LB 1085 Report to the Nebraska Unicameral for Dodge, Douglas, Sarpy, Saunders and Washington Counties: Multi-County Shared Services Project

Transcription

1 University of Nebraska at Omaha Pubications Archives, Center for Pubic Affairs Research LB 1085 Report to the Nebraska Unicamera for Dodge, Dougas, Sarpy, Saunders and Washington Counties: Muti-County Shared Services Project Center for Pubic Affairs Research (CPAR) University of Nebraska at Omaha Foow this and additiona works at: Part of the Demography, Popuation, and Ecoogy Commons, and the Pubic Affairs Commons Recommended Citation (CPAR), Center for Pubic Affairs Research, "LB 1085 Report to the Nebraska Unicamera for Dodge, Dougas, Sarpy, Saunders and Washington Counties: Muti-County Shared Services Project" (1997). Pubications Archives, This Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Pubic Affairs Research at t has been accepted for incusion in Pubications Archives, by an authorized administrator of For more information, pease contact unodigitacommons@unomaha.edu.

2 MULT-COUNTY SHARED SERVCES: ;... A Response to LB i!i Dodge Dougas Sarpy, Saunders Washington LB 1085 REPORT TO THE NEBRASKA UNCAMERAL FOR DODGE, DOUGLAS, SARPY, SAUNDERS AND WASHNGTON COUNTES Muti-County Shared Services Project December 1997

3 r ', r [ r [ [ [. [ L L

4 1 7;') '<-:--c / BOARD OF COMMSSONERS MARY ANN BORGESON, CHAR MCHAEL BOYLE CLARE DUDA CAROLE WOODS HARRS KYLE HUTCHNGS GEORGE MLLS CAROL McBRDE PRSCH Dean C. Sykes, Chief Administrative Officer 0~ December 22, 1997 Mr. Patrick J. O'Donne Cerk of the Legisature P.O. Box Lincon, NE Dear Mr. O'Donne: Encosed is the report from Dodge, Dougas, Sarpy, Saunders and Washington Counties concuding the year ong effort to examine the question of whether property taxes might be reduced through consoidation of counties, offices or services with another county as required in LB A steering committee consisting of two Commissioners/Supervisors from each county directed this examination with the assistance of Russe L. Smith, a professor of the UNO Department of Pubic Administration. n addition to anayzing county office consoidation costs and savings, the steering committee chose to broaden the anaysis to incude a review of opportunities for sharing among eected officias and other genera services provided by county governments. The steering committee schedued meetings with eected officias and department heads in February Priority work areas were determined and committees were formed at an Apri 11, 1997, kick off meeting hed at the AKSARBEN Cubhouse, Omaha, Nebraska. The working committees met through the summer and in August the steering committee reconvened for the next 4 % months to review reports, vote on recommendations and to schedue and preside over pubic hearings in each of the five counties. (402) Suite LC 2 Civic Center 1819 Farnam Street Omaha, Nebraska (402) (FAX)

5 L r ' ' r! i! i i i ' i i f

6 Mr. Patrick J. O'Donne Cerk of the Legisature Page2 The report incudes a summation of the recommendations and pubic comments. The steering committee profited from this engthy process, athough it became apparent from pubic comment and feedback from other oca officias that any cost savings reaized woud have a minima impact on the individua taxpayer because of the sma portion of the county's evy compared to the tota property tax evy. Nevertheess, each of the five county boards wi determine in eary 1998 the impementation of the recommendations. Pease forward this report to the appropriate party. This Muti County Shared Services Committee ooks forward to hearing from the individuas reviewing the LB reports as to any future direction or initiatives regarding county consoidation of offices or services. Sincerey, Bud ossi Doqge County Supervisor Pau Marsh Dodge County Supervisor Care Duda Dougas County Commissioner Caroe Woods Harris Dougas County Commissioner Bart Bonn Sarpy County Commissioner Tim Gay Sarpy County Commissioner Karen Johnson Saunders County Supervisor Doris Karoff Saunders County Supervisor Tom Cady Washington County Supervisor Harris Vogt Washington County Supervisor /ckm Encosure

7 L r i r i

8 MULT-CO SHARED SERVCES: A Response to LB 085 Dodge Dougas Sarpy Saunders Washington LB 1085 REPORT TO THE NEBRASKA UNCAMERAL FOR DODGE, DOUGLAS, SARPY, SAUNDERS AND WASHNGTON COUNTES Muti-County Shared Services Project December 1997

9 L r! [

10 Report Contents Background on the Muti-County Shared Services Project As A Response to LB 1085 Discussion of County Government and County-State Government Reationships County Government Costs and Services County-State Government Reationships Objectives and Activities of Each Study Track Track 1--Study of Consoidation Track 2--dentification of Potentia Coaborations, Resource Sharing, and mprovements in Operations Among Eected Officias Track 3--County Study Team Review of Opportunities For Consoidation and Coaboration Findings and Recommendations for Consoidating and Sharing of Services Track 1 Findings Duties of the Register of Deeds Current Register of Deeds Staffing, Revenues And Expenditures Consoidation Findings "Metropoitan" Five County Consoidation Two County "Urban" Consoidation Three County "Rura" Consoidation Track 1 Recommendations Vision Statement Recommendations Track 2 Recommendations Treasurer Assessor Register of Deeds Track 3 Recommendations Corrections Emergency Management Extension Services Veteran's Services Weed Contro Resuts of the Pubic Hearings Attachments Muti-County Shared Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska Unicamera

11 [ L r ' r ' i ' t ; '!

12 List of Attachments Attachment!--Budget and Expenditure nformation for Each County Attachment 2--Track 1 Report: Potentia Costs and Savings from Consoidating Register of Deeds Offices Attachment 3--Track 2 Report: dentification of Potentia Coaborations, Resource Sharing, and mprovements in Operations Among Eected Officias Attachment 4--Schedue of Pubic Hearings Attachment 5--Format for Pubic Hearings Attachment 6--Draft Recommendations Discussed at Pubic Hearings Attachment 7--Pubic Hearing Summaries Muti-County Shared Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska Unicamera

13 L ~ r! i ' ' t ~

14 LB 1085 REPORT TO THE NEBRASKA UNCAMERAL Background on the Muti-County Shared Services Project As A Response to LB 1085 The 1996 session of the Nebraska Unicamera enacted severa bis focusing on the organization and cost ofoca governments. One bi-lb provided new, more specific anguage and procedures governing county consoidation and service cooperation. Couped with the new anguage and procedures was a requirement that each county compete by January, 1998 a study of whether property taxes might be reduced through the consoidation of offices, services and/or county governments. On November 18, 1996 the Dougas and Sarpy County Boards announced an agreement to work together to address the reqnirements oflb An invitation was extended to surrounding counties, with Dodge, Saunders and Washington Counties joining the effort. During the January-March, 1997 period, meetings were hed with the commissioners and supervisors of the five participating counties, other eected officias, and department heads. The Muti-County Shared Services Project was shaped by these meetings. Severa goas were estabished by the project's Steering Committee in response to the panning meetings. The minimum requirement set by LB 1085 was to examine whether property tax savings might be achieved through the consoidation of county offices, services and governments. Whie this was seen as an important goa, the Steering Committee fet that other possibe strategies for improving services and possiby owering the cost of county government were equay important and more feasibe. As a resut, the cooperating counties agreed that the project woud aso examine: [J services to eiminate; [J services counties can share; [J services the state might be persuaded to perform; [J services that might be privatized; and [J services that shoud remain as they are. To address these goas, the project was designed to proceed aong three "tracks." Track 1 focused on an anaysis of the costs and savings which might be reaized through the consoidation of certain eected offices in each county. Track 2 focused on identifying and prioritizing potentia coaborative actions which might be undertaken by the County Boards working with each county's eected officias. Track 3 focused on opportunities for consoidation, coaboration and sharing of resources in the deivery of services in: corrections, emergency management, extension services, veteran's services, and weed contro. These services generay are the direct responsibiity of the eected county commissioners and supervisors. Muti-County Shared Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska Unicamera Page

15 L r-

16 The UNO Center for Pubic Affairs Research faciitated the work of the project. Separate reports summarize the work conducted under each of the project's tracks. This report presents the major findings and recommendations deveoped by the Muti-County Shared Services project Steering Committee. Discussion of County Government and County-State Government Reationships County Government Costs and Services One of the eary questions asked by the county eected officias participating in this study process was why county government had been singed out by the Nebraska Unicamera for studies of consoidation. County officias fee they operate their units of government and services at the owest possibe cost. Furthermore, county officias fee they must constanty watch costs, services, and performance since their units are grassroots units cose to the peope who pay for the services. At the same time, county officias recognize that a governmenta units must constanty examine and make efforts to improve services, whie hoding costs to a minimum. One of the exhibits prepared for the pubic hearings in each of the five participating counties deat with property taxes. The exhibit consisted of a pie chart and supporting data detaiing county government's share of the oca property tax in each county (see Attachment for the budget pies and supporting information). The county government share of the oca property tax evy in the five counties ranged from a ow of 10 percent to a high of 15 percent. To achieve as much as a 5 percent reduction in a homeowner's property tax bi woud require that county government expenses be cut by 50 percent! With roads/streets and aw enforcement/corrections consuming about onehaf of most county government budgets, achieving meaningfu property tax reduction on the backs ofcounty government is an impossibe task. n fact, the pubic hearings demonstrate that the pubic does not want property tax reduction if it means massive cuts in county government. Other sources of tax reiefmust be examined County-State Government Reationships Another question raised throughout the study process was why the Nebraska Unicamera reguary increases the number of mandates and requirements paced on county government. The net resut is that counties and their eected and appointed officias have ess and ess freedom and discretion to taior services and activities to meet the needs of county residents. With the devoution of responsibiities to ower and ower eves of government, perhaps it is time to recast the reationship of counties and state government. A diaogue on the roe and functions of counties in the next mienium is needed. t is time to aow counties to move beyond the state's conception of them as mere administrative units for the state. Muti-County Shared Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska Unicamera Page2

17 ~---1 i ' [ L L i i! i! i ' ' ' j ' ' ' i i

18 Objectives and Activities of Each Study Track Track 1-Study of Consoidation The objective of Track was to provide background information and conduct an anaysis of the costs and savings that might be reaized from consoidating the five counties' independenty eected offices. Three consoidation "scenarios" were examined: a five county "metropoitan" merger of each office; an "urban" county merger (Dougas County and Sarpy County); and a "rura" county merger (Dodge County, Saunders County and Washington County). For each scenario, estimates of costs after merger were compared to current costs. Net savings or costs expressed as county property tax evies and as a percentage of the county property tax bi for a homeowner were aso estimated. Origina pans for Track incuded the foowing offices in the study: Assessor, Cerk, Register of Deeds, Sheriff, Surveyor/Engineer, and Treasurer. Subsequent to the project's "kick-off" meeting and orientation for a county eected officias, department heads and staff in Apri, 997 the Sheriff, Surveyor/Engineer and Treasurer offices were dropped from Track 1. Discussions with the sheriffs indicated that a good dea of study had aready taken pace. n the case of the surveyor/ engineer position, it became apparent that the participating counties had diverse approaches to the handing of roads, engineering and surveyor duties. For exampe, Dougas County has an eected Engineer who has responsibiities for a road and street activities in the county. Washington County, on the other hand, has an appointed road superintendent and an eected surveyor. Finay, additiona examination oflb 1085 indicated that the Nebraska Unicamera did not intend to incude the county treasurer's office in the required consoidation study. This resuted in trimming back the initia ist of seven offices preferred for incusion in the track to four. To compie data for Track 1, UNO maied a set of data sheets on Juy 30, 997 to the Assessor, Cerk and Register of Deeds in each county. Competed data sheets were requested by August 18, On August 20, 1997 UNO asked Steering Committee members to ca offices not yet returning their data sheets. Atogether, seven sets of data sheets (out of 15; 3 offices x 5 counties) were received. Just one office--register of Deeds--had returns from a five counties. As a resut, the Track 1 consoidation study and recommendations focus on this one office. The draft consoidation report was discussed during severa meetings of the Steering Committee. The discussions incuded the participation of the Dodge County Register of Deeds, and consideration of written and/or teephone comments from the Washington County Cerk/Register of Deeds and the Saunders County Register of Deeds. Muti-County Shared Services Project LB JOBS Report To The Nebraska Unicamera Page3

19 i L i f i r : r

20 Track 2-dentijication of Potentia Coaborations, Resource Sharing, and mprovements in Operations Among Eected Ojficias The focus of Track 2 was on the identification of opportunities for coabomtion, resource sharing and improvements in county eected offices. To compie information, bminstorming sessious were panned by the Steering Committee. The sessions were to be faciitated by staff of the University of Nebraska at Omaha, Center for Pubic Affairs Research. Separate sessions woud be hed for County Assessors, Cerks, Registers of Deeds, and Treasurers. The purpose of the meetings woud be to share ideas and suggestions for coaboration and resource sharing among the respective offices. Letters were sent to the eected officias June 26, The etter provided background on the purpose and date/time for the bminstorrning meetings. n addition, the etter asked the officias to give thought to the goa of exporing ways to stretch budgetary doars and/or improve services through coopemtive efforts. To make the meetings productive, it was suggested that each officia prepare 3-5 ideas in advance. deas for coaboration coud range from "very theoretica," to "reaistic," to "aready proven." Time was schedued for foow-up discussion to carify and deveop information about obstaces and factors faciitating the reaization of the ideas. Meetings for the different offices were schedued on Juy 17 and 24, 1997 and confirmation of attendance was requested to be made through the Center for Pubic Affairs Research at UNO. Subsequent teephone foow-up reveaed ony two positive confirmations by Juy 15 for assessors and treasurers. As a resut, teephone interviews were schedued and conducted as an aternative method of coecting ideas and suggestions; in sevem instances officehoders preferred to submit thoughts in writing. deas from the officias were summarized in a draft report and faxed back to the respondents for their review, any additions and comments. The fina step in Track 2 incuded Steering Committee review and prioritization of the eected officias' ideas and suggestions. Track 3-County Study Team Review of Opportunities for Consoidation and Coaboration Track 3 focused on identifying opportunities for coabomtion and consoidation in the deivery of services that generay are the direct responsibiity ofthe eected county Commissioners and Supervisors. The services incuded: 1::1 Corrections; 1::1 Emergency Management; 1::1 Extension Services; 1::1 Veteran's Services; and 1::1 Weed Contro. Muti-County Sfuuoed Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Neb1VJJka Unicamera Page4

21 ! L ri i!! i i!

