- Home
Up Wildfire Rural Fire Protection District Exploratory Committee Justice System Exploratory Committee
| |
JUSTICE
SYSTEM EXPLORATORY COMMITTEE
Justice System & Public Safety Services Study Design:
2015
The Hugo Justice System & Public Safety Services
Exploratory Committees (Justice System Exploratory Committee) was formed with a
definition of its July 18, 2013 scope of work, Justice System & Public Safety
Services Issue Scope Of Work. That year, and the next, it worked on
understanding the issue, writing letters to the editor of The Grants Pass Daily Courier,
and web publishing educational brochures on the issue.
Hugo Justice System & Public
Safety Services Exploratory Committee. Draft July 18, 2013. Justice System & Public
Safety Services Issue Scope Of
Work (Scope) Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical Society. Hugo, OR.
The 2012 expiration of federal SRS payments to JO CO,
used mostly for public safety services, resulted in five county levies and one city sales
tax as solutions. They all failed. However, there is a high probability for another levy
to be on a future ballot. This is reasonable, as public safety services are needed, even
though the form and the cost are issues.
- 1. May 15, 2012 JO CO-wide Primary Election Measure
17-43, Criminal Justice System Operations Four Year Local Option Tax (i.e., $1.99
per $1,000 of assessed value), failed 57 - 43 percent, Voter Turnout - Total 52.59%;
25,405 votes for Measure 17 - 43/ 49,561 registered voters = 51%.
-
- 2. May 21, 2013 JO CO-wide Special Election Measure
17-49, Criminal Justice and Public Safety Three Year Local Option Tax (i.e.,
$1.48 per $1,000 of assessed value), failed 51 - 49 percent, Voter Turnout - Total 51.97%;
26,331 votes for Measure 17 - 49/ 50,944 registered voters = 52%.
-
- 3. May 20, 2014 JO CO-wide Primary Election Measure
17-59, Criminal Justice and Public Safety Three Year Local Option Tax (i.e.,
$1.19 per $1,000 of assessed value), failed 53 - 48 percent, Voter Turnout - Total 56.51%;
27,991 votes for Measure 17 - 59/ 50,655 registered voters = 55%.
-
- 4. May 19, 2015 JO CO-wide Special Election Measure
17-66, For Patrol, Jail, Shelter of Abused Youth; Five Year Levy (i.e., $1.40 per
$1,000 of assessed value), failed 54 - 46 Percent, Voter Turnout - Total 50.65%; 25,824
votes for Measure 17 - 59/ 51,143 registered voters = 51%.
-
- 5. November 3, 2015 Grants Pass City-wide Special
Election Measure 17-67 2 Percent Sales Tax for City Public Safety and Criminal
Justice Services, failed 78 - 22 Percent -
-
6. November 8, 2016 JO CO-wide General Election Measure 17-74 (Referred to the
People by Initiative Petition),
For
Four-Year Deputies, Prosecution, Treatment and Jail Beds Tax; Four Year Levy (i.e., $1.42
per $1,000 of
assessed value), failed 60 - 40 Percent.
-
In 2015, after the 4th levy
failure in four years, the JSEC Committee, HNAHS, asked the question, "What
can we do to shed some light on the issues?" Members of the committee believed that
the first important step was the identification of the issues for why the levies failed.
Except for the recent vetted study, Citizen Perceptions of Public Safety Levies in
Josephine County, Oregon: A Test of Group Engagement Theory (Davis 2016), reasons for
the levy failures are complex and unknown as facts (i.e., interested citizens debate and
provide opinions on their non-vetted facts). However, it is believed that vetted research
of citizen issues is the most important step in developing a successful, Justice System
& Public Safety Services Study Design: 2015. The Authors believe it would be
prudent for the BCC to take Davis up on his challenge for future research to test his
conclusions about public trust in government and citizen preferences utilizing several
different citizen participation mechanisms (e.g., surveys, standing JO CO Budget
Committee, focus groups, JO CO Fiscal Advisory Committee, workshops).
Hugo Justice System & Public
Safety Services Exploratory Committee. Draft 2015. Justice System & Public
Safety Services Study Design: 2015.
Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical Society. Hugo, OR.
The purpose of the proposed
JS&PSS study grant is to provide grass roots opportunities, for JO CO citizens for
active citizen involvement (CI), accessibility to information, and education, to better
understand the JS&PSS issue, which is partially driven by the history of revenue
sharing from the federal government.
