Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Government topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors and public urge opposition to SB 11‑93, saying it would hobble small nonprofit grants
Summary
Public nonprofits, residents and several supervisors told the board that SB 11‑93 — recently amended — would broadly redefine discretionary funds and require contracts/performance objectives even for small awards, risking funding for neighborhood services. Board members expressed strong opposition and requested further legal and policy review.
Dozens of public commenters and multiple supervisors told the Alameda County Board of Supervisors on April 21 that Senate Bill 11‑93 threatens small nonprofit grants that supervisors use to meet urgent local needs.
The issue: Speakers — including local nonprofit directors and longtime volunteers — said the bill’s April 16 amendment broadened the definition of "discretionary funds" so sharply that modest, short‑term awards (some as small as $500 to $8,000, as cited by supervisors) would require contracts and formal performance objectives. That, they argued, would slow or stop funding for community events, food assistance, shelters and other neighborhood services that rely on nimble, supervisor‑level grants.
Examples and concerns: "SB 11‑93 puts critical nonprofit funding in jeopardy," said Brandy Lombardi, who told the board the change could cut off support for women’s shelters, homeless services and other essential programs. Several speakers — including nonprofit leaders who said they moved headquarters to Alameda County because of the county’s responsiveness — urged the board to register formal opposition to the bill.
County counsel’s assessment: When Supervisor Miley asked whether the bill would affect current agenda items, county counsel said the recent amendment is broad and likely would cover allocations the board makes to community organizations and private entities. That triggered supervisors to name specific items on the day's agenda (for instance items 14 and 17) that could be affected.
Supervisor responses: Supervisors from across the dais voiced strong concern. "This is a poor use of time and energy to write a bill that targets Alameda County," Supervisor Miley said, and Supervisor Marquez noted the small size of many district grants and the potential harm to vulnerable residents. Supervisor Fortunato Bass urged transparency while also calling for statewide application and carve‑outs for small grants if any such law moves forward.
Next steps: Supervisors asked county staff and legal counsel to continue tracking the bill, to advise whether the county should take an official position and to clarify which local funding mechanisms would be affected. The board did not take a formal vote on a resolution opposing SB 11‑93 at the April 21 meeting; multiple supervisors said they would register opposition or seek amendments if the legislation remains targeted to one county.
