1. Metro’s Natural Areas: Maintenance Strategy Needed
ALGA Conference
Nashville, TN
May 6-7, 2013

2. Presentation outline What is Metro? Metro’s Office of the Auditor
Natural Area Maintenance Audit
Questions and Discussion

3. What is Metro?
An elected regional government, that serves more than 1.7 million residents in Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington counties and the 25 cities in the Portland region. Annual budget of about $536 million with 741 FTE

4. What is Metro? Responsible for the region’s:
Recycling and waste disposal system
Land use and transportation planning
Regional parks and natural areas
Oregon Zoo
Performing arts, convention and exhibit centers

5. Metro’s Office of the Auditor
Small office
Elected Auditor
Four staff auditors
One administrative assistant
Focus on performance audits
Hours per audit range from 200 to 2,500 hours
Average about five reports per year
Average 680 hours per audit
We spent 2,300 hours on this audit

6. Who we are Brian Evans Michael Anderson
Former economist with State of Oregon
5 years auditing
Michael Anderson
3 years auditing

7. Audit background
Metro spent $129 million to purchase 8,203 acres using funds from 1995 Bond Measure.
Metro spent $69 million to purchase 3,166 acres using funds from the 2006 Bond Measure

8. Natural Areas The focus is on nature
Parks…
…are for people.
Natural Areas…
…are for wildlife.

9. Planning vs. Implementing
Scientists do this…
Technicians do that…

10. We reviewed plans and expenditures at three parks
Graham Oaks
Cooper Mtn.
Mount Talbert
Management
System
Metro owned, Metro maintained.
Metro owned, partner maintained with funding and technical assistance from Metro.
Metro owned, partner maintained with technical assistance from Metro.
Acres
250
230
220
Park Operations
$60,000
$383,000
$20,000
Maintenance & Restoration
$633,000
$151,000
$137,000
Construction
$3.2 million
$1.6 million
Acquisition & Stabilization
$2.6 million
$9.1 million
$13.8 million

11. Fieldwork

12. Learning about maintenance
15 site visits to the parks and natural areas in the region.
108 hours with the scientists and technicians who work in the natural areas.
Interviews with Metro’s partners to understand challenges.

13. Understanding program history
Analyzed 15 years of electronic and paper expenditure data.
Reviewed park planning and natural area restoration documents
Reviewed IGAs and bond documents.
Using these two methodologies (qualitative and quantitative) we were able to compare maintenance strategies to expenditures.

14. What we found

15. Maintenance priorities are needed

16. Maintenance priorities are needed
Metro’s land management role increased
Land needs maintenance
Maintenance needs increase when parks are built
Metro pays someone to maintain the land
Metro develops in-house maintenance capacity
Costs increase when this…
…is turned into this

17. Maintenance priorities are needed
Without overarching strategy it was difficult to assess progress and adapt techniques

18. Maintenance priorities are needed
Elements of land management system could be improved
 Not all done
Needs work…
 Not all done
 Unclear
Not all done

19. Maintenance priorities are needed
Without a plan, priorities were inconsistent at Mount Talbert
Use Conflicts: Parking lot built in wildlife corridor

20. Maintenance priorities are needed
Without a plan, priorities were inconsistent at Cooper Mountain
Use Conflicts: Parking lot built in wetland
…to build beautiful park facilities!
Wetland impacts require mitigation…

21. Management responsibilities need to be clarified

22. Management responsibilities need to be clarified
Roles and responsibilities unclear
Who does the work?

23. Management responsibilities need to be clarified
As role evolved, costs increased
Metro’s maintenance standard is high
Metro Standard
Partner Standard
Illegal Dumping
Illegal Dumping
Metro Standard: Post signs, monitor activity, talk to homeowner, install cameras, report to authorities
Partner Standard: Monitor activity, talk to home owner
Invasive Plants
Metro Standard: Kill and remove plants, return to pre-European state with native species, maintain for 3-5 years
Partner Standard: Kill plants, monitor and kill any new growth
Invasive Plants

24. Management responsibilities need to be clarified
Lack of clarity hinders evaluation
Graham Oaks
Cooper Mtn.
Mount Talbert
Management
System
Metro owned, Metro maintained.
Metro owned, partner maintained with funding and technical assistance from Metro.
Metro owned, partner maintained with technical assistance from Metro.
Park Operations
$60,000
$383,000
$20,000
Roles & Responsibilities
Clear
Clear, for now
Unclear
Maintenance Standards
High
High, for now
Low
BUSY
Metro wants to move from the Graham Oaks model to either a Cooper Mountain model, or a Mount Talbert model.
The question is, which one?

25. Recommendations

26. Prioritize maintenance
Develop site specific plans for land to be maintained
Define the maintenance standard for each site plan
Ensure that plans include all maintenance activities regardless of who performs them
Periodically review prioritization and plans

27. Organize land management
Clarify roles and responsibilities
Develop systems to better track expenditures and estimate future costs
Develop, collect, and monitor performance measures to improve maintenance strategies
Improve management of partnership agreements
Develop a toolkit that includes how standards will be implemented
Define what technical assistance will be provided.

28. Results

29. Management response We agree with the recommendations but…
“Detailed planning takes a significant amount of staff time and comes at the cost of addressing some day-to-day needs on the ground.”

30. Operating levy
Local Option Levy “Improve natural areas, water quality for fish”
Election Day: May 21

31. Questions

32. Contact Information
Report
Natural Areas Maintenance
of the Auditor - Performance Audit Reports - Audit Reports - Natural Areas Maintenance Audit.PDF
Presenters