Document text
County could hire departed officials If building department goes private, they might win the contract By Dani Dodge Three Jackson County building officials who left to form a private corporation eventually could end up at their old desks � on contract. "If we put out a request for proposals and they answer it and have the best price, it would be in the interest of the taxpayer to award it to them," said County Administrator Sue Slack. "It would depend on how they answer the RFP." It also would depend on many other factors � most important, whether Jackson County decides to privatize part or all of its building department. And the decision will be based in part on a report written by one of the departing building officials. Dale Bohannan wrote the report on whether the county should privatize its building department a few weeks before he announced his resignation. The report outlines the pros and cons of privatization but does not make a recommendation. Slack said she and Joe Strahl, the roads, parks and planning director, would consider the report and other information before making a recommendation to the Board of Commissioners about whether to pursue privatization. She said the county also would discuss the issue with the county�s union � which has expressed opposition � before moving forward. Slack said she and Strahl are in the process of determining how to fill Bohannan�s position as well as those of the two other county building employees who resigned last week to pursue private enterprise. Associate Building Official Pat DeBenedetti, Chief Building Inspector Todd Meador and Bohannan announced on Nov. 7 they will leave in November and December. Bohannan said that a recent ethics complaint filed against him and DeBenedetti wasn�t the reason for their departure � but it did make them re-evaluate their plans and timeline for going into private business. He said going private is something the three men have been considering for about three years. Carl Worden, spokesman for the Southern Oregon Militia, made the ethics complaint to the state�s Government Standards and Practices Commission three weeks ago. He said Bohannan and DeBenedetti have been in conflict of interest because they simultaneously worked for both the county and several cities. The commission has not yet decided whether to conduct a full-scale investigation into the case. Bohannan continues to deny he and DeBenedetti did anything wrong. In fact, in the privatization report, he notes that state law allows building officials to represent two or more jurisdictions. Bohannan also writes that recent legislation allows the county to charge the fees necessary to provide timely and professional code administration. In his report he lists the pros and cons of privatization. These include: Pros: County eliminates expenses related to the building department. County eliminates responsibility for operational duties. County saves money on general business liability insurance. County receives an administration fee from any contractor supplying the code enforcement service. Increased oversight by the state. Increased opportunities for alternative work hours to better suit the needs of construction community. Cons: For the first year, there would be a number of permits that had been paid for but not completed. The obligation for outstanding inspections would be between $300,000 and $400,000. County would lose revenue in other departments like county counsel and information technology that is currently charged to the building department. Perceived reduction in service to public. Perceived reduction in wages and benefits for employees. Plans to integrate services would be stymied. County would lose direct contact with code inspectors and plan examiners. Reach reporter Dani Dodge at 776-4471, or e-mail [email protected] Mail Tribune Home | Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. | Dow Jones & Co., Inc. | Privacy | Contact Us Copyright � 2000 Mail Tribune, Inc.