■ Community Development chief: Council OK’d fundraising, but ‘grants can usurp priorities’
Grants aren’t free money, and city employees wouldn’t support members of the Community Sustainability Commission pursuing grants that could obligate the city to dedicate staff time or city funds, interim Community Development Director Dan Marks told the panel Monday night.
However, Marks said, that doesn’t mean he has objections to the CSC engaging in other fundraising.
But grant-seeking is in a different category, he explained to the panel that has been seeking ways to raise money to fund projects that further its purpose, with the expectation it would have a say on how that money is spent.
“Grants can usurp priorities,” Marks said.
In addition, they can come with additional costs, particularly in staff time, especially if the grant doesn’t cover the additional work employees would be required to do.
The commission could recommend the city pursue a grant, subject to Council approval, he said. But sometimes the deadline to apply would mean the city wouldn’t have enough time to do that.
“I’m not sure every grant application is what staff would want to do,” he said.
Two other city advisory panels are allowed to raise money, the Human Services Board and the Arts and Culture Commission.
Specifically, the Human Services Board, which has been raising money longer, has organized wine tastings with auctions and has organized an Oktoberfest event.
It also sells water bottles and accepts donations by requests included in water customers’ bills.
The Arts and Culture Commission obtained a grant from the Community Sustainability Commission to underwrite the city’s first public art piece, a multi-pane, recycled materials work that illustrates the environmental elements of wind, water and land.
The artwork and an accompanying educational component are scheduled to be installed in the Benicia Community Center in March.
Responding to Marks, Constance Beutel, who concluded her most recent term as chairperson and stepped down from the commission Monday night, asked, “The whole reason to do this is if we raise money, could we be assured it would stay for sustainable use?”
Marks said he may have misunderstood the CSC’s intent when he wrote an earlier report to the Council in which he said the panel was seeking unprecedented control of money it raised.
The panel’s money would go into a special sustainability fund, he recommended, but the Council, not the commission, would have final say on how the money is spent.
If that process is followed and the commission doesn’t ask for permission to obtain grants on behalf of the city, the ordinance governing the commission would require only minor changes to authorize fundraising, he said.
Throughout the meeting, Marks took opportunities to remind the panel of the city’s commitment to sustainability and its Climate Action Plan’s strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, water consumption and energy use.
In fact, he said, a quarter of his time and half the working hours of outgoing management analyst Gina Eleccion, who has transferred to a different department, have been dedicated to the panel and sustainability projects.
He said he isn’t sure the city recognized a few years ago how much staff time would be required to put the multiple strategies of the Climate Action Plan into play.
In addition, the panel has the services of Climate Action Plan Coordinator Alex Porteshawver, who has obtained some environmental and climate change grants for the city. Marks called her work “significant.”
Her contract ends June 30, but Marks has asked her to submit a proposal for an additional year’s work, to see if the Council or the commission can pay to keep Porteshawver in Benicia.
“We’re implementing the Climate Action Plan,” he assured the commission. However, the Council has to examine how that work compares to other city priorities, he said.
“The Council decides on what level it will go forward.”
Newly elected vice chairperson Sharon Maher said there has been much talk about the costs associated with advisory panels without supplying “the missing piece” — the corresponding benefit to the community.
“I don’t think that’s well understood by the Council,” she said.
Mayor Elizabeth Patterson, who attended as an audience member, said the Council is striving to set performance measures, “but it’s harder in some departments.”
In addition, the city has seen a 20-percent reduction in its staff, Patterson said. Newly elected Chairperson Kathy Kerridge also observed the commission has experienced a continuing problem in a lack of staff support.
In other matters, the commission decided to continue to a future meeting discussions of the sustainability grants it awards to projects using money from the Valero-Good Neighbor Steering Committee settlement agreement fund. Meanwhile, Kerridge has recommended those grants shouldn’t go to companies that, through the programs the grants would fund, could realize in a short time savings equal to the amount of the grant.
Instead, Kerridge said, the companies should view those projects as good business practices.
Sharing is caring!
It is about time that the City told the CSC in a straight forward manner that they do not run this City. The City is showing good faith on the Climate Action Plan co-ordinator. I do not believe the City should fund the co-ordinator fully. If A compromise can be worked out that would be fine. This is the City of Benicia not the City of CSC, In the eyes of one member the benefit to the City is in her eyes only. Does it benefit all the residents? No. The CSC is again an agenda driven group that only cares about their agenda not the City as a whole. They still have not figured that out. So maybe some straIght talk will.Good job Mr. Marks.
Sounds like the CSC wants to do whatever they want any time they want. The City Council is voted in by the folks of Benicia not the CSC. Left wingers only want what they want and seems to me if you disagree your anti environment or not as smart as they are!
Please clarify, to whom does the anti-environment belong?
To whom the shoe fits! The CSC is stacked with left wing liberals and with it comes the, I know what’s best for you and the environment mind set.
