A proposed increase of grant funds in Solvang’s 2024-26 budget stirred up enough backlash to delay its inclusion, but the matter will resurface as a separate resolution in August for further review.
Reaction to the amendment—which suggested allocating an extra $125,000 for grant funding—was mixed among the public and elected officials during the Solvang City Council’s June 24 meeting.
In anticipation of the city’s biennial budget becoming effective July 1, Mayor Mark Infanti introduced the proposal on behalf of the city’s grant funding ad hoc committee during council comments.
“We want to give everybody on the council the opportunity to support organizations that they are particularly interested in,” Infanti said. “The idea is to add into the budget $125,000, based on $25,000 for each of the five of us to have to allocate to approved grant requesters.”
Infanti described the amendment as a way to potentially help organizations that meet the city’s grant application standards but ultimately don’t receive the desired amount of funding. Each council member would have the option to allocate their $25,000 between one or multiple organizations of their choice—from the pool of pre-approved groups.
“It’s called pork. … This is pure pork,” said Councilmember Robert Clarke, who asked City Attorney Chelsea O’Sullivan to comment on whether or not enough public notice was given to decide on an amendment of this kind.
“The item that is on the agenda is the budget, and you’re discussing adding a line item to the budget,” O’Sullivan said. “So, I think it’s an appropriate discussion … considering that grant funding generally already is a line item on the budget.”
In response, Clarke said “this room would be full out to the parking lot” if “the public was aware of this line item. … This stinks to high heaven.”
A total of three speakers participated in public comment. Each speaker sided with Clarke, including Solvang Senior Center President Jim Richardson.
“I think you’re stepping into dangerous territory,” Richardson said. “This subject of earmarks is not on the agenda.”
Richardson suggested that the City Council exclude any definitive amount, such as the suggested $25,000 per council member, in the budget and use a case-by-case method instead.
“If the majority of the council is not comfortable with placing a dollar amount on it tonight, you can always amend the budget … when it comes back with the CIP [capital improvement plan],” O’Sullivan said. “You could do an amendment at that time. … But the important thing is to pass a budget tonight so we can keep functioning.”
Clarke replied that “if the pork is out, I will vote on it.”
“Not to get on a soapbox, but I’ve raised my family from grade school to college in this town, and because they were in dance and youth government and sports and all that, I did nothing but raise money for 18 years,” Clarke said. “My message to the residents of Solvang is: It is not the city nor the taxpayers’ responsibility to pay for my good deeds … to pay for your good deeds.
“If you want to raise money and give food away, gosh, God bless you. That’s altruistic,” Clarke continued. “It’s not altruistic doing it with somebody else’s money.”
Immediately after approving the 2024-26 budget with a 4-0 vote (Councilmember David Brown was absent), the Solvang City Council agreed to direct staff to return in August with more data on a potential discretionary grant funds system.
