those officials to promote beneficial resolutions. The Committee shall
examine resolutions to be placed before the membership for proper form and
content, organize by category, combine similar resolutions, and recommend priorities.
The Committee shall have legislation
drafted as directed by resolutions approved by the membership at the annual
conference or special meetings; and assist the Executive Director in securing
sponsorship for the legislation. The
Committee, together with the Executive Director, shall recommend to the
Officers and the Board the response of the Association to all legislation
affecting county government.
Section 2. BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
The Budget and Finance Committee shall
consist of at least five members. Members shall be appointed by the
President subject to the approval of the Board of Directors. The Fiscal
Officer shall serve as chairperson of the Committee. The Committee shall
prepare and submit to the Board of Directors a proposed budget for the
Association. The proposed budget shall provide adequately for all planned
activities of the Association.
Section 3. EXPENSES
Members of Standing Committees shall
receive their necessary expenses incurred in their attendance of meetings, as
approved by the President, with the exception of meetings held at the annual conference or special
meetings of the full membership.
ARTICLE
VII
OTHER
COMMITTEES
Section 1. ESTABLISHMENT
Special interest, ad hoc, or problem‑solving
committees may be formed by the President, the Board of Directors, or the
general membership as needed.
Section 2. EXPENSES
Members of committees may receive their
necessary expenses incurred in their attendance of meetings, as approved by the
President, with the exception of meetings held at the annual conference or
special meetings of the full membership.
REGIONAL
DISTRICTS
Section 1. DISTRICTS IDENTIFIED
The counties of the state shall be
grouped into twelve districts in conformance with the Governor's Administrative
Districts, as follows:
District No. 1 District
No. 2
District No. 3
Daniels Dawson Carter
Phillips Garfield Custer
Roosevelt McCone Fallon
Sheridan Prairie Powder River
Valley Richland Rosebud
Wibaux Treasure
District No. 4 District
No. 5
District No. 6
Blaine Cascade Fergus
Hill Chouteau Golden Valley
Liberty Glacier Judith Basin
Pondera Musselshell
Teton Petroleum
Toole Wheatland
District No. 7 District
No. 8
District No. 9
Big Horn Broadwater Gallatin
Carbon Jefferson Meagher
Stillwater Lewis and Clark Park
Sweet Grass
Yellowstone
District No. 10 District
No. 11 District
No. 12
Flathead Mineral Anaconda
Deer Lodge
Lake Missoula Beaverhead
Lincoln Ravalli Granite
Sanders Madison
Powell
Butte-Silver Bow
Section 2. DUTIES
AND RESPONSIBILITIES
A Regional District shall have the
authority and responsibility to call district meetings and adopt resolutions directed to the
attention of the Association. No District shall take action of record in
the name of the Association on any question involving the welfare of counties
outside the Regional District except in the form of a resolution to the
Association.
Section 3. DISTRICT OFFICERS
The district officers shall be a
chairperson and vice-chairperson elected by a majority vote of member counties
in each district. They shall be elected to an annual term at a district
meeting prior to the annual conference and take office immediately following
the annual conference.
Districts shall be represented at Board
of Directors meetings by the district chairperson, or the vice-chairperson in
the chairperson’s absence, or the chairperson’s designee when both the chairperson and vice-chairperson
are unable to attend a Board meeting, and that person shall have the power to
vote on issues at that meeting.
ARTICLE
IX
ANNUAL
CONFERENCE AND PROCEDURES
Section 1. DATE
AND LOCATION
The date of the annual conference shall
be determined by the Executive Committee, and the place determined by a vote of
the general membership at an annual conference, a quorum being present. A majority of the members shall constitute a
quorum.
Section 2. REPORTS
The following individuals shall make
their reports at the annual conference:
a) The President;
b) The Fiscal Officer;
c) The Executive Director;
d) All committee chairpersons
of standing committees and special committees;
e) NACo steering committees
members.
Section 3. CONDUCT OF OFFICIAL BUSINESS
The official business of the
Association shall be conducted in accordance with the most recent edition of Robert’s
Rules of Order.
Section 4. NOMINATIONS
a) The Nominating Committee
(see Article IV, Section 3 (J)) shall
make its nominations report to the membership in the opening general session
of the annual conference.
b) The report shall not
require a seconding motion, but shall be adopted along with additional nominations
made from the floor.
c) All nominations will be
closed at the conclusion of the opening general session.
