1

VOLUME XXXXVIII NO. 46 DECEMBER 4, 2009 DATES TO REMEMBER DECEMBER 6-9, 2009 CCAO/CEAO ANNUAL WINTER CONFERENCE, HYATT REGENCY, COLUMBUS DECEMBER 18, 2009 RECOVERY ZONE BONDS BRIEFING: IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNTIES, CCAO

OFFICES, COLUMBUS MARCH 6-10, 2010 NACo LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE, MARRIOTT WARDMAN PARK HOTEL,

WASHINGTON, D.C. MARCH 10, 2009 OHIO CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION BREAKFAST, WASHTINGTON, D.C.

ASSOCIATION NEWS COMMISSIONERS RECEIVE FAVORABLE COURT DECISION ON ENGINEER CHARGEBACKS The Knox County Common Pleas Court has ruled once again that the county engineer’s portion of property and liability insurance premiums can be paid from the motor vehicle gas tax (MVGT) funds. CCAO was notified of the Court’s decision on November 20, 2009. The Court also ruled that deductibles under the automobile physical damage coverage that result from repairs to engineer vehicles can be paid from MVGT funds. The latest suit was filed by the Knox County Commissioners after the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in the original suit that the original case did not establish a link between the premiums and a highway purpose, and therefore the premium could not be paid from the MVGT funds. Under the Ohio Constitution, expenditures from MVGT funds must be related to a highway purpose. Although the engineer pays health insurance premiums from the MVGT, the engineer’s position is that premiums for liability and physical damage insurance on highway vehicles are not related to a highway purpose and therefore can not be paid from MVGT funds. In the latest decision, the Court referenced language in the original decision which stated that had the case included evidence that the premiums pertained to a highway purpose, the outcome might not have been the same. The fact that the latest decision specifically stated that both the premium and deductible payments are directly connected to a highway purpose should help the commissioners’ position as the suit progresses through the appeal process. The engineer has already appealed the case in the Fifth District Court of Appeals, which also ruled in the commissioners’ favor in the original suit... We expect the issue to be heard again by the Ohio Supreme Court. Please contact Dave Brooks, Managing Director of Property and Casualty Insurance, (614) 220-7988 or dbrooks@ccao.org if you have any questions about the latest suit or about the issue in general.

2

RECOVERY ZONE BONDS: IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNTIES CCAO has scheduled an important briefing on “Recovery Zone Bonds: Implications for Counties” to be held on Friday, December 18 from 9:30 a.m. to noon at the CCAO Offices, 209 East State Street, in downtown Columbus. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), commonly referred to as the Federal Stimulus Act, authorized two types of Recovery Zone Bonds: Recovery Zone Economic Development Bonds (RZEB’s) and Recovery Zone Facility Bonds (RZFB’s). These two new types of bonds are of special interest to counties because most counties receive a specific dollar allocation that can be used to lower borrowing costs for various types of projects in their county. Counties have until December 31, 2010 to use their allocations, however, if your county does not express its intent to use its allocation within the county, the county allocation will be deemed waived and assumed by the State. The State will determine the total amount of waived allocations and undertake a process to reallocate that amount to projects across the state. In this way we will maximize utilization of Ohio’s RZEB and RZFB allocations to benefit the State of Ohio as a whole. This briefing will give you an opportunity to better understand the possible uses for these bonds in your county, the interest rate savings that can be achieved, and other program requirements. There is no charge to attend. Space is limited. To register, please contact Janet Erwin, CCAO Administrative Assistant, at (614) 220-7986 or jerwin@ccao.org. FUNDING FOR OSU EXTENSION AND SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS Recently, we have learned that rumors are apparently spreading around the state that CCAO is recommending that commissioners not fund OSU Extension or Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD) during these difficult budget times. No such recommendations have been made by CCAO. When asked about funding obligations under the law CCAO staff will provide information on legal obligations or authority to fund under Ohio law, Attorney General’s Opinions, and case law, but we do not make specific recommendations about what Commissioners should fund or not fund as these are decisions to be made in each county. Clearly there is no CCAO policy to not fund these or other functions within any county’s appropriation resolution. Attached to this edition of CIDS is a memo that provides more detail on funding of both OSU Extension and SWCD’s. If you need additional information contact Larry Long, CCAO Executive Director, at (614) 221-5627 or lllong@ccao.org.