22 n each area, a study team was deveoped. The study teams were made up of 10 peope (2 from each of the 5 counties) and were chaired by a member of the project Steering Committee. Members were drawn from the county boards, department heads, and staff working in the service areas. Each study team was asked to compie and review appropriate information on the current demand for services, organizationa and staffing approaches used by the counties, service mix, and tota costs/expenditures. After considering the current environment, structure and cost of service deivery, the study teams were to identify opportunities for consoidation, coaboration and aternative approaches to deivering services. Work proceeded over the summer months. By ate September, 1997 the study teams had competed their work and forwarded recommendations to the Steering Committee. As with Tracks 1 and 2, the Steering Committee reviewed, discussed and prioritized the recommendations for each service area. Findings and Recommendations For Consoidation and Sharing of Services Track 1 Findings The compete consoidation study conducted for Track 1 is contained in Attachment 2. An overview of the findings foows. Duties of the Register of Deeds a The Register of Deeds is responsibe for recording documents and maintaining information regarding the ega status of rea property in each county. a A number of instruments have been designated under Nebraska State aw for fiing with the Register of Deeds office. Among the instruments are: iens; pats and subdivisions; annexation agreements; condemnation orders; tax deeds; orders, resoutions and ordinances creating specia taxing and improvement districts; and deeds and conveyances. a No significant variations in duties exist across the five participating counties. Current Register of Deeds Staffing, Revenues and Expenditures a More popuous service areas (counties) are abe to take advantage of economies of scae. The argest county, Dougas County, operates with one-haf the empoyees per 10,000 popuation that Washington County (the smaest) operates with. a Per capita personne expenditures are generay a function of popuation size, with the smaer counties tending to have higher per capita personne expenditures. Muti-County Shared Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska Unicamera PageS

23 L r

24 o Per capita revenues and tota expenditures are ess reated to popuation size and appear to refect other factors such as office staffing eves and personne structure (which are a function, in part, of transaction eves). o The number ofregister of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation ranges from a ow of.53 in Dougas County to a high of 1.12 in Washington County. o Per capita tota expenditures range from a ow of $1.99 in Dougas County to a high of$3.47 in Saunders County. o Per capita personne expenditures range from a ow of $1.73 in Dougas County to a high of$3.11 in Saunders County. o Per capita net revenues (tota revenues ess expenditures and remittance to state) ranged from a high of$2.77 in Sarpy County to a ow of$0.60 in Saunders County. Consoidation Findings "Metropoitan" Five County Consoidation o Tota expenditure for the Register ofdeeds office function woud decine $315,100, a tota of23.4 percent from the current eve of$1,342,697. o The property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office functions woud decine from the current five county average of $6.29 for a house assessed at $100,000 to $4.81. o The 23.5 percent reduction in the property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office provides a 0.46 percent reduction in the county property tax bi for the owner of a home vaued at $100,000. Two County (Dougas and Sarpy County) "Urban" Consoidation o Tota expenditure for the Register of Deeds office function woud decine $179,471, a tota of 15.8 percent from the current eve of $1,138,808. o The property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office functions woud decine from the current two county average of$6.18 for a honse assessed at $100,000 to $5.20. o The 15.9 percent reduction in the property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office provides a 0.29 percent reduction in the county property tax bi for the owner of a home vaued at $100,000. Three County (Dodge, Saunders and Washington County) "Rura" Consoidation o Tota expenditure for the Register of Deeds office function woud decine $46,577, a tota of22.8 percent from the current eve of$203,889. Muti-County Suuet Serviees Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska UnicteiY Page6

25 L r [ [

26 J J The property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office functions woud decine from the current three county average of$6.99 for a house assessed at $100,000 to $5.39. The 22.9 percent reduction in the property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office provides a 0.51 percent reduction in the county property tax bi for the owner of a home vaued at $100,000. Track 1 Recommendations Vision Statement Whie discussing the study findings, their impications, and other issues pertaining to consoidation, the Steering Committee deveoped a vision statement to guide their work and that of future foow-up activities by the five counties. The Steering Committee's vision is that: Our counties wi be we-managed, responsive to citizens, and provide efficient and effective services. Tax payers desire ower cost government. Technoogy is making it possibe to accompish maey activities in new ways and at ower cost. Yet, our counties are organized on the basis ofpractices and technoogy avaiabe in the 19th century. Our goa is to act consistent with these newer forces by advocating structura changes that faciitate achieving our vision. Recommendations Considerabe discussion centered around the equity of ony examining and fashioning recommendations for the Register of Deeds office. The Register ofdeeds office was the ony office for which infonnation was provided by a five counties. Steering Committee members fet it was unfair that an office which was forthcoming with infonnation be made the center of attention in the discussion of potentia property tax savings from office consoidation. At the same time, it was agreed that consoidation is an issue that requires starting with some office since the issues are so arge. Furthennore, the Steering Committee recognized that the Track 1 study is ony a starting point in a process that requires: (1) ong-tenn discussion; (2) invovement of a parties; and (3) additiona, more detaied research and infonnation gathering. Four recommendations were made as a resut of the Track 1 consoidation study and discussion process: 1. That representatives of the Dougas and Sarpy County boards work with the Registers of Deeds from the two counties to consider consoidating into a singe Register of Deeds office. 2. That representatives of the Dodge, Saunders and Washington County boards work with the Registers ofdeeds from the three counties to consider consoidating into a singe Register of Deeds office. Muti-County Shared Services Project LB 1085 Report To TheNeb1USka Unicamera Page7

27 ! t L r [ ~

28 3. That each county board request their Assessor and Cerk office to work with the other counties to conduct consoidation studies simiar to that competed for the Register of Deeds office. 4. That the five counties meet severn! times during 1998 to examine and work toward structura change. Track 2 Reconunendations As indicated earier, Track 2 reied on the efforts of county eected office hoders (Assessor, Cerk, Register of Deeds and Treasurer) to identity opportunities for coabomtion, sharing of resources and improvements in office opemtions and services. The recommendations for each office are divided into three categories: o county actions (actions which can be undertaken by the counties on their own initiative); o privatization actions (actions which woud reduce county reiance on their own empoyees for service deivery); and o state actions (actions which require egisative change by state government). Since no Cerks submitted ideas for coaborating or sharing resources, no recommendations are provided for this office. The compete report deveoped for Track 2 is provided in Attachment 3. Treasurer State Actions. Aow driver's icensing exams and issning oficenses to be done from any county. 2. Change renewa period for driver's icenses from current 4 to 5 years or onger. 3. Extend ife span of pates from current 3 to 5 years. 4. Discontinue county-specific pates and aow renewa at any county office or via automation. 5. Shift issuing driver's icenses to the state. Assessor Offices County Actions 1. Share county appraisa staff and expertise. Privatization Actions. Deveop muti-county contmcts for private appraisa services. 2. Contract county appraisa services. Mufi..County Shared Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska Unicamera PageS

29 ! L ' r i ' ' i! i! i i

30 Register of Deeds County Actions 1. Share staff with expertise in information management. Privatization Actions 1. Aow direct access/purchase of records by users. State Actions 1. Seek change in statutes that currenty do not permit counties with more than 100,000 popuation to charge for pubic records. Track 3 Reconunendations Recommendations were deveoped by study teams working in five areas: corrections, emergency management, extension services, veteran's services, and weed contro. Corrections. Estabish interoca agreements to share transportation of adut and juvenie offenders to youth treatment and rehabiitation centers and state prisons. 2. Estabish an annua or semi-annua training program for county corrections empoyees. 3. Deveop a joint egisative pan to address issues such as jai overcrowding and inmate medica co-payments. Emergency Management 1. dentify emergency management issues which might be accompished at a regiona eve. Consideration shoud be given to panning, certain coordination activities, and other issues requiring speciaized expertise which may be better supported by organizationa forms faciitating pooing of resources and/or spreading costs across arger popuations. Extension Services 1. Estabish a singe Extension Program Unit to serve Dougas and Sarpy County. Continue oca advisory boards to provide oca program direction and guidance. 2. Deveop and impement uniform user fees in each county for Extension educationa and training programs, faciities, sateite use, homeowner visits, specimen diagnosis, and consutations. Muti-County Shared Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska Unicamera Page9

31 [ L r

32 Veteran's Services 1. Recommend that the State ofnebraska assume responsibiity for veteran's services functions currenty handed by counties. Weed Contro 1. Reorganize weed contro in the five counties. This can be accompished through consoidation, by deveoping interoca agreements, or by contracting for services. Resuts of Pubic Hearings As required by LB 1085, pubic hearings were hed in each of the five counties participating in the Muti-County Shared Services Project (see Attachment 4 for dates, times and ocations of the hearings). Each hearing asted approximatey 1 1/2 hours and opened with brief introductions of Steering Committee participants and recognition of other eected officias attending the hearing. Dr. Russe Smith then provided a brief introduction to the purpose of the hearing, LB 085 and each county's services and share of the current property tax burden (Attachment 5 contains the format used for the hearings). Next, Dr. Smith reviewed the three study tracks and their draft recommendations (Attachment 6 presents copies of the overheads used for the presentation). The hearing concuded with pubic reaction and comment to the study process and recommendations (summaries of each pubic hearing are provided in Attachment 7). A fina meeting of the Steering Committee was hed after the pubic hearings were competed. During this meeting, members reviewed the hearing summaries and discussed other comments received from the pubic, eected officias and county empoyees. n addition to a genera discussion ofthe hearings, the Steering Committee identified severa major themes which emerged through the pubic hearing process. Major pubic hearing themes identified by the Steering Committee incuded the foowing: 1:1 Residents of the counties generay ike the current structure, operation and expenditures of county goverument. 1:1 Residents are not sure the sma budgetary savings--and the resuting sma changes in property tax bis-are worth the possibe oss of services and access to services. 1:1 Citizens generay perceive county goverument as efficient and responsive. Muti-County Shared Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska Unicamera PageiO

33 L

34 .:~ Residents want oca contro..:~ Peope want their oca eected officias to have more fexibiity and autonomy to determine how best to do things..:~ To achieve a significant reduction in property tax payments for individua homeowners, county government budgets woud have to be cut by 50 percent or more. Even at this eve, the average property tax burden in the five participating counties woud ony be about 5-6 percent. Mufti..County Suued Services Project LB 1085 Report To The Nebraska Unicamera Page

35 , [ L r

36

37 r t L!

38 TAX LEVY NFORMATON Dodge County Tota Tax Levy= (City of Fremont Resident) OTHER SUBDVSONS 8.1% DODGE COUNTY CTY OF FREMONT 18.3% FREMONT PUBLC SCHOOLS 60.9% LEVY SUBDVSON DODGE COUNTY CTY OF FREMONT FREMONT PUBLC SCHOOLS OTHER SUBDVSONS %OF LEVY OTHER SUBDVSONS Lower Patte North Natura Resources District Metropoitan Community Coege Dodge County Agricutura Society Educationa Service Unit #

39 [ L

40 TAX LEVY NFORMATON Dougas County 1996 /1997 Tota Tax Levy = (City of Omaha Resident) OTHER DOUGLAS COUNTY 10.3% CTY OF OMAHA 22.2% OMAHA PUBLC SCHOOLS 59.0% LEVY SUBDVSON DOUGLAS COUNTY CTY OF OMAHA OMAHA PUBLC SCHOOLS OTHER SUBDVS10NS OTHER SUBDVSONS Pubic Buiding Commission Papio Natura Resources District Metro Community_ Coege Educationa Service Unit MUD Hydrant Metro Area Transit (MAT) %OF LEVY

41 ! f ' L ~ r ( [! ' i ' ' '!

42 TAX LEVY NFORMATON Saunders County 1996/1997 Tota Tax Levy = (City of Wahoo) OTHER SUBDVSONS AG SOCETY 5.78% 0.51% CTY OF WAHOO 33.20% WAHOO SCHOOL # % WAHOO ARPORT AUTHORTY 1.09% SAUNDERS COUNTY 11.36% LEVY SUBDVSON CTY OF WAHOO WAHOO ARPORT AUTHORTY SAUNDERS COUNTY WAHOO SCHOOL #39 AGSOCETY OTHER SUBDVSONS %OF LEVY OTHER SUBDVSONS Educationa Service Unit Technica Coege Lower Patte North NRD

43 L r- 1

44 SARPY COUNTY, NEBRASKA 1996 TAXES LEVED CTY 11.2% FRE 1.1% NRD 1.3% SD'S 9.2% OTHER 1.4% SCHOOL 57.9% COUNTY 14.7% METRO 3.1%

45 L r!

46 TAX LEVY NFORMATON Washington County 1996 /1997 Tota Tax Levy= (City of Bair Resident) OTHER SUBDVSONS 7.2% WASHNGTON COUNTY 15.4% CTY OF BLAR 21.5% PUBLC SCHOOLS 55.9% LEVY WASHNGTON COUNTY CTY OF BLAR PUBLC SCHOOLS OTHER SUBDVSONS SUBDVSON %OF LEVY OTHER SUBDVSONS Natura Resources District Metro Community Coege Educationa Service Unit Airport Authority Agricutura Society Historica Society

47 [ L [.. i.

48 Attachment 2--Track 1 Report: Potentia Costs and Savings from Consoidating Register of Deeds Offices

49 L r [

50 Track 1 Report POTENTAL COSTS AND SAVNGS FROM CONSOLDATNG REGSTER OF DEEDS OFFCES Muti-County Shared Services Project Dodge-Dougas-Sarpy-Saunders-Washington Prepared by Center for Pubic Affairs Research Coege of Pubic Affairs and Community Service University of Nebraska at Omaha

51 L r-.

52 Track 1 Report Potentia Costs and Savings from Consoidating Register of Deeds Offices Prepared by Center for Pubic Affairs Research Coege of Pubic Affairs and Community Service University of Nebraska at Omaha October 1997

53 L r ~

54 CONTENTS Preface i Executive Summary iii Objectives of Track 1 1 Offices ncuded in the Anaysis 1 Contents of the Report 2 Report Findings 2 Primary Duties of the Register of Deeds Office 2 Variations in Duties Across the Participating Counties 3 Cu"ent Register of Deeds Staffing, Revenues, and Expenditures 3 Data Sources 3 ~ffi~ 4 Revenues 5 Expenditures 7 Net Revenues 7 ~~ry 7 Consoidati~ Register of Deeds Offices 8 Five County "Metropoitan" Consoidation Scenario 9. Assumptions of the Metropoitan Scenario 9 2. Metropoitan Consoidation Scenario Resuts 9 3. Effect of Metropoitan Consoidation on Property Taxes 11 Two County "Urban" Consoidation 12. Assumptions of the Urban Scenario Urban Consoidation Scenario Resuts Effect of Urban Consoidation on Property Taxes 15 Three County "Rura" Consoidation Assumptions of the Rura Scenario Rura Consoidation Scenario Resuts Effect of Rura Consoidation on Property Taxes 18 Comparison of the Three Consoidation Scenarios 19 Notes 20

55 L 1 [

56 PREFACE This report examines the potentia for achieving property tax savings by consoidating the Register of Deeds offices in Dodge, Dougas, Sarpy, Saunders and Washington Counties. Severa considerations shoud be kept in mind as this information is reviewed. First, this report is intended to serve as a vehice for discussion. By focusing on the Register of Deeds office, we do not mean to impy that this office is ess efficient or effective than other county offices. nstead, our focus on the Register of Deeds office is a matter of convenience. Other county offices coud have been examined. Second, the Register of Deeds office generates revenues for county government. During the baseine year for this study ( 1996), this office contributed amost $1.4 miion in excess of costs for the five counties. As a resut, any effort to consoidate this office must consider the impact of changes on the abiity to provide services and maintain revenues at current eves. The bottom ine is that whie the Register of Deeds office does carry a cost to the property tax payer, the office generates revenues which hep operate other functions of county government. Third, whie this study estimates that the current costs of providing Register of Deeds services in the five counties coud be reduced by approximatey $315,100 from current eves, no effort is made to show how the expenses, revenues and staffing might be aocated across the five counties. Whie such estimates are not compicated to deveop, they do require that decisions be made about which of severa criteria might be used (e.g., popuation, Register of Deeds transactions). These decisions can best be made after discussion of the genera costs and savings that might accrue from consoidation of this office. Fourth, the estimates deveoped in this report assume that the Register ofdeeds functions are carried out using current eves of technoogy found in the five counties. n reaity, practices range from a heavy reiance on computerization and other technoogy (e.g., use ofscauners) in severa counties to traditiona paper and edger book in severa others. f consoidation of these offices moves forward in future years, it is highy ikey that expenditures woud need to be made to enhance the technoogy base of severa of the counties. Whie this might reduce the projected savings in the short run, it may we increase savings in the ong run by further reducing the personne expenditures required to provide this service. Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Pagei

57 A fma consideration which readers need to keep in mind is that current Nebraska aws governing the Register of Deeds offices does not pace them each on the same footing. For exampe, ony counties over 100,000 popuation may charge for remote access to Register ofdeeds documents. This requirement keeps smaer counties from upgrading their technoogy, particuary using the nternet as a medium for accessing county records. These and other egisative requirements wi need to be examined and fine tuned to faciitate county innovation in the structure of this and. other offices.! _j Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shored Services Project Page ii