- Justice
System & Public Safety Services Study Design: 2015
-
- Public Outreach
- Appendices to Study
Design
- National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA)
- Press Releases
- Letters-To-The-Editor
- Guest Opinions
- Media Articles
- Voters Pamphlets
- Studies & Information
- Minimally Acceptable Level Of
Public Safety Services
- Public Safety Services (PSS)
- Public Meeting
Presentations
- City of Grants Pass Public Safety
Project Reports
- Josephine County Budgets
- Citizen Participation in Local Budget
Process
- Courts
Justice System & Public Safety Services Issue Scope
Of Work
INTRODUCTION
Josephine County (JO CO) Justice System (JS) & Public Safety Services
(PSS) Tax Levies
The 2012 expiration of federal funding in JO CO, used mostly for public
safety services, resulted in JO CO proposing two tax levies as solutions. They both
failed.
- 1. May 2012 JO CO-wide Measure 17 - 43, Criminal Justice System Operations Four Year
Local Option Tax (i.e., $1.99 per $1,000 of assessed value), failed 57 - 43 percent.
- 2. May 2013 JO CO-wide Measure 17 - 49, Criminal Justice and Public Safety Three Year
Local Option Tax (i.e., $1.48 per $1,000 of assessed value), failed 51 - 49 percent.
According to The Grants Pass Daily Courier 1 Grants Pass
precincts would have passed the 2013 tax 59 to 41 percent and the JO CO precincts would
have turned down the tax 56 to 44 percent. Overall the voting citizens of JO CO were about
half and half in supporting and opposing the measure. Two examples of rural precincts in
the Hugo region are Merlin and Lucky Queen. The Merlin Precinct had 58
percent against and Lucky Queen had 51 percent against (Merlin yes 209 /
no 284; Lucky Queen yes 363 / no 383). Lucky Queen had the same percentages for and
against as county-wide.
- The Merlin Precinct had 58 percent against and
- Lucky Queen Precinct had 51 percent against
- Measure 17 - 49.
Many believe that the 2013 nay vote was not necessarily a vote
of whether citizens supported the JS&PSS, but more a view of trusting government and a
vote on the specific measure, including its unknowns.
Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical Society The name of the
association is the Hugo Neighborhood Association & Historical Society (Hugo
Neighborhood and/or HUNAHS). The use of HUNAHS is a way
to use the magic vowel U in Hugo so we can have our own county-wide catchword.
It is pronounced like you say Hugo, HU-NAHS.
The association is perpetual.
The Hugo Neighborhood had its roots in the Oregon
Legislatures 1973 Senate Bill 100 and birth as the Hugo Citizen Advisory Committee
in January 1976. Seventeen years later in 1993 it became the Hugo Neighborhood
Association, and in 2000 it reorganized into the Hugo Neighborhood Association &
Historical Society. These three associations were the same evolving organization with the
primary purpose of monitoring land use applications to assure local land laws were
correctly applied. The Hugo Neighborhood is a land use association with a vital
interest in the history of its land and people as so reflected in its 2000 evolution into
a neighborhood association with its two primary missions of land use and history.
The Hugo Neighborhoods membership and geographical interests
are focused on the Hugo area, but its land use concerns are county and statewide. Its
history interests are local, but their context can be county, state, and nationwide.
The purposes of the association is to protect Hugos rural quality of
life by promoting an informed citizenry in decision-making. The Hugo Neighborhood is
a nonprofit charitable and educational organization with a land use and history mission
promoting the social welfare of its neighbors by working to promote Oregon Statewide Goal
1 Citizen Involvement, and by preserving, protecting, and enhancing the livability
and economic viability of its farms, forests, and rural neighbors. Its mission follows.
- Land Use Promote Citizen Involvement (Oregon
Statewide Goal 1)
-
Promote Education
-
Protect Our Farms and Forests (Oregon Statewide Goals 3 & 4)
-
Protect Our Communitys Rural Quality of Life
- History Preserve Our Local
History (preserving, documenting, promoting & interpreting)
-
Promote Education
This nonprofit charitable and educational organization encourages free
admission to Hugo Neighborhood sponsored events and donations to support its
activities.
The Hugo Neighborhood is non-political and will not be involved in
politics in the sense of lobbying for the outcome of a public vote of the issues or
officials to be elected.
