Neighborhood Reinvestment Program policy updated

The San Diego County Board of Supervisors updated the board policy which covers the county’s Neighborhood Reinvestment Program. The supervisors’ 5-0 vote Oct. 21 amends Board of Supervisors Policy B-72 to allow for one-time website and food bank expenditures, to stipulate that the prohibition against supervisors receiving gifts from organizations to which they have provided funds does not apply to admission or participation in a non-profit fundraising activity allowed under the California Political Reform Act or to anything received which is not defined under that act as a gift or income, to require that the recipient organization maintain a governing body or employ an administrator or staff which will be responsible for the funds’ expenditure, to require each supervisorial office to post on its website that district’s priorities which guide funding recommendations and cite specific examples of projects funded while including information about requirements, to add a hyperlink on the county website application page which directs potential applicants to the grant instruction web page, to require board offices to maintain applications for at least three years, to prohibit late docketed items (items docketed between a meeting’s initial docketing deadline and the Friday deadline for urgent items to be heard at the following week’s meeting) unless the recommendation satisfies requirements for immediate action, to prevent a county supervisor or any of his or her staff members from publicly presenting an actual or mocked-up check to grant recipients while also preventing the posting of such awards on a supervisor’s social media site, and to amend the prohibition against recipient organizations recognizing an individual supervisor so that the prohibition now only covers written recognition on the item received.

“My colleagues and I all agreed to make some changes in the county’s Neighborhood Reinvestment Program,” said Supervisor Bill Horn. “I see great opportunities in the additional funding options, including one-time technology services for website design and money for food and beverage purchases for organizations that provide meals to those in need.”

The Board of Supervisors also had a Sept. 23 hearing on the updates, but the scheduled revisions were continued to allow more clarification on the policy that the county rather than an individual supervisor be given credit for the grants. The supervisors tried to address the issue of organizations’ newsletters and social media sites providing simple written recognition before realizing that continuing the matter and allowing for staff to provide specific wording would minimize confusion and subsequent debate.

The initial rationale behind the prohibition on credit to individual supervisors involved organizations crediting a specific supervisor on buildings or vehicles funded by the program. The eligibility requirements had required that if an organization chose to give written recognition it was to recognize the county rather than a particular supervisor. The new language that the prohibition on non-photographic written recognition only applies to the item obtained not only allows for recognition of the recommending supervisor in newsletters, as was the focus of the Sept. 23 discussion, but also ensures that board minutes which reference the staff member of a specific supervisor are not in violation.

“It does not put any additional restrictions on the communications practices of non-profit grantees,” said Supervisor Greg Cox.

The final prohibitions on social media posting prevent a supervisor of district staff from publicly presenting actual or mocked-up large checks to recipients and prevent any presentations of grant awards on the supervisors’ Facebook, Twitter, or other social media sites. The added language allows an organization to attribute grant funding to a specific supervisor, but the supervisor or staff members cannot re-post that item.

That allowance enables organizations to explain the Neighborhood Reinvestment Program process, and if a general member references the recommending supervisor on a Facebook post the organization would not be in violation. The clause as considered on Sept. 23 would have required that any post on a social media site refer only to the county as the granting agency and not any individual supervisor or staff member as responsible for recommending or awarding the grant.

The Neighborhood Reinvestment 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 can also fund schools and fire departments, and supervisors can also use money from their budgets to supplement other county funding for specific county projects such as parks, roads, and libraries. Each county supervisor recommends the allocation of his or her Neighborhood Reinvestment Program funds, although those allocations must be approved by a majority of the board. 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 spending one-time revenues for one-time projects rather than for ongoing programs.

The Neighborhood Reinvestment Program was called the Community Projects program when it was created during fiscal year 1998-99 with a total budget of $5 million, or $1 million per county supervisor. The budget was expanded to $10 million for fiscal year 1999-2000. In September 2009, the Board of Supervisors changed the program’s name to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Program while also creating Board of Supervisors 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 expenditures but did not specify restrictions on the types of projects for which the funds could be used.

In March 2010, the supervisors reduced the total budget to $5 million while directing the county’s chief administrative officer to redirect the one-time resources available from that reduction towards priorities consistent with the supervisors’ strategic initiatives. That reduction amount was used to implement the county’s fire response plan and the spending included facility improvements, training facilities, and geographic information system technology needs.

In September 2010, Policy B-72 covering the Neighborhood Reinvestment Program was revised. The 2010 revisions prohibited funds from being used for food and beverages or for fundraising activities, allowed the county to use legal means to seek the return of funds not spent according to the grant agreement, required that public acknowledgment of funding credited the County of San Diego rather than an individual county supervisor, and prohibited county supervisors from receiving gifts with a value of at least $50.00 from organizations to which they have provided Neighborhood Reinvestment Program funds. Ron Roberts was in Washington, DC, when the other supervisors voted 4-0 in favor of those revisions.

Following the September 2010 revisions, Policy B-72 stated that the program provides grant funds to county departments, other public agencies, and non-profit organizations for one-time community, social, environmental, educational, cultural, or recreational needs which benefit the county’s neighborhoods and communities. Language was added that the 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.

Grants to county departments or other public agencies can still be used for any lawful purpose or activity meeting the policy criteria, but grants to public 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.

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 2010 revision required any recognition to be given to the County of San Diego and not individual supervisors.

When the county supervisors approved the 2014-15 budget in June, the $2 million allocation per supervisorial district was restored.

In 2012, Horn proposed a $50,000 grant to the North County Economic Development Council for the “Prosperity on Purpose” comprehensive economic development study. A waiver was needed for the grant to be spent on a purpose other than capital improvements, equipment, materials, goods, or supplies. The grant passed on a 3-2 vote with Dianne Jacob and Pam Slater-Price (Dave Roberts’ predecessor) in opposition, and the motion also created a subcommittee of Ron Roberts and Cox to work on revising the restrictions to allow for economic development programs.

Several other restrictions also had unintended consequences. The prohibition on spending money for food and beverages was intended to cover community events, but it also prohibited food banks or social service agencies from feeding the needy and prevented animal shelters from purchasing food. The latest revisions stipulate that grants may be used to pay for food and beverage only if the food or beverages are provided to individuals in need through organizations which provide meals to needy individuals or families while also adding that grants may be used to pay for feed for animal shelters to support the rehabilitation of animals.

The restrictions to tangible items also precluded information and technology services, including websites and data bases, which for formation are more one-time expenses than ongoing programs. The latest amendment allows grants to be awarded for one-time website, software, and related information and technology development services.

The prohibition against supervisors receiving gifts from organizations to which they have provided Neighborhood Reinvestment Program funds resulted from a controversy over symphony tickets. In addition to stipulating that the ban does not apply to admission to non-profit fundraising activities or to items not considered a gift or income, the new language also stipulates a 12-month period for the prohibition of gifts following the final receipt of funds from the county.

In addition to requiring the recipient organization to have a governing body or administrator, applications now will require acknowledgment of a commitment to such a governing body or administrator or staff.