58 EXECUTVE SUMMARY This study of the potentia costs and savings from consoidating county Register of Deeds offices was undertaken to fufi the requirements oflb1085. Passed in 1996, LB 1085 provided new, more specific anguage and procedures governing county consoidation and service cooperation. Couped with the new anguage and procedures was a requirement that each county compete by January, 1998 a study of whether property taxes might be reduced through the consoidation of offices, services and/or county governments. Duties of the Register of Deeds The Register of Deeds is responsibe for recording documents and maintaining information regarding the ega status of rea property in each county. A number of instruments have been designated under Nebraska State aw for fiing with the Register of Deeds office. Among the instruments are: iens; pats and subdivisions; annexation agreements; condemnation orders; tax deeds; orders, resoutions and ordinances creating specia taxing and improvement districts; and deeds and conveyances. No significant variations in duties exist across the five participating counties. Current Register of Deeds Staffing, Revenues and Expenditures More popuous service areas (counties) are abe to take advantage of economies of scae. The argest county, Dougas County, operates with one-hafthe empoyees per 10,000 popuation that Washington County (the smaest) operates with. Per capita personne expenditures are generay a function of popuation size, with the smaer counties tending to have higher per capita personne expenditures. Per capita revenues and tota expenditures are ess reated to popuation size and appear to refect other factors such as office staffing eves and personne structure. The number of Register of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation ranges from a ow of.53 in Dougas County to a high of 1.12 in Washington County. Per capita tota expenditures range from a owof$1.99 in Dougas County to a high of$3.47 in Saunders County. Per capita personne expenditures range from a ow of $1.73 in Dougas County to a high of $3.11 in Saunders County. Per capita net revenues (tota revenues ess expenditures and remittance to state) ranged from a high of $2.77 in Sarpy County to a ow of$0.60 in Saunders County. Track Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Page iii

59 1 Consoidation Findings Two County Dougas and Sarpy County) "Urban" Consoidation Tota expenditure for the Register of Deeds office function woud decine $179,471, a tota of 15.8 percent from the current eve of$1,138,808. The property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office functions woud decine from the current two county average of $6.18 for a house assessed at $100,000 to $5.20. The 15.9 percent reduction in the property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office provides a 0.29 percent reduction in the county property tax bi for the owner of a home vaued at $100,000. Three County Dodge, Saunders and Washington Countv) "Rura" Consoidation Tota expenditure for the Register of Deeds office function woud decine $46,577, a tota of22.8 percent from the current eve of$203,889. The property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office functions woud decine from the current three county average of $6.99 for a house assessed at $100,000 to $5.39. The 22.9 percent reduction in the property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office provides a 0.51 percent reduction in the county property tax bi for the owner of a home vaued at $100,000. "Metropoitan" Five County Consoidation Tota expenditure for the Register of Deeds office function woud decine $315,100, a tota of23.4 percent from the current eve of$1,342,697. The property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office functions woud decine from the current five county average of $6.29 for a house assessed at $100,000 to $4.81. The 23.5 percent reduction in the property tax required to support the Register of Deeds office provides a 0.46 percent reduction in the county property tax bi for the owner of a home vaued at $100,000. Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Paxe iv

60 Potentia Costs and Savings from Consoidating Register of Deeds Offices Objectives of Track 1 The objective of Track is to provide background information and conduct an anaysis of the costs and savings that might be reaized from consoidating the five counties' independenty eected offices. Three consoidation "scenarios" are examined: a "metropoitan" merger invoving Dodge, Dougas, Sarpy, Saunders and Washington County; an "urban" county merger (Dougas County and Sarpy County); and a "rura" county merger (Dodge County, Saunders County and Washington County). For each scenario, estimates of costs and any net revenues for the office after merger are compared to current costs and net revenues. Net savings (or costs) expressed as county property taxes evies, and as a percentage of the county property tax bi for a homeowner are aso estimated. Offices ncuded n The Anaysis Origina pans for Track incuded the foowing offices: Assessor, Cerk, Register of Deeds, Sheriff, Surveyor/Engineer, and Treasurer. Subsequent to the project's "kick-off" orientation in Apri, 997 the Sheriff, Surveyor/Engineer and Treasurer offices were dropped from Track 1. Discussions with the sheriffs indicated that a good dea of study had aready taken pace. n the case of the surveyor/ engineer position, it became apparent that the participating counties had diverse approaches to the handing of roads, engineering and surveyor duties. For exampe, Dougas County has an eected Engineer who has responsibiities for a road and street activities in the county. Washington County, on the other hand, had an appointed road superintendent and an eected surveyor. Finay, additiona examination oflb 085 indicated that the Nebraska Unicamera probaby did not intend to incude the county treasurer's office in the reqnired consoidation study. This resuted in trimming back the initia ist of seven offices preferred for incusion in Track to four offices. To compie data for Track 1, UNO maied a set of data sheets on Juy 30, 1997 to the Assessor, Cerk and Register ofdeeds in each county. Competed data sheets were requested by August 18th. On August 20th, UNO asked Steering Committee members to ca offices not yet returning their data sheets. Atogether, seven sets of data sheets (out of 15; 3 offices x 5 counties) were received. Just one office--register of Deeds-had returns from a five counties. As a resut, this report focuses on this one office. Track Report: Muti-County Shored Services Project Page

61 Contents of the Report This report estimates costs and savings which might be reaized from consoidating the Register of Deeds office and expresses them as property tax changes. First, the functions of the office are profied. Second, the current structure and budgets of the five Register of Deeds offices are summarized. Next, three consoidation scenarios are presented. Each contains cost and savings estimates, as we as changes in the property taxes paid by homeowners profied. Report Findings Primary Duties of the Register of Deeds Office The Register of Deeds is responsibe for recording documents and maintaining information regarding the ega status of rea property in each county. The principe duties of the Register of Deeds are enumerated under Nebraska Revised Statutes through (Reissue 1991 ). n preparing for its LB 1085 anaysis, Lancaster County summarized the main duties of the office:' 1. Have the custody of and safey keep and preserve a books, records, maps, and papers kept or deposited in his or her office; 2. Record or cause to be recorded a deeds, mortgages, instruments, handwritings presented for recording; 3. Record a pats and subdivisions ony after they have been approved by the appropriate governing body; 4. Proofread a records presented for fiing; 5. Endorse upon every instrument propery fied the minute, hour, day, month and year when it was fied and then enter the instrument in the proper book. After the instrument has been recorded, the book and page or computer system reference sha be endorsed thereon; 6. Pay to County Treasurer by the 15th day of each month a fees coected the previous month; 7. Coect the tax evied against grantors for the fiing of deeds (document stamp tax) and make recommendations to the State Tax Commissioner regarding caims from taxpayers for reimbursement of the tax on account of mistakes or cerica errors; and 8. Assist the Assessor in the examination of Register of Deeds records and provide the Assessor with other information in his or her possession that wi assist the assessment of property. J A number of instruments have been designated under Nebraska State aw for fiing with the Register of Deeds office. Fiing documents and instruments with the register of Deeds aows officia notice regarding any ega actions which might affect the status of rea property. Among the instruments fied with the Register of Deeds are the foowing: Track 1 Report: Muti-County Sht'ed Services Project Page2

62 Liens (e.g., weed contro expenses, construction iens) Pats and subdivisions Cemetery ot conveyances Orders, resoutions, and ordinances of governing bodies creating specia taxing or improvement districts Annexation agreements Condemnation orders Documents to be fied pursuant to the rues of civi procedure (e.g., satisfactions of judgements, probate orders, appointment of agents) Leases invoving mineras, oi and gas State highway vacation proceedings Taxdeeds Deeds and conveyances n recording documents and other information, the Register of Deeds may keep paper or computerized records. f a computerized system is not maintained, the Register of Deeds must keep separate books for each of the foowing: deeds and conveyances; mortgages; construction iens; misceaneous records; federa iens; and fees. Variations n Duties Across The Participating Counties Each Register of Deeds was asked to review the sururnary deveoped by Lancaster County and indicate whether their office's duties differed Responses indicate no significant variations from the baseine summary provided above (see Attachment 3 for detai information on duties). Exceptions and/or additions noted by the five Register of Deeds incuded the foowing: maintenance of both paper and computerized indexing systems; provision of research assistance over the phone; assistance with geneaogy research; copying of records for the pubic; and provision of support services for other county offices (e.g., FAX machine). Cu"ent Register of Deeds Staffing, Revenues, and Expenditures Data Sources. As indicated earier, forms were sent to each Register of Deeds for competion. Each office was asked to suppy information for FY Because the Dougas County Register of Deeds was unabe to compete the forms, the Dougas County Board's budget officer handed that work. n addition to personne, revenue and expenditure data suppied by the Register of Deeds offices, this report uses popuation, assessed vaue, and evy information gathered from census and other county sources. The popuation and assessed vaue data are for 1995; tax evies used for comparison are for Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project PageJ

63 Whie the data used in this report were suppied by each office and are understood to represent actua revenues or expenditures, in some cases estimates have been used. For exampe, empoyee benefits (FCA, retirement, heath, vacation, hoidays, and ife insurance) are paid out of each county's genera fund. Severa counties suppied cost aocation reports deveoped by David M. Griffith and Associates. These detai fu benefit costs attributabe to the Register of Deeds office. n other cases, costs for severa benefit items were reported, with no supporting evidence such as the cost aocation report. One county provided no benefit information. When ony partia or no benefit information was reported, benefits were computed at 22 percent of saa:ry and wages for reported positions in that office. t must aso be noted that this study does not incude the foowing types of costs: Centra data processing Buiding use charges nsurance Equipment use charges Buidings and grounds Services suppied by other offices Misceaneous charges and fees Because such costs usuay are not paid by any of the individua offices of county government, they are not incuded. At the same time, it is important for officias to remember that these costs are a part of the tota expense of county government and shoud be considered as more detaied panning continues. n Washington County, these costs tota approximatey $60,000 for the Register of Deeds portion of the Cerk's office. n Dougas County these tota $337,738 ($200,309 for centra data processing) for the baseine year used in this report. f consoidation were accompanied by reductions in these expenditure categories, additiona property tax savings coud be expected in addition to those identified in this report. Staffing. Tabe 1 summarizes the staffmg, revenue and expenditure information for the Register ofdeeds office in each of the counties. Tota staffing ranges from a ow of2 in Saunders and Washington County to a high of23 in Dougas County. Figure 1 standardizes this information by reporting the number of Register of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation. As can be seen, eves range from a owof0.5 in Dougas County to a high of 1.12 in Washington County. ] Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Page4

64 Tabe 1 Register of Deeds Staffing, Revenues and Expenditures ~ County +staff count does not incude a part-time ine. As aready mentioned, Dougas County operates the argest Register of Deeds office among the five participating counties. The cassification of the 23 empoyees found in the Dougas County Register of Deeds office, as we as those of the other counties is provided in Tabe 2. Revenues. Tabe 1 aso dispays revenue information for the five counties. As can be seen, each Register of Deeds office derives the preponderance of its revenues from recording and documentary stamp fees. A revenues produced by the recording activities of each Register of Deeds office are retained by the county. A portion of the documentary stamp fees, on the other hand, are remitted to Nebraska State gove=ent. Currenty, just over 71 percent ofthese revenues are remitted to the state. The revenue rank order of the counties generay foows that found for staffmg. Track Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project PageS

65 Tabe 2 Staffing Pattern for Register of Deeds Offices Fig. Number of Register of Deeds Empoyees Per 10,000 Popuation W ash in gton County Saunders County Dodge County Sarpy County Dougas County Empoyees Per 10,000 Popuation 1.2 Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Page6

66 Expenditures. The argest expense category for the offices is for personne. This incudes saaries/wages and benefits (see Tabe 1 ). n fact, personne comprised 86 to 91 percent of each county's tota expenditures for the office. Net Revenues. The net revenue derived from the Register of Deeds offices in each county is summarized in the ast row in Tabe 1. The high is just over $1 miion for Dougas County and the ow is $11,355 for Saunders County. To standardize this information, per capita net revenue figures for the five Register of Deeds offices are reported in Figure 2. As can be seen, Sarpy County's Register of Deeds office generates the highest net revenue per capita ($2.77). Next are Dougas County ($2.32) and Washington County ($1.94); Dodge County ($1.02) and Saunders County ($0.60) generate much ower eves of net revenue for their county government. Fig. 2 Per Capita Net Rewnues for Register of Deeds Offices Sarpy County Dougas County Washington County Dodge County Saunders County $0.00 $0,50 $1.00. $1.50 $2.00 $2.50 $3.00 Per Capita Net Rewnues Sununary. Discussions of consoidation typicay Center around the greater efficiencies which can be attained by creating arger (popuation) jurisdictions. A reevant question, then, is whether the staffmg, revenue and expenditure data point to greater efficiencies on the part of Register ofdeeds offices in the arger counties? Tabe 3 brings together the indicators that have been discussed thus far and can be used to shed ight on this question. Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Page7

67 J Tabe 3 Popuation Size and Comparative ndicators for Register of Deeds Office J First, we can see that when it comes to the staffing indicator--empoyees per 10,000 popuation--more popuous counties are abe to take advantage of economies of scae. Thus, the argest county--dougas County--operates with one-haf the empoyees per 10,000 that Washington County (the smaest) operates with. Second, popuation size is reated to tota expenditures per capita, but ess strongy. f a inear reationship existed between popuation and tota expenditures, Dougas County woud have the owest expenditure per capita and Washington County woud have the highest. But, as can be seen in Tabe 2, Washington County performs better than woud be expected on this indicator and Sarpy County performs somewhat worse. Third, per capita personne expenditures are generay reated to popuation size, with the smaer counties tending to have higher per capita personne expenditures. The exception to this generaization is Sarpy County. Finay, per capita net revenues--the funds deposited in each county's treasury and in excess of expenditures for each office--increase with size. Here again, however, the reationship is not perfect, with Sarpy performing better than Dougas County, and Washington County performing better than both Dodge County and Saunders County. Overa, arger counties appear to be abe to carry out the Register of Deeds functions at a ower cost and higher net revenue per capita than smaer counties. As with most reationships, however, the reationship between size and economic performance is not perfect. This certainy appears to be the case with Washington County which performs the Register of Deeds functions more efficienty than woud be predicted from its popuation size. This is ikey a function of the joint Cerk-Register of Deeds office.z ~1 Consoidating Register of Deeds Offices To identify potentia costs and savings and their effect on property taxes in each of the counties, three consoidation scenarios are examined: a five county "metropoitan" consoidation; an "urban" consoidation invoving Dougas County and Sarpy County; and a "rura" consoidation invoving Dodge County, Saunders County and Washington County. This section presents the findings for each scenario. Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shored Services Project PageS

68 Severa assumptions are common to a three scenarios: There wi be no major change in current eves of service demands. Register of Deeds offices wi be maintained in current or equivaent offices in each county. As a resut, there wi be no faciity savings or cost increases. Trave wi be kept to a minimum, with FAX and e-mai/internet used as much as possibe for communication and information sharing between sateite and centra offices. No transition costs are incuded; these require more detaied panning for impementation. Five County "Metropoitan" Consoidation. This section presents the resuts of the metropoitan consoidation portion of the study.. Assumptions o[the Metropoitan Scenario. The metropoitan consoidation scenario assumes the foowing: The current staffing pattern of Dougas County is utiized as a framework, with minor adjustments as noted in the anaysis Adj ustrnents in personne costs wi be made at the current saary paid to the Dougas County Register of Deeds and associated staff. Recorders for each county are paid at Sarpy County rates. 2. Metropoitan Consoidation Scenario Resuts. Tabe 4 contains summary staffing, revenue and expenditure information. Since the consoidated office area contains a arger popuation, it was assumed that there woud be a proportionate reduction in staffing due to additiona economies of scae. t was thus necessary to deveop a measure of the number ofregister of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation for the consoidated area. New staffing figures were deveoped as foows. First, the difference between Sarpy County and Dougas County in the number of Register of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation was computed (O.9). Second, the difference in popuation between Sarpy County and Dougas County was computed (322,34 ). Third, the difference in popuation between Dougas County and the tota for a five counties was computed (83,293). Fourth, the ratio of the popuation differences was computed (0.56). Finay, this was mutipied with the difference in empoyees per 10,000 to yied a rate ofo.o. This figure was subtracted from the current Dougas County rate of0.53. The resuting rate of0.43 Register ofdeeds empoyees per O,OOO popuation was used to determine the number of empoyees for the consoidated metropoitan Register of Deeds office. As can be seen, approximatey 27 empoyees woud be required. This is a reduction of from current eves for a five counties. Tabe 5 portrays how these might be aocated across the five counties under this scenario. The tabe aso compares the consoidation staffing pan with current staffing assignments. Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Page9