Justice System Exploratory Committee Established On June 17, 2013
the Board of the HNA&HS passed on a 3 - 0 vote the establishment of the Justice
System and Public Safety Services Exploratory Committee. The mission of the committee
is to independently research the JO CO JS&PSS issue and publicly provide its analysis
through web page publications. Its proposed mission is limited to educating its members
the best it can and sharing this information publicly. The HNA&HS believes in the
sanctity of freedom of speech and the right to vote.
- The Exploratory Committee is NOT to
- conclude there is a right or wrong answer
- nor to recommend how citizens should vote.
The HNA&HS also believes there is a high probability for another
JS&PSS levy to be on a future ballot, probably 2014. It believes this is reasonable as
adequate public safety services are needed, even though the form and the cost are a
potential concern.
Exploratory Committees Structure The Exploratory Committee
is a small informal nonprofit charitable and educational organization. Part of its
purpose is to independently investigate the issue. Independent does not mean ignoring the
valuable information and perspectives that the public and consultant resources can
provide.
Members of the Committee are responsible for its health and well
being. A qualification of potential members is that they be advocates for the Exploratory
Committees mission. Existing members have the authority to independently
investigate, solicit, and champion new members to the Committee.
- The first job of the Hugo Justice System
- Exploratory Committee is to define a potential
- list of analysis issues.
Analysis Issues The first job of the Hugo Justice System
Exploratory Committee is to define a potential list of issues for analysis (this scope of
work). This first list will be refined and evolve as the committee moves forward with its
work.
Outreach Information gathered will be made available to others for
their own evaluation.
Mission Big picture ideas for the exploratory effort include the
following.
- 1. Identifying the JS&PSS issue.
- 2. Identifying the JS&PSS sub-issues for research and analysis.
- 3. Identifying a range in level of services
- 4. Identifying a range of costs for services.
- 5. Identifying revenues for services.
The ultimate goal is an adequate justice system and public safety
services. Is it possible to have a higher level of service for a lower cost? The purpose
of the Exploratory Committee is to gather information adequate enough to understand
the JS&PSS issues. This includes educational outreach efforts.
Exploratory Committees Purpose Is Not Overtly Political The
Exploratory Committees purpose is limited to investigating, researching, and
evaluating the JS&PSS issues. It will not make evaluations of legislative proposals as
to right or wrong, nor make recommendations on how to vote.
The contents of the educational brochures are expressions of the opinions
and beliefs of those that contribute based on their thoughts and experiences. Hopefully,
their efforts will assist the pubic toward informed decision-making.
Exploratory Committee Process For Decision-Making What is the actual
process for the Exploratory Committees selecting, researching, and web publishing
JS&PSS issue papers and educational brochures? For instance, do the members of the
Exploratory Committee vote (after discussion on individual
suggestions/conclusions) in order to present a unified position statement, or to decide
which issues are worthy of further research?
Members of the Exploratory Committee would not vote on whether
JS&PSS issues would be documented in reports or educational brochures. The lead
volunteer investigator for a topic, report, brochure would research and document, other EC
members might comment, or pass on being involved. The mission of self-education would be
accomplished on the volunteer members schedule without rigid deadlines. The Exploratory
Committees goal is consensus, but it could support a majority view without a
vote. Consensus is expected as all minority views can be expressed, just as the consensus
and majority views in a web published paper or educational brochure. In some cases the Exploratory
Committees published information may look in conflict with each other, but it is
in fact probably reflecting the different views of citizens (i.e., pros and cons research
and web publishing is encouraged).
- In some cases the Exploratory Committees
- published information may look in conflict with
- each other, but it is in fact probably reflecting
- the different views of citizens.
Like many volunteer organizations, the job is what folks volunteer for.
One objective not proposed for the Exploratory Committee is for it to
recommend how the citizens should vote on any new ballot pertaining to the issue. The Exploratory
Committees purpose is limited to investigating and researching the JS&PSS
issues. It will not make right or wrong evaluations of a legislative proposal, nor make
recommendations on how to vote.
However, the Exploratory Committee is encouraged to evaluate the
effectiveness of understanding what is being proposed (i.e., proposed levies, HB 3453,
other alternatives). For example, how effective was the 2013 JO CO-wide Measure 17 - 49
for Criminal Justice and Public Safety Tax when the measure as written did not inform the
reader as to whether any public safety services would even be funded, nor how much they
would be funded?
