Supervisors restructure Neighborhood Reinvestment Program

The County of San Diego’s Neighborhood Reinvestment Program was restructured in order to correlate the grants provided by the program with the program’s intent.

The changes, which will be reflected in Board of Supervisors policy B-72, prohibit funds from being used for food and beverages or for fundraising agreements, require the return of funds not spent according to the grant agreement, require that public acknowledgement of the funds credits the County of San Diego rather than an individual county supervisor, and prohibit county supervisors from receiving gifts with a value of at least $50 from organizations to which they have provided Neighborhood Reinvestment Program funds.

“The changes before us today will help solidify the integrity of this program and make sure it has a lasting impact,” said Supervisor Dianne Jacob.

All four county supervisors present at the board’s September 28 meeting voted in favor of the changes, although they lamented the effect of some of the restrictions on grant usage. Supervisor Ron Roberts was in Washington, DC, and while legally he could not provide input prior to the vote his statement in support of the changes was read into the record following the 4-0 vote.

The Neighborhood Reinvestment Program was called the Community Projects Program when it was initiated during Fiscal Year 1998-99 with a total budget of $5 million. The budget was expanded to $10 million for Fiscal Year 1999-2000, the name change took place in September 2009, and a March 23 action earlier this year reduced the total budget to $5 million while directing the county’s Chief Administrative Officer to redirect the one-time resources available from the reduction towards priorities consistent with the supervisors’ strategic initiatives (the reduction amount was used to implement the county’s fire response plan and will be spent on facility improvements, training facilities, and geographic information system technology needs).

The program is intended to provide grants to non-profit organizations for the furtherance of public purposes at the regional and community levels. In addition to non-profit organizations, county supervisors have also funded schools and fire departments, and some supervisors have also used money from their budgets to supplement other county funding for specific county projects such as parks, roads, and libraries.

While each county supervisor recommends the allocation of his or her Neighborhood Reinvestment Program funds, those allocations must be approved by a majority of the Board of Supervisors. The Neighborhood Reinvestment Program is funded by balances in the previous year’s general fund and is intended to reflect the

county’s policy of spendin one-time revenues for one-time projects rather than for ongoing programs.

“This is a very good program,” said Supervisor Greg Cox. “It’s very important for the residents of this region.”

The September 2009 revisions which changed the program’s name also established Policy B-72 which included process and eligibility requirements. The original policy included a statement that a higher priority shall be given to requests for capital projects and one-time expenses but did not specify restrictions on the types of projects for which the funds could be used.

The revised policy now states that the program provides grant funds to county departments, other public agencies, and non-profit community organizations for one-time community, social, environmental, educational, cultural, or recreational needs which

benefit the county’s neighborhoods and communities. Language was also added that grants must serve lawful public purposes and cannot be used for purposes prohibited by law for public funds such as religious, political campaign, or private purposes.

Although grants to county departments or other public agencies can be used for any lawful purpose of activity meeting the policy criteria, grants to non-profit community organizations must now be used for capital improvements, equipment, materials, goods, or supplies. Capital improvement projects can include contracted labor, contracted consultant costs, and other professional services, but grants to purchase tangible items cannot be used for the purchase of food, beverages, or items used for fundraising activities.

“These are precious tax dollars. We cannot be all things to all people,” Jacob said.

Fallbrook community activist Vince Ross noted that community organizations try to become self-sufficient. “One of the ways they can do that is with special events,” he said. “Our community’s going to suffer if you keep cutting back on non-profit funding.”

Don McDougal, whose activities include the Fallbrook Beautification Alliance, noted the irony that maintenance abandoned by the county and now provided by community organizations would not be eligible for such funds. “The community has taken it upon itself to maintain these programs,” he said. “We have some major projects in the community that need ongoing maintenance.”

The Fallbrook Beautification Alliance took over maintenance of the South Mission Road median after the county stopped maintaining that roadway portion. The Live Oak Park Coalition has maintained that Fallbrook park since the county curtailed

that activity. “Our community would be in very poor shape without the funds,” McDougal said.

Other speakers noted that funding for educational programs would be at risk of ineligibility.

Each county supervisor also has a Community Enhancement Program budget which is funded by the Transient Occupancy Tax collected from lodging facilities in the unincorporated portion of the county, but that money must be given to organizations which promote tourism or economic development. “That is an appropriate funding source for many of the types of things the speakers talked about,” Cox said.

Although the revenue is derived only from TOT money collected from lodging facilities in the unincorporated portion of the county, each supervisor has an identical Community Enhancement Program budget. The Fifth Supervisorial District, which includes Fallbrook, thus is allocated 20 percent of TOT revenue while collecting 82 percent of the source for Community Enhancement funds.

On more than one occasion Fifth District Supervisor Bill Horn has used Community Projects or Neighborhood Reinvestment Program money to provide fire-retardant gel to local fire departments and community fire prevention organizations. He expressed concern that such an annual expenditure would be prohibited, although

Jacob’s opinion is that each fire gel purchase is a one-time expenditure.

The initial language of Policy B-72 stipulated that if an organization wished to give recognition for the funding the wording should be “Funded by the County of San Diego at the recommendation of Supervisor [Name]”. The new language states that if an organization chooses to give written recognition the organization shall recognize the County of San Diego and not individual supervisors.

“This is taxpayers’ money. Board members are not making their own personal charitable donations,” Cox said.

The policy had already required funds to be spent within one year of the grant agreement’s execution unless the Board of Supervisors approved an extension. The previous language allowed the county to seek the return of funds through legal means. The changes now require the grantee to return any funds not spent or documented under the agreement while allowing the county to seek the return of the funds through legal means if necessary. A new clause in Policy B-72 calls for the use of the county’s Website

to post and maintain information about organizations more than 60 days delinquent in submitting documentation about grant money.

To comment on this story online, visit http://www.thevillagenews.com.