69 Tabe4 Register of Deeds Staffmg, Revenues and Expenditures: Five County Metropoitan Scenario! ~ Revenues for Five Counties 753 Based on the assumptions outined above, revenues are estimated to be the same as current eves for the five counties. Tota expenses are estimated to be $1,027,597. ncuded within this tota are $862,898 for personne (saary/wages and benefits@ 22%) and other expenses of$164,699 (the same as current eves for the five counties). Net revenues woud be $1,714,754. This is an increase of$315,100 in net revenues for the five county area when compared to net revenues for the current structure (see Tabe 1) and woud be avaiabe for reducing the property tax. What can we say about the "performance" of the consoidated office? Tabe 6 contains summary information for the comparative indicators presented earier (see Tabe 2). As can be seen: The number of empoyees per 10,000 popuation decines 30.6 percent from an average of.62 to.43; Per capita tota expenditures are reduced 32.5 percent from an average of $2.46 to $1.66; Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project PaxeJO

70 Per capita personne expenditures are reduced 41.4 percent from an average of $2.39 to $1.40; and Per capita net revenues increase 55.3 percent from an average of$1.79 to $2.78. Tabe 5 Staffing Pattern for Register of Deeds: Metropoitan Consoidation Scenario Tabe 6 Popuation Size and Comparative ndicators for Register ofdeeds Office: Metropoitan Consoidation Scenario 3. Effect of Metropoitan Consoidation on Propertv Taxes. Under the current structure, the average property tax required to support the Register of Deeds offices for the five counties is $6.29 for a home with an assessed vaue of$100,000. Under the metropoitan consoidation scenario, the average property tax required to support the Register of Deeds offices for the five counties woud be $4.81 on the same home. Track 1 Report: Muti-Counf Shared Services Project Page 11

71 Tabe 7 summarizes severa items: (1) the average county evy for the five counties (expressed as a percentage of the tota assessed); (2) the five county average property tax bi for a house vaued at $100,000; (3) the average property tax savings from consoidating the Register of Deeds office; and ( 4) the average percent change this woud produce in the county's share of property tax bi on a house assessed at $100,000. As can be seen in the ast counm of the tabe, consoidating the Register of Deeds office woud resut in approximatey a one-haf of one percent ( -0.46%) reduction in the county property tax on a home vaued at $100,000 for property tax purposes. Overa, property tax payments to fund Register of Deeds offices in the five county area woud decine approximatey $315,100. Tabe 7 Summary of Property Tax Changes from Consoidating Register of Deeds Offices: Metropoitan Scenario ~ 0.46% Two County "Urban" Consoidation. This section presents the resuts of the urban county consoidation portion of the study.. Assumptions ofthe Urban Countv Scenario. The consoidation scenario assumes the foowing: The current staffing pattern of Dougas County is utiized as a framework, with minor adjustments as noted in the anaysis Adjustments in personne costs wi be made at the current saary paid to the Dougas County Register ofdeeds and associated staff. Recorders for each county are paid at Sarpy County rates. 2. Urban Consoidation Scenario Resuts. Tabe 8 contains summary staffing, revenue and expenditure information. Since the consoidated office area contains a arger popuation, it was assumed that there woud be a proportionate reduction in staffing due to additiona economies of scae. t was thus necessary to deveop a measure of the number ofregister of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation for the consoidated area. J Track Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Page12

72 Tabe 8 Register ofdeeds Staffing, Revenues and Expenditures: Urban Consoidation Scenario Net Revenues for Two Counties New Staffing figures were deveoped using the same approach outined earier with the metropoitan scenario. First, the difference between Sarpy County and Dougas County in the number of Register of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation was computed (0.19). Second, the difference in popuation between Sarpy County and Dougas County was computed (322,341 ). Third, the difference in popuation between Dougas County and the tota for both counties was computed (,806). Fourth, the ratio ofthe popuation differences was computed (0.346). Finay, this was mutipied with the difference in empoyees per 10,000 to yied a rate of0.07. This figure was subtracted from the current Dougas County rate of0.53. The resuting rate of0.46 Register of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation was used to determine the number of empoyees for the consoidated urban county Register of Deeds office. As can be seen, approximatey 25 empoyees woud be required. This is a reduction of 6 from current eves for the two county's Register of Deeds offices. Tabe 9 portrays how the 25 empoyees might be aocated across the two counties under this scenario. The tabe aso compares the consoidation staffing pan with current staffing assignments. Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project PageJ

73 Three County "Rura" Consoidation. This section presents the resuts of the rura county consoidation portion of the study. J. Assumptions ofthe Rura County Scenario. The consoidation scenario assumes the foowing: Staffmg wi consist of a Register of Deeds, a deputy, a cerk and recorders. Adjustments in personne costs wi be made at the current saary paid to the Dodge County Register of Deeds and at average saaries for the three counties for other positions. 2. Rura Consoidation Scenario Resuts. Tabe 12 contains summary staffing, revenue and expenditure information. Since the consoidated office area contains a arger popuation, it was once again assumed there woud be a proportionate reduction in staffing due to economies of scae. t was thus necessary to deveop a measure of the number of Register of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation for the consoidated area. J Tabe 12 Register of Deeds Staffmg, Revenues and Expenditures: Rura Consoidation Scenario -, 1 Net Revenues for Three Counties Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Page16

74 New Staffing figures were deveoped using the same approach outined earier for the metropoitan and urban scenarios. Since Dodge County is the argest of the rura counties and has the owest number of personne per 10,000 popuation, their staffmg ratio was used as the base for adjustment. First, the difference between Dodge County and Sarpy County (the next argest county of the five incuded in the study) in the number of Register of Deeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation was computed (0.14). Second, the difference in popuation between Dodge County and Sarpy County was computed (77,804). Third, the difference in popuation between Dodge County and the tota for a three counties was computed (36, 765). Fourth, the ratio of the popuation differences was computed (0.47). Finay, this was mutipied with the difference in empoyees per 10,000 to yied a rate of0.07. This figure was subtracted from the current Dodge County rate of0.86. The resuting rate of0.79 RegisterofDeeds empoyees per 10,000 popuation was used to determine the number of empoyees for the consoidated urban county Register of Deeds office. As can be seen, approximatey 5 empoyees woud be required. This is a reduction of2 from current eves for the three county's Register ofdeeds offices. Tabe 13 portrays how the 5 empoyees might be aocated across the three counties under this scenario. As shown, there woud be a Register of Deeds, a Deputy, one cerk and two recorders. The tabe aso compares the consoidation staffing pan with current staffing assignments. Tabe 13 Staffmg Pattern for Register of Deeds: Rura Consoidation Scenario Tra k 1 Revort: Muti-Countv Shared Services Proiect Page 17

75 j, J 1 Based on the assumptions outined above, revenues are estimated to be the same as current eves for the three counties ($468,900). Tota expenses are estimated to be $157,312. ncuded within this tota are $137,672 for personne (saary/wages and benefits@ 22%) and other expenses of$19,640 (aso at current eves for the three counties). After remitting approximatey $183,713 to the State ofnebraska and deducting expenses of $157,312, roughy $127,875 woud be avaiabe to the three counties for deposit. This amount represents an increase of $46,577 when compared to current net revenues for the three counties. This amount ($46,577) is assumed to be avaiabe for property tax reief. Tabe 14 contains sununary information for the comparative indicators presented earier for the current configuration and the rura scenario (see Tabes 3, 6 and 10). As can be seen: The number of empoyees per 10,000 popuation decines 18.6 percent from an average of.97 for the three counties to.79; Per capita tota expenditures are reduced 17.9 percent from an average of $2.68 to $2.20; Per capita personne expenditures are reduced 25.2 percent from an average of $2.58 to $1.93; and Per capita net revenues increase 57.0 percent from $1.14 to $1.79. Tabe 14 Popuation Size and Comparative ndicators for Register of Deeds Office: Rura Consoidation Scenario 3. Effect of Rura Consoidation on ProperY Taxes. Under the current structure, the average property tax required to support the Register of Deeds offices for the five counties is $6.99 for a home with an assessed vaue of$100,000. Under the rura consoidation scenario, the average property tax required to support the Register of Deeds offices for the three counties woud be $5.39 on the same home vaued at $100,000. J Traek Report: Muti-County Shared Ser'ices Project Paf(eB

76 Tabe 5 summarizes the property tax changes presented earier for the metropoitan and urban consoidation scenarios (see Tabes 7 and ). The ast coumn expresses the reduction in the property tax for the three county rura area as a percentage of current county taxes. As can be seen, consoidating the Register of Deeds offices into a singe unit woud resut in approximatey a 0.5 percent reduction in the average county property tax on a home vaued at $OO,OOO for property tax purposes. Overa, property tax payments to fund Register of Deeds offices in the three county area woud decine approximatey $46,577. Tabe 5 Summary of Property Tax Changes from Consoidating Register of Deeds Offices: Rura Scenario.3148 $34.80 $ % Comparison of the Three Consoidation Scenarios This section of the report compares the three scenarios to one another and with the current structure. Tabe 16 presents each county's tota expenditures, net revenues (revenues ess state remittance and tota expenditures), and property tax required to fund the Register ofdeeds office under its current structure. As can be seen, the current property tax burden ranges from a ow of$5.65 in Dougas County to a high of$8.73 in Sarpy County. Tabe 6 Tota Expenditures, Net Revenues and Required Property Tax for Current Register of Deeds Structure Track 1 Report: Muti-County Shared Services Project Page 19

77 As has been shown in previous sections, when the reduction of property taxes and cost of county government are considered, it is cear that each of the scenarios is abe to provide spending reductions. This, in turn, can provide property tax reief. More detaied information on each county's share of expenses and revenues under the consoidation scenarios--and their utimate property tax reief-can't be deveoped without more specific aocation criteria. Finay, it is important to ask which scenario provides the greatest property tax reief/ Tabe 17 summarizes the average property tax requirement to support the Register of Deeds office for each scenario, as we as the percentage reduction in the average county average property tax for the counties incuded in the scenario. As can be seen, the metropoitan consoidation scenario has the owest property tax requirement. Yet, if one ooks at the coumn summarizing the reduction in taxes, Dougas and Sarpy County wi be better off under the metropoitan consoidation scenario, whie Dodge, Saunders and Washington Counties wi be better off under the rura scenario. Tabe 17 Property Tax Requirements for Each Scenario! ~ j 1 "Lancaster County Consoidation Committee Statutory Duties of Eected Officias," Lancaster County, no date. 2 n a teephone conversation the Washington County Cerk indicated that the joint Cerk-Register of Deeds office is working at its maximum. Her goa is to encourage the estabishment of a separate Register of Deeds office. Track 1 Report: Muti-Countv Shared Services Proiect Paze20 )

78 Attachment 3--Track 2 Report: dentification of Potentia Coaborations, Resource Sharing, and mprovements in Operations Among Eected Officias

79 !! ~ '!! {

80 TRACK 2 --DENTFCATON OF POTENTAL COLLABORATONS, RESOURCE SHARNG, AND MPROVEMENTS N OPERATONS AMONG ELECTED COUNTY OFFCES August 1, 1997

81 i L [ r!.!

82 Tabe of Contents. Overview. Executive Summary--County Treasurers. County Treasurers--deas for Coaboration/Resource Sharing V. Executive Summary--County Assessors V. County Assessors--deas for Coaboration/Resource Sharing V. Executive Summary--County Cerks V. County Cerks--deas for Coaboration/Resource Sharing V. Executive Summary--County Registers X. County Registers--deas for Coaboration/Resource Sharing Appendix

83 Muti-County Shared Services: A Response to LB Overview As part of the task mandated by LB 1085, brainstorming sessions were panned by the steering committee of the five-county region, to be faciitated by the staff of the University of Nebraska at Omaha, for county assessors, cerks, registers of deeds, and treasurers. The purpose of the meetijgs was to share ideas and suggestions for coaboration and resource sharing among ~ their respective offices. Letters were sent to the eected officias June 26 (see Appendix) asking them to give some thought to the goa of exporing ways to stretch budgetary doars and/or improve services through cooperative efforts. To make the meetings productive, it was suggested that each officia prepare 3-5 ideas in advance. deas for coaboration coud range from "very theoretica" to "reaistic" to "aready proven" and time was schedued for more discussion about obstaces and factors faciitating their reaization. Meetings for the different offices were schedued on Juy 17 and 24 and confirmation of attendance was requested to be made through the Center for Pubic Affairs Research at UNO. Subsequent teephone foow-up reveaed ony two positive confirmations by Juy 15 for both assessors and treasurers, and ony one confirmation for cerks and two for registers by Juy 22. As a resut, teephone interviews were schedued and conducted as an aternative method of coecting ideas and suggestions; in severa instances officehoders preferred to submit thoughts in writing. deas from the officias were suiuiied in a draft report and faxed back to the respondents for their review and any additions or comments. J 2

84 . Executive Summary--County Treasurers The majority of ideas for coaboration and resource sharing cited by the responding treasurers, where a arge measure of consensus seems to exist, were in reation to the foowing areas: ) Motor Vehice Operating Permits 2) Motor Vehice License Pates/Tax Coection and Rc;)gistration Renewas 3) Feasibiity!mpact Studies of State Legisation Prior to Enactment 4) County and Eected-Office Mergers These areas were identified by the treasurers as most meriting further exporation, deveopment and detaied discussion among the eected officehoders, the steering committee, the county boards, and at the state eve. Summaries of the main ideas, as presented by the treasurers in each county, foow in the next section of the report. 3

85 m. County Treasurers--deas for Coaboration/Resonrce Sharing Dodge County--Ms. June Mattson Motor Vehice Operating Permits J Coaboration and cooperation among counties shoud be expored to improve services with regard to obtaining motor vehice operatingpennits. Currenty, citizens can take examinations in any county, such as where they work, but then need to purchase the icense and have their phot()graph taken in the counties where they reside. n Dodge County, examiners are avaiabe ony on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays which creates great inconvenience and wasted time for the pubic. A regiona site with one-stop shopping" for icenses woud provide better service arid conserve resources for the peope of Dodge, Cummi11g, Saunders, Cofax, and Washi11gton counties. (Note: Simiar ideas were expressed by Mr. Rich James, Sarpy County and Mr. James Fauver, Saunders County and are summarized here aso). Mr. James S!ggested that renewa times for icenses be extended to 5 years from the current 4 years. Extending the time frame woud reduce his office's workoad in this area by 20% during that 4~yearperiod 1 meaning that the same number of empoyees coud hande the increase in popuation and demand for icensing services. Currenty, Sarpy County is experiencing an annua. growth rate of about 2%, resuting in additiona pennits per year which must be processed. t was aso noted by Mr. James that if a driver moves to another county and oses his/her icense, he must return to his former county of residence to get a dupicate before procuring a new ) one. This process is unnecessary and wastefu for both the county and the taxpayer as the 4

86 information of record is avaiabe to a counties in the computerized records maintained by the Nebraska Department of Motor Vehices. Furthermore, Mr. James indicated that a aw change is needed to improve the efficency of the icensing process. Currenty a driver must first stop at the state office of the Nebraska Department ofmotor Vehices then go to the county treasurer's office to have the photograph taken and pay for the icense. This system resuts in greater overa staff needs and wasted time and resources. Mr. James fet the state coud assume a responsibiities for driver icensing more efficienty than the current system tied to the counties, or that at a minimum, a counties shoud be better integrated with the state system. t was aso suggested that more icenses shoud be renewed by mai, perhaps ony requiring a new photograph and eye test every other time. Aso that a grace period of30-60 days be aowed for a non-test renewa. Currenty if a person is ony one day ate, he/she must take unnecessary and time-consuming tests. Dougas County-Ms. Juie Haney Written comments concerning icense pates, driver icensing and the need for the state egisature to get input and suggestions prior to enacting egisation which impacts the counties are as foows: [see inserted etter] 5

