Deschutes County officials on May 2 urged caution and requested a meeting with the bill sponsor over House Bill 3069, a proposal to consolidate Criminal Justice Commission (CJC) grant requests so counties submit a single, biennial application.

The concern centers on new administrative limits and uncertain implementation. "It reduces the acceptable administrative cost for the administration of grants to 3%," said DA Gunnels, noting counties typically budget closer to 8–9% for administration. "We don't have enough detail and we don't have enough finality to know exactly how this is gonna come out and whether it would be good or bad for us."

County staff and officials said the bill's stated goal — giving counties more control and simplifying application processes — could be beneficial if details protect local coordination and funding administration. "The administrative burden on us and on as a county and on practitioners is no less," said DV, adding that consolidating timelines and programs under one grant application may increase, rather than reduce, county work during a transition.

Doug Riggs, representing the county at the Capitol, said a recent dash-1 and dash-2 amendment shows the bill is in flux and urged communicating specific concerns to the sponsor. "I think it would be very good if we have some constructive ideas for the amendment that we put those down on paper, and maybe we can put a letter together to Representative Krepp," Riggs said.

Officials flagged three main issues: (1) the 3% cap on administrative costs appears too low to cover current reporting, contracting and program coordination expenses; (2) timing — making a structural change mid-biennium risks disruption; and (3) membership and expertise concerns for the proposed commission that would review grants, including lack of a city representative, which the League of Oregon Cities has already criticized. Gunnels said the bill as written contemplates an 11-member commission and worried it "wouldn't have the expertise in all 5 or 6 or 7 areas."

The county proposed drafting a letter with bullet points and inviting Representative Krepp to a Zoom meeting so staff can present suggested amendments. County staff also recommended that, if changes are made, they should preserve the role of local coordinating bodies such as the Public Safety Coordinating Council and allow realistic administrative rates or shared-county arrangements where appropriate.

No formal county vote was taken; the board directed staff and stakeholders to draft comment language, seek a meeting with the sponsor and continue monitoring the bill as it moves through the Legislature.