With massive cuts, layoffs and the grim potential for bankruptcy
in the coming years, Hollister city leaders should thoroughly
examine every last idea for additional spending.
With massive cuts, layoffs and the grim potential for bankruptcy in the coming years, Hollister city leaders should thoroughly examine every last idea for additional spending. That’s why it is curious that council members at their budget adoption last week approved an extra $25,000 to the Economic Development Corp. of San Benito County without a detailed analysis or questions surrounding the specific purpose of the additional funding.
Council members adopted the city’s budget last week and it included funding from the Hollister Redevelopment Agency, which has allocated money each year to the EDC and Hollister Downtown Association. The HDA has received $65,000 and asked for $20,000 more to sustain an event coordinator position. The EDC had received $50,000, while it gets additional funding from other sources such as San Benito County.
Officials denied the HDA’s request and approved the EDC’s, but did so without requesting any data or goals beyond a three-and-a-half-page letter that discussed activities from the past year and plans for the next one. The information was a broad summary, discussing such efforts from the past year as working to enhance the airport area for economic development, creating a Wine Country Council for tourism, and making more than 20 presentations promoting the city. It had plans for the next year that include establishing a business retention program, pursuit of expanding a “foreign trade zone” in Hollister, and discussions over possibly housing the Governor’s Office of Economic Development.
It all sounds nice, but the request certainly lacked a remarkable level of detail as to where the extra money is headed, and council members didn’t bother to ask.
It is possible the additional spending toward the EDC – and to the HDA for that matter – could greatly benefit economic development efforts. But if the additional expenditures are not quantifiable, then how could council members justify such added spending? They do not OK allocations to their own departments without details as to where the money is going, so why neglect to ask an outside group?
Government leaders three years ago took the initiative by enhancing the EDC’