James Rose:

In order to ensure that the city is resting on a strong financial foundation there are several essential things that I believe need to happen and include:

1. Being better stewards of the taxpayers money and be willing to make the tough choices while honoring citizen priorities.

2. Ensuring that a highly qualified financial management staff is in place in city administration.

3. Rethinking, reinventing and reshaping how local government services are delivered to citizens. Expensive and expansive city halls and public buildings may no longer be the most efficient and effective way to deliver services where they are needed – when they are needed. Local government really matters more than ever and our city government can and should be making people’s everyday lives better and easier – and we do that by delivering services smarter – faster and cheaper.

4. Completing a thorough and independent audit of the city’s books.

5. Implementing a continuous budget review process that involves the City Council and the citizen led budget committee.

6. Publishing the financial status of the city each month and continuously sharing the information with the public.

Jessica Engelke:

I plan to identify opportunities to reduce the City’s budget in ways that would have the least impact to citizens. I will look for ways to be more efficient and explore potential revenue streams. I want to help sustain our local businesses that are the backbone of our community while working to attract new investors.
The City’s budget process needs to be reexamined and have opportunity for direct input from our citizens. I would look to implement quarterly meetings as opposed to annual budget meetings to maintain a better line of sight.

Eric Gleason:

We need to look at what service we are providing, and what the return-on-investment is for those programs. Are there services that we provide that are missing funding opportunities and if so, how do we capitalize on those missed opportunities? Discuss the financial concerns with the community and get their honest input on how they think we move forward together.

Jonathan Vinyard:

1) Dispatch Call Center. I would advocate for merging of our cities dispatch call center into the already established primary public safety answering points (PSAP) at the Coos County Sheriff’s Office or Coos Bay Police Department as our dispatch call center is a secondary PSAP that does not take 911 calls. This means that all calls are filtered through a primary PSAP which in turn delays emergency response. This move would also save citizens of North Bend at least an estimated quarter million dollars per year.

2) Growing City Limits. Because our city is surrounded and not able to grow, incorporating outer communities of Glasgow, North Bay and Hauser into our city would be a good way to grow. This would generate revenue for the city in the form of property tax. Our Police already service North Bay Elementary (which feeds into North Bend Junior High inside of city limits) in the form of
Resource Safety Officers as well. Perhaps it’s time to take a look at this option.

Pat Goll:

A thorough review of all city budgets, city departments. Accountability of department managers to live within their budget. To cut non-essential expenses. Possibly look at redoing a more transparent budget where expenses are clearly defined and not a shell game. Meaning where is administration payroll? It is scattered throughout departments, instead of on one expense line. Being transparent is the key.

Ron Kutch:

As a member of North Bend’s Budget Committee, I have taken a closer look at the City’s finances than most folks. There isn’t much fat to cut. We run pretty lean. However, I think the first step is to have a thorough review of finances. I don’t know how that would look exactly, but it needs to be done, it needs to be thorough, it needs to be abundantly transparent and it needs to be communicated to the citizens in a way that they can easily receive it and understand it. If citizens choose to not participate, that is on them, but the City needs to make the information abundantly available.
After the is completed, we need to engage the public in finding real solutions, then, possibly, make some hard choices. Then we need to set priorities and budgets. It is Council’s job to make the choices, but they need the citizen’s input. I am prepared to make the tough choices and take my lumps if needed. But there needs to be a conversation with the citizens.
To be clear, I’m not saying this is not already being done. I AM saying, however, that the communication needs to be better and it needs to be two-way. It is the responsibility of City leadership to improve the communication.

Susanna Noordhoff:

I would propose that Council discontinue current employments contracts to retired former employees, and using the services of the League of Oregon Cities for temporary hires when a specific skill is needed for a short time. I would propose that consultant contracts be reviewed. I would propose a referendum to approve a split of urban renewal funds with a street repair fund, if this is still possible under State law.

Timm Slater:

It’s important to know that with the property tax limitations of Measures 5, 47 & 50, passed in the 1990’s, there will continue to be a growing gap between that source of revenue and costs of providing services. Also, the ever growing PERS financial requirements, although that will eventually disappear in the extended future, will have a negative impact on city budgets for many years to come. With a new Mayor, Administrator and Council, it is appropriate to do a structural and performance review of city operations, services provide and staff to facilitate those products. That may lead to changes or refinements of the services we provide to our citizens. With that information in hand, we next need to review all the forms of revenue currently available to the City and understand any restrictions on the use of those funds. Looking at needed and desired services, I see at least two sources of funding. First, we have enjoyed some success over the years with filing for grants. However, we don’t do it on a consistent basis. We should have a grant writer that is actively pursuing those opportunities on regular basis each year for all departments. Secondly, some services could lend themselves to serial levies. The beauty of the levy is its limited duration, three to five years, and the ability of the voting public to evaluate the value they received. Then extending the levy or ending it.