87 Dougas County Treasurer Juie M. Haney Dougas County Treasurer 1819 Farnam Street Suite H-03 Omaha, NE FAX: Juy 15,!997 MR RUSSELL SMTH DRECTOR CENTER FOR PUBLC AFFARS COMMTTEE PETER KEWT CONFERENCE CENTER OMAHA NE Dear Russ, apoogize for not returning a repy to you sooner. 'm a itte overwhemed at the moment with trying to get two computer systems up and running simutaneousy. We are under a strict time frame and my time is spent in one meeting after another. first want you to know that never "write anything off' and if time aowed, woud be more thim happy to participate in your discussion process. However, fee that sitting in a discussion with my counterparts has a far ess importance to the process of accountabiity and efficiency for government than what shoud be done to hep the owering of taxes and a that goes with it. The Legisature itsef needs to start ooking at the bigger picture of how the State itsef coud start improving efficiency and cutting out waste which in turn woud then hep the counties improve their cost efficiencies.. Treasurer's have for the past few years tried to get the State to go to a 5 year icense pate. No other state around prints pates for ony three years at a time. Legisators have resisted this idea saying that severa prisoners then woud have no work and that they woudn't be earning a ski for when they got out. Who prints pates in the outside word or even uses that type of equipment. The cost of re-design every year and the thousands of pates that are printed woud be a huge cost savings to the taxpayers (who aso fee this is a waste of money.) Their second argument is that they woud ose revenue by peope getting away with a onger period of time that they woudn't register their vehices. The treasurer's countered that with making stiffer penaties for the vioators. 2. The biggest compaint to treasurer's comes from the Driver's Licensing portion that the State is over. Not enough examiners cause ong ines and hours of waiting. Treasurer's get bamed when we ony take the pictures and issue the icense. We have repeatedy asked that the State "beef up" their hiring in this area... but service to the pubic is the farthest thing from the State's mind. 3. Every year more reguations in Motor Vehices are voted on by the Legisature with no thought ofthe cost that is passed to the counties nor the manpower it takes to get adhere to the new regs. To be efficient and cost saving, egisators shoud be contacting those being affected to get their input and suggestions. Miions of doars

88 in this State are being ost to soppy egisation that has no teeth and adds to the bureaucracy that currenty exists. These are just a few of the situations th.at currenty exist... there are many more, but your eyes coudn't take that much strain. My point is that there is so much more to be done at the State eve that coud cure some of the waste in government that currenty exists than at the county eve. am sorry that won't be abe to attend your meeting. Besides having an over abundance efwork here at the office, am aso in the process of moving and both are coiding ike two runa-way trains. J.rie M. Haney ougas County Treasurer

89 Sarpy County-Mr. Rich James Motor Vehice License Pates Many cost savings and efficiencies coud be reaized by changing many of the practices regarding icense pates. Moving from a 3-year to a 5-year pate (or even better to a permanent pate which woud remain with the vehice throughout it's ifetime) woud resut in great savings for the counties and taxpayers of the state. The currentpractice means that many pates are thrown away at the end of the 3-year period by the county offices as it is impossibe to know precisey how many wi be required. The current system of using county-specific pates is is aso tremendousy wastefu and costy compared to an apha-numeric system. Concerns ofaw enforcment to be abe to identify non-oca drivers coud be met using stickers simiar to those used for renewas, athough personaized pates in Nebrasksa aready do not identify the county nor do pate systems in some other states. Moving to a non-county specific system coud potentiay aow owners to renew pates at any county office and taxes coected coud be forwarded to the county of residence. t woud aso mean that pates woud not have to be changed eveytime an owner moves to a different county. Such a system coud aso pave the way for the deveopment and use of automated registration renewa machinces, simiar to A TM devices used by banks for financia transactions. t woud aso make sense to promote more renewas by mai and to charge individuas the personaized pate or other handing fee if they request a specific pate number year after year. This practice/service is more costy to provide than that for the owner who accepts a random pate assignment. J 8

90 Persona PropertyNehice Tax CoUection and Registration Renewas n addition to the above changes, service provision woud improve and personne costsavings woud resut from having pate renewas spread out more eveny throughout the year. Currenty, registrations are due in whatever month the vehice is purchased; as most are purchased during May-August, this is a peak time when additiona empoyees are required to hande renewas. An optiona approach woud distribute renewas more equay throughout the year by aowing them during the owner's birth month or in an aphabetized system based on the ast name corresponding to a renewa in a particuar month, thereby dividing the workoad more eveny over 12 months. County and Eected-Office Mergers The merging of certain counties, their governments and certain offices is inevitabe if we reay want to save taxpayer doars. Some counties are actua!y serving smaer popuations than they were 10 or 20 years ago, which means per capita costs for smaer counties are much greater. One study reveas that annua per capita costs for the treasurers in some rura counties are as high at $45 compared with our costs of $5 per capita in Sarpy County. Merging wi aow for economies of scae and the non-dupication of personnne costs, infrastructure, etc. Mergers are not appropriate for every county situtation, but the 93 counties we have seems excessive and not the most efficient way of doing the pubic's business. 9

91 ) Saunders County--Mr. James Fauver Written comments concerning the state egisature conducting impact and feasibiity studies prior to enactment, meeti)g once every three years and imiting the number of bis that can be introduced; icense pates and drivers' icenses; and an exampe of the necessity of the egisature to "cean-up od statutes" (inparticuar , subsection (4}, vs [reating to a Supreme Court case and its impact on treasurers' offices]) are as foows: [see inserted etters and attached documents] J j J 10

92 Juy 9, 19g7 Mr. Russe Smith Director Center for Pubic Affairs Research Peter Kiewit Conference Center Omaha, Nebraska Dear Mr. Smith, am in receipt of your etter, dated Juy 8, Whether or not the County Treasurers are invoved in the process does reay matter to me, as am concerned about the big picture in Nebraska. am "not writing your meeting off, and am not refusing to participate." t was my intention to try to be at the Juy 17th meeting. However, with my office bookkeeper being off for a number of weeks due to a workpace reated injury and subsequent surgica procedures, and the Deputy having schedued vacation time-off next week, it is now virtuay impossibe for me to be away from the office anytime next week. am very sorry, but office procedures must be conducted and fee it is my absoute obigation to be here during business hours, as the situation now dictates. f may interject a few written comments, for your consideration, woud entertain the foowing: (1) That the Nebraska Legisature take more time to study egisative proposas, before they ever consider a vote by the fu body, i.e. 1997's LB271. t is my understanding that an interim study wi now be hed in order to study the impact and feasibiity of LB271. sn't this ike "putting the horse before the cart?" (2) That the Nebraska Legisature meet once every three years, imit the amount of bis each can introduce, and to aso imit the amount of bis for passage by the entire egisative body. Woudn't this save us a a ot of tax doars each year? More tax doars and time unwasted!

93 PAGE2 (3) That the Department of Motor Vehices be required to hire additiona driver icense examiners. The current system, with neary 75 examiners for the entire State of Nebraska is absoutey a dis-service to the pubic we a serve. (4) That the Legisature require icense pates to be issued (new) once every five years. The 1976 Centennia Pates were used approximatey eight years. Woudn't it be ogica to try to save taxpayers' money by issuing icense pates for onger periods of time? (5) t is my opinion, after seeing many forms of gpvernment at work in our State of Nebraska, that the County form of government is probaby the most efficient one around. Counties vaue property, evy taxes, coect taxes, and distribute tax coections to a governmenta subdivisions who depend on those tax doars in order to function-propery. Why then, do we keep hearing things out of Lincon, and esewhere, that county government is inefficient? This is simpy not true. want to thank you for your time and consideration of my persona views. am once again very sorry that T wi not be abe to attend the Juy 17th meetmg. Respectfuy subqritted,.unders County Treasurer P. 0. Box337 Wahoo, Nebraska

94 JLL 18 '97 03:23PM s:ji..'d CO CURTHOJS!::. P.2 Juy 18, 1997 Mr. R. K. Piper Community Services Coordinator University ofnebraska Omaha TELE: (402) FAX (402) Dear Mr. Piper, Pease find with this fax transmission a copy of the etter containing the five items consider to be of importance in the study deaing with "brainstonning amongst coty officias," which had sent to Mr. Russe Smith on Juy 9, Aong with the five points, that have suggested for consideration, woud ike you to incude another item, which you and visited about on the teephone just recenty. n the fax just received from your office yesterday, it appears you have euded to this additiona iten, i. e. "ceaning up od statues" (by the Legisature). One in particuar is , subsection (4), vs The City of Ekhorn recenty won a Supreme Court Case, against the Dougas County Treasurer, due to these two conficting statues. The question was in regard to the distribution of funds by the County Treasurer. am encosing a copy of the dcci sion for your review. Pease note that the Supreme Court essentiay says "it is reay a probem to be resoved by the Legisature, and not the court." The way reads they rued in favor of the City of Ekhorn. Does anyone, with the exception of County Treasurers, understand the impact of distributing coections to governmenta subdivisions on a weeky basis? n our county it woud mean cos.ing out the books (on a poitica subdivisions) at the cose of bs:iness on Friday, competing the distribution process and payment checks sent out before the opening of business on Monday morning. This woud have a detrimenta (fisca) impact on our taxpayers, as we woud most ikey have to retain at east two new empoyees to compete the distribution process over the weekend. Or, we coud pay a ot of overtime to our present office staff, if they woud choose to work over the weekends :::-=-"'-c=

95 JLL 18 ''3? 03:31ZPM SA..ND CO CctRT-OJSE Let's have the Legisature not ony recind , which was apparenty designed for someother purpose in the beginning of time, but have them do a study to eiminate any probems ike this that coud surface in the future. Especiay for those officias who must administer the statues. And to think some Legisators are critica of a county system that tries to conduct business in the most efficient manner possibe. \\'here do most county fisca probems begin? The wise forty nine!! They need to think before they act. REFER TO TEM #2. thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfuy,. (, ::., r -. "M-<.rC:. ( s L. Fauver. / ' ders County treasurer,_,. 0. Box 337 Wahoo, Nebraska ,... ~ ~ P.12 J! ~--- J!

96 JU.. 18 '97 03: 25PM SALND CO CC.RT-U.SE P.S COUNTY OOVERNMENT AND OFFCERS 23-1G os. Z3 ~G. Coun\Y o!cit:e examiners: ~ppointment; saaru. Repeaed. Laws 1959, c. 266, 11. Cn ty office examinen: erpens:s. Repeaod. Lawo 19117, c. 3ft, t 10. Caahif!r'' bonds; amo1,1nt County heasu ar; genera dutas. (1) sha be the duty of the county trehburer to receive a money beonging to the county, from what. oever source derived, ~nd a other money which is by aw directed to be ];J&id to him or her. A money received by him O"her for the use of Lhe c<utty sha be p~id out by him or her ony on the wa:rranti issued by the county boat<! according to aw, except wher" speeia provision for the 'ayment thereof is or sha be othe.-wise made by aw. (2) The county treasurer sha prepa:re and fie th<o required onnua inventoty statement of county persona property in his or her custody or posaeosion, as provided in soctions to , (3) The county treasurer sha at the direction of the city or vage :nvest the bond fund money coected for each city or viage ocated within each county. Such bond fund money sha be invested by the county tr~asurer and any nvestnuont income sha accrue to the bond fund. The county treuurer sha notify the city or viaae when th~ bonds have been retired. (4) On or before the fifteenth day of each month. the county tre1111urer (a) sha pay to each city or viage ocated within such county the amount of a f tinds coected or received for such city or viage the previous caendar month, ncuding bond fund money when requested by any city of the first cass under section , and (b) on forms provided by the Auditor of Pubic Accounts ohancude with payment, a statement ndic11tin1j the source of a such funds received or coected, and an accounting of any expense incurred in the roection of ad vaotem taxes, except that the Auditor o( Pubic Accounts sha, upon request of a eounty, approve the u~e and reproduction or a county's generaedser or other existing forms if sueh edger or other forms ceary indicate the sources of a funds ~oeeived or eoected and an accounting of any e><pen&es incw'red id the coection of ad vaorem taxeo. Source: Laws 1879, 91, p. 3'79; R.S.1913, 5637; C.S.1922, '964; C.S.929, ; Laws 1939, c. 28, 14, p. 153; C.S.Supp.,1941, ; R.S.943, ; Laws 1978, LB 847, ; Law 1983, LB 391, eo Reoidaacy requirement. A county treasurer eected after November 1986 need not be a resident of the eouuty when he or ohe fies for eection county treasurer, but a county treuuter sha reside n the county in which he or she hod offiee. Source: Laws 1986, LB 812, CO\V"'.V Udt.ci.( rant dr CWJ n on. Su BrcwnC1 With ~t eount.y tr ~ewt ti m.ant Crwk1 J The co be r regist~ The tj. easm the of! The endors urer rr. n t thedu i11 reqt. de put! e 33- inter preser payth the tr< Si: h; date o the ti what drawj an<e 1 Coun JM' cr ment. 27, 1Z8 Cou;n owcc" nc fy

97 COLLEC1'10N O~TAXES " , c. ush v. 0,11,my bonrd of 'qudit.aion s soo judge n11 Q when ''t't'shi)' or 'Xa\intion nf act'ounts of tremt1rcr cx!bt.', (.('nrrmy County v. Tht~, J(i Ncb. 34, )9 N.W. 63'1. tjnnrd uf C..'q\11\~.it h!! nutwny mu~ r iti: SCC')Qn to 'fty t'un\p'c11 rt''!i\ hi!m<nit' ii::c:uunt~ o/tf'( i,!urm. L1W!i v JJ,u,t\1 ('W\{\. [;! Nob. 631;!2 N.W ' with JU\ty ' the :h the ;sary, kean >f the _rer is. 1922,.fie ate to the make '!) and enu:nt , :it for nistra.em~nt, but i ' sha :o.rrect, me for operty desig books. <'inted :o such n01tion ,. 1995, Co~tion of taxet; settement of county treasurer; a.\juthnen with county cerk; order by county >oard. n a cases when the adjustn1 nt s made with the rounty cerk, the county board sh~. at tho first "~"'";"" t1erentor, examine such settement and ii owtd eomictsha e\.r an urder to tho! efe<t f any omissio" or error is found. the ooard shn cause Lw snm~ to be corrected and a correct statement othe facts in the ca~o i,>rwarded to the Property Tax Administrator and othc'' proper auh<>rity or p0rson who sha correct ond adu~t the!j casurc 's ncmunts nw>rd in!\y. Source: Laws 1903, c. 73, 175, p. 453; J<.$.1913, (k'03; CS.1'1Z2, 6031; C.S.1929, ; R$.1943, ; Lnws 1\1~5. LB 490, to R peaed. Lawe1995, LB 490, ' Coe<ion of taxes; report to and pay1nen1 o to~es and sp da nuessn ento municipa corporation ; when requirrd. The couny treasurer sho report and pay over the amount of tax and optca assessmeni due to towns, districts, cities, viages, corporations and persons, co ccd by him, when demanded by the proper authorities o persons. Sou<ee: Laws 1903, e. 13, 183, p. 456; R.S.913, 6511; C$1'122, 6039; c.s.t929, 77-t9«. i~~o th\','tt,jty ofcuuny t-'.311:urertucnet{t\..:es-_ ond r~r )V;'r ru schoo diatrict. City Nt Bink_ v. Schno Dfit Ne\1. 213,236 N.W, 616. Mumunum W'ii. to cumpt ~:11\!\' 't'<nw ( pay tu dy -h't!nsu ~"' city i\xt' '~ ~ h d h)~hhn. St,C! v_ RCk'crh:~ ~3 N.'b. 505, 37 N W,i Coection of 1100!1; faiure to repof and, pay taxes coic( Jed by county tre,asur~r; U on bond. f any county treasurer!ais to m'ake r~ports and payr11ento requirod by section for five dnys aft r de\nd mndt the proper authority or perso;;1 may bring JUit upon his or he1 bont. - - Source: Laws 1903, c , p. 456; R.S.'913, 6512; C.S.922, 6040; C.S.1929, ; R.S.1943, ; Law 1~95, LB 490, 171. Hc'f'tf'd cnunv o((cu! mc! n!"itod P r,ivt" Jnd1\chm oficl' bond~. BmkC!t bond ( :nnt ~mffici~nt, ~ote v. CoiUty o Ada111c, 163 N~. 40.,110 N.W.d 179 Nutkt to co~.mt)' bcacurcr! tu df!num"' (111 district Tf1111utCC' rtquit'fd as con1u\ion pr««<cnt ~~ f~t.fcn rt!funi,\1 ~.'h(t' ot..,n;. (~1\~ -N..!out!.. v. Schoo mst., J21 Nui. 21J, 2:h N,W. {,f(,. 9tne tft.x(!s. in hand~ of<uun.tv trc':!!lhn. H m< WhO"' faut ufcounty, ~' proj.,t"ryof ~toto-, ond cuunty i not inm C1 Rt!. L.mc.U~t\'~ (\iu11y,..?atc,14 Neb. 211,104 N.W. H', 1!17 N W. JH!t Coedo of taxes; faiu1e to report and pay \a)(eo oooctod by (OUnty tre11surer; remova 1rom office. f any county treasu re' fnhn tn account for and sette as required in sect!on 77-"1?60, his office n1ay be 815

98 JLL 18 ' A'1 S'UD SE:U' BY!OUC.HER LAW ~iiim -,., D~Jf.R,T~ ; 60UCHERLAWOFFCEe P:?DH ,. -- -! ( /r -~t~t :...,v ~ /.~~. ~,~ ' ' "-~41,1' ' _... _,.,. ~ ft OPNON OF!H!! SUpREME COuRT QF NEBRM!SA CA!fTs State of Nsbruka ex rei. the City of.e<hom, Nebraska, Appeant,. v. Juie M. Haney, Cougtas County Treasurer, AppePee. cuaoagpgn State ex rei. CiY of E<hom v. Haney Fiaef JUjy 3. 1@87. Nq. S.RS-1112, Ap~rom the Catrct Countor COugu County. Richard J. Spehman,.fudge., Reversed and reitfdec with cii!vqtiors. Macom 0. You~ and Jeff c. Mier, of Young Wnit, or appeant. Jamee s. Jansen, Cougaa County Anomey, and John e. Hubsr for F'4tee... i...

