A Stockton city councilmember’s discretionary spending was again in the spotlight Friday after fellow councilmembers began censure proceedings against her for alleged misuse of taxpayer funds.
District 1 Councilmember Michele Padilla could face censure Aug. 20 for allegedly letting candidates campaign at an event she paid for using several thousand of her $15,000 discretionary fund, according to councilmembers’ letter requesting the censure.
While Padilla’s funds have dominated headlines, few may know that councilmembers’ discretionary funds pale in comparison to the discretionary money the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors voted to allocate themselves last year.
Under the January 2023 policy, each supervisor gets $250,000 in discretionary or “district funds” — nearly 17 times what councilmembers receive — each year, when the county budget is deemed sustainable.
At roughly $2.8 billion, the county budget is about three times the size of the city’s $956 million budget.
Stockton’s city attorney and city manager’s office review councilmembers’ discretionary fund requests before they spend the money.
But who holds supervisors accountable for their spending?
What do county rules allow?
Under the county’s policy, in years when the budget is deemed sustainable, supervisors each get $250,000 to give to community programs or activities that benefit their districts, according to the resolution supervisors passed unanimously Jan. 24, 2023.
“Those elected officials closest to their district know how — because they’re not our money, they’re taxpayers’ money — they know best how to spend that money to help their particular part of the community,” District 4 Supervisor Steve Ding said.
This year, recipients have included groups from the Tracy Theatre Arts Collaborative, little leagues, animal shelters to the Stockton Kings and the Miracle Mile Revitalization Project.
Unlike typical county funding opportunities, discretionary money isn’t widely advertised, supervisors said. Potential recipients typically connect with supervisors at events, they said. Once a supervisor identifies a project, it must get a three-fifths vote on the board to receive discretionary funds, county policy says.
Recipients, such as nonprofits, must agree to be audited if selected by county auditors.
But “the county does not require recipients of discretionary funds to provide documentation regarding how the funds were spent,” Assistant County Administrator Brenda Kiely said.
No ‘political purposes’
Like Stockton’s policy, county policy forbids supervisors from using discretionary money for political purposes. Navigating possible political gray areas was part of the discussion from the start.
“A lot of people see this as kind of a political slush fund,” District 2 Supervisor Paul Canepa said last January. “Holding people accountable is really important for me, so that you don’t have the appearance of a slush fund and ‘hey, this is helping me get re-elected.'”
The policy the board ultimately passed 5-0 does not define “political purposes,” nor explain how supervisors or county staff would be alerted if a supervisor used discretionary funds politically. It also doesn’t specify what the consequences would be for political spending.
‘Who makes that final call?’
Following Padilla’s alleged misuse of her discretionary fund, supervisors briefly considered creating rules to ensure county discretionary funds don’t make their way into political campaigns.
“I don’t want to be the one that has to tell a board member, ‘this appears to be a campaign function,'” Clerk of the Board Rachel DeBord said.
“Then there’s a back and forth with the board member saying, ‘no, it’s not a campaign.’ Who makes that final call? I think it should be the board.”
At the special meeting Thursday, District 3 Supervisor Tom Patti — who is running for mayor of Stockton — requested supervisors use $10,000 of their discretionary money to hold town halls about public safety and homelessness across the county.
“I’ll address the elephant in the room,” Ding said. “That $10,000 is kind of an identical amount to what was put in the papers the last few days with what the city of Stockton did, and a city councilwoman that just went a little sideways on taking the responsibility.”
“How do we make sure that it’s not seen as money used for getting somebody possibly in front of folks for an election year?” Canepa said.
“(That is) very different, and a very distinct difference, (from) what we’re doing here, which is informative. You will not see poster signs up, who to vote for, who to support or anything. It is all about what the county’s doing,” Patti said.
The board ultimately took no action on new rules, and unanimously approved Patti’s request.
Record reporter Aaron Leathley covers government accountability. She can be reached at aleathley@recordnet.com or on Twitter @LeathleyAaron. Support local news, subscribe to The Stockton Record at https://www.recordnet.com/subscribenow.