Davis County work session advances draft policy allowing solicited donations, adds sponsorship rules and $500 reporting threshold

Davis County commissioners and staff spent a May 6 work session reviewing a proposed update to the county's donations policy that adds sponsorships, allows departments to solicit donations with commission approval, and sets a $500 threshold for heightened documentation and formal agreements.

The draft discussed at the work session would add sponsorships to the county's definitions and permit departments to solicit donations only if the Commission authorizes solicitation. "We've switched up to now allow for the solicitation of donations although it does need to be approved as this is right now, it would need to be approved by the Commission," said Brett, civil attorney's office, who reviewed redline edits and legal input from the subcommittee.

The policy separates small donations from larger ones by using $500 as a break point. For cash or noncash donations at or above $500, the draft recommends treating acceptance as an individual agenda item with a more formal agreement. For donations under $500, the draft would allow departments to report contributions on summary lists submitted to the Commission. "If it's less than $500, it's gonna be more of kind of what Ashley does right now ... with a list as the consent item," Brett said, referring to existing department practice.

Why it matters: commissioners said the county needs clearer, consistent rules because departments already receive unsolicited goods and money (books, dog food, shoes, cash jars), and larger, solicited gifts could change operations or create obligations for the county. "If you're going to actually solicit, then it has to be done as a governing body," said Bob Stevenson, commissioner, recounting past public reactions when other entities solicited from the public.

Key discussion points - Sponsorships added: The draft explicitly defines sponsorships and treats them separately where a sponsor receives a benefit (naming, recognition, advertising). Brett said sponsorship agreements are expected to follow the county's contracting process and include sponsor name, terms, restrictions and obligations. - Solicitation vs. unsolicited donations: Commissioners and staff discussed a substantive distinction between unsolicited gifts that arrive without county action and solicitation that asks the public for money or goods to support county operations. Several speakers said soliciting funds to offset operating costs can change how a program is accounted for and should require prior Commission consideration. - Valuing in-kind donations: Staff raised that the current policy and practice are inconsistent on whether in-kind gifts should carry a monetary value. "In-kind donation is not involving money or not measured in monetary terms. So why are we talking about in-kind donations and monetary terms?" asked Brian Hatfield (department staff), quoting language in the draft. Library staff said they use book-sale values to estimate donated-book worth; others pointed to IRS guidance or Salvation Army ranges as reference points for valuation. - Program-level approvals and recurring solicitations: Several department representatives asked whether the Commission could preapprove recurring solicitations or programs (for example, an annual book drive or an animal-shelter wish list) so departments would not need Commission approval for each instance. Brett and commissioners said the draft could be edited to allow program-level authorizations that remain in effect until revoked; departments would still report activity and track revenue. - Tracking, staff time and thresholds: Staff warned that tracking low-value in-kind items (used shoes, small book donations) requires staff time and might increase workload if the reporting threshold is raised from a previous $50 level to $500. "It takes staff time," said Josh Johnson, library staff, about assessing and documenting donated items. - Election office exceptions and reputational risk: The work session included a reminder from election staff that some donations to election offices are restricted by statute and the county should avoid accepting funds that could create political appearance issues. - Surplus and redistribution: For unsolicited goods that cannot be used, departments described existing surplus/redistribution practices (for example, sending usable items to nonprofit partners) rather than retaining questionable donations.

What remains unresolved - Exact valuation method for in-kind donations: The group asked for clearer language and thresholds (for example, treating a large donated collection that appears worth more than the threshold differently from a box of low-value items). Brett said he would tighten the language and propose a consistent approach. - Sponsorship approval language: Commissioners asked that the sponsorship section be revised to require Commission approval of sponsorship agreements, not merely an acknowledgment after a department signs an agreement. "If you're doing agreements for specific events ... I think ... it would be agreements, not acknowledgments," said a commissioner during the discussion. - Whether departments may solicit without prior approval for donations under $500: Some commissioners suggested allowing limited solicitation for small donations (dog food, books) without preapproval, while others stressed the Commission should retain oversight to avoid unwanted partnerships or reputational risk.

Next steps Brett will revise the draft to reflect the discussion points, clarify solicitation versus unsolicited gifts, tighten the wording on in-kind valuation, and rewrite the sponsorship-acknowledgment language so agreements require Commission approval. The revised draft will be circulated to participants and the county controller for additional review, and may return on a future agenda for formal Commission action. The work session concluded at 9:14 a.m.

Ending note No formal vote occurred at the work session; the meeting functioned to surface practical concerns and editing directions before staff and the civil attorney's office prepare a revised ordinance or policy to send to the Commission for consideration.