All members of the Committee would be responsible for its health
and well being. The only qualification of potential members is that they be advocates for
the Exploratory Committees mission and the purposes for which it was formed.
Existing members of the committee would have the authority to independently investigate,
solicit, and champion new members to the committee, including the expertise of consultant
experts, as well as analyzing and publishing their results without approval of the Hugo
Neighborhood.
Justice System Exploratory Committee Information Articles
- 1. Justice System & Public
Safety Services Issue Scope Of Work (draft July 18, 2013)
- 2.
Justice System Exploratory Committee Letters to Editor
- Support
Funding For Justice System While Living Within Our Means
- April 10, 2014 Submitted
- Grants Pass Daily Courier
- Wayne McKy, Hugo
-
- Facts
Should Support How Safety Dollars Spent
- April 17, 2014 Published/Submitted April 10, 2014
- Grants Pass Daily Courier
- Mike L. Walker, Hugo
-
- Which
Safety Services Do We Really Need?
- April 25, 2014 Published/Submitted April 10, 2014/
- Grants Pass Daily Courier
- Jon Whalen, Grants Pass
EDUCATIONAL BROCHURES
Educational brochures are authored by the Hugo Neighborhood Association &
Historical Society (HNA&HS) or the Hugo Justice System and Public Safety Services
Exploratory Committee (Exploratory Committee).
Many of the brochures are qualified as "very draft" which means that they are
just an idea, or "draft" which means they are the beginning of a research
project to collect information on an idea. "Final" means the research on a topic
is complete and the brochure only needs final editing. No qualification label means the
educational brochure is web published. All brochures are considered open for public review
and comments.
For the HNA&HS and Exploratory Committee verifiability means other
researchers and the public reading the educational Justice System & Public Safety
Services brochures, or other documents, can check where the information comes from and
make their own determination if the references or sources are reliable. The HNA&HS and
Exploratory Committees goal is not to try impose "the truth" on its
readers, and does not ask that they trust something just because they authored it. They do
not ask for trust. Its goal is to empower other researchers and the public through
educational materials that can be checked in order for them to find their own truth.
Brochure Number System - The first breakdown for brochure serial numbers are the
chapters 1st order roman numeral heading (I) and 2nd order
upper case alphabet letter sub-section heading (I.A). Further breakdowns are the 3rd
order numerial heading (I.A.1) and 4th order lower alphabet case heading
(I.A.1.a)). In summary, the educational brochures identification numbers are the
outline order headings where the material is addressed.
HNA&HS (HNA) BROCHURES
- Br.
II.A Hugo Justice System Exploratory Committee
- Br. II.B
HNA&HS Constitution
- Br.
II.C All Voters & Votes Are Legitimate
- Br. II.D
Government Needs Support
FACTS: ISSUE, PROJECTS, ANALYSIS
- Br. III.A.1 Justice
System Public Safety Service Issue
- Br. III.A.2
JS&PSS Educational Brochures
- Br. III.B.1
Potential Research Projects
- Br. III.C.1 Analysis Method
FACTS: JOSEPHINE (JO) COUNTY (CO) SHERIFFS OFFICE
- Br.
IIID.1.1.2 JO CO Sheriffs Mission, Vision, Goals, & Budget
- Br. IIID.1.2
Meet the Josephine County Sheriff
- Br.
IIID.1.2.1 JO CO Sheriff Seeking Stable Funding: 2008
- Br.
IIID.1.2.2 Constitution JO CO Sheriff 2nd Amendment
- Br.
IIID.1.2.3 Constitution JO CO Sheriff 10th Amendment
- Br.
IIID.1.4 JO CO Sheriffs Office History
- Br.
IIID.1.5 JO CO Sheriffs Patrol Division
- Br.
IIID.1.5.1 JO CO Sheriffs Contracted Patrol: Marine Unit
- Br.
IIID 1.5.2 JO CO Sheriffs Contracted Patrol: Federal Forests
- Br.
IIID.1.5.3 JO CO Sheriffs Contracted Patrol: City of Cave Junction
- Br.
IIID.1.6 JO CO Sheriffs Rural Patrol: K-9 Unit
- Br.
IIID.1.7 JO CO Sheriffs Major Crimes Unit
- Br. IIID.1.8 JO
CO Sheriffs Office: Evidence Unit
- Br.