STRICKLAND TO ADDRESS CCAO/CEAO ANNUAL WINTER CONFERENCE Governor Ted Strickland will speak during the CCAO/CEAO Annual Winter Conference at the general session on Monday, December 7 at 2:00 p.m. Following the Governor’s remarks, administration officials will address the “State General Fund & Transportation Budget Challenges: Where Do We Go From Here?” Join J. Pari Sabety, Director of the Office of Budget and Management; Rich Levin, Tax Commissioner, Ohio Department of Taxation; and Jolene Molitoris, Director, Ohio Department of Transportation to hear how the economy has impacted both state and county budgets. But where do we go from here? Where are we for the rest of this biennium and what is the outlook for the next state budget? How has the federal stimulus money helped us and what happens when this money and other one-time monies are not longer available? What are the state budget implications to counties? Mark your calendars and plan to attend the 129th CCAO/CEAO Annual Winter Conference and Trade Show to be held December 6-9, 2010 at the Hyatt Regency, 350 North High Street, in Columbus. Register for the conference by November 13 to get the pre-registration discount. Everyone attending the conference must

3

register, even if you are attending meetings only. Registration materials and an updated draft agenda are on the CCAO website at www.ccao.org. Click on the story on the front page. The headquarters hotel is the Hyatt Regency, 350 North High Street, in Columbus. Rate: $139 single/double. Reservation deadline: November 14. To reserve a room call (888) 421-1442, (402) 592-6464 or http://columbusregency.hyatt.com/groupbooking/cmhrc2009ccas.

CCAO NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT The CCAO Nominating Committee, chaired by Daniel Troy, Lake County Commissioner and CCAO Past President, met on Friday, November 20, 2009. Other members serving on the committee included Commissioners Olen Jackson (Morrow), Tom Wheaton (Carroll), John Love (Putnam), and Mike Curry (Clinton). The committee wishes to thank all members who submitted their names for consideration. The nomination process was difficult because 30 highly qualified and motivated individuals expressed interest in serving on the Board. The Committee, however, was charged with recommending candidates for seven regular two-year terms and one, one-year unexpired term. The committee adopted the following report:

CCAO OFFICERS

For President - Paula Brooks, Franklin County Commissioner For 1st Vice – David Dhume, Madison County Commissioner For 2nd Vice President – Mike Adelman, Huron County Commissioner For Secretary – Doug Corcoran, Ross County Commissioner For Treasurer – Ben Nutter, Seneca County Commissioner

PAST PRESIDENTS WHO HAVE ELECTED TO SERVE ON THE BOARD

Bob Corbett, Champaign County Commissioner Lenny Eliason, Athens County Commissioner Patricia Geissman, Medina County Commissioner Olen Jackson, Morrow County Commissioner Daniel Troy, Lake County Commissioner Kerry Metzger, Tuscarawas County Commissioner

FOR TWO YEAR TERMS ON BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Nick Kostandaras, Summit County Council Gary Lee, Union County Commissioner Deborah Lieberman, Montgomery County Commissioner Richard Myers, Henry County Commissioner Otto Nicely, Defiance County Commissioner Ann Obrecht, Wayne County Commissioner Penny Traina, Columbiana County Commissioner Tom Wheaton, Carroll County Commissioner Finally, the 2010 President will make nine more appointments to the CCAO Board for next year. Should you desire to be considered for such an appointment, please complete and return the attached form and

4

questionnaire to Kathy Dillon at the CCAO no later than December 8th. In the event you previously expressed an interest to the Nominating Committee for a position and were not selected, you need NOT submit your name again as the next president will automatically receive names previously submitted.

PURCHASING– COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HANDBOOK CHAPTER UPDATED

Over the decades, CCAO has published four editions of the County Commissioners Handbook and distributed copies to all counties. Since the first edition, the Handbook has grown to nearly 1,000 pages and publishing an updated copy of all chapters in a timely manner is nearly impossible. Due to technology changes and the high cost of publishing a hard copy of the Handbook will be published on our website.

Recently, Chapter 20 - Purchasing was updated. A revised copy has been published on the CCAO website at www.ccao.org. Click on the story on the front page about the Handbook.

