At the September 20, Coos County Board of Commissioners meeting this year I asked the commissioners if they had considered rather than co-opting the Coos Bay Wagon Road lands simply buying more private timber land to supplement county revenue. Main answered they had considered it but that there isn’t any money for a capital purchase.
At this point I suggested that with some analysis of the county’s $47 million of investment funds it might be possible to purchase additional timber property. During this meeting I acknowledge that some of these funds were dedicated but analysis… at which point Main interrupted saying “analyzing doesn’t do it” and there was some great guffawing and snorting from the commissioners bench at the possibility of this much cash in the county coffers and they would sure like to see that.
That day I sent an email with a link to the Coos County 2010 Annual Audit report and the page numbers to look at along with a snapshot of one page.

Dear Commissioners,

Pursuant to your request during my public comment during today’s BOC meeting you may find the audit report on the county website here http://www.co.coos.or.us/treasurer/fye6302010/CoosCounty2010AuditReport.pdf

Go to pages 42 and 43 to see a detail of the county’s deposit and investment funds totaling $54 million. Attached is a screen shot of page 42-

Now, I do understand these may be short term investments of otherwise dedicated funds but this is what I was talking about today

Mary

On September 23, I published the same information on MGx listing both page numbers and showing screen shots of both pages. Nevertheless, at the October 4, board meeting Commissioner Main, without mentioning my name, misrepresented what I said, suggested I hadn’t read the second page, that I needed some “schooling” and further indicated he does not understand the county’s flow of cash or cash flow statements.

Back when I was the financial controller for a $30 million commercial real estate developer we maintained cash flow statements to track liquidity to enable us to invest in or acquire income producing assets while computing the timing for near term cash needs to avoid negative consequences to ongoing operations. Limited forms of cash management is standard practice in most households and a critical function of any corporate finance department.

In the case of the county investment funds which include operating accounts that are replenished throughout the year, according to information available from the county’s own website the balance has not changed significantly since its $49,822,107 balance 2007. The carrying amount of investments from fiscal year end 2009 to 2010 have only fluctuated from $48, 442,178 in 2009 to $47,883,580 in 2010. No one has said all that money is available for income producing capital acquisitions but an analysis of the lowest balances ever held in these accounts indicates there may be as much $15 million to work with if a viable repayment plan is established.

As evidenced by the county’s support for the CBWR/Coquille proposal the commission has a great deal of confidence in the timber market, despite its fluctuations. Unfortunately, this commission doesn’t undertake any of its own analysis, “analyzing doesn’t do it” after all, so it will be up to the public to find viable alternatives on their own.

And now a little mea culpa. Out of the five top candidates chosen by the selection committee to replace Andy Jackson I advocated for Cam Parry. My belief at that time was of the five only he would bring the critical thinking skills necessary to properly weigh and assess the matters brought before the commission. Regrettably, I have been proven wrong as he has demonstrated no critical thinking skills and while the public never really had any say in his selection, I apologize if I wrongly encouraged confidence in his appointment.