I'll give you one pushback on this. The County's current procurement process for any kind of service from bulk lots of clip boards to innovative new mental health services is so off-putting and lengthy (hence expensive) that the supervisor who just hands an organization some money has saved the County big dollars. It doesn't have to be this way. I have yet to find another California County that expects procurement to take nine months.

Posted by bettie | reply to this comment
June 15, 2009 4:47 pm

I don't much like the Dog Beach "Sandy Claws" event being funded with tax dollars, but for the rest of it -- maybe it's okay. A little old-fashioned patronage in return for a full-page color photo of the Supervisor in the Opera program is not as bad as a lot of stuff that goes on in this town. It's all so polite and WASPy, I think labeling it "machine politics" is overstated.

Posted by Fed Up | reply to this comment
June 15, 2009 7:49 pm

You are absolutely correct about this practice. It is money for votes, or at least money for community goodwill which is effectively the same thing. It is inherently corrupting, not only for the supes, but for their patrons...er, the beneficiaries. Please keep up the pressure. They have remarkably thick skins about it, largely because there are even more supplicants than blessed recipients, with the result that few if any community groups will blow the whistle. They don't want to piss off the supes and blow their chances of getting in on the action. The problem is not that the recipients don't need money (who doesn't?), it is that the intent and effect of this now $100 million-and-counting multiyear party is to cultivate voter support. That kind of behavior has no place in San Diego.

Posted by Don | reply to this comment
June 15, 2009 8:44 pm

Nothing can be said about this practice, no matter how damning, that will convice the sups to abandon it. They fell a hugh amount of good will by it among their supporters. Every dollar handed out has their face on it, whereas few of the billions paid by the county government seem connected to individual board members. Take a look at where they spend time away from their offices and you will see the pride they take in these donations to community projects, events and organizations. Congressmen are caught in the same siren song. Their earmark practices have caught plenty of bad press lately, thanks to Senator McCain's campaign. But only a few have backed away from the competition to have their earmarks included in the deficit spending spree in Washington. Their rationalization is ever so close to home and their supporters.

Posted by Christopher | reply to this comment
June 16, 2009 5:14 am

I recently visited the newly opened elephant exhibit at the San Diego Zoo. Much to my surprise and chagrin, I found a large plaque at a new play area lauding the County Board of Supervisors in general, and Pam Slater-Price in particular for the gift. Its a nice play area, but I'm not thrilled with that use of public money at the zoo, and I find it decidedly distasteful to see large plaques erected honoring pols for gifting away our tax dollars in this economy when their pension obligation is starting to run away like the city's and they can't even afford proper fire protection.

Posted by Paul | reply to this comment
June 16, 2009 7:14 am

Paul, I don't disagree with you but I would also point out that tax money already pays for the Zoo. See City Charter section 77a. San Diego government is a travesty. BCW

Posted by bcw | reply to this comment
June 17, 2009 8:27 am

I work in Oceanside, and recently saw some evidence of this blatant self-promotion by the supes. There was a group of mentally disabled adults out for a walk around the harbor, and I noticed their van parked next to my car in the parking lot. On the side of the van was the name of the organization, and in equally large letters it said, "Donated by County Supervisor Pam Slater-Price." First of all, it's not your money, Pam. Second, how disgusting. The supervisors act almost completely without oversight, and no one really understands what they do except for those who get money from them. It works out really nicely for someone who wants their own little empire.

Posted by Rachel | reply to this comment
June 16, 2009 8:30 am

Supervisors know that 98% of voters aren't paying attention, so they'll continue to do it. It is too bad we couldn't pick one issue a month of bad government such as this, organize a very large protest, and at least get the supes' attention. But, in the end, it may prove to be as ineffective as the current protests in Iran because the unchecked, unmonitored, almost invisible power of the supes continues.

Posted by KenC | reply to this comment
June 16, 2009 9:18 am

They probably used some of the money they saved by not providing food stamp approval for hungry families.

Posted by Roy | reply to this comment
June 16, 2009 10:48 am

Okay, okay, I guess nobody who wrote here ever lived in Chicago or Boston. I will concede that the Supervisors should stop blowing their own horns (note pun) by giving away our tax dollars. But I bet that means the Opera will have to forego a County gift -- and it deserves one! Maybe what the Entrenched Five should stop doing is TAKING CREDIT for giving the gifts, as if their "donations" were supervisorial philanthropy -- which they aren't.

Posted by Fed Up | reply to this comment
June 16, 2009 7:44 pm

Full disclosure, I am part of a group that received $6K (another $4K went to another org) from Supervisor Robert's office for our Stop Graffiti Now! campaign. That said, if you make the argument that things like graffiti removal should be completely private, I cannot argue. But if you concede the point that it is a municipal function, then the question is whether we can do it better and more efficient for less money from within the communities served. And if we can, aren't the Supervisors actually SAVING you money with that choice? I haven't audited all the programs to know how the money is spent by others, but as with many maintenance type issues, the big cost is people to do the work. And volunteers help cut those costs. Point is, I think this criticism is remarkably one-sided.

Posted by Omar | reply to this comment
June 17, 2009 7:27 am

Scott: No member of a legislative group can act alone. So all these donations, grants whatever- are being made, not by the individual supervisor, but by the entire board. AND the board doesn't act on its own behalf, but on behalf of the COUNTY. That's why it's galling- if not more legally questionable- to see the groups who get the money blatantly advertizing the individual supervisor. I agree the groups are worthy. But skeptics might think the individual supervisors were deliberately using these gifts so the benefited organizations WOULD use their advertizing power for them (or their re-election chances)- as they do. Hmm --wonder what the fair political practices commission thinks? If credit is to be given by groups --it should only be to those to whom its due- County taxpayers.

Posted by historian | reply to this comment
June 17, 2009 6:38 pm

• Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
• Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
• Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.