By DOUG BATES/Editor/The Herald — Police, fire and ambulance services in Oakridge face a cloudy future in the wake of a 4-to-2 vote by the city council Monday night to reject a public safety fee.
The $31 monthly fee, to be added temporarily to Oakridge water bills, had become a lightning rod on a social media site controlled by three members of the council. The fee had been included in the city’s proposed 2021-22 budget as a means of plugging a projected deficit of more than half a million dollars in the city’s emergency services fund.
In Monday night’s tumultuous meeting, councilors passed the budget proposal that included the fee, then defeated the ordinance necessary to enact it — a turnabout that Mayor Kathy Holston and City Administrator Bryan Cutchen blasted as disingenuous.
Only Councilor Bobbie Whitney joined Holston in voting for the public safety fee. Councilors Dawn Kinyon, Melissa Bjarnson, Michelle Coker and Audy Spliethof killed it.
Cutchen told the four it was “unbelievable” that they would pass the $8 million budget “knowing you weren’t going to approve the fee” necessary to balance that budget.
“You have placed the city in jeopardy,” Holston told her colleagues. “How are you now going to balance the budget?”
More cuts, was the reply from Kinyon.
Kinyon had dominated the meeting to that point by leading the council through a list of her own ideas for budget cuts that added up to roughly $50,000. They included cuts to the library’s summer reading program, seasonal workers for the parks and training for city employees.
When asked how mowing and restroom cleaning would get done in the parks, she suggested asking for volunteers.
“I will clean bathrooms if that’s what I need to do,” she said.
Kinyon said her list of cuts would reduce the proposed fee from $31 to $27. That was enough to win Holston’s reluctant support. In the ensuing vote to amend the budget to allow for Kinyon’s cuts, only Whitney voted no, saying she couldn’t support the library reductions.
Then, when Kinyon and her allies on the council refused to support the $27 fee after making the cuts that Kinyon had persuaded the mayor to support, Holston said, “Wow.”
“This isn’t a game,” she admonished. “This isn’t a gotcha.”
At one point during their heated exchange, when Kinyon turned her back on the Zoom discussion, Holston asked if she was leaving the council meeting.
“Don’t get your hopes up, honey,” Kinyon retorted.
“Don’t be disrespectful,” Holston countered.
Cutchen told the councilors that they had passed a legally balanced budget, on paper, but because the fee that’s included in the budget was rejected, a supplemental budget will now be necessary.
It remained a mystery how that budget will be balanced. None of the four “nay” voters on the council had any proposals, other than “more cuts.”
Kinyon’s roughly $50,000 in cuts to the parks, library and administration funds was barely a drop in the bucket. About $500,000 in additional cuts will be needed to balance the balance the supplemental budget.
That’s where Oakridge public safety will inevitably have to take a big hit, because nearly 70 percent of the city’s spending is on police, fire and emergency medical services.
It’s the EMS services — fire and ambulance — that put the biggest drain on city resources. Oakridge employs paid firefighters, while most Oregon cities Oakridge’s size use volunteer firefighters or join fire protection districts. And the remote location of Oakridge makes the city’s advanced-life-support ambulance service extremely expensive.
The temporary fee that was rejected Monday night would have bought the city time to address the ambulance service dilemma, possibly through a new arrangement with the county to relieve Oakridge of so much of the burden. Now it appears likely the city will have to make deep cuts in ambulance service, or lose it altogether.
Much misinformation about the proposed fee has been spread on Oakridge Chat Forum, the Facebook site controlled by Kinyon, Bjarnson and Council President Christina Hollett. Because her husband is an Oakridge fireman, Hollett declared her conflict and abstained from the budget work Monday night.
Holston and Cutchen pointed out a number of false claims being propagated about the fee. One was that low-income people who couldn’t afford it would have their water turned off. Another was that motels would have to pay the fee for each room in their establishments.
The fact is that the fee ordinance would have allowed low-income residents to apply at City Hall for waivers from the fee, and the amount collected through the fee had been calculated to allow for such waivers. And motels would have been treated like any other businesses, as single entities, rather than being charged fees on a per-room basis.
But the council majority rejected those explanations Monday night. And now Oakridge residents are left with a pressing question: If the best that those councilors could come up with Monday night was $50,000 in cuts, where will the city find the remaining half a million dollars needed to balance the budget?
📣 Support Your Local News Publication: Donate to Highway 58 Herald! 📣
The Highway 58 Herald is your trusted source for all things local, from community events to breaking news. But we need your help to keep delivering the stories that matter most to you. Your generous donation ensures we can continue providing in-depth reporting and vibrant coverage of our community.
Every dollar helps us maintain high-quality journalism and keep you informed. Please consider making a donation today and support the voice of our community. Donate today!
Thank you for helping us keep Highway 58 Herald strong and vibrant!