Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Measure P Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission subcommittee backs draft five-year Measure P evaluation, urges independent audit and clearer spending data
Summary
The Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission subcommittee presented a draft five-year Measure P evaluation finding the city largely met proportional allocations but urging more documentation, auditor-level review to verify the ordinance's maintenance-of-effort requirement, and expanded technical assistance to reach underserved neighborhoods.
The Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission's five-year evaluation subcommittee presented a draft evaluation saying the city appears to comply with Measure P's proportional allocations but needs stronger documentation and outside expertise to verify some legal spending requirements.
The subcommittee summarized allocations established by Measure P and reported that, in its review, the city has been allocating funds roughly in line with the ordinance: about 46% to existing parks, roughly 21.5% to new parks, about 12% to arts and culture, 11.25% for trails and 8.5% for youth and senior programs. "We feel very comfortable the city of Fresno is complying with those allocations as prescribed under Measure P," the subcommittee said in presenting its findings.
Why it matters: Measure P requires the commission to produce a public five-year evaluation (citing ordinance section 7509) and contains a maintenance-of-effort expectation tied to 2017–18 spending levels. Commissioners said the draft provides useful findings but lacks the accounting detail and auditing rigor needed to verify whether Measure P funds have supplemented—rather than supplanted—existing park spending.
Commissioner John Dolan, speaking during the discussion, said evaluation "is a very complex and sophisticated process" and recommended hiring outside consultants or auditors to perform a thorough, traceable analysis. The subcommittee recommended requiring auditors or the budget office to produce traceable figures showing Measure P-related expenditures each year.
Report gaps and concerns: The subcommittee acknowledged it did not investigate a separate fraud investigation reported in the media involving the Fresno Arts Council; it cited media references to an identified individual and a potential loss of about $1.8 million but said that matter was outside the subcommittee's scope because investigatory details were handled by law enforcement and were not part of the audit materials available to the subcommittee.
Commissioners pressed staff on whether the evaluation should compare Measure P expenditures only to general fund figures or to a broader set of city spending (including grants, special revenues and capital outlays). Parks staff told the commission the finance office historically used a general-fund baseline (about $14.8 million in the referenced memo) but noted many grant and restricted funds exist that complicate a compliance determination.
Next steps: The subcommittee will finalize the draft for commission ratification and the commission plans to transmit the evaluation to the City Council. Commissioners recommended the final submission include a clear list of outstanding data needs, a request that the city auditor or an outside consultant perform a traceable audit of Measure P expenditures, and public-facing documentation of how Measure P funds reached high-need neighborhoods.
The commission did not take a final vote on the evaluation at the meeting; commissioners said they will refine the document before forwarding it to the City Council for review.