CEAO NEWS FRED PAUSCH NAMED CEAO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR The County Engineers Association of Ohio (CEAO) is pleased to announce Fredrick B. Pausch as the new Executive Director of the Association, effective January 1, 2010. In the interim, Pausch started as CEAO’s Assistant Executive Director on December 1, 2009. Pausch brings to the CEAO over twenty years of association management and lobbying experience with the Ohio General Assembly. For the organizations he has represented in the past, he has provided a strong voice not only in the Legislature, but also in the news media promoting the goals of those he has served. STATE ACTIVITIES SUPREME COURT SIDES WITH JUDGE IN ASHTABULA COURT FUNDING CASE Finding that the commissioners had not met their burden to establish that the judge abused his discretion by ordering unreasonable and unnecessary funding, the Ohio Supreme Court has issued a writ of mandamus to compel the Ashtabula County Board of Commissioners to appropriate an additional $109,380.20 for calendar year 2009 to Judge Hague of the Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas, Probate and Juvenile Divisions. This amount is the difference between the reduced appropriation contained in the commissioners’ amended appropriation resolution and the amount of funding that had been previously agreed upon by the parties in June 2009. While the case established no new principals of law in the area of the commissioners’ responsibility for funding the courts, the Supreme Court’s analysis of the facts and its comments regarding undue hardship should be of significant interest to commissioners. The case, State ex rel. Hague v. Ashtabula Cty. Bd. of Commrs. ( Slip Opinion No. 2009-Ohio-6140.) was decided November 20, 2009. The Court’s opinion is beneficial in that it concisely outlines the principles of law with respect to budget disputes between commissioners and judges: First, common pleas courts and their divisions have inherent power to order funding that is reasonable and necessary to the courts’ administration of their business. [State ex rel. Morley v. Lordi (1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 510, 511]

5

Second, the board of county commissioners is obligated to appropriate the requested funds, unless the board can establish that the court abused its discretion by requesting unreasonable and unnecessary funding. [State ex rel. Wilke v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Commrs. (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 55, 60]; Third, a court’s funding orders are presumed reasonable, and the board must rebut the presumption in order to justify its noncompliance with the funding orders. [State ex rel. Weaver v. Lake Cty. Bd. of Commrs. (1991), 62 Ohio St.3d 204, 205] This presumption of reasonableness emanates from the separation-of-powers doctrine because courts must be free from excessive control by other governmental branches to ensure their independence and autonomy. [Wilke, 90 Ohio St.3d at 60-61]; Fourth, absent an abuse of discretion on the part of the judge, the board of county commissioners is obligated to appropriate annually such sum of money as will meet all the administrative expenses of such court which the judge thereof deems necessary. [State ex rel. Ray v. South (1964), 176 Ohio St. 241,paragraph two of the syllabus]; Fifth, the reasonableness of a court’s funding request must be determined only from a consideration of the request in relation to the factual needs of the court for the proper administration of its business. [State ex rel.Milligan v. Freeman (1972), 31 Ohio St.2d 13, 18, quoting State ex rel. Moorehead v. Reed (1964), 177 Ohio St. 4, 5]; and, Sixth, the board of county commissioners cannot simply substitute their judgment for that of the judge in these matters [Wilke, 90 Ohio St.3d 55, 61, citing State ex rel. Foster v. Wittenberg (1968), 16 Ohio St.2d 89, paragraph three of the syllabus]. FACTS SUPPORT JUDGE’S FUNDING REQUEST: Although the commissioners claimed that they rebutted the presumed reasonableness of the requesting funding because Judge Hague failed to make sufficient operational changes to reduce the courts’ budget, failed to cooperate with the budget process in a timely manner, and has sufficient money to operate the courts for the remainder of 2009, the Court found the these claims lack merit based upon evidence submitted by the judge. The Court found that the evidence presented established that the judge’s requested funding was reasonable based on the factual needs of the courts for the proper administration of their business. First, the judge’s funding orders reflected the sum agreed to by the commissioners and the judge prior to the commissioners’ unilateral reduction of the courts’ funding. Second, Judge Hague submitted specific evidence that proved the reduced funding impaired the efficient continued operation of his courts by causing staff reductions which delayed the timely processing of filings and the resolution of cases, effected the ability to supervise probation cases, and diminished the potential revenue generated for the county through fines and court costs. Third, the commissioners’ reduced funding resulted in the closure of the county’s youth detention center, which limited the juvenile court’s dispositional alternatives for delinquent children. And fourth, the commissioners’ own study of 12 Ohio counties indicated that for 2007 and 2008, although Ashtabula County had the ninth largest population of the 12 counties, its juvenile court budget was the lowest. The Court was not persuaded by the commissioners’ evidence that seven different county departments received greater or similar cuts to their 2009 budgets than Judge Hague and pointed out the commissioners failed to mention that at least 14 other departments received increases in their 2009 budgets or decreased funding in amounts lower than Judge Hague’s budget. The Court found that the judge did not abuse his discretion in using his special projects fund, which has no impact on the county’s general fund, to pay for the reasonable and necessary expenses of the judge and court personnel to attend conferences at which probate and juvenile court problems are discussed, noting that ORC 2151.10 authorizes such activities.

