91ST Annual Conference

Montana Association of Counties

Havre, Montana

September 25 - 27, 2000

 

MONDAY                    The  91st  Annual  Conference  of  the  Montana  Association  of  Counties

SEPTEMBER 25       convened   at   9:00  a.m.     John   Prinkki,   Carbon   County,  served  as

L. Harold Blattie        parliamentarian.   Presentation  of Colors and  Pledge of  Allegiance were

    MACo President   led by the Havre National Guard Unit.  Reverend Walter Kirkegaard, First Lutheran  Church,  provided invocation for the Conference.

 

WELCOME                             “I welcome you to Havre.  We are truly happy that you selected Havre as

     Phyllis Leonard    your meeting  place.   We hope  you have  a great  time and  that you  start at the

     Mayor, Havre        Heritage Center, see the museum, go to Havre-beneath-the-Streets and the Railroad Museum, and then on to Fort Assiniboine. 

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.

 

MEMORIAL                The  seconded  motion  to  adopt  the  Memorial  Resolution  passed  by 

RESOLUTION           unanimous consent and is hereby inserted in this record.

     Art Kleinjan          

     Blaine County     

 

RESOLUTION IN MEMORIAM

 

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. 

 

                                   

RESOLUTIONS                     I want  to take  a moment  of personal  privilege to say,  “Thank you.”

COMMITTEE             Jefferson County was one of the counties in the State which suffered devastating

REPORT                    fires this summer.  It was amazing and gratifying to me how many commissioners

     Glenna Obie         from counties  that had no fires called me at home or at the office.  Thank you for

     Jefferson County your offers of help.  We had staff people come from Fergus County to help; we had offers of help from Yellowstone County and beyond.  I know we weren’t the only ones who received those calls and those offers of help.  Thank you.

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.” 

           

           

PRESIDENT’S                       “Given the time,  we will  dispense with  the President’s  Report and  I will 

REPORT                    blend it with the  Executive Director’s  report with the presentation on Wednesday

   Harold Blattie         at noon.  We will coordinate that, as you remember that it has been skipped year

after year after year.”

 

FISCAL REPORT                  I thank Carla Smith for preparing the budget sheets which keep me very

     Allan Underdal     well-informed.    In last year’s  FY 2000  budget,  the estimates were pretty exact. 

     Fiscal Officer        We took in 101.8% revenue; we exceeded by $22,000.  Expenditures were at 97.5% of the budget; a total of 2.5% remained.  So it was very well estimated. 

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.

 

 

NOMINATIONS         The Nominations Committee presented the following candidates:

COMMITTEE                         President                                 Gary Fjelstad, Rosebud County

REPORT                                First Vice President                Dean Harmon, Roosevelt County

     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.

CONVENTION           Convention 2001 will be held in Glendive at Dawson Community College.
LOCATION                

PRESENTATIONS    Peggy Beltrone, Cascade County

“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.

 

 

ASSOCIATION                       “I would like  to summarize  the over-all evaluation of the Association that

EVALUATION             was sent out last spring  to all of the counties.   I thank you  for taking  the time to

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.

                                                        VERY VALUABLE     SOMEWHAT VALUABLE          NOT VALUABLE                   NO OPINION

                                                67                                           1

 

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.

        VERY VALUABLE     SOMEWHAT VALUABLE       NOT VALUABLE       NO OPINION

                                                         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

VERY VALUABLE      SOMEWHAT VALUABLE         NOT VALUABLE                      NO OPINION

                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

VERY VALUABLE     SOMEWHAT VALUABLE         NOT VALUABLE    NO OPINION  

                                                           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

                                                                If “Yes” would you be willing to pay for such a service?

Yes  42                                    No     3

 

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. 

 

 

                                          The following services fall under the various insurance program offerings:

·          Workers’ Compensation Self Insurance

·          Property and Casualty Insurance Coverage

·          County Employee Health Insurance

·          Nationwide Employee Retirement Benefit Program

·          Personnel Services to Counties

 

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:

·          District Meetings

·          Annual Conference

·          New Commissioner Orientation

      MID WINTER MEETING

·          DES Governor’s Conference       (held at midwinter)

·          Elected Officials Conference       (held at midwinter)

·          Loss Control / Risk Management Conference  (midwinter)

 

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 t