The spokesperson for a Curry County citizens’ group behind a proposed law enforcement levy broke the numbers down for elected officials on Monday, stating if voters approve the measure, $1.2 million could go back into the general fund.

But commissioners were no closer to supporting a levy than they were at last Thursday’s regular meeting when they said they were uncertain about how many patrol deputies it would fund.

On Monday, commissioners, staff and the few residents who showed up to the workshop had more questions for Georgia Cockerham, who spoke along with Sheriff’s Lt. Jeremy Krohn, in favor of the levy. They asked if they would consider using the levy to fund correctional deputies or if they thought about paying for a detective who could follow up on cases patrol deputies initially respond to.

Finance Director Keina Wolf said that with merit increases, cost-of-living adjustments, increases to health insurance and costs associated with the Oregon Public Employee Retirement System, the levy wouldn’t be able to fund the sheriff’s office in its third year.

Resident Ree Klein pointed out that the county’s budget cuts following a previous law enforcement levy that failed last May hurt everyone, not just the sheriff’s office.

“I am absolutely frustrated that the sheriff isn’t here,” Klein told Cockerham. “That really disappoints me and I don’t feel like you should be speaking on his behalf. I understand you’re doing what you believe is right for the county, and I think your intentions and your goals are admirable, but I feel like we’re just going down a bad path and I cannot support this at all.”

The proposed levy, as it currently stands, would result in a property tax of $1.12 per $1,000 of assessed property value. According to Cockerham, this would raise an estimated $4.28 million for the sheriff’s office annually and pay for eight patrol deputies and two dispatchers. If approved, a five-member citizens review board would oversee how the funds are spent.

Currently three deputies are on patrol, Krohn said. The sheriff and a sergeant also cover patrol shifts, he said. Staffed hours are from 8 a.m.-6 p.m. Monday through Friday.

If voters approve the levy, Krohn told commissioners that the sheriff’s office could return to “pre-cut hours” of 6 a.m.-midnight seven days a week and have two deputies and a sergeant on duty for each shift.

On Monday, Cockerham specified what she and other proponents are looking for in a levy — and what they wouldn’t support.

“We are not interested in going out with this levy to support the jail, for instance,” she said. “We are willing to do the work. We are willing to get the levy passed, and I think we can do it, but we are doing all of this specifically to put more patrol deputies out there on the road, and increase staff in dispatch.”

Cockerham broke things down further, stating that if approved the levy would generate $2.87 million for patrol, $91,970 for search & rescue, $30,635 for the marine division.

Since those dollars would be coming from the tax levy instead of the general fund, Curry County would be able to retain $1.25 million for use in other departments, according to Cockerham. This includes $818,837 that is allocated to dispatch, she said.

Commissioner Jay Trost noted that the county allocated $1.18 million from the Road Department reserve to fund the sheriff’s office when he and his colleagues approved the 2024-25 budget in June. The $4.8 million levy would replace the roughly $2.4 million that’s used to pay for law enforcement currently, he said, taking into consideration the $1.25 million Cockerham said the general fund would retain if voters approved the measure.

Trost urged Cockerham to be as detailed as possible as to what the levy would pay for. If it would fund eight additional deputies, would that make for a total of 11 since there are currently three on patrol, the commissioner asked.

He got further into the tax levy weeds, subtracting $2.4 million from $4.3 million — getting $1.9 million — and stating that instead of receiving eight deputies, voters would get five additional deputies, one sergeant and two dispatchers if they approve the ballot measure.

“That’s eight staff total,” Trost said. “So basically what we’re going to be asking the citizens is that, for an additional $1.9 million, we’re going to receive eight additional staff.”

Trost asked if the tax levy would cover administrative costs, the materials and services a deputy needs to do his job, benefits and other “rollup costs.” He also coined the phrase “department creep”.

“If we’re saying this is going to fund two sergeants, eight deputies, one lieutenant and one sheriff and three years later there’s a decision to say, ‘No, we’re going to actually do three sergeants and seven deputies,’ it’s essentially going against this levy, and that’s when we start to lose trust,” Trost said. “When I say ‘department creep’ is when we start changing the allocations of positions.”

After Krohn confirmed that staff at the Curry County Jail were still working 12-hour shifts and that patrol deputies are filling in for vacant positions, Alcorn asked the lieutenant and Cockerham if they thought about including correctional positions in the levy.

Krohn said two positions at the jail have been open since September and a third would become vacant this week.

Alcorn argued that if there were enough correctional deputies, they could provide security at the courthouse and could fill in if there were any vacancies at the jail. He said if the levy included correctional deputies in addition to patrol deputies, it would be a more efficient use of personnel.

Krohn, however, argued that the $1.2 million that would go back to the general fund if the levy passed could fund those two security officer positions at the courthouse.

Alcorn pointed out that Brookings residents use the courthouse and might be more supportive of a levy for Curry County law enforcement, who responds primarily outside of city limits, if it ensured the courthouse was safer.

“They come here for grand jury, they come here for jury duty and they are shocked when there’s no law enforcement presence there, so this could be a benefit for the people who live in the cities,” Alcorn said. “And my question is, what would that look like? What would two positions look like in the overall amount of money you’re asking for and could there be any adjustments? Could there be any wiggle room to make something like that happen?”

Cockerham said she didn’t want to reduce the amount of patrol deputies or dispatchers the levy would fund. She argued that there could be a problem if a security officer at the courthouse went on vacation and another was out sick and something happens at the jail.

Cockerham said she spoke with Brookings residents who said they would support a levy of $1.12 per $1,000 of assessed property value for additional patrol deputies.

Alcorn said he also spoke to Brookings residents who were absolutely against the tax levy.

During the workshop, Wolf showed a spreadsheet outlining the median wage scale for the sheriff’s office’s civil deputy, administrative assistants, two sergeants, a lieutenant and three road deputies. Her worksheet also included a portion of the sheriff’s salary.

She said her spreadsheet included five-year assumptions taking into account increases in health insurance, merit raises, cost-of-living adjustments as well as PERS. Merit increases are written into the collective bargaining agreement between the union that represents law enforcement and the county.

“Staff get anywhere between a 3 to 5 percent increase depending on what year of service they are and how much longevity they have, in addition to their COLA,” she said.

Krohn said unless the county pursues a $5 million tax levy, it’ll break even in the third year after it’s approved.

Trost urged them all to work together to come up with a measure everyone in the county would support. He pointed out voters had questions about the last levy that was on the May 2024 ballot and would have resulted in a property tax of $2.23 per $1,000 of assessed value. 

“The response was it’ll take me three years to get to the staffing to be able to provide 24/7 coverage, which made a five-year levy almost null and void because we paid three years into something that we’ll only get two years outcome for,” he said.

Krohn noted that no one is going to work for an agency that doesn’t have stable funding.

Commissioner-elect Patrick Hollinger, who will replace outgoing commissioner John Herzog in January, called for an in-depth audit of the sheriff’s office to determine how the current funding is being spent — whether or not it’s being used efficiently. An analysis could also help figure out what exactly is needed at the sheriff’s office, he said.

Hollinger also asked that the Board wait until he takes his seat before deciding whether the levy should move forward.

“How many specific patrol deputies do we need? Do we need a detective?” Hollinger asked. “I don’t know and I don’t think anybody can answer that. But I would flat out ask, please don’t vote on anything to go on the ballot until I’m sworn in because I’m going to have to be a part of this and I’m going to have to be a part of selling it.”