Council divides on councilmember travel, discretionary grants and policy changes; several items pulled from consent

Hollister City Council members split Tuesday on several consent items that had been pulled for discussion, approving travel for one councilmember while arguing over the use of discretionary council funds and nonprofit contributions.

Council approved a request by Councilmember Morales to attend an upcoming League of California Cities policy meeting in March 2025 in Burbank. The motion to authorize travel passed 4-1; Councilmember Resendiz cast the lone dissent and urged the council to avoid travel while the city is reducing expenditures and holding a hiring freeze.

Council then debated two discretionary grants pulled from consent. The first request sought authorization for Councilmember Morales to use up to $25,650 from her discretionary allocation to support a Rapid Action Network led by LULAC (League of United Latin American Citizens) and partner organizations. Council discussion focused on the city’s tight budget, the origin and oversight of discretionary funds and whether the request duplicated existing community resources. According to the roll-call result recorded at the meeting, the action on the LULAC request was decided by a 3-2 vote (recorded in the minutes as three in favor, two opposed).

The second pulled item asked the council to approve a two‑year contribution to United Way of San Benito County of up to $5,000 per fiscal year. After debate about long‑standing relationships with the United Way and the city’s budget pressures, the council approved the contribution by a 3-2 vote.

Later in the meeting councilmembers also approved two related policy actions:

- A motion to rescind the city’s discretionary funds policy entirely. After discussion about the fund’s original intent for small, traffic‑study‑related uses and concerns about appearance of impropriety, the council voted 5-0 to eliminate the policy.

- A separately introduced set of technical amendments linking any future discretionary allocation to the city’s reserve level and adding a prohibition on using discretionary funds within six months of a municipal election. Those clarifying edits were considered in the broader conversation and staff said they will implement policy changes consistent with the council’s direction.

Public speakers urged fiscal caution. Several residents who had attended earlier discussions about the general plan told council members to lead by example during the city’s fiscal recovery; others supported the LULAC and United Way requests as important services for immigrants and residents in need.

Council staff said the city would treat future discretionary allocations cautiously and that any re‑established program would adhere to the new limits tying disbursements to reserve levels and election timing.