Section 5. ELECTIONS
The election of officers shall occur at
the annual conference and be governed by the rule of majority ‑‑
50% plus one of the entire votes cast.
The ballot will be repeated in the event of the failure of a candidate
to receive a majority with the nominee receiving the lowest number of votes
removed from the ballot for purposes of the subsequent vote of the members.
Section 6. AMENDMENTS
TO THE BY‑LAWS
Proposed amendments to these by‑laws
may be considered at a regularly scheduled meeting of the full membership, or
at a special meeting of the full membership properly called for. These by‑laws may be amended by a
majority vote of all votes cast, provided that any proposed amendments must be
submitted in writing to the President of the Association and read at the first
general session of an annual conference, and voted upon at the final business
session of the conference. Copies of said proposed amendment or
amendments shall be made available to the general membership at least ten days
prior to the convening of the annual conference.
Section 7. EFFECTIVE
DATE
These
by‑laws having been duly amended by a majority vote of the members cast
at the 88th Annual Conference will be effective upon the adjourning of the
annual conference with all provisions for compliance in regard to the elected
officers of the Association having been provided for by action on the floor of
the Association.
REMARKS OF
JAVIER GONZALES
Commissioner, Santa Fe County, New Mexico
NACo President-Elect
“Thank you
for the kind introduction. It is great
to be here with you today. This is my
first trip to Montana. I’ve heard a
great deal about Montana, and I imagined big, beautiful mountains, blue skies,
green pastures and a vast frontier.
Since I’ve arrived I’ve had a little time to drive through the State and
I have not been disappointed. It is
everything I expected and more. I am in
awe of the beauty and magnificence. It
reminds me of the northern area of my State, New Mexico.
Last week
all the weather forecasters were watching Montana closely for a snowstorm. That snowstorm was predicted to find its way
to New Mexico. It never did. I would, however, like to extend an
invitation to all of you to find your way to visit us in New Mexico where the
vast lands that compliment desert and mountain areas create the drama of our
terrain in the “Land of Enchantment”.
We do have
several things in common between our states:
Your state animal is the grizzly
bear; ours is the brown bear.
Your state fish is the cutthroat
trout; ours is the rainbow trout.
The pine tree is common to both our
states.
Your state tree, the ponderosa pine, exhibits
magnificent height and strength of stature.
New Mexico’s pine tree is small, prickly, with crooked limbs and is
known as the pinon tree. Our
commonalities create a bond between New Mexico and Montana.
My message to you today is to build on those
commonalities, so I propose a mathematical formula: National Association of Counties to the fourth degree The formula represents National
Association of Counties Collectively and Cohesively Creating
Collaborations. One of the basic
principals of mathematics is based on the premise that “all mathematical
problems of a given value produce an end result.” Together, counties, by this formula, can produce end results.
The
problems we face as county officials are unique to our individual selves: our
districts, our constituents, and indeed, our resources. However, the problems we face as counties
are unique to us all.
One of the
most recent problems of high visibility that we have shared is apparent by the
blackening of over 7million acres of lands by ravaging fires. Seven million acres is equal to the size of
New Jersey! Since the last catastrophic
fire season in 1994, NACo has been demanding action from the federal government
about forest conditions. NACo’s Public
Lands platform and policy resolutions could not have been clearer on the
subject. That policy calls for a
cohesive strategy to reduce the volatile high-risk forest fuels. NACo sent a letter to President Clinton on
September 5 pointing out these facts and demanding that a strategy be developed
to prevent this devastation in the future.
President Clinton last week announced an ambitious new firefighting
strategy. The plan would provide $1.6
Billion in new money beyond the existing $1.2 Billion firefighting budget. Of the new money, $900 Million would
replenish funds depleted by the high cost of fighting this summer’s fires,
leaving $700 Million for prevention.
The money spent on prevention would provide for thinning overgrown
forests and more controlled burns--actions we have called for all along. This is not enough; we must do more.
Also,
as a result of the letter, Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt will attend the
Western Interstate Region Board of Directors meeting on September 28 in Jackson
Hole, Wyoming. Babbitt will be there to
hear the concerns of county officials and discuss the development of that
strategy. It should be a very interesting
meeting, and I will be there to participate and put into action this
mathematical formula--NACo to the 4th degree--that would encourage
Secretary Babbitt to gain Washington’s support in preparing for future
devastations to our lands from fires--fires, that as we have learned, take on a
life of their own.