6

The Court also found that the commissioners failed to specify any reasonable alternative for Judge Hague to reduce costs for the probate and juvenile courts that would not have been harmful to the courts’ efficient operation. Finally, the Court held that the commissioners had a duty to appropriate the requested funds to Judge Hague when he issued the funding orders and their duty to do so did not dissipate with the passage of time. To hold otherwise would, according to the Court, in essence reward a funding authority for failing to timely appropriate the reasonable and necessary amount ordered by the court. UNDUE HARDSHIP WON’T CARRY THE DAY ALONE: One of the arguments made to the Court by the board of county commissioners was that of undue hardship. The commissioners claimed that due to the county’s severe financial condition, complying with the judge’s funding orders would impose an undue hardship on other county offices. The Court noted, however, that government hardship is insufficient by itself to establish an abuse of discretion in determining the required amount of court funding. [State ex rel. Maloney v. Sherlock, 100 Ohio St.3d 77, 2003-Ohio- 5058; State ex rel. Britt v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Commrs. (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 1, 3-4; and State ex rel. Weaver v. Lake Cty. Bd. of Commrs. (1991), 62 Ohio St.3d at 206-207] and the commissioners’ duty to appropriate the ordered amounts is not “vitiated by the fact that compliance with the court’s requests would work an undue hardship on other offices and agencies.” [Maloney, 100 Ohio St.3d 77, 2003-Ohio-5058; Weaver, 62 Ohio St.3d at 208; and, Moorehead, 177 Ohio St. at 6] The Court stated that the commissioners’ evidence concerning declining annual carryover balances and the importance of these balances, while relevant, did not excuse them from complying with the judge’s reasonable funding orders and indicated that in Weaver, 62 Ohio St.3d at 206-207 the commissioners’ evidence about the county’s decreased personal-property-tax revenues, declining annual carryover balances, and insufficient resources to fund appropriation requests were held to be insufficient to establish abuse of discretion in juvenile court judge’s determination of amount of required court funding. COMMISSIONERS RECEIVE ADMONISHMENT FROM THE SUPREME COURT: In granting the writ of mandamus the Supreme Court found that although the commissioners attempted to claim that they accorded the probate and juvenile courts budgetary priority, their actual appropriations indicated that many county departments and offices fared better in the board’s 2009 appropriations. In effect, the appropriations were “based on an arbitrary determination rather than any analysis of the needs and programs of the courts.” [Maloney, 100 Ohio St.3d 77, 2003-Ohio-5058] In its concluding paragraph of the opinion, the Supreme Court states: “In so holding, we are cognizant of the budgetary pressures faced by local legislative bodies like the board of commissioners. But while we appreciate the dilemma that the commissioners encounter in promulgating a budget during difficult economic times, we are compelled to remind the commissioners that the courts must not be held hostage to competing interests when the courts, in their discretionary power, submit budgetary requests that are reasonable and necessary.’ State ex rel. Rudes v. Rofkar (1984), 15 Ohio St.3d 69, 72, and Weaver, 62 Ohio St.3d at 207-208.” FEDERAL ACTIVITIES 2010 CENSUS: QUESIONNAIRE ASSISTANCE CENTER/BE COUNTED SITE In an effort to reach every resident, the U.S. Census Bureau will be implementing a strategy to provide one-on-one assistance in filling out the 2010 Census questionnaire. In Ohio, roughly 1,350 Questionnaire Assistance Centers (QACs) will be located throughout the state. These Centers will provide assistance in filling out the questionnaire to remove any hesitation because of a language-barrier or disability. Approximately 30,000 QACs will be open nationally to the public from March 19 to April 19, 2010. Regional partnership staff is working with local Ohio partner organizations to identify the locations of donated space. They will be staffed with paid Census employees and possibility volunteers.