99 ~r a~1~uc~~~ 9 Aw~i~PM ~,GO.c~r~z. BOUO~ERLAWOFFCES~ 40244:P.81 0 i# 2 J STATE EX FEL.. CTY OF EL.(HORN V. HANEY NO fied Juy 3, 1887,!! ' 1. Mandamue: Proof. n a mandamu action, t'e reator has the Mden of p oearty and concusivey that t ts entited to the partiouar thing the reator respondent!egay obigated to act. 2. Statute : Appea and Error. Statutory nterpretation a mater of aw n con an appeate court haa an obigation to!uoh an independent, correct concusion 1 determination made by the CC't beow. 3. Mandamu. To warrant tie isuance of a peremptory writ of mand perfarmancs or a duty by apubftc cffoa, (1) the dutv muat be mpc~ea by aw, (2) extat at the time the writ is appied for, and (3) the dutv must ba cear, Mand enforce parformanca of a mandatory mnatara act or dutv and s net avaiabe dacre\en. to compe the,e duty must sti Lt 1111 ony to contro judicia 4, statutes: Appea and Error. n tha absence of anything to the contrary, stattory anauaga is to be gtvan ta pain and ordinary meaning; an appefate court Wi not resort t nterpretation to. asoertain the meaning cf atatutoay ~rde which ara pain, Crcct, and unarnbgu e.. 5, Statutes, nquay into the egisative hitoay requraa that tegaation be openfcr oons'ucon. A. statute s open for conetruction when the anguage use~:! raqures nterpretation ct may reaaonabiy be ccnedered ambiguoue. e. - n the absence of cear egisative intent, a ce~nstno~r:m of a statute wt not be adoj'ted which has!he effegt of mifying or repeaing another statute. 1. _ t ia not within the PfO\nce of a court to read a meaning into a statute h~t a not there. or to read anything direct and ~n out of a statute. e._. Statutaa reaung to thasema subject matterw:a constmd ac u to mfntain a sensibe and coniint scheme and eo that affect is given to eveay proaion. e. Taxation: PU"'c Offcera and Empgyeea. T'e pain anguage ot Neb. F... Stat (R&BUa18t8) aut'ottzea a tuinij authority to maea dii!t8'd for payment of itiitd. revenues which have been coutcted by tt:je oountv treaaurer. J "' "'" ~..., n 1.,...,... ft - -

100 St;NT S':C-1J.,.,.~'!... ;,97...,.,"0j3~~ 9'.;iD, co.c~tf-?..i?i=s i 60UCHER~AiiOFF1CcS"' 40244t':..9! 0 i# 3.,. = 1 WHTE, C.J., CAPOAALE, WRGHT, CONNOLLY, GERRAC, STEPHAN, and M(J)ORMCK, JJ. STEPHAN, J. Th8 s an action by the City of E!(hom, NebruQ., for a wr1 of mandamu M. Haney, the duy eectect treasurer of Dougas County, Nebraaka (Treas.~. to compy with Eikhom'a demand for weeky remi11ance c taxes and assessrnen& evad by E rn and coactec by the Treasurer. The datrct ccurt fer.dougu County denied Ekhorn's re uest for a writ of miu"'damus. and Ekhorn appeaed, Sec:au$11 we find that 'e Ttoasurer hu n t compied witn a cear ega duy mposed by Neb, Aev. Sia ;9 (Reaaua 1 Qs), we reve, and remand to the ciatrct oourt with nstrictians to isu11 a peremptory writ of mandamus. frt FACT$ Ekhorn s a city of the SCOnd C888, OO&tod n Dougas CoUnY. A8 of her officia duties, the Treaaurer coects taxea and aaaeaam11nts evied by!khom and othe a11thortes in Dou;aa County, These oouectione are maintained n separate acccunta, witn rec11,pts entered n a cash book.' On or abo11t February 20, 1985,1ha maygr of Ekhorn sent a etter to the asurer. in which he stated: Pursuant to Neb. Fev, Stat.[ '7'?' 1'759), pease report and p~ier a taxaa anc aaeeaements due to tne City of Ekhom oooctad by you on tte Monday reach week. n the evant the amount ccactd and ~d by you doea not equ One Thouaana Coa111 ($1,000.00) on a MondaY, thts request anc damanct may be 1'05p ned unti!he next Monday or unti t'8 amount equas One Tnouund Coa111 (51,000.00). Sec:tion 7?' 1759 provides: 'The county treuurer sha report and pay over the mount of t1111 and specia ~~aaaments due to towne, digtrfcts, ;itim, Vages, oorporaone and per ens, coected by him, When demanded by the proper authcrtsa or persona.. On February 24, 1EUi5, the Treasurer aent a etter to Ekhorn rwfusng demand. n her et'er, the Treasurer stated 111at 'must be read in a broader cont beginning with m, aeg which pertains to tt ccac:uo~ of '&tate property taxes' whic;:h aa you know, no onger axist9 [sic] and, therefore dcaa not appy to the dst'butcn Of oca pro arty taxes.' Tne Trauurer further stated that the 'distribution cr oca property t1111a1 and my duu to distribute the same aro found n (4) of the NebrasQ. Revaac htutae. Neb, Rev. tat. i (4) (Reissue 1&91) provida in pertinent part: 'On or b11foro the fifteenth d~of 11ach onh, the couny troaaurar (a) sha pay to each city or viage ocated Whn such ccuny the a ount of a funds coeotac or received for such city or viage tie p~avious cb.ar'idar month,, The Trea urar concuded that ehe had uy ccmpied with this atutory requirement and woud so n the Mure. Ec'crn cornmenetc'a actio'n 1'e Ciitrict court for Dougas County n Apr14, n the ~ativa amended petition ffed June 20, Ekho.m aegecta demand for edy payment of we coectona and the Treuurer'a refusa to compv wt' that damand. E rn prayed for a peremptory wrft of mandamus requiring the Treasu'8,r to comp!ywth Ekhom'a emand pursuant to i n her answer, the Treasurer asserted N same aetenaea ut fo in ner February 24 etter. eummerzed abo\11. On,11.11y 2'1', 1981, Ekhcm fied a motion W\taccompanyi~ affidavit uatng that the d8tct court ssue a peremptory writ of mandamus ccrnpein the Treasurer to y to!!knom the unda coected by the Treuum on behaf of Ek!:om, A neetng WA hed on.ju 31, during whgh the district court recev.d n evidence tit egiaatv. history of 10'78 Neb. Lawt, B. 847, purauant to the Treasurer' offer. On Augusta, E orn nd a aecona motion, requaati that the datrct ccurt ssue a JOervmptory Wri1 or an aternative wrtwth an order to the T'Hurar ahow cause aa to wh)f the writ shoud ngt be aaud. At a aeoond hearing on Au;uat a, the part tpua.ted to the materia facta W'cn are summarized abevt. On Septemcer 2, 895, the district court iaad an order denying f!kh n'e request for a peremptory writ Of mandamus or for an aternative writ of mandamus. n ta an yaa, tha dstret court agreed w'he Treuurar'e contention that her duty to remit taxae and aaa aments to ctiaa of the eecond cau wu ditarmnd soey by 123>1601(4), wtc;:h required au pa~ta on a monh!f taaa, and thb.tan.'ad no cmv to make more freq.ent HYY8n'on d nd. The district ccurt. thar!fore, denied ia requ,eated writ Of rnancamu. _j -"" ' ' '., j'~-... _' --..

101 s.=nt. ~--TJ.J...!.!?..:.~.,.,0'? ~~ SCU',D, CO. CQ.!<T~ 60UOHERLAWOFFOES~ 40244f',).~; 4 Ekhorn perfeoted a timey appea to the Nebraaka Court of Appeas. authority to reguate the Cocke!s of me court of Appeas and this court. we trans to our docket. ASSGNMENTS OF ERROR Ekhorn contends the! 1110 datr!ct court erred in 1) denying the stu mandamus compeing the Treasurer to pay over the amount of!exec and specia Ekhom in compienc11 wh ita demand end (2) d!amaang t~a amenced P' mandamue. u rsuant to our rred the appea ;e of a wrtt of 'aasamer:rtt due iton for writ of SOOF'E OF FEVEW n a msndamua action, the rear hu the burden of proof and muat ~ow ceary ind c;oneusvey!hat t s entitied to the particuar thing the reator &aka and that the ondent s e;ay obigated to aet Stt.Jt "' Wai-Mart v, Kortum, 251 Neb. 805, 559 N.W.2d ); State ex 1'81. Firs Tier &nk v. Muen, 248 Neb. 384, 534 N.W,2d 575 (1995); State ex rat. s rsr v. Mad/aw Oty, Oomrtt., 247 Nab. 384, 527 N.W.ad 515 (1995), Statutory nterpretation is a matter of aw n connectcm wth Which an ap~te court has an obigation to reaon an ndapendant, oorr~~ct.conouaicn rrespective of the data 'nation made by the court beow. Moore v, Eggera Consuffng Oo., ante p. 396, 562 N.W.Zd 534 ( 997); t.oup City Pub. SQh. v. NeiWikB &:ept. of 'iev., 4fe p. 367,662 N.W.2d 551 (1997); Me potsn Utt/H Dst. v. Ba/ka,anfp.172, 1160 N.W.2d 795 (1997).. ANALYSS To warrant the ssuance oa peremptory writ of mandamus to compe th~erormanoe o a duty by a pubic OCA, (1)!he dut) must be mp~:~~aa by aw, (2) tte duty must 811 exat at the dme the writ s appuad for, and (3) the duy muet be cear. Mandamus!ita ony to en1c performance of a mandatory ministeria act or duty and a not avaiabe to contro judicia da r.tcn. K)fUm, supra; Muen, UPta: State ex rei. 0,./ghton Unv. v. H/ct.man. 245 Neb. 247, 12 N.W.2d 374 (1S94),... The ony Jssue bafora usia whaher the Truaurer has a cear ega duty ndar to remit rex coections to Ekhom pursuant to its demand. Fesoution of!hi asue rec)uir~~s appcaon o wan-aatabshed standards of atatuigry construction. n the absen of anything to the contrary, ata:tutory anguage s to be given Ts pain and ordinary meaning; an a petate court wi not reaert to nterpretation to ucartan the meaning of statutory word& which are ain, direot. and unambiguous. nrtt Estate of Muohsmore, ants p. 119;580 N.W.2d 477 (19&7); s orectn SeM. v. Roh, 251 Nab. 474,558 N.W.2d 2;5 (1997); MtnorfaJ Hasp. of1jot1111 Cy, v. ter, 251 Neb. G27, 557 N.W.2d 21 (1&911). nquiry intq the egsave hatcry requires that egis on be cpan tor construction. A statute s open for ccnstn.cton Whan ha anguage uaad requires n~t~rpr.tation or may reaaonaby ba conaidarac ambig~o~~a. OtMa PutJ. Powtr ater. v. N TSJict Dept. "' Revenue, 248 Nab. S1 8, 1137 N.W.2d 31 Z (1895): St.ta V; Met:her,.240 Nab. 592, 83 N.W.2d S40 (19112). we find that1guage of c be pain, direct, and unambiguo sand therefore determine!hat t is not open for construofon. The T,.aaurar contand that t appn to tha distribution of atata p party taxes and!hat becauca atate property!es are no onger coectad n tha state of Nebraska doee not appy. wa Cingree. t s tr1.1e that Neb. Fev. Stat through (Ressue18110) deat with the coac:an of eate ]:'Q~ taxes by oounty tru.urers end the re ttanoe of those axee ro 111a aine treasury, and it is 1110 fi that these Statutes were 111paaed by es Neb. L.awe, L.B. 490, f 1 GS, operative January 1, Howawr, there are two fata faws the Treasurer's argument regardn; the affect of this repaa. First, the pain anguage of t makaa no reference aate pi'q)erty taxn, but deafa intaad with an entirey different GubJe ma\ter: twqes) and spacia assessments due to towne, d&trcts, cmea, \ages, coi!)oratons an persons which are coected by the county treasurer. second; f wa not repea~. Th a, the repea o !hrough no reevance to he teue presented n tta ca The TreaaurBr inaia th&t she i$ not governed by i , but b t (4). Therafara, her pt1ncpa contention, adopted by the district court, a that 'UY tofed her ega duty under i 23 1SOH4) by remitting!axea to Ekhom on a monthy bo.eie, aa pi'qvdec: n 2 )!

