Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Chamber Contract topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lompoc council trims Chamber of Commerce funding, directs retail strategy in‑house

3670687 · June 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The City Council approved a reduced funding agreement with the Lompoc Valley Chamber of Commerce and directed staff to bring retail strategy work back in‑house; councilors debated whether utility funds should have paid part of the contract.

The Lompoc City Council on June 3 approved a reduced contract and funding allocation with the Lompoc Valley Chamber of Commerce, directing staff to bring retail strategies in‑house and to fund the approved amount from the city’s general fund.

Council members debated several financing options before settling on revised amounts: $35,000 for visitor services and $25,000 set aside for event fee waivers, for a combined $60,000 contribution under the amended agreement. Councilors specified that the payments come from the general fund rather than enterprise (utility) funds.

The vote followed a lengthy staff presentation and public comment in support of the chamber. Council member Bridge said the chamber “does a lot of really great events for us and helps us out in economic development, tourism, assisting businesses, running a lot of our events.” Bridge and other council members also discussed moving the chamber’s retail strategy work back to city staff.

Council member Ball and others urged caution about shifting costs to the general fund at a time the city is still rebuilding reserves; Ball noted that the city is “running a balanced budget” but warned that cost‑of‑living increases and negotiations could use available surplus. Council member Starbuck and others said the city has historically prioritized the chamber and argued the organization delivers value to local businesses and community events.

City staff described three funding options in the staff report: full general‑fund support, maintaining the existing cost allocation percentages, or keeping prior cost‑allocation practices that used enterprise funds. Several council members said they were uncomfortable using utility ratepayer funds for chamber operations without a formal nexus study under Proposition 218.

The amended contract also removes the retail strategy from the chamber’s scope; the council directed staff to bring that work into a city department. The motion approving the funding and modified agreement passed on a council vote and includes direction to revise the contract terms to match the funding levels voted on June 3.

The council asked staff to return final contract documents reflecting the agreed funding levels and to present the in‑house retail strategy plan to the council later. The chamber will continue to receive in‑kind support and event waivers per the agreement.

The approval does not resolve a broader question raised during the meeting about whether enterprise reimbursements to the general fund should be re‑examined; several council members asked that the city freeze current enterprise reimbursement numbers until a new allocation study is completed.