West Sacramento PFA adopts minor EIFD budget-policy changes after debate over oversight role

The West Sacramento Public Financing Authority voted May 21, 2025, to adopt Resolution 25-2, which makes limited edits to the EIFD budget policy to allow more timely appropriations from EIFD funds while keeping formal amendments to the infrastructure financing plan (IFP) under the authority's review.

The change is intended to let the city respond faster to grant opportunities and local funding needs by allowing expenditures for projects already listed in the IFP to be appropriated through the city budgeting process and then reported to the PFA, rather than requiring a separate PFA appropriation each time. The amended language, read into the record by the city manager, states in part that "proposed changes to the IFP will be reviewed and approved by the authority" and that "improvements and associated administrative costs funded with EIFD bond proceeds will be reviewed and approved by the city council through the city's budgeting process and received by the authority at least annually through the EIFD annual report."

Community Investment Manager Mark Polhemas said the original policy had required funds to be appropriated only through the biennial budget and that the edit is meant to give staff flexibility to provide local matches or fill gaps when grant windows open. "What we had established in that policy was that funds would be appropriated through the biennial budget," Polhemas said.

Several board members pressed staff on whether the change would shift decision-making authority from the PFA to the City Council. Member Alcala said he understood the need for flexibility but wanted to ensure the PFA retained its statutory oversight of changes to the IFP. "My concern...is that when we're talking about amendments to the IFP, those changes in your view...should be considered by this board," he said. Bond counsel Constantine Baranoff of Lozano Smith answered that the amendment is meant to streamline spending, not to circumvent the PFA's role: "If the IFP is going to be amended, of course, that is required, EFA being responsible for reviewing those changes and running the amendment process and all the noticing process pursuant to the IFP law."

Board members asked staff to clarify language and to provide more frequent notice to PFA public members when council programs EIFD funds between meetings. The board briefly tabled the item to allow staff and counsel to propose wording changes and then returned later in the meeting to adopt the revised language as read by the city manager.

Action and vote: The PFA adopted Resolution 25-2 (minor EIFD budget-policy changes). The motion to adopt was moved by Member Alcala and seconded by Member Guerrero; a roll-call vote recorded all members present as "Aye." The board had earlier voted to table the item to the end of the meeting by motion of Member Alcala, seconded by Member Guerrero; that tabling motion also passed by unanimous vote.

The adopted changes tie how EIFD funds are appropriated to the city's budget process while preserving the PFA's statutory role to review and approve formal amendments to the IFP. Staff said they will return with any additional word-smithing and will incorporate administrative notice procedures so the PFA receives timely updates when council programs EIFD funds.