We well remember the hard work that the Sonoma City Council expended just a year ago to formalize its process for financial assistance to local non-profits.
Many meetings were spent, and much public comment taken, with the council finally deciding on a two-tier approach, looking at the proverbial “big picture” for its two-year budgeting cycle (2007–2009). Notably, the top tier itself went through a change, with the Sonoma Community Center electing not to participate, and the Sonoma Ecology Center taking its place at that level, along with the Boys & Girls Clubs and the Vintage House Senior Center.
Many hours of staff time were spent, as well, to evaluate the separate programs of the twenty-five non-profits in terms of their service to city residents. That, in our view, was local government working effectively to spend our taxpayer money wisely. Procedure was established in a transparent manner, resulting in some $139,700 divided among the three “tier-one” agencies and $100,300 given to seventeen “tier-two” groups. Half of that latter amount was in $10,000 awards to five groups: FISH (Friends in Sonoma Helping), Valley of the Moon Teen Center, Pets Lifeline, Meals on Wheels, and … the Sonoma Valley Film Society.
In April of this year, the city council formed an ad hoc committee to develop a “long-term, strategic plan” for funding non-profits in the future, perhaps in a manner different from the two-tier approach of the prior fall. In September, as part of that question, the council discussed whether to lease or purchase the Sonoma Community Center building and then provide it at $1 per year back to the Sonoma Community Center organization to use. And just two months ago, in October, a budget surplus of $110,00 was given by the city council (on a 3-2 vote) to the three tier-one agencies in a special, mid-cycle allocation.
Our issue today? With another six months to go in its 2007–2009 budgeting cycle, the council last week gave $25,000 to the re-named Sonoma International Film Society for the April 2009 film festival (on a 3-2 vote), plus $50,000 to the Sonoma Community Center, with the stated expectation of another $450,000 over the next five years!
We hasten to note how highly we regard both recipient organizations – their board members, the people who run them and their good works in our community. No, our concern is with the city council, spending taxpayer money without following its own process for consideration of the expenditures and without the same apparent depth of review (financial statements, perhaps?) practiced a year before. Since the council views its film festival sponsorship as a money-maker, then we might expect this new policy to call for sponsorships of Sonoma Jazz +, too, the Wine Country Half-Marathon, or maybe the FRAM Autolite NHRA Nationals at Infineon Raceway.
Yes, we recognize that while the film festival money comes out of the city’s general fund, the money for the community center comes from the Community Development Agency, better known as “redevelopment” money. And, yes, we recognize the fear that the state may take back uncommitted monies, to help balance its own budget, so there is incentive to commit as much as possible of that money as soon as possible. But we think council member Steve Barbose had it right when he urged care in how such an arrangement is structured.
It might be worth noting, for instance, that the council members actually are in the process of selling a property the redevelopment agency already owns – the old fire station on Patten Street at Broadway; that would seem to worsen the problem they’re hoping to solve.
Certainly, it’s the city council’s prerogative to change its policies. We simply encourage such changes to be made explicitly, so the public understands the impact and can comment. In our view, that’s good government.
