A 501(c)(3) Organization

Is the city looking out for your best interests?

As the city council moves Yamhill into the next century are they looking out for all our interests? Leave your comment below.

5 thoughts on “Is the city looking out for your best interests?

  1. FACT: During the last city council meeting in November 2021 it was reviled there are 10 additional water districts the city of Yamhill provides SURPLUS water to and that during the water crisis these districts were using over 68% of our city water and the actual city of Yamhill was only using 25%, but the city of Yamhill council asked all the residents to reduce their water usage by activating a level 2, level 3 and level 4 restriction during the months of the crisis but never asked any of the 10 water districts to conserve water until the second month of the water crisis and could have reduced or stopped providing water to these districts without having all the residents accept a level 2, level 3 or level 4 restriction?

  2. Open Letter To: Mayor, City Council, and Citizens of Yamhill
    Subj: Police services Town hall meeting, Request for
    Further to my request to the City Council for a town hall meeting to review police services, at the 9 March 2022 council meeting.
    Whereas the City placed a Police Service Fee (PSF} on the utility rate payers about a year ago,
    Whereas the annual budget process will be starting soon, so now is good time for a public update,
    Whereas the police budget increased by 13% from 2020-2021 $496,567 to 2021-2022
    $509,236, to more than half a million dollars,
    Whereas the 2021-2022 budget, allocated $730,851 for the general fund of which $509,236, or 70% was allocated to the police dept. leaving only $221,615 for city administrative services,
    Whereas over the past several years small communities like Yamhill have dismantled their police department, not because of the quality of policing, but the cost of policing.
    Therefore it is very important for the city to have an open dialog with the citizens to ensure the public gets the policing they need, at a price they are willing to pay, and transparency so as not to erode public confidence.
    These figures and four attached pages are taken from the 2021-2022 City Budget posted on the City web page.
    The concerns are budgetary, not intending to defund the police, or do away with our police.
    My hope is that the Citizens of Yamhill will contact the City, Mayor, and Council, and voice their opinions and concerns on this very important issue.

  3. In regard to our discussion at the special council meeting on Thursday, September 1, 2022, I still have concerns that the city is in violation of Chapter 7.20, Police Service Fee ordinance.
    Specifically, 7.20.060 Dedicated Funds.
    (A) There shall be established a police services fund as a sub-fund of the General Fund. All police service fee revenues imposed and collected under this chapter shall be deposited in the police services fund.
    (B) Money in the police services fund shall be used for the purposes of City police services as determined each year during the budget process. The police service fee shall not be used for any other governmental or proprietary functions of the City. Any revenues in excess of actual expenses as identified in the budget process shall be carried forward to the next year’s budget. (Ord. 532 §6, 2021)
    There appears to be no “sub-fund” in the General Fund titled “police services fund”, as required in Paragraph (A). Both the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 budgets list the following sub-funds in the general fund: Council, Administration, police, municipal Court, parks department, and planning program. Again, neither budget has a PSE sub-fund.
    The police service fees collected are deposited in the general fund – resources, budget line 31, 10-922 in budget years, 2021-2022 and 2022-23-023. Following this, there is no obvious expenditure line item in either the general fund –administration detailed expenditures or the general fund – police detailed expenditures, in either budget or the monthly financial statements approved by the city council.
    There appears to be no specific guidance in the budget packages as to the authorized expenditure of the PSF as required in paragraph (B). Additionally, there is no indication as to any funds from 2021-2022 being carried forward into the 2022-2023 budget, as required in paragraph (B).
    Please show me the financial path for the PSF in the budget and monthly financial statements.
    Jay Disbrow

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sharing is Awesome, Do It!

Share this post with your friends