7

The Bureau will also be making questionnaires available within high-traffic locations (i.e., libraries, grocery stores, or laundromats) to allow residents a chance to pick up a form. These are referred to as Be Counted Sites. The Ohio Library Council has agreed to sponsor libraries throughout the state as Be Counted sites, as well as a number of central Ohio urgent care units. If your county has space available, please complete the form that is attached to this issue of CIDS. A copy is also located www.ccao.org. Click on the article on the front page. NACo ACTIVITIES NACo LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE REGISTRATION OPENED DECEMBER 1 NACo’s Legislative Conference will be held March 6 - 10 at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel in Washington, D.C. The conference’s theme and focus, “Finding Solutions for Tough Times” will provide you with tangible solutions to take home and apply in moving your county forward in these very difficult economic times. The Opening Session keynote speaker is Joe Klein, columnist for TIME magazine. A veteran of eight presidential campaigns, The New York Times wrote that “Klein possesses one of the more musical ears in American politics, a gift for hearing what others miss.” Registration opened on December 1. Register online and save $25. The Ohio Congressional Delegation breakfast will be held on Wednesday, March 10 at 8:00 a.m. More information will be published later. GRANTS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY BLOCK GRANTS Funding for the U.S. Department of Energy competitive grant section of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program (EECBG) will be in two categories:

• Retrofit Ramp-Up Program - The retrofit program will provide up to $390 million for 8 - 20 project awards funded at $5 million - $75 million each. Both eligible and non-eligible counties (under the EECBG funding formula) may apply.

• General Innovation Fund - The Innovation Fund provides up to $63.68 million for 15 - 60 awards of $1 million - $5 million. The General Innovation Fund is limited to local governments that were not eligible for direct EECBG funding through the EECBG formula grants.

Applications are due December 14, 2009. For more information, contact Mike Belarmino, NACo Special Projects Coordinator, Recovery Act, (202) 661-8840, fax (202) 393-2630 or www.eecbg.energy.gov/Downloads/EECBGCompetitiveFOA148MON.pdf. CONFERENCES SERB OHIO PUBLIC SECTOR DEVELOPING LABOR LAW SEMINAR The State Employment Relations Board (SERB) will hold an “Ohio Public Sector Developing Labor Law Seminar” on Thursday, December 10, 2009 at the Ohio Department of Transportation Auditorium, 1980 West Broad Street, in Columbus. Registration begins at 8:30 a.m. with sessions starting at 8:55 a.m. and ending at 3:45 p.m. Seminar topics include: Ohio’s Sunshine Laws & Collective Bargaining, “Hot” Issues in Collective Bargaining, Dealing with Substance Abuse Issues, Ethics in the Public Sector, and Professionalism in the Public Sector.

8

Registration fee (includes all sessions and course materials disk): $160 – full day or $100 – half day. Lunch is on your own. For more information, contact Labor Law Seminar, State Employment Relations Board, Research & Training Section, 65 East State Street – Floor 12, Columbus, OH 43215-4213, (614) 466-2963, or timothea.johnson@serb.state.oh.us. CLASSIFIEDS TOWNSHIP ADMINISTRATOR Jefferson Township in scenic northeast Franklin County seeks a full-time township administrator. Jefferson Township, population 8,800, is a progressive township practicing conservation development and other programs that achieve or move the township toward sustainability. Under the general direction of the Board of Trustees, the administrator supervises and directs the activities and affairs of the divisions of Township government; administers, enforces and executes the policies and resolutions of the Board; prepares the annual tax budget, and carries out numerous other duties as assigned. Further, the Administrator represents the board by participating in selected community groups, and keeps the Board advised of community needs and issues. The position is executive in nature; therefore the administrator is expected to demonstrate a high degree of self-direction and professionalism in performing the duties and responsibilities of the position. The successful candidate should have a thorough knowledge of public finance and administration as well as a thorough knowledge of supervision and management techniques. The Administrator must establish and maintain effective working relationships with government officials at all levels, as well as employees and the general public, and must be experienced with all forms of electronic communication and record keeping.

Minimum Qualifications: Bachelor's degree in public or business administration, political science, regional planning or related field, with a minimum of five years of supervisory experience in local government, or professional experience equivalent to the above.

Salary and benefits are competitive and commensurate with experience and education. This job is posted at www.jeffersontownship.org. Application deadline: December 7, 2009. Send resumes to: Administrator Search, Jefferson Township, 6545 Havens Road, Blacklick, OH 43004. EOE and AA Employer.