IIID.1.9 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Records Division
- Br.
IIID.1.10 OR Sheriffs Jail Command Council
- Br.
IIID.1.10.1 JO CO Sheriffs Office Jail: 2006 - 2012
- Br.
IIID.1.11 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Civil Division
- Br.
IIID.1.12 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Communications Division
- Br.
IIID.1.13 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Proactive Policing
- Br.
IIID.1.14 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Integrated Fire Plan
- Br.
IIID.1.15 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Animal Evacuation & Sheltering
- Br.
IIID.1.16 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Flood Preparedness
- Br.
IIID.1.17 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Community Outreach
- Br.
IIID.1.18 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Police Memorial
- Br.
IIID.1.20 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Volunteers
- Br.
IIID.1.20.1 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Reserve Unit
- Br.
IIID.1.20.2 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Mounted Posse
- Br.
IIID.1.20.3 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Volunteer Unit
- Br.
IIID.1.20.4 JO CO Sheriffs Office: Search & Rescue
- Br.
IIID.2 Justice System Public Safety Services Funding History: 2000 - 2012
FACTS: JO CO JUSTICE SYSTEM PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES
- Br.
IIID.3 Justice System Public Safety Services Staff History: 2000 - 2012
- Br. IIID.4
- Br.
IIID.5.3 Voter Response to 2013 Measure 17-49 JS&PSS Proposal
FACTS: MEDIA
- Br.
IIID.6.1.1 Citizens Write January - May 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.1.2 Citizens Write June 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.1.3 Citizens Write July 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.1.4 Citizens Write August 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.1.5 Citizens Write September 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.2.1 Coverage by The Grants Pass Daily Courier: Jan - May 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.2.2 Coverage by The Grants Pass Daily Courier: June 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.2.3 Coverage by The Grants Pass Daily Courier: July 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.2.4 Coverage by The Grants Pass Daily Courier: August 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.2.5 Coverage by The Grants Pass Daily Courier: September 2013
- Br. IIID.6.3
Coverage by The Oregonian: February - July 2013
- Br.
IIID.6.4 Coverage by California Newspapers
- Br.
IIID.6.5 Coverage by Other Media
- Br.
IIID.7.1 First Amendment Coverage in The Daily Courier
- Br.
IIID.7.2 JO CO Sheriffs "Rural Patrol"
- Br.
IIID.7.2.1 JO CO Sheriffs "Rural Patrol" Coverage
- Br.
IIID.7.2.2 JO CO Sheriffs "Rural Patrol" Statistical
Analysis
- Br.
IIID.7.3 JO CO Sheriffs Rural Patrol Reserve
- Br. IIID.7.4
- Br.
IIID.7.5 JO CO Historical Costs of Public Safety Services
- Br.
IIID.7.6.1 JO CO Best Public Safety Services Our Tax Dollars Can Buy: Standards &
Authorities
FACTS: DEMOGRAPHICS, BUDGETS, & TAXES
- Br.
IIID.8.4 OR Health Care, Prison Numbers, PERS Retirement System, Tax Expenditures
- Br. IIID.8.4.1
Cost of Health Care
- Br.
IIID.8.4.2.1 Relentless Growth in Dept. Of Corrections (Prisons) (1 of 2)
- Br.
IIID.8.4.2.2 Relentless Growth in Dept. Of Corrections (Prisons) (2 of 2)
- Br.
IIID.8.4.3 Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS)
- Br.
IIID.8.4.4 Tax Expenditures
- Br.
IIID.8.8 Josephine County Comprehensive Plan & Zoning
- Br.
IIID.10.1 City of Grants Pass, or Tax Rates: 2012 - 2013
- Br.
IIID.10.1 Oregons Permanent Tax Rates
- Br.
IIID.10.2.1 Oregon City Size & Tax Rate
- Br.
IIID.10.3 Oregon State Tax Rates County Wide
- Br. IIID.10.3.1
Josephine County Assessor
- Br.
IIID.10.3.2 Taxes Example
- Br. IIID.10.3.3
- Br. IIID.10.3.4
Josephine County, or Net Taxable Rate, Including History Before and after Housing Bust
- Br.
IIID.10.3.5 Josephine County, OR Net Tax Rate Adjusted
- Br.
IIID.10.4 Tax Levies Over The Years
FACTS: CRIMINAL OFFENSES, CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT, &
GOVERNMENT
- Br.
