By Richard Halstead, Marin Independent Journal -
The Marin County Civil Grand Jury issued a report Monday calling for significant changes to the county supervisors' practice of dispensing money from a discretionary spending fund.
"If these improvements are not adopted for fiscal year 2013-14, the grand jury recommends the program's termination and the return of unspent funds to the general budget," the report states.
The 2000-01 Marin County Civil Grand Jury also issued a report that criticized use of the fund. Last month, Supervisor Steve Kinsey proposed his own plan for revamping the discretionary spending program.
Since the early 1990s, each of Marin County's five supervisors has received a yearly allocation from the county general fund that they are allowed to award as they see fit to various charities, civic groups and selected projects within their individual districts. Awards are generally approved without discussion as part of the supervisors' "consent" agenda. If a supervisor fails to give away their allocation during a given year, the amount carries over to future years.
During the current fiscal year, the supervisors will divvy up the $349,405 in the so-called Community Service Fund.
Many of the recommendations made by the grand jury are contained in Kinsey's reform proposal; however, Kinsey would leave supervisors in charge of making individual grants. Kinsey could not be reached Monday for comment.
Supervisor Judy Arnold, who the grand jury notes has pushed for greater transparency in the fund's operation, said, "The grand jury brings up some very good points, and we're gong to be looking into them." Arnold declined to say, however, if she thinks supervisors should remain in charge of who gets the money.
The grand jury said that during its investigation of the last three years of grants it "uncovered one clear example of conflict of interest: a supervisor made a grant to a multi-county organization of which the supervisor was a board member."
Rich Treadgold, the grand jury's foreperson, said the jury could not specify which supervisor it was because it is prevented by law from naming any individual in its reports. Treadgold did say, however, that the supervisor in question is no longer on the board.
In its findings, however, the grand jury also states that "A review of Community Service Fund disbursements over the past three years did not indicate any evidence of improprieties or any other irregularities."
The report further states that "The grand jury fully recognizes that the Community Service Fund money is distributed for projects that for the most part appear to provide value to the community and that each supervisor sincerely strives to grant money to worthy endeavors.
"However," it continues, "at issue is not whether Community Service Funds provide value to Marin but whether they provide that value in ways that appear to, or in fact do, serve the political interests of the incumbents." It adds that "inevitably alliances are created and favor is likely curried as a result of such disbursements."
Judi Shils, executive director of Teens Turning Green, a Sausalito-based nonprofit, said, "I guess my response would be, 'Cut me a break.' I think the fact that they give grants that support local organizations and agencies is incredible. They certainly don't buy us. It's really sad to me that people have to criticize everything."
During the 2009-10 fiscal year, then-Supervisor Charles McGlashan awarded Teens Turning Green $10,000 in Community Service Fund money, which the organization used to mount a successful campaign to ban plastic bags in unincorporated Marin County.
The grand jury's report contains a long list of recommendations. The grand jury says:
• The process for applying for Community Service Fund grants should be made public along with information on which organizations have received grants and which have been denied; grants should not be made to the same entities in consecutive years.
• Supervisors should not request a grant for any organization of which they or a family member are an officer, director or policymaker; minimum and maximum amounts of individual grants should be established.
• Community Service Fund money not spent during a given year should be returned to the county general fund.
• County money should not be allocated to the Community Service Fund if there was a deficit in the general fund the previous year or if other county departments are asked to cut their budgets for the next fiscal year.
• Grants should be restricted to non-for-profit entities and should not be used for any recipient's ongoing program.
• The county Auditor-Controller should conduct spot audits of at least five recipient entities each fiscal year.
• Control of the disbursements should be removed from the supervisors and assigned to newly established district committees or an appropriate county administrative office.
Unless these steps are taken, the grant jury "recommends that immediate steps be taken to terminate the Community Service Fund."
No comments:
Post a Comment