DIRECTOR, DELAWARE, MARION, MORROW AND KNOX COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISTRICT Resumes are being accepted for the position of Director of the DKMM Solid Waste District. The successful candidate will communicate the mission of the Solid Waste District to the public, supervise employees, use marketing strategies, exhibit knowledge of solid waste legislation, develop and monitor a budget, write and administer grants, seek alternate funding sources, develop special projects and carry them through to completion. Bachelor’s Degree in Business Management (is preferred but not required) plus a strong background in environmental science or natural resource management, minimum of three years of experience in the field or any equivalent combination, and experience that provides the requisite knowledge, skill and ability for this job. Candidates should submit a cover letter and resume no later than December 15, 2009 to DKMM Board Chairman Olen Jackson, Morrow County Commissioner, 80 N. Walnut Street, Mt. Gilead, OH 43338. Complete Director’s Job description may be obtained from www.dkmm.org or by calling (740) 223-4150. EOE.

9

WATER OPERATOR / MAINTENANCE The Ottawa County Sanitary Engineering Department currently has a job opening for a Water Operator / Maintenance position at the Regional Water Treatment Plant. Applicant must be able to perform laboratory tests of water to determine water quality; operate the regional water treatment plant to ensure required water quality standards are achieved; implement proper procedures for efficient water treatment plant operation and maintenance; perform skilled mechanical maintenance of equipment at the facility; lift or move chemical drums/bags; and perform housekeeping duties. Minimum Ohio EPA Class I Water Supply Operators license required. Ottawa County provides a competitive salary and benefits package. Applications are available at the Ottawa County Sanitary Engineering Department, 315 Madison Street, Room 105, Port Clinton, Ohio 43452 or online at www.co.ottawa.oh.us. Applications deadline: 4:30 p.m. December 18, 2009. EOE.

CLASSIFIED ADS CCAO publishes the County Information and Data Service (CIDS) weekly. Classified ads will be published free of charge as a service to counties. Ads will run for two weeks if space is available. Ads will also be published on the CCAO website at www.ccao.org. When submitting your ad to CCAO please provide a link to the job posting online and a deadline. Please provide a copy of the classified ad by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday of each week. Transmit the copy to Mary Jane Neiman, CCAO Public Relations Associate, by e-mail at mjneiman@ccao.org

MMMAAARRRKKK YYYOOOUUURRR CCCAAALLLEEENNNDDDAAARRR!!! HHHOOOLLLDDD TTTHHHEEE DDDAAATTTEEE!!!

RECOVERY ZONE BONDS: Implications for Counties

AN IMPORTANT BRIEFING

Friday, December 18

9:30AM-12:00 PM

CCAO Office, 209 E. State St., Columbus

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), commonly referred to as

the Federal Stimulus Act, authorized two types of Recovery Zone Bonds; Recovery Zone Economic Development Bonds (RZEB’s) and Recovery Zone Facility Bonds (RZFB’s). These two new types of bonds are of special interest to counties because most counties receive a specific dollar allocation that can be used to lower

borrowing costs for various types of projects in their county. Counties have until

December 31, 2010 to use their allocations, however, if your county does not

express its intent to use its allocation within the county, the county allocation will

be deemed waived and assumed by the State. The State will determine the total

amount of waived allocations and undertake a process to reallocate that amount to

projects across the state. In this way we will maximize utilization of Ohio’s RZEB

and RZFB allocations to benefit the State of Ohio as a whole.

This briefing will give you an opportunity to better understand the

possible uses for these bonds in your county, the interest rate

savings that can be achieved, and other program requirements.

Please register (no fee) by email to Janet Erwin; jerwin@ccao.org

MMMAAARRRKKK YYYOOOUUURRR CCCAAALLLEEENNNDDDAAARRR!!! HHHOOOLLLDDD TTTHHHEEE DDDAAATTTEEE!!!

November 27, 2009

MEMO TO: ALL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, SUMMIT COUNTY EXECUTIVE AND

SUMMIT COUNTY COUNCIL FROM: LARRY LONG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SUBJ: RECOVERY ZONE BONDS The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the Federal Stimulus Bill or ARRA) includes new and expanded bonding authority for states and local governments. The new bonds are targeted to primary and secondary education, alternative energy, and economically distressed communities. Of particular interest to counties are bonds for economically distressed communities. An overview of the various bonds can be viewed at: http://www.recovery.ohio.gov/docs/ARRABondsOhio.pdf . General Information The ARRA included two types of Recovery Zone Bonds; Recovery Zone Economic Development Bonds (RZEB’s) and Recovery Zone Facility Bonds (RZFB’s). These two new types of bonds are of particular interest to counties because most counties receive a specific dollar allocation (see attached table) that can be used to lower borrowing costs for various types of projects in their county. Recovery Zone Economic Development Bonds (RZEB’s) are a type of taxable bond that allows state and local government issuers to achieve lower borrowing costs through an interest rate subsidy of 45% of the interest payable when these bonds are issued. RZEB’s can be used finance a broad range of "qualified economic development purposes" including public infrastructure and facilities and job training and educational programs. This type of bonds must satisfy the requirements of governmental use tax-exempt bonds.