102 JUL 18 '97 m 29A'1 ~~T- R~:~uu~MC.t ~W r~,.,- Sf:{i?. C~ ~T~ 60UCHERLAWOFFCes~ ~02~43P':11i. 5 ' ' (4). The Treasurer arguea t'at when (-4) was enacted in 1978, the LegsaiUre aao repeaed Nab. Rev. Stat (Fiestii.S 1977), ch provided: Ths treuurer of the ccuntv shi pay over on demand to tha treas ref of any city of the aacond ous or viage a money received by him arising from taxeae iee beonging to &JCh city or viage, togetherwth.a men&)! coected t1s a tax on dogs from 'dents of such corpqraton, tor the uee of the genera tuner therein. t ahaf be the d ty of the county treasurer n making such remittance to specify what part thereof t derv fn;jm aocation of gas tax and what part from other eou~ws.. The Treuur.rconends that the rvpea Qf and the mpamenta11 refect an ntent t'at county treasurara ba required to remit taxee ~:oieeed for ci caes on a monthy basia nsiead of "CCn demand.' Further, the Treasurer removed the authority of a city of the second cass to demand pureuant to n contrast, Ekhorn arguaa that the repea of 17 os eiminated a redundancy with and that (4) merey estab~es tie mimu frequency with which treasurers must remit tax coection~~~ to c111es of the eecond ean f no man'. frequent 'Gmttance s mads pur~uant to We agree that tie repea of 1 7- remove the authority of a city of the second cass to demand payment under anguage of Urovdes!bat ht county treasurer shaf pay ever the amou t of ii when damandec: by the proper authorities or porte~ne. Oieary, tie mayer of Ekt1o wh demand on t'a Treasurer in this caaa, -was the proper authority to make said de d. t s unnecbbmy for ua to attempt to determine why the Legisature did when t enacted (4); ~s sufficient to note that it dd.not. The question and (4) n diametric eonfct With each other, so that the statute nuities the other? n!he absence of cear egisiauve ntent, a not be-adopted Which haaha affect of nu!yin or repaan; another atat~o~e... Par. v. Gsot.chnc.afS.tW., 230 Neb, 22,430 N.W.2d 34 (1988). Wa concud and c:an be me so as to 1:11ve affet to the pain anguage of each. Sa!on ra(uire.a coi.jnty trauurer to remit tax ccectone to cttiea of tht 11eoond cia c regardess of wneher!he~~~~ have demandod remittence. S.ct g~ a of demanding remittance more frequenty than once a mgnth f t wishes to do so The rreuurera contenon that her duty to remit tax co'-ctons to citiee of e second s derived excusivey from (4) woud essentiay require us to disregard we cannot do. i not within the provn~:e o a court to read a meaning into as tute 1 th~we, or to read anything direct and pain out of a statute. V/ags of WinmrJe v. Je 851, 553 N.W,2d 478 (1996); N~!Uka Ufs & Heatns. iiuar. Assn. v. Oob 631 N.W.2d 217 (1995): 01//arrJ Oept Stoi'H v. Poinsky, 247 Nab. 821, Statutes reating to the same subject matter wi be oonetruac eo as to consistent Chema and eo tat e~ ig given to every provaon. See, n Nat. 19, 49' N.W.2d 166 (1&92); Bau v. Ccuntyofs.J/ne, 1?'1 Nab. 53B, Giin; effect to evtiy prc!son n the reevant statutes, we nc that the pn ngue!e authorizes a taxing authority to make demand tor payment of ts tax revenues c:oer;tec~ by tht county treasurer. n st.r. v. Roaa'fok, 23 Neb. sos, G'T N.W. n (1BB8), hs courr!d tnaindtr in;ua;e aimfar to t n 175B, a eounty treasurer had a ega duty to remit tax due _. demand and that compiance with this duty coud be enforced by a writ of manda There s n< baais on the twcord afora ue to depart from tha procecant. n the abaanoa of a bguty, coutt 1 muat give effaot to statutes u they are written. f the Treuurer feea &jgreved tna outcomi : ~75~w1:.~ ~t~1j;':i~-~-~. ~ ~c'.e_qj/~~0.~- : !. /''~ We, therefore, r.veraahe Jua;ment of th datct ccurt Tor Dougas CO\nty~d, r cause with directions to iaaue a peremptory Writ of mandamue requiring - 1 ooeccn~~~ which she hods tor Ekom on a wsekty basta, n c~mpat:\e&.. ' ',! mads on FG:ruary 20, 11111&, pureuant to the Treasurer'& ega duty under i.. r.. 'i -._ A~c ~D F!E!MANDD TH DU!CTCNS.!... ~ - - ~ -,_,_.._ ~ y ,.._... -~-.. ~-- -~,).-- -,... ':-.. - i -.-~ "'' '....

103 Washington Connty-Ms. Kay rwin Written comments concerning icense pates, changing statutes reating to the coection and distribution of taxes and drivers' icenses are as foows: [see inserted etter] J 22 }

104 JLL 18 ''3? 09:52 CPAR io C WASHNGTON COUNTY TREASURER P.O. BOX 348 BLAR, NEBRASKA PHONE (402) FAX (402) P./1 KAY ERWN COUNTY TREASURER jance MLLER DEPUTY COUNTY TREASURER JULY 16, 1997 R. K. PPER COMMUNTY SERVCES COORDNATOR CENTER FOR PUBLC AFFARS RESEARCH PETER KEWT CONFERENCE CENTER OMAHA NE DEAR MR. PPER: FOUND T EXTREMELY DFFCULT TO LST ANY SERVCES THAT COULD BE COORDNATED WTH OTHER COUNTES. AS YOU KNOW MOTOR VEHCLES LCENSNG MUST BE SSUED THRU THE COUNTY OF REStDENCE. OUR CURRENt' SYSTEM DESGNATES THE COUNTY NUMBER. OUR ASSOCATON HAS SUGGESTED CHANGNG THE SYSTEM TO 3LETTERS & 3 Nv~BERS. AS WELL AS SSUNG ONE PLATE ONLY. OUR LEGSLATURE WLL NOT SUPPORT US ON THS SSUE. EXTENDNG THE LCENSE SSUANCE PEROD TO 5 YEARS FROM 3 YEARS WOULD HELP THE EXPENSE. THS SEEMS TO BE AREA THAT THE STATE COULD CUT COSTS. COLLECTON OF TAXES AND DSTRBUTON ARE A LARGE SERVCE CONDUCTED BY OUR OFFCE. FUNDS ARE COLLECTED FROM MANY DFFERENT AREAS AND DSTRBUTED TO EACH ENTTTY. MANY CHANGES WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE N OUR STATUE TO ENABLE COMBNNG COUNTY SERVCES. ONE AREA THAT CAN AND S TO EVENTUALLY BE 'S:? :THE:.:SSUANCE OF';A DRiERS LCENSE. PROJECTED COMPLETON FOR THS S N 1999 OR 2000 THRU. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHCLE. AT THAT TME AN NDVDUAL WOULD BE ABLE TO APPLY AND RECEVE A LCENSE N ANY EXAMNERS STATON' N NEBRASKA. 'M SORRY AM UNABLE TO MAKE ANY CONSTRUCTVE SUGGBST10NS. MY UNDERSTANDNG OF THE ORGNAL BLL THE TREASURER'S OFFCE WAS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR COMBNNG SERVCES DUE TO THE COMPLEXTY OF THER WORK. ~ v~ ~ '"'""" """o "...-- ;fifi7.- ~ 4 DATE:.. DNG, ~- KAY J. ERWN , ;1/dtJ.fJJ{.. -'4?'5.. THS P~~. P TO: V J! pj 'j}~r... PHONE f: f).f). c b ~75$ Fi>X N.... FAX t: 4.?i) - "}.;

105 V. Executive Summary--County Assessors The m\iority of ideas for coaboration and resource sharing cited by the responding assessors, where a arge measure of consensus seems to exist, were in reation to the foowing areas: ) Standardize assessor software 2) Share appraiser services 3) Consoidate schoo districts 4) Re-organize eected office functions These areas were identified by the assessors as most meriting further exporation, deveopment and detaied discussion among the eected officehoders, the steering committee, the county boards, and at the state eve. Summaries of the main ideas, as presented by the assessors in each county, foow in the next section of the report. 24

106 V. County Assessors--deas for Coaboration/Resource Sharing Dodge County--Ms. Kathy Reeves (Acting Assessor) Did not respond Dougas County--Mr. Frank Bemis Written comments concerning standardizing assessor software, sharing appraisers, reorganizing eected office functions and consoidating schoo districts are as foows: [see inserted etter] 25

107 JUL :45 DOUCiLRS COUHTY ASSESSOR P.02 FRANi W. BEMS DOUGLAS COUNTY ASSESSOR Omaha-Dougas Civic Center. 18th & Farnam Stree~ Omaha, N<:braska (402) FAX (402) Juy 21, 1997 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: R. K. Piper, Community Servic;e5 Coordinator Department of Crimina Justice University of Nebraska at Omaha Frank W. emis, Dougas County Assessor SUBJECT: Draft Report LB 1085 am in receipt of your draft response to LB am in favor of a four areas being taken into serious consideration, as isted in the draft under N. Executive Summary--County Assessors. n particuar, consoidating schoo districts woud not ony save taxpayers an enormous amount of money, but woud be a ot easier on Cerks, Treasurers and Assessors as they coud streamine their efforts. f there is anything further you woud ike me to comment on, pease fee free to contact me at (402) i FWB/js 1 TOTAL P.02, ~c

108 Sarpy County--Mr. Lowe ske Standardize Assessor Software The area where coaboration among counties woud yied the greatest benefit woud be in the standardization of computer software used by assessors. The state shoud seect one or two vendors as suppiers of computer software and a the counties shoud use the same basic programs and practices. This woud mean training efforts coud be standardized and shared and counties coud consut each other and the state when probems or difficuties are encountered. (These sentiments were strongy seconded by Ms. Sidney Penke, Washington County, who noted that daho has had exceent resuts where each county is required to use the same software). Consoidate Schoo Districts Many probems coud be eiminated and savings woud resut by consoidating many schoo districts into arger ones. Sarpy county has 6 high schoo districts with different evies and poicies which unnecessariy compicate the assessement process and the assessor's duties. Taxpayers woud aso see savings as the number of individua superintendents, boards, and support staff are reduced. Certain districts aso cross over into other counties and this creates probems and costy compications. 27

109 Re-organize Office Functions n many cases the functions of one office may be better and more ogicay handed by another office or eve of government. n Sarpy and Dougas counties for exampe, motor vehice assessments were transferred to the treasurers' offices to improve processing efficiency. Whie "turf issues" may exist based on traditiona modes of operating, these shoud not stand in the way of improved service provision and efficiency. Rather, we shoud be creative and unrestricted in how we "re-invent government" where it is appropriate. Saunders County--Ms. Betty Patzoff Share Appraiser Services Counties woud greaty benefit by being abe to share the services of appraisers. For exampe, estabish a network where the appraiser in one county coud consut with the speciaized appraiser of another county to draw on their expertise with regards to a particuar type of property. That is, to see what other appraisers had on comparabe commercia, residentia, industria, or agricutura properties, for exampe, or to acutay use the appraiser from another county to make certain appraisas. Ms. Patzofffet that Saunders county woud benefit by being abe to draw on the appraisa expertise that exists esewhere, as in Dougas county for exampe. She fet this woud resut in better service provision in her office and more efficient use of resources during peak periods of activity when their appraisa staff is over-extended. (Mr. Lowe ske, Sarpy County, agreed, noting that moving to private contractors, to some extent or totay, may be the way to_go and that doing assessments in aternating years 28

110 woud save taxpayer doars and aow assessors to more readiy share appraisers). Washington County--Ms. Sidney Penke See comments on standardized software--sarpy County 29

111 V. Executive Summary--County Cerks No ideas and suggestions had been received at the time this report was written. V. County Cerks--deas for Coaboration/Resource Sharing Dougas County--Mr. Thomas Cavanaugh Did not respond. Dodge County--Mr. Fred Mytty deas and suggestions forthcoming. Sarpy County--Ms. Debra Houghtaing Unabe to confirm attendance; possibe confict. No response to teephone and fax requests for input..j Saunders County--Ms. Patti Lindgren Unabe to attend. No response to teephone and fax requests for input. Washington County--Ms. Charotte Peterson Unabe to attend. No response to teephone and fax requests for input. 30

112 V. Executive Summary-County Registers of Deeds The majority of ideas for coaboration and resource sharing cited by the responding registers of deeds, were in reation to the foowing areas: 1) Meetings to improve communications and understanding with county boards, share technoogy and service provision methods 2) Share computer programmers and other speciaists 3) Standardize forms and zoning ordinances 4) Consoidate tax ien function at state eve These areas were identified by the registers as most meriting further exporation, deveopment and detaied discussion among the eected officehoders, the steering committee, the county boards, and at the state eve. Summaries of the main ideas, as presented by the registers in each county, foow in the next section of the report. 31

113 X. County Registers of Deeds--deas for Coaboration/Resource Sharing Dodge Connty--Ms. Caro Givens Share Computer Programmers for nternet Access/Change Technoogy Statutes Whie there have been many improvements in efficiency and service provsion in her office within the past severa years, owing to the use of new technoogy, even more progress can be made. Knowedgeabe programmers are needed to systematize the coding of documents when fied, to faciitate the use of internet technoogy for remote access by users. Each user (tite companies, enders, attorney's, etc.) woud be given a password to access pubic information directy, thus improving service whie reducing the need for personne to hande as many requests. The use of eectronic document scanning and other technoogy has aready reduced the operating budget by 30% by not having to microfim or make individua paper copies of the recordings. Having cients fax requests to the office and then sending a fax response, rather than taking teephone requests and making photocopies for cients has reduced the burden on staff and resuted in savings. Additiona savitgs coud be made b_y aowing back-up copies to be stored in CD-ROM or disk format with the state, rather than in paper copy or microfim as is now required by statute. Currenty the statutes require that she unnecessariy print an aphabetica back-up report that no one reay uses or ooks at. Consoidate Tax Lien Function at the State Leve Ms. Givens recommends that the state assume the function of recording tax iens in a centraized ocation. Currenty the state sends state and federa ien notifications to severa 32

114 counties where an individua is thought to own property, these are recorded and forwarded to the cerk who types them in the state computer. t woud be more efficient to have the state type them in directy using a centraized state ien software program and eave the registers and cerks out of this particuar oop. ntracounty Equipment Sharing/Foating Office Manager and Speciaists Currenty each deaprtment and eected office purchases and maintains its own copiers and printers for exampe. t is possibe to wire many of them so they can be shared, which woud resut in cost savings. Counties, offices and departments shoud aso be abe to share the expertise of "foating" but institutionaized, permanent, fu-time programmers, accountants, office managers, and pubic reations/media speciaists. At present the offices and jurisdictions are totay independent by statute, so there may need to be changes in the aws to aow such cooperation and sharing. Dougas County--Mr. Richard Takechi Standardization of Forms and Zoning Rues Mr. T akechi agreed that there are advantages in and greater opportunities coming for the pubic to access records directy, athough there are obstaces to improving the process. The registering process is different between counties and deeds offices are very unique. Farms and formats used need to be standardized to faciitate more automation and this shoud be coordinated and interfaced with the state. Many peope misunderstand the office and think that it is entirey automated aready, but it is not. 33

115 Counties and townships have their own zoning rues and ordinances and standardization must occur in this area and with respect to ega descriptions, before more coordination, cooperation, and streamining can occur. Counties have aso historicay handed their recordings in different ways which presents additiona difficuties due to the uniqueness of the process and procedures in each county. The farther one has to trace a property back into time, the more unique and difficut the process; tracing back into history has been more constant for treasurer records, for exampe, than for registers of deeds. Thus retrieva is sti a probem and obstace with respect to greater automation, especiay in cases which require considerabe direct interfacing between staff and the pubic; this is necessary more often than peope expect. Standardization offorms andprocedures wi be difficut to accompish however, as witnessed by the wide variety offorms that are used in different states and counties across the country. Forms come in a great variety of sizes, information and scannitjg formats, bar code patterns, etc. Efforts at standardization shoud first be made at the state eve, in a cooperative effort with a counties, if improvements are to be made in this area. Sarpy County--Mr. Loyd Dowding mprove Communications Between County Boards and Eected Offices/Support Meetings to Encourage Technoogy Sharing Mr. Dowding suggested that greater understanding shoud repace the oftentimes adversaria reationship that seems to exist between county boards and eected offices. He indicated that 0 years ago there was an effort to deveop a standardized software for use among a counties, but that many boards woud not support the effort or share the costs. Thus, each 34

116 register has been on his/her own trying to find a way to accompish their duties most efficienty, as generay aid out by the state in four pages of statutes. Some boards have been wiing to fund the atest in technoogy and training, others have not, and this has resuted in as many different practices and procedures existing as there are counties. Mr. Dowding fet that standardization and coordination of efforts woud have resuted in reductions in equipment and training costs at that time. As most have aready purchased and deveoped their own automated systems and technoogy at this point however, he is not sure there exists an overriding need for standardized systems at this point; as counties do not have to access the records of other counties. Mr. Dowding woud ike to see better communication and understanding between the boards and the registers. This coud best be faciitated by institutionaizing meetings for supervisors to earn more about exacty what registers' offices do and how they do it. Boards shoud aso officiay encourage and financiay sup_port very inexpensive meetings which coud be hed for registers to share ideas about operations, procedures and service provision improvements, new techno()gies coming down the road, and statutory obstaces to pr()gress. One such existing obstace is a state statute which hods that ony counties with popuations over 100,000 can charge to access pubic records. As a resut, smaer counties have not been abe to afford to purchase, operate or maintain avaiabe remote accessing technoogies and therefore such services are not avaiabe there. 35