IIID.11 Types of Criminal Offenses: Felonies, Misdemeanors and Infractions
- Br.
IIID.12 Citizen Advocacy Strategies
- Br.
IIID.12.1.1 Groups Concerned with the JO CO JS&PSS Issue
- Br.
IIID.12.1.2 Individuals: Pro, Con, & Neutral
- Br.
IIID.12.1.3 Constitutional Party of Josephine County
- Br.
IIID.12.1.4 Grants Pass Chapter of John Birch Society
- Br.
IIID.12.1.5 Were for a Constitutional Government PAC
- Br.
IIID.12.2.1 Trust & Ownership by Citizens
- Br.
IIID.12.2.2 Trust Me, I Understand
- Br. IIID.13 Josephine
County Government: Elected Officials, Departments
- Br.
IIID.13.1 Josephine County JS&PSS Issue: Elected Officials
- Br. IIID.13.2
Josephine County Board of County Commissioners
- Br. IIID.13.3 Josephine County JS&PSS Issue:
Departments
FACTS: STANDARDS
- Br. IIIE.1.1 United States Constitution
- Br. IIIE.1.2 US Bill of Rights
- Br. IIIE.1.3 US Declaration of Independence
- Br. IIIE.1.4 Oregon
Constitution
- Br. IIIE.1.5 Josephine County Home Rule Charter
- Br. IIIE.1.6 Oregon Agencies & Public Safety Services
- Br.
IIIE.1.6.1 Oregon Attorney General
- Br. IIIE.1.6.2 Oregon Legislative Counsel
- Br. IIIE.1.6.3 Oregon Criminal Justice Commission
- Br. IIIE.1.6.3.1 OR Criminal Justice Commission & 2009 OR
Governors Reset Cabinet
- Br. IIIE.1.6.3.2 OR Criminal Justice Commissions Public
Safety Subcommittee Report
- Br. IIIE.1.6.3.3 OR Criminal Justice Commissions & OR
Senate Bill 77
- Br. IIIE.1.7 ORS Minimally Adequate Public Safety Services
Standards
- Br. IIIE.1.7.1 Oregon Senate Bill (SB) 77: 2009
- Br.
IIIE.1.7.2 Oregon House Bill 4176 (2012)
- Br. IIIE.1.7.3.1 Enrolled Oregon House Bill 3453: 2013 (1 of 2)
- Br. IIIE.1.7.3.2 Oregon House Bill 3453 (2 of 2)
- Br. IIIE.1.8.1 Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 213-070-000: 2011
- Br. IIIE.1.8.2 Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 213-070-000: 2013
- Br. IIIE.2.1 Standards: JS&PSS Historical Costs
- Br. IIIE.2.2 Standards: JS&PSS Comparison Costs
- Br. IIIE.2.3 Actual or Average Costs
- Br. IIIE.3.1 Defining JO COs Public Safety System Taxpayer
Driver
- Br. IIIE.3.2 CO Required to Maintain Some Minimal Level of PSS
Regardless of Funding Constrains?
- Br. IIIE.3.3 OR Governors Reset Cabinet
- Br. IIIE.3.4 Best JO CO Public Safety System Our Tax
Dollars Can Buy
ALTERNATIVES
- Br.
IIIG.1 Adequate Information & Analysis Methodology
- Br.
IIIG.1.1 Adequate Analysis: Information Is Understood or Not
- Br.
IIIG.1.2 Adequate Analysis: Supporting Arguments Are Made or Not
- Br.
IIIG.1.2.1 Adequate Analysis: Standard(s) of Review
- Br.
IIIG.1.2.2 Adequate Analysis: Applicable Evidence/Facts
- Br.
IIIG.2 Adequate Information Analysis Process
- Br.
IIIG.2.1 Adequate Analysis: Historical PSS Services & Costs
- Br. IIIG.2.2
Adequate Infor Analysis: Enrolled Oregon House Bill 3453
- Br. IIIG.2.3
- Br.
IIIG.2.4 Adequate Analysis: Lack of Confidence and Trust in Government
- Br.
