As previously reported, interim commissioner Fred Messerle arbitrarily and unilaterally reduced research fees at the Coos County planning department last summer. Fees charged by the department on applications requiring research are set by the budget committee charged with keeping the department self sustaining and ratified by a vote of the commission. Nevertheless, even after voting to adopt the budget, Messerle used a statement printed on the department fee schedule implying the liaison, working with the planning director, may reduce fees to enact a widespread fee reduction from $75 per hour to $60.

The fee adjustments jeopardized the department’s self supporting status and were contrary to the approved budget so planning director Patty Evernden has invoiced the county for reimbursement out of the general fund. In an email from treasurer, Mary Barton, she says “…if the Board wants to maintain the current structure they’ll need to make your office whole by subsidizing your operations.”

Evernden, who decided earlier this month to retire at the end of June, has been dealing with the budget crunch like everyone else and sent the county two invoices on June 12. One invoice for $14,490 for 4.5 months of employee time to be billed to the general fund and another for $20,760 to collect 1,384 hours at the $15 per hour rate reduction.

One of the beneficiaries of the fee reduction was Commissioner Messerle and during the July 10 BOC meeting, he was grilled by a citizen, Phil Thompson, questioning his authority to make an across the board fee reduction. Messerle’s response is bizarre at best.

In the economic times that we are in it is not realistic that the planning department, with the amount of volume that they’ve got, that they’re going to be able to cover their expenses with just their fee structure. The idea that the people, their users if you will, the people that are trying to do something in the county get stuck with the whole bill.. uh, that’s not fair either. The decision was made as a matter of fairness for these user groups uh, as a matter of fact this will uh, this item will be on our agenda next Tuesday on the consent calendar next Tuesday morning.

“In the economic times that we are in it is not realistic that the planning department, with the amount of volume that they’ve got, that they’re going to be able to cover their expenses with just their fee structure.” Is Messerle daft? That’s precisely what budgets are for, to establish need and associated staffing levels and fee structures to cover those costs. Messerle has been caught napping before, was he sleeping during the budget hearings?

“The idea that the people, their users if you will, the people that are trying to do something in the county get stuck with the whole bill.. uh, that’s not fair either”. This sentence doesn’t make any sense at all. What does he mean by “doing something”? What does he mean by “stuck with the whole bill”? Is he implying that someone “doing something” like applying for a boundary line adjustment is “stuck with the whole bill” simply because of a $75 per hour charge for research?

“The decision was made as a matter of fairness for these user groups…” Are we to understand that “user groups” that “do something” should not pay the costs associated with that something?

Messerle also explained his decision to reduce planning department fees with this confusing statement.

… because that is within the purview of the planning director and the liaison to be able do that and frankly the reason for doing that was that in their calculation they had included their contingency fund to come up with their rate. And that is akin to basically agreeing to do something to recover your costs, your operating costs to do a project and then at the end of it you calculate your payments to count in to it and that is neither proper nor fair.

“…the reason for doing that was that in their calculation they had included their contingency fund…” Years as a cost accountant, controller and chief financial officer for a major California real estate developer taught me one thing… always factor in a contingency fund. It is common business practice, expected and frankly, good policy. The planning department is required to maintain a reserve fund precisely because it is a self supporting (or was until Messerle came along) department.

Here is the key issue? Who should pay for Messerle’s mistake? According to Messerle…

” …uh, as a matter of fact this will uh, this item will be on our agenda next Tuesday on the consent calendar next Tuesday morning.” To be accurate, the invoice for $20,760 along with another planning department invoice $14,490 attributed to actions made by the human resources department are on the consent calendar, which is not up for discussion, and will be paid out of the general fund. This means that “as a matter of fairness” you and I picked up the tab for those “user groups”, which include Fred Messerle and Sons, Inc, Pacific Connector Pipeline, Messerle contributor and PAC board member John Knutson and more. Matters of conflict of interest are under the jurisdiction of the Oregon Government Ethics Commission and I encourage the public to file a complaint on this matter.

Rather than let the board sweep the matter aside and simply transfer money from the general fund to the planning department, demand that Messerle reimburse the county for his poor judgment.

Bob Main

(541) 396-3121 ext 770

email Bob Main

Fred Messerle

(541) 396-3121 ext 247

email Fred Messerle

Cam Parry

(541) 396-3121 ext 281

email Cam Parry

Watch the full meeting online at Coos Media Center