117 Saunders County-Mr. Don Cark Technoogy Sharing Mr. Cark gave exampes of the many technoogy changes (scanning, CD-ROM, fax responses, etc.) that have occurred within the past ten years that he beieves aready make his office very efficient. He and a programmer wrote the software themseves for $4,000 and purchased a hardware system for $5,500, with which he is very satisfied. The software has aso subsequenty been obtained by Washington county, which is an exampe of the type of cooperation and communication which is taking pace. Mr. Cark fees that in the not too distant future, peope wi be abe to access information directy in his county and that this may be an opportunity for more such cooperative efforts and technoogy sharing. He aso echoed Mr. Dowding's sentiments that 10 years ago agreement coud not be reached among the county boards with regard toprocuring and deveoping standardized programs, so each county pursued its own path. At this point he coud see no rea reason for standardization as he never needs to access another county's records, atho11gh requirements for remote accessing might resut in some simiarities that woud be shared by a systems. Mr. Cark aso fet that consoidation of register's offices m~,ty ony make sense in western counties, for exampe, where there may be ony one or two recordings per month. However, in these areas the distances peope woud have to drive to a regiona site woud then aso become a " consideration. Washington County--Ms. Charotte Peterson Unabe to attend meeting. Did not respond to teephone and fax requests for input. 36

118 xwuaddy

119 Mr. Frank Bemis County Assessor, Dougas County Civic Center, 1819 Farnam Omaha, NE Mr. Thomas Cavanaugh County Cerk, Dougas County Civic Center, 1819 Farnam Omaha, NE Mr. Richard Takechi County Register ofdeeds, Dougas County Civic Center, 1819 Farnain Omaha, NE Ms. Juie Haney County Treasurer, Dougas County Civic Center, 1819 Farnam Omaha, NE Ms. Betty Johnson County Assessor, Dodge County 435 North Park Fremont, NE Ms. Caro Givens County Register ofdeeds, Dodge County 43 5 North Park Fremont, NE Mr. Lowe ske County Assessor, Sarpy County 1210 Goden Gate Drive Papiion, NE Mr. Loyd Dowding County Register ofdeeds, Sarpy County 1210 Goden Gate Drive Papiion, NE Mr. Fred Mytty County Cerk, Dodge County 435 North Park Fremont, NE Ms. June Mattson County Treasurer, Dodge County P.O. Box999 Fremont, NE Ms. Debra Houghtaing County Cerk, Sarpy County 1210 Goden Gate Drive Papiion, NE Mr. Rich James County Treasurer, Sarpy County 1210 Goden Gate Drive Papiion, NE ] Ms. Betty Patzoff County Assessor, Saunders County 5th & Chestnut Wahoo,NE Ms. Patti Lindgren County Cerk, Saunders County P.O. Box61 Wahoo, NE 68066

120 - - Mr.. Don Cark County Register ofdeeds, Saunders County P.O. Box 184 Wahoo, NE Mr. James Fauver County Treasurer, Saunders County P.O.Box337 Wahoo, NE Ms. Sidney Penke County Assessor, Washington County 1555 Cofax Street Bair, NE Ms. Charotte Petersen County Register ofdeeds, Washington County P.O. Box466 Bair, NE Ms. Kay Erwin County Treasurer, Washington County P.O. Box348 Bair, NE Ms. Charotte Petersen County Cerk, Washington County P.O. Box466 Bair, NE 68008

121 .. - June 26, 1997 University of Nebraska at Omaha Mr. Frank Bemis County Assessor Dougas County Civic Center, 1819 Farnam Omaha, NE68183 Center for Pubic Affairs Research Peter Kiewit Conference Center Omaha, Nebraska (402) fi Dear Mr. Bemis: As part of the task mandated by LB 1085 (see June 16, 1997, etter and background materias from Dr. Russe Smith), brainstorming sessions have been panned by the steering committee for county assessors, cerks, registers of deeds, and treasurers, to share ideas and suggestions for coaboration and resource sharing among the five counties in the region. The meeting schedue is beow. A meetings wi be hed at the Ekhorn Pubic Library, 100 Reading Road, Ekhorn. A map is encosed for your convenience. Office County Assessors County Treasurers County Cerks County Registers of Deeds Date Juy 17 Juy 17 Juy 24 Juy 24 Time 10:00 a.m. 2:00p.m. 10:00 a.m. 2:00p.m. Pease give some thought to the goa of exporing ways to stretch budgetary doars and/or improve services through cooperation with offices in other counties. For exampe, some have suggested that corrections officers in the five coimties share prisoner transportation duties to save man hours, fue and equipment costs. To provide a structure for thought and discussion on this topic, we wi be using a process of identifying and categorizing ideas at this meeting, and then determining priorities for foow- up. To make the meeting productive, recommend your preparing 3 to 5 ideas in advance for discussion. At this point, we are sti in the idea-deveopment stage, so thoughts can be anywhere on a spectrum from "very theoretica" to "reaistic" to "aready proven" ways to coaborate. Once the ideas have been outined, time wi be provided for more discussion about obstaces and factors faciitating their reaization. Pease confirm your attendance with Meanie Hayes or Joyce Carson at the Center for Pubic Affairs Research, (402) , and do not hesitate to contact me, Dr. Russe Smith or members of the steering committee if you have questions. ]?t'~ J R.K. Piper, Community Services Coordinator RK:mah/encosure University of Nebraska at Omaha University of Nebra.ska Medica Center University of Nebraska-Uncon University of Nebraska at Kearney /1,/'.,...!

122 Ekhorn City Library Bess Johnson Pubic Library Cedar Street and Reading Road Ekhorn, Nebraska ,._ <$>u;...o, 'i>,. ~0 '> "':!>~! C] ~ N 131, Mape Road N."o'>~ ~ '"" Biondo Ekhorn City Library Cedar St & Reading Rd. Dodge Road

123 University of Nebraska at Omaha Center for Pubic Affairs Research Peter Kiewit Conference Center Omaha, Nebraska (402) ~ Juy 8, 1997 Ms. Juie Haney County Treasurer Dougas County Civic Center, 1819 Farnam Omaha, NE Dear Ms. Haney: COPY About ten days ago you received a etter from my office about your participation in the Muti-County Shared Services Project. Whie the County Treasurer's office wi not be incuded in the consoidation portion of this pro]ect, am hoping you wi be interested in joining with your counterpart Treasurers to discuss opportunities for coaborating and sharing resources in providing services. understand that your office has an extensive set of services and state required activities. aso understand that whie each of the counties is somewhat different you do provide a number of common services. As a resut, want to encourage you to sit down with one another and with our group faciitator, Mr. R.K. Piper, to discuss ways that you might share resources and coaborate. Pease do not write off this meeting and refuse to participate. By working together and within the overa project you wi make it possibe for the project's Steering Committee and the five participating County Boards to better understand the areas in which they might hep you achieve your office's goas for coaboration and resource sharing. You wi aso be: () heping deveop information on shared services opportunities that can be taken to the pubic via pubic hearings ater this fa; and (2) heping identify state egisative changes that might be required to faciitate cooperation between county treasurers to share resources and coaborate. The brainstorming meeting for County Treasurers is schedued for 2:00p.m., Juy 17, at the Ekhorn Pubic Library. Don't hesitate to ca me at if you have questions. Sincerey ~~ Russe Smith Director cc: Steering Committee members and staff; R.K. Piper ] University of Nebraska at Omaha University of Nebraska Medica Center University of Nebraska-uncon University of Nebraska at Kearney

124 University of Nebraska at Omaha Crimina Justice Annex 37 Omaha, Nebraska (402) Neihardt Lincon, Nebraska (402) TO: County Treasurers FROM: R.K. Piper, Community Services Coordi RE: Draft Report LB 1085,{ //.. --A-,.. / ' Juy 18, 1997 ~ Dear Treasurer, Encosed is a draft copy of the Track 2 summarized comments received from the eected officias in the five-county region regarding potentias for coaboration and resource sharing. A fina version of this report wi be presented to the steering committe August 1, Pease reveiw this draft and fax any additions, comments or revisions to me by Juy 21, 1997 at (402) or ca me at (402) Thank you for your hep and participation. University of Nebraska at Omaha University of Nebraska Medica Center University of Nebraska-LinC?on University of Nebraska at Kearney

125 University of Nebraska at Omaha Crimina Justice Annex 37 Omaha, Nebraska (402) Neihardt Lincon, Nebraska (402) / /w-,) TO: County C~rks... < r/. FROM: R.K. Piper, Commumty Services Coordmatk_Z. RE: Draft Report LB 1085 Dear County Cerk, Juy 25, 1997 Encosed is a draft copy of the Track 2 overview, executive summaries and an exampe of the summarized comments received from eected officias in the five-county region regarding potentias for coaboration and resource sharing. Thus far, we have received an exceent response from the treasurers, assessors, and registers; but so far have no ideas or suggestions from county cerks (see overview and June 26 etter for background). Pease reveiw this draft and fax any ideas, suggestions or comments to me (in Lincon) by Juy 29, 1997 at (402) or ca me at (402) Thank you for your hep and participation. A ~1,1a version of this report wi be presented to the steering committe August 1, ] University of Nebraska at Omaha University of Nebraska Medica Center University of Nebraska-Un~on University of Nebraska at Kearney

126

127 [ \ t c - '!! L '

128 SCHEDULE OF PUBLC HEARNGS MULT-COUNTY SHARED SERVCES PROJECT DATE LOCATON TME Dodge County Courthouse 7:00p.m Dougas County Leg. Chamber 7:00p.m Saunders County Courthouse 10:30 a.m Sarpy County Courthouse 4:00p.m Washington County Courthouse 2:00p.m.

129 \ r!!

130

131 {! [ f

132 FORMAT FOR PUBLC HEARNGS MULT-COUNTY SHARED SERVCES PROJECT ntroduction to Hearing [8-10 min.] [We wi announce that questions for carification shoud come at the end of each section of the hearing. Pubic comments wi constitute the ast section of the hearing.] Purpose of hearing Report on what has been done to ook at how county services are deivered Get feedback and suggestions from pubic for future directions ntroduce peope invoved in the process and hearing; recognize state senators and other oca eected officias [This wi be done by steering committee members from each county.] Background on the project LB1085 What we did to respond to the egisation Profie of county government services and expenditures [This wi utiize the budget and expenditure pies each county has provided Kathy Keey. This information wi be avaiabe in hand-out version, as we as in poster-size.] Services Expenditures County taxes as percent of tota tax bi for county taxpayers Track 1--Summarv of Consoidation Recommendations/Findings [10-15 min.] [Russ Smith wi do this] Summarize Register of Deeds Findings Summarize track 1 recommendations Discuss foow-up actions Tack 2--Summarv of Cooperation and Sharing Recommendations/Findings [10 min.] [Russ wi do this] Review process and what was done to deveop this information Summarize officias' ideas and suggestions for improving services Recommended priorities for eected officia foow-up

133 r

134 Track 3--Suromarv ofstudy Team Recommendations/Findings [15min.] [Russ wi do this} Summarize study team recommendations Discuss foow-up actions Pubic Comments on the Findings and Recommendations of the Muti County Shared Services Project [30 min.] [Russ wi faciitate and provide answers, but steering committee members shoud be prepared to be a part of this, as wel}

135 r t. i!

136

137 ! { [ [ - r (!!

138 MULT-COUNTY SHARED SERVCES PROJECT: REPORT TO DODGE COUNTY A Partnership nvoving Dodge, Dougas, Sarpy, Saunders and Washington Counties Purpose of the Pubic Hearing -Report on~ what has bee[\ done to ook :rr hnw~~ county services.are deivered. Receive feedback and suggestions from the pubic on.projectiei:ommendations Why The Project Was Deveoped PassagefLB1085inJ996 ~-required counties study -consoidation opportunities The five counties wanted to ook at ~opportunities for sharing services and ~ resources How The Work Was Done.~County boardmembersmetinfebruary and estabished a SteeringConmittee to guide the study process. Three study ''tracks'~ were deveoped Three Study Tracks Track 1,-Study ofpotentia property tax ~ savings from eected. office.consoidation Track 2,- Eected officias'j<jeas for shari!g. if services and co<1perating in service deivery. -Track3:-StudyteamScfocusingon ~ ~opportunities for rtconfiguring ~count}'~ services Profie of Dodge County Government County J;OVemment services Spendinitfor services ~Taxesf() payfor~cou!ty seryices MULT-COUNTY SHARED SERVCES

139 r

140 Track 1 Vision Statement Track 1 Findings and Recommendations Out counties_:wh b.e_:we-t. DagetL-. t'e:sponsive to -_citizens; aud. p~yj@-e_ffic.i~nt and.dfecti:y:e ~rvices.-- 'fax payej1' des~:ower_-oost _governtient _T~c~_ogy _is -~i!j,g _ i~ po_~si_b~~ to accompish many- activities-in new -ways- and atower 'cost- -Yet, our CoUDties-afe or8aruzed on -the -basis of practices arut. fcchnotogy- avaiabe iii the. 9tt Centwy. Ouf_goar is. to- act Cotisiste-ntY With. - hese newer rotces_.by advocaiiig swcuua- changes that faciitate ac~cwing QtA"visiQt_t_ Track 1 Recommendations Dougas ~!d Sarpy Couuty WQrk to d~v~!op~ 1!11 impementation phm for ~onsoid~ting ta~ir otices into a sing!~ R~gister of Dceds officec ' 2. Dodge, SaU1ders and WashingtonCounti~s work (Od~veop an impementation pan for ~onsoidating their-o~ces ~to -a-sij?.ge - Register of Deeds office; Track 1 Recommendations (cont.) 3c Eac.h co!d)ty~board request~theirasses'or!d Cerk.office~to wor!<with the o!her c!!d)tiesto. conductcousoidatio!:stodies simi~r to!hat J;Oif(petedfor. 1)1.-!.egister of ~ds otice. 4. Five couuties continue tomeet<!uringj998 to ixamino 11td work toward structura chauge: Track 2 Recommendations Assessor Offices Couirty ActiOns 1. Sbare county appraisa staff aud expenise 2. Deveop-muti~unty- contracts-for private ap}mus3~ervices_-_ Privamatiott ;c#otts ~.. Contract~praisa services Track 2 Recommendations (cont.) Register of Deeds- County ActionS. L Wok -fi standardize zoning roes-,- -ordiruuices,. and -recon:iiji appioaches - 2. shaie s!jiffwithexpettise in infonnaion management.. Priv~n -1-"~ns Aow direct accesspui:cbase ofrecords~!j' users ~ MUL1-COUN1Y SHARED SERVCES

141 ! r [

142 Track 2 Recommendations (cont.) Track 2 Recommendations (cont.) i. Seek change in statutes t!uti cuneiity- do-fat pennit comities-with <OO,OOO.. popuation.to ctarge. foi". pubic- records 1. Aow driver'-s :1cinsing ex3m s: 3tid issuing of: icenses.to be-done rrom.any. comity 2. Aow deveopment of "one stop'! driver'-s censiig-centeis - 3. Change-renewa_period fordriver!s-icenses from -~n(~ io--5 YeMs.or.o~er ,_ Track 2 Recommendations (cont.) State. Actions (cont). 4. -~hift issuing driver~ s ucetses-to the state 5. Ex~nd ifc?'_spanofpates~rom c~nt3_~o-~ yeeu's 6. Discontinue CQunty-spec_ific pates an,d aow ren~a" at _any co~t;tty-of'f!ce_ or v~a!j.utom@~n 7. Require that egisation be preceded by more. thorough examinatio11 and stqdy of (!Sea impacts, f~~owed ~y dis~sion 'YJQ-cou:n~es Track 3 Recommendations StndyTeam.Areas: --_..,; corrections- - E~e~e!o/ M~eme~t_ - Ext~ion Servic_es _-:-:Veteran's Setvices - ~Weed Contro. Track 3 Recommendations- Corrections :Estabish intedoca agreemenno share transportation.of inmates to. state prisons. and other correctiona centers. 2.EstabisJ-r an antma.or semi-!jua trainittg program for COMy corrections empoyees. J.Deveopajointegisative pan to encourage ) egisationto address!ssuessuch agjai... overcrowding andinmatemedic_a co-. payments Track 3 Recommendations- Emergency Management LRecotUUend that each comty co!s.idec restructuring or consoidating emergency management, preferaby at aregionaj evei Whie emergency management is a oca~ issue; paruim~. coordinton,. ~-id.~~c~#o~. an.~ -~~_su~~ -r~quiri~g SPe~ciaized expertise. C'!J ~best be. accompisiied at a: regiona eve. MULT-COUN1Y SHARED SERVCES