IIIG.2.5 Adequate Analysis: Taxes
-
- Br. IIIF Range
JS&PSS Planning Alternatives - Proposals
- Br. IIIF. 1 Alternative 1: No Action Alternative
- Br. IIIF. 2 Alternative 2: 2012 JO CO-wide Measure 17 - 43
for Criminal Justice System Operations Tax
- Br. IIIF.3 Alternative 3: 2013 JO CO-wide Measure 17 - 49
for Criminal Justice and Public Safety Tax
- Br. IIIF.4 Alternative 4: Minimally Adequate Alternative
- Br. IIIF.5 Alternative 5: Modally Adequate Alternative
- Br. IIIF.6
Alternative 6: Declare Bankruptcy
- Br. IIIF.7 Alternative 7: House Bill (HB) 3453
- Br. IIIF.8 Alternative 8: 2014 JO CO-Wide Measure for
JS&PSS Tax
-
- Br.
IIIH.4.1 OR Sec. of State Financial Condition Review of OR Counties: 2012
- Br.
IIIH.4.2 OR COs: 2012 Review of Fiscal Indicators (FI) 1 Local Support & 2 Timber
Payment Dependence
- Br.
IIIH.4.3 OR COs: 2012 Review of FI 3 Debt Burden & 4 Liquidity
- Br.
IIIH.4.4 OR COs: 2012 Review of FI 5 Fund Balance & 6 Retirement Benefit Obligation
- Br.
IIIH.4.5 OR COs: 2012 Review of FI 7 Public Safety & 8 Personal Income
- Br.
IIIH.4.6 OR COs: 2012 Review of FI 9 Population Trends & 10 Unemployment
- Br.
IIIH.4.7 JO CO: 2012 Financial Condition Review
-
- Br.
IIIH.5 OSUS Rural Studies Program (RSP) & JS&PPS Documents
- Br.
IIIH.5.1 OSUS RSP: Changing Federal County Payments and Rural Oregon Counties
- Br.
IIIH.5.2 OSUS RSP: Federal Forest Revenue Sharing Policies
- Br.
IIIH.5.3 OSUS RSP: State of Oregon Property Tax Policies
- Br.
IIIH.5.4 OSUS RSP: Factors Affecting County Policy Impacts and Responses
- Br.
IIIH.5.5 OSUS RSP: Changes in Funding, Staff, and Service Levels from Loss of
Federal Forest Payments: Policy Decisions by JO CO: 2005 - 2009
- Br.
IIIH.5.5.1 OSUS RSP: JO CO Funding Changes from Loss of Federal Forest Payments:
Policy Decisions: 2005 - 2009
- Br.
IIIH.5.5.2 OSUS RSP: JO CO "STAFF" Changes from Loss of Federal
Forest Payments: Policy Decisions: 2005 - 2009
- Br.
IIIH.5.5.3 OSUS RSP: JO CO "Service Level" Changes from Loss of
Federal Forest Payments: Policy Decisions: 2005 - 2009
-
- Br.
IIIH.5.6 OSUS RSP: Anticipated Impacts on JO CO and Possible Responses from Loss of
Ffp: after 2009
- Br.
IIIH.5.6.1 OSUS RSP: Impacts on Well Being from Reductions in Public Safety: After
2009
- Br.
IIIH.5.6.2 OSUS RSP: Impacts on Financial & Political Implications from Loss of
FFP: After 2009
- Br.
IIIH.5.6.3 OSUS RSP: Lack of Confidence and Trust in Government from Loss of FFP
- Br.
IIIH.5.7 OSUS RSP: Oregon State University Rural Study Program Conclusion
- Br.
IIIH.5.8.1 OR Governors Task Force on Federal Forest Payments and County Services:
2007
-
- Br.
IIIH.6.1 OR Governors Task Force (OGTF) Findings: Impacts of No Action Alternative
(1 of 3)
- Br.
IIIH.6.2 OR OGTF Findings: Impacts of No Action Alternative (2 of 3)
- Br.
IIIH.6.3 OR OGTF Findings: Impacts of No Action Alternative (3 of 3)
PUBLIC OFFICIALS & SECURITY
- Br.
IIIJ The Rewards & Perils Of Elected Officials
- Br. IIIJ.1
Political Rewards Of Proactive Decision Makings
- Br. IIIJ.2 Political
Risk Of New Taxes Without A Vote Of The Locals
- Br.
IIIK.3 Neighborhood Security Groups
- Br.