You are correct Kevin. It is their view against folks that do not agree with their views. You know what is best for the folks as their theme. We must take into consideration the geograpy of where folks live. The San Joaquin Valley is an example. The folks that live there are stuck with a geography that does produce what the enviromentalist call a very anti enviromental area. Been that way for as far back as John Muir could remember. So some could say the anti enviromantal fokks do care more about everyone and not the agenda driven former conservationist who now call themnselves enviromentalist.. Does not stop them from putting solar panels all over that valley in the name of renewAable energy.. In todays lamguage of the so called emviromentalist fossil fuel is their target.
Kevin,
Below is a great article entitled “When Did Republicans Start Hating the Environment?”, Coincidentally it also touches on Grant Cook’s “Remember when Republicans liked the environment?” column.
http://bit.ly/Vfd6LA
One quote is particularly interesting:
“One intriguing related hypothesis posits that the right wing has become more unwilling to compromise in general because it has become more psychologically authoritarian—closed-minded, prone to black-and-white thinking. That’s not a pattern that would uniquely affect environmental issues, though. If anything, it would be felt most strongly on the topics that authoritarians most care about: crime, national defense, religion in public life, and matters of that ilk.”
My hypotheses, both the far right and far left won’t get anything done ever. It seems you have pre-determined without knowing, that I am a right wing nut. What I am trying to get across is any entity stacked with one side will only voice their views and not the will of the people. The will of the people is how we roll here in our land.
This was *your* comment, “The CSC is stacked with left wing liberals.”. This seems a bit “pre-determined”, as well. *Your* comments, thus far, are hardly void of sweeping generalizations. That aside, my comment (in regards to *your* original comment) was merely a pass at the ironic thesis. Sorry, if you feel that you were pigeon-holed.
Yours in reason,
TP
Can you name a member on the CSC board that is not a Liberal. If so please let me know so I can be pre-determined.
Thank You
I am sorry I would like to be post-determined and set strait on this matter.
Thank You
Kevin the only ones could be post-officio. You are correct it is a stacked Commission. Remember the mayor says this is her greatest accomplishment. That should give all the folks a heads up..
Perhaps you can qualify *your* statements and offer up a list of folks that are associated with the CSC that certifies that they all can be considered liberal. If this indeed the case, why would that be? If there are conservative folks that are against the way the CSC is run, why do they not get involved and try to change things? Lack of interest; would rather that the CSC did not exist; anti-environment; not smart enough, etc.? It is an interesting question.
No reason. The CSC is doing a good job all by themselves of destroying their personal agenda. You are seeing what is happening. The City is tired of this group. No longer a force just a group of very anti fossil fuel folks. So be it.
Mayor Moonbeam Would not have anyone on the CSC that is not a liberal and that’s a fact Jack!
Kevin,
If there is one thing liberals hate (after anyone who disagrees with them, of course), is to be ‘labeled’ as a liberal. They like to think of themselves as independent, free thinking and open minded individuals. Yet they take offense at being defined based on their ideology.
You would think they would be proud to be labeled as such (a few of them are), but most take offense and change their branding. What really needs changing is for liberals to be held accountable for their actions and the results of their failed policies.
Kevin, they also need thicker skins
Thicker skin and a dose of humility!
Take notice Dennis Thomas reply’s on the the other run like your rerply. These folks do not have anything new to say.
He’s playing a game.
I saw them and got a pretty good laugh out of it, even though Conservatives have no sense of humor.
Check the history of this commission. Take a look at the folks on that commission that are ANTI fossil fuel. It is very easy .
Seems they are very anti-anything that does not fit the Mayors agenda. Any commission needs some sort of balance that fits the folks living in Benicia. All I see from the CSC is to charge into whatever is new and cool no matter what the cost!
Kevin the main issue is the commission is in charge of the Climate Action _Plan. Backed and supported by the Mayor/Council. They apply and are interviewed and then the mayor makes the appointment. It then must be approved by the council/mayor. That is how all commissions are chosen. Not elected. So as you say if you have an agenda driven Mayor you now know what you will get. I do not think it is their mission as it is their thinking of authoritarian controll. The council has been puting a stop to that recently. It goes back to how much time they use of city staff.. They did not think they were getting enough time. So they get a Climate Action Plan co-ordinatoer paid for with Valero Good Neighbor {oxymoron}.money. As the article says they still use more city staff time. That must stop. They will have to in the future be limited to staff use and find a way to pay for a Climater Action Plan co-ordinator. This group is well organized and have been involved in the mayors election and also the Crude By Rail project. Yes you are correct a very driven Liberal/Socialist./Progressive group as a whiole. It will be comtolled by the council. and this group will try to get elected members on the council in 2016. keep your eye on this group. Yes it is very liberal. No proof needed. Actions speak for themselves. Just think of thisThey just sold the counil/mayor the Golden Gate Bridge in the form of MCE. Not fully fetted and bullied through. Bad decision by the mayor/council. That is what you get from these Ernviro Greenies. They think they are above anyone else.
I concur with your statement! I believe the majority for Benicians want a balanced approach to environmental concerns and it is up to us to vote for council members that will do what is best. Every one I know is opting out of MCE! All the Seniors I know in town are afraid there rates are going to go sky hi and do not understand the implications of MCE.
Thanks Kevin