By
putting the mathematical formula into action, we would be able to collectively
and cohesively collaborate in assisting President Jane Hague in pursuing the
initiatives she has identified as priorities:
Priority
#1: the delivery of services by
effective technology
Priority
#2: focusing on “smart growth”, the
concept that is designed to address a problem unique to most counties, if not all--“sprawl”
To
focus on the effective technology initiative there will be a technology summit
next year in King County, Washington, on February 1--3. The summit will feature presentations by
technology experts, information about new innovation and discussions by county
officials of critical technology issues.
Part of the summit will be held on the Microsoft campus, and it promises
to be an exciting event.
The
smart growth initiative will focus on how counties are dealing with growth and
what is working. It will explore the
various processes involved in addressing growth issues and identifying the end
result of models that are effective.
The initiative will be pursued through the Joint Center for Sustainable
Communities, which NACo runs with the U.S. Conference of Mayors.
During
my term as President, I will continue to pursue the technology and smart growth
initiatives. For these, I’m focusing my
collaboration with Ms. Hague on two issues:
digital divide and literacy.
On
the issue of literacy the statistics are mind boggling: 20% of American adults
are functionally illiterate; another 34% have only marginal skills; 50% of
American adults cannot read at eighth-grade level; 13% of all 17 year olds and
44% of minority youth are functionally illiterate. The estimated cost of illiteracy to taxpayers and businesses is
$20 Billion per year. This, combined
with the statistic that only 27% of newly created jobs are low skill, creates a
large gap. Literacy is necessary to
produce the sustainability of our economy and indeed our nation. My primary focus will be rural
counties. I want to help rural counties
raise economic standards and improve the delivery of services. Despite our booming economy, there are
counties that have been left behind; they should not be forgotten. My dream is to create a special institute on
rural governance that would provide policy research, leadership training and
technical assistance to rural officials.
The goal is to help rural officials become stronger leaders. I will work hard to see that it
happens. Helping rural counties is a priority
with NACo and establishing the Rural Action Caucus is a good beginning. Collectively and cohesively collaborating in
creating the governance institute is a perfect way to continue that effort.
The
digital divide issue is another collective and cohesive collaboration with Ms.
Hague. As social scientists examine the
demographic patterns of Internet access and usage, we are learning more about
digital divide being created because of accessibility issues. While Clinton’s “Call to Action for American
Education” provides a universal access guarantee for the next generations,
accessibility to the Internet is providing us with key demographic variables
like income and education. Although
almost 70% of the schools in this country have at least one computer connected
to the Internet, less than 15% of classrooms have Internet access. There exists inequities, and we must find an
end result.
Neither
Jane nor I can accomplish these goals without your help, without helping each
other. We must put into action the
mathematical formula (NACo 4th degree) to create the end product for
Internet access and literacy. That
would be the result of collective cohesive collaborations.
The
NACo cooperative purchasing program is a perfect example of how this formula
has worked. Together, counties can save
time and money. Recently, NACo’s
Financial Services Center announced a new program that will save counties and
cities as much as $50 Million on technology purchases. It allows local governments to buy computers
and other high-tech equipment directly from such leaders in the computer
industry as IBM, DELL, Gateway, Micron, Comark and Software Spectrum. The cooperative alliance saves counties
money because it pools the purchasing power of local governments and achieves bulk
volume discounts. This new program is
the second phase of the alliance’s efforts.
It already offers an office supply program through Office Depot that
saved local governments $35 Million in 1999.
In
addition, NACO has a number of awards programs, like the Achievement Awards and
the Acts of Caring. These programs
provide recognition to counties and county officials for their hard work. They also serve another purpose as a
valuable resource of successful, effective programs. NACo’s Research Division keeps a database of successful county
programs. You can save staff time and
resources by finding out how another county solved a similar problem simply by
contacting the Research Division.
As you
know, NACo is a lobbying organization.
But it is much, much more. It is
an organization that brings together counties and county officials to help
improve our great nation. More than in
Washington DC, NACo lives in the counties.
If your county is a member, thank you.
I encourage you to become active in the association. If your county is not a member, I encourage
you to join. Our voice in Washington
and our ability to help counties are both stronger because of your support. Our potential to produce end results that
collectively and cohesively create collaborations will not only strengthen but
will enhance our capabilities as elected officials and administrators. This afternoon please join us in a reception
from 4:00 to 6:00 to discover how NACo can benefit your counties.