Recovery Zone Facility Bonds are a type of traditional tax-exempt private activity bond that may be used in designated recovery zones, generally an economically distressed area, to finance a broad range of depreciable capital projects. A typical financing arrangement for RZFB’s would be for local governments to issue conduit

bonds for qualifying businesses operating in a recovery zone to fund commercial, industrial, and other economic activities. These RZFB's are not limited to small business enterprises.

Ohio' share of ARRA's $10 billion national allocation for RZEB’s is $422.6 million and Ohio's share of the ARRA's $15 billion national allocation of RZFB’s is approximately $634 million. The U.S. Treasury has sub-allocated these state allocations to Ohio's counties and large cities in proportion to the local employment decline during 2008 (See attached table).

The deadline for the issuance of bonds (closing on the bonds) under the RZEB and RZFB programs is December 31, 2010. The federal guidance for RZEB’s and RZFB’s can be found at: www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-09-50.pdf.

Ohio's Implementation of Recovery Zone Bonds

The State of Ohio does not have a direct role in the allocation or issuance of either RZEB's or RZFB's. The U.S. Treasury sub-allocated both types of bonds to counties and large cities in Ohio. Counties and cities, however, may elect to waive their allocations to the state. The state is in the process of establishing a waiver process as well as a procedure for reallocation of any bond authority that may be waived. The Ohio Department of Development will coordinate the state's efforts related to both types of Recovery Zone Bonds.

What Should Your County Do?

CCAO encourages you to become familiar with how these bonds might be used in your county for eligible projects. As is the case with all bond issues, the details on eligibility, issuance, and repayment are complicated. Counties are encouraged to discuss this with your local bond counsel or underwriter to see if there are eligible projects that would be beneficial to your county.

The bonds must be issued no later than December 31, 2010. Bonds not issued before this date are lost to the county and the state. The state is now in the process of developing a process whereby counties will need to express its intent to use some or all of its allocation. For counties that do not use their allocation, a process will be developed whereby the county’s allocation will be waived to the state and then reallocated to counties who have identified viable projects or used for eligible projects in the state.

While the time line for expressing the intent of the county to use all or a portion of its allocation has not been finalized at this time, more detailed guidance from the state is expected around December 1. We encourage your county to become informed on possible local uses for the bonds during November and December to assure that your county uses the largest portion of the allocation possible for eligible projects in your

county. We are working with the state to assure that county allocations not being used by any county is not lost to the state as a whole.

In addition, we are working with the state to sponsor a short seminar on Recovery Zone Bonds so that any questions you have may be answered. We are holding a seminar on December 18, 2009 at the CCAO offices in Columbus!

Other References

• Link to table showing the various kinds of bonding authority under ARRA http://www.recovery.ohio.gov/docs/ARRABondsOhio.pdf

• Link to IRS site that shows county and large city allocations

http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/docs/rzballocation-local_AR-ZS.pdf

• Link to State Web Site on Recovery Zone Bonds http://www.recovery.ohio.gov/opportunities/bonds/#RZBs

• Link to PowerPoint for Information Session on the Program by Ohio OBM

(Webinar) http://www.recovery.ohio.gov/docs/RZ_Bonds_Education.pdf

• Link to Internal Revenue Service Guidance

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-09-50.pdf

November 25, 2009

MEMO

TO: ALL COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, SUMMIT COUNTY EXECUTIVE,

AND SUMMIT COUNTY COUNCIL

FROM: LARRY LONG

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

SUBJ: FUNDING FOR OSU EXTENSION AND SOIL AND WATER

CONSERVATION DISTRICTS

Recently we have heard that rumors are apparently spreading around the state that CCAO has recommended that Commissioners not fund OSU Extension or Soil and Water Conservation Districts during these difficult budget times. The purpose of this memo is to discuss the issue of funding for both entities and to state that CCAO has not made any such specific recommendations concerning either OSU Extension or Soil and Water Conservation Districts. First, CCAO does not have a position as it relates to the amount, method, or manner of funding of OSU Extension or a Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD), or for that matter, any other items in any county’s budget as long as the appropriation for the purpose or program is authorized under Ohio law. As long as the function is an authorized expenditure under Ohio law, the amount of funding is within the discretion of the Commissioners. CCAO staff is often contacted by Commissioners with a variety of questions about funding related to numerous areas. When we are asked these questions it is our role to respond to those inquiries. Most of our responses to these inquiries are to give our view of what the law allows or requires as it relates to the funding of various programs and services. This is always based on our understanding of the statutes and of any relevant case law with which we are familiar. In most areas, it is clear whether funding is authorized by law. In addition it is evident that some functions are clearly permissive, others are clearly prohibited, while for others, the question is more of the level of funding that is required. In most cases, there is no clear statutory or common law direction as to how much funding must be

