Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budgeting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Proposal to pilot biennial budgeting for Water Environment Services fails after commissioners debate oversight and applicability
Summary
A motion to direct Water Environment Services to work with county finance on a two‑year budgeting pilot failed 2–2 after commissioners raised concerns about transparency, forecasting risks and whether a special‑district pilot would generalize to other county departments.
The Clackamas County board considered a proposal April 7 to pilot a biennial (two‑year) budget for Water Environment Services (WES) and to return with an action plan for the 2027–29 biennium. The motion failed on a 2–2 vote.
Cindy Becker, project manager in the county administrator’s office, summarized benefits and drawbacks of biennial budgeting under Oregon law, saying advantages include more strategic multi‑year planning and potential staff time savings while disadvantages include forecasting uncertainty and reduced short‑term flexibility without strong internal controls.
Greg, the WES director, said WES has stable revenues and long‑range capital plans that would make it a reasonable pilot candidate and that rates-setting would still return to the board annually. Supporters argued the pilot could free staff time for other work and aid multi‑year capital planning. Opponents, including Commissioner Savis, said biennial cycles reduce ongoing oversight and public engagement and stressed the county’s unique 30‑year forecast and tight current budget constraints.
Chair Roberts and other commissioners said a pilot limited to WES or to similarly structured special districts might be worth exploring, but several board members cautioned against a countywide roll‑out without further study. A motion to direct WES and finance to develop a biennial‑budget pilot for FY 2027–29 was moved and seconded but failed on a tie vote (2–2). No pilot was authorized at the meeting.