IIIK.3.1 Citizens Against Crime (Cac) Patrol
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.1 Securing Our Safety (SOS)
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.2 SOS Board & Officers
- Br. IIIK.3.2.3 SOS
Teams
- Br. IIIK.3.2.3.1 Natural Resources: Timber & Other
- Br. IIIK.3.2.3.2 Sales Taxes and Other New Tax/Fee Revenues
(NOTE: this effort is halted due to public input)
- Br. IIIK.3.2.3.3 Property Tax Adjustments
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.3.4 SOS Team 5: Trust, Transparency, and Education / Public Ownership and
Involvement
- Br. IIIK.3.2.3.5 IIIK.3.2.3.5 - IIIK.3.2.3.13
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.8.1 SOSs 11 Most Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ): 1. Problem & 2. Cost
(1 of 5)
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.8.2 SOSs 11 Most FAQ: 3. COs Existing Property Taxes Spent, 4. Cost
to Lodge an Inmate, 5. Cost Deputy District Attorney, 6. Discretionary Funding, & 7. #
Grants Pass Police Officers (2 of 5)
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.8.3 SOSs 11 Most FAQ: 8. Taxed for # GP Police Officers, 9. GP & CO
Costs, 10. CO Jail & GP Jail, & 11. Property Tax System (3 of 5)
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.8.4 SOSs 11 Most FAQ: Selected FAQs Of SOSs 43 FAQs (4 of 5)
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.8.5 SOSs 11 Most FAQ: Selected FAQs Of SOSs 43 FAQs (5 of 5)
- Br. IIIK.3.2.12
SOSS Mission: Provide a Citizen-Voiced Plan to Provide for a Secure, Stable and
Sustainable JO CO
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.12.1 SOSs Mission Standard: Provide a Citizen-voiced Plan for JO CO
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.12.2 SOSs Mission Standard: Provide a Secure JO CO
- Br. IIIK.3.2.12.3 SOSs Mission Standard: Provide a
Stable JO CO
- Br.
IIIK.3.2.12.4 SOSs Mission Standard: Provide a Sustainable JO CO
- Br.
IIIK.3.3.1 North Valley Community Watch (NVCW)
- Br.
IIIK.3.3.2 NVCW Response Team
- Br.
IIIK.3.3.3 NVCW Response Team Training
- Br.
IIIK.3.3.4 NVCW Response Team Self-Defense Training
- Br.
IIIK.3.3.5 NWCW Supports Local Neighborhood Watch Groups
- Br.
IIIK.3.4 Media Coverage of JO CO Citizen Groups Against Crime
- Br.
IIIK.4.1 Decisions on Second Amendment
- Br. IIIK.4.2 CATO
Institute
RECOMMENDATIONS
- Br. IV.B OR Govenors Task Force (OGTF) on Federal
Forest Payments (FFP) and County Services: January 2009
- Br. IV.B.1 OGTF Recommendations: 2009
- Br. IV.B.2 OGTF Executive Summary On FFP & CO Services:
2009
- Br. IV.B.3 OGTF Section 1: Introduction and Overview On FFP
& CO Services: 2009
- Br. IV.B.4.1 OGTF Section 12: Legal Mechanisms For Dealing
With Counties In "Fiscal Distress": 2009 (1 of 3)
- Br. IV.B.4.2 OGTF Section 12: Legal Mechanisms For Dealing
With Counties In "Fiscal Distress": 2009 (2 of 3)
- Br. IV.B.4.3 OGTF Section 12: Legal Mechanisms For Dealing
With Counties In "Fiscal Distress": 2009 (3 of 3)
- Br. IV.B.5 OGTF Summary Of Findings And Recommendations On
CO Services: 2009
- Br. IV.B.5.1 OGTF Recommendations On CO Services: 1.
Overview, 2. Help Yourself, & 3. Help to COs - 2009 (1 of 4)
- Br. IV.B.5.2 OGTF Recommendations On CO Services: What the
State and State Taxpayers Can Do to Help the COs - 2009 (2 of 4)
- Br. IV.B.5.3 OGTF Recommendations On CO Services: What the
State and State Taxpayers Can Do to Help the COs - 2009 (3 of 4)
- Br. IV.B.5.4 OGTF Recommendations On CO Services: Feds Can
Better 1. Share Resources and Revenues & Manage Federal Forest Lands, & 2. Legal
Mechanisms for Facing "Fiscal Distress"(4 of 4)
- Br. IV.D Oregon County-Wide Solutions - Recommendations
- Br. IV.D.1 How JO CO Has Addressed its Financial Condition
Back
to Top
|