provided for authorized or even mandated functions as these are discretionary decisions made by the Commissioners. For example, we normally point out that extraordinary powers have been granted to the Courts, the Veterans Service Commission (VSC), and the Board of Elections (BOE) in relation to their needs. In addition County Prosecutors’ may apply to the common pleas court to fix the amount of compensation of their employees. It is thus clear that the degree of discretion Commissioners possess as it relates to funding of the Courts, as a separate branch of government and to the VSC, BOE and Prosecutor are significantly more limited than is the discretion in other certain other areas of the budget. As it relates specifically to OSU Extension and to SWCD’s our understanding of the statues is that both of these entities may be funded by the Commissioners, however, they are generally permissive and the amount of funding is within the discretion of the Commissioners. Statements made to this effect by staff, however, should not be interpreted that CCAO is recommending that they not be funded. As it relates to OSU Extension there are two primary sections of the Ohio Revised Code that apply, ORC Sections 3335.36 and .37. ORC Section 3335.36 contains language that requires Commissioners to provide office space for OSU Extension employees. The relevant portion of this statute reads as follows:

“Such employees shall have offices provided by the county or other political subdivision in which they serve in which bulletins and other educational materials of value to the people may be consulted and through which the employees may be reached.”

In addition, ORC 3335.37 specifically allows general fund appropriations and also allows Commissioners to levy a tax, within the limitations set by law, and reads as follows:

“The board of county commissioners of any county may levy a tax, within the limitations prescribed by law, and appropriate money from the proceeds thereof or from the general fund of the county to be paid to the Ohio state university to the credit of the Ohio cooperative extension service fund.”

Thus, in the case of OSU Extension, Commissioners have a mandatory statutory duty to provide offices and it appears that this is the only mandatory statutory obligation. In the case of SWCD’s the statutory duties for funding appear to be permissive. Commissioners may pay fringe benefits for employees of a SWCD as provided for in ORC 1515.09:

“The board of county commissioners may make payments of benefits that are provided under this section.”

Commissioners may also appropriate money from the county general fund and may levy a tax within the ten-mill limit. ORC Section 1515.10 provides:

The board of county commissioners of each county in which there is a soil and water conservation district may levy a tax within the ten-mill limitation and may appropriate money from the proceeds of the levy or from the general fund of the county. The money shall be held in a special fund for the credit of the district, to be expended for the purposes prescribed in sections 1515.09 and 1515.093 of the Revised Code, for construction and maintenance of improvements by the district, and for other expenses incurred in carrying out the program of the district upon the written order of the fiscal agent for the district after authorization by a majority of the supervisors of the district.

In addition, Commissioners may request the advance of state money’s for drainage improvements in ORC 1515.15 and may propose a tax levy, outside the ten mill limit, for specific drainage improvements.

CCAO staff has met with a number of counties during this year at their request to help them through the very difficult budget decisions that they need to make to balance their budgets during this year and next. We attempt to inform them on which programs are statutory mandates and which are permissive.

We thus tell Commissioners that OSU Extension and Soli and Water Districts are generally permissive functions just like we tell them that road patrol functions of the County Sheriff is not mandated under the statute. Just as the Sheriff’s road patrol is a valuable service to county residents, we feel that the services provided by OSU Extension and SWCD’s are also valuable to county residents. This does not, however, change the fact that all three of these functions are not mandated under Ohio law. Whether Commissioners fund OSU Extension and SWCD’s is clearly a policy matter that is within the discretion of Commissioners and CCAO does not make specific recommendations in this regard.

If you have any questions please feel free to contact Larry Long. In addition, you might want to review the Managing Budgets Power Point Presentation that CCAO uses to explain a broad variety of issues related to funding a variety of county programs at:

http://www.ccao.org/LibraryArchives/CountyTaxandFinanceInformation/tabid/285/language/en-US/Default.aspx