Editorial: Quoth the council: ‘Nevermore’

More thoughts on Sonoma’s new Community Grant Fund program|

“Offences against charity,” wrote Edgar Allan Poe, “are about the only ones which men on their death beds can be made, not to understand – but to feel – as crime.”

Of course, “The Raven” author died drunk and penniless in the streets of Baltimore, so perhaps he would say that.

But it does speak to why so many Sonomans have kept a close watch on the workings of the City’s new Community Fund Grant program.

Or, put it this way: Whether one’s charitable organization receives City of Sonoma “charity” through the nonprofit grant system goes a long way toward explaining whether an organization feels like it’s been taken.

Here’s the story: For the past few years, essentially all of the City’s nonprofit grant monies have been split among four venerable, respected organizations – the Sonoma Community Center, the Sonoma Ecology Center, the Boys & Girls Clubs and Vintage House senior center – which are viewed by some as de facto providers of parks and recreation services for the city, which lacks such a department. They were labeled “Tier 1” nonprofits, a hierarchical ranking that, while arguably valid, irked some nonprofits who felt they could claim similar community standing, yet left the grant-allocation party each year empty handed.

Few questioned the value and need for dedicated city funding for the Tier 1s. But the somewhat arbitrary cutting off point of “four” nonprofits must have bedeviled the likes of the Sonoma Valley Mentoring Alliance, La Luz Center and others, which also provide invaluable community services for the city.

So the question became: If not four nonprofits, what? Five? Six? Where does Sonoma draw the line?

The answer for the Sonoma City Council: Erase the line.

And hence this year’s abandoning of the Tier system in favor of the Community Fund Grant program, which essentially opened the grant opportunities to all Valley nonprofits. Earlier this spring, 23 organizations applied for grants from a fund of $175,000, with 13 nonprofits winning grants ranging from $5,000 to $25,000. All of the former Tier 1 nonprofits received less than they did last year – substantially in some cases – while several other Valley nonprofits received thousands of dollars for the first time in years, if ever.

All four of the Tier 1 nonprofits have, at some point in recent months, voiced their opposition to the new funding paradigm. They don’t begrudge funding smaller nonprofits, but it’s coming at their expense, they say; meanwhile, they’re still expected to offer many services that, in typical municipalities, the city provides.

And yet, like the Raven in Poe’s famous poem, the City Council has all but said “nevermore” to the Tier system.

Councilmember Rachel Hundley, who was one of the early voices on the council calling for a restructuring of the grant process, wrote to me recently suggesting that the I-T’s coverage of the new grant program hadn’t adequately explained the rationale behind the funding change.

She says that, while the Tier 1 nonprofits perform important work, the Tier system was deeply flawed.

“The former Tier 1 system was not a set fund,” says Hundley, “and the constant pressure to increase city contributions often resulted in a scramble to pull the money from other areas of the budget.”

Hundley also says she never completely embraced the argument that the Tier 1 nonprofits act as the city’s de facto parks and recreation department.

“Parks and recreation has never been defined or specified,” Hundley said. “And, at least in recent years, there has never been a discussion of exactly what parks and recreation services were needed and what each organization is providing.”

Several members of the council the past year have voiced their discomfort with the idea that nonprofits may have been factoring the grants into their budgets. Hundley says that “fear of destabilizing the organization will always pressure the City Council to maintain or increase city contributions, even when tax payer dollars are better spent elsewhere.”

So the Community Fund Grant program appears here to stay, at least for the foreseeable future.

That being said, the theory that nonprofits shouldn’t be overly dependent upon guaranteed funding from a single entity is nothing new. In 2009, the Marin Community Foundation – which isn’t a public fund, but rather a private fortune bequeathed to that county by the late Beryl Buck – began weaning nonprofits from their vociferous Buck Trust thirst, cutting the majority of yearly grants by about half in order to redirect funds toward poverty-relief programs. Grant programs inevitably evolve; the City of Sonoma isn’t in uncharted waters here.

The good news is the Sonoma City Council still seems open to tinkering with the fine points of the CFG. And to that, here are a few tinkering suggestions:

• Reconsider the third-year-off rule: One of the program’s stipulations is that if a nonprofit receives grants two years in a row, it won’t be considered for a grant the third year. But if a program warrants a grant, then it warrants a grant – it shouldn’t be denied simply because it has won grants in the past.

• The CFG program should have been rolled out gradually. This is more an observation, really, but one worth noting. Murmurings about opening up the grant funds to all nonprofits started about a year ago, and only truly became a reality to the Tier 1 nonprofits this past winter. The aforementioned Marin Community Foundation gave about a three-year notice of its shifting funding priorities – which meant, while many nonprofits weren’t pleased by the change, they had ample time to plan for it and none could say they were caught off guard.

• Er, how ‘bout more money? This year the CFG program divvied up an amount equal to 1.5 percent of the city’s general fund tax revenue – about $175,000 (the full fund had about $194,000, but 10 percent is set aside for discretionary funding for the Council to deal out over the course of the year). Last year’s program, by comparison, had $188,000 – which meant not only were the former Tier 1 nonprofits vying for grants among a larger pool of contenders, they were doing so for a smaller total amount. Councilmember Gary Edwards has suggested increasing the percentage of the fund – 1.6 percent? 1.8? 2? And while we realize you can’t add here, without subtracting there, it’s something to look at.

In the end, Hundley says, the Community Grant Fund acknowledges that city needs change over time. “New needs can be addressed by different nonprofits and different projects.” She notes that the response from the non-Tier 1 organizations has been “overwhelmingly positive.”

“Tradition alone – or personal preference – is never a good reason to spend money in the same way or same place,” concludes Hundley.

Or, to put it once again in Poe’s words: “She shall press, ah… nevermore!”

Email Jason at jason.walsh@sonomanews.com.

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.