Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nonprofit Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates waiver for nonprofit with delayed filings; audit underway
Summary
Legislators considered granting a waiver to a nonprofit that provides emergency meals while that organization completes overdue filings and an audit; the committee split and the resolution was defeated in committee, with members citing both operational need and concerns about compliance.
The Ways and Means Committee on May 15 debated whether to grant a procurement waiver that would allow a nonprofit to receive county payments while it corrects deficiencies in its filings and audit documentation.
County staff told the committee the nonprofit supplies emergency meals to people in emergency housing and that the organization had missing tax returns and an outstanding single audit. The county deputy comptroller said test work for the audit has finished and a report is expected in the coming weeks; earlier memos had flagged the nonprofit as noncompliant.
Under the county’s updated vendor policy, departments cannot pay for services already rendered or enter new contracts with vendors that lack required filings unless a waiver is granted. County staff said the nonprofit proposed a correction plan and committed to be in compliance by the following month; staff recommended allowing the organization to continue providing meals during that corrective period so service to vulnerable residents is not interrupted.
Several legislators signaled support for the nonprofit’s mission but expressed concern about bypassing contract compliance. Legislator Collins and other speakers said the policy is working to identify noncompliant vendors, and deputies said departments will improve vendor notification and contract language to reduce confusion about which year’s filings to provide.
When the committee voted on the waiver, the resolution failed in committee (the transcript records dissenting votes and a recusal). Committee members later discussed whether to bring the matter to the full legislature for further consideration; one legislator changed his vote to allow referral to the floor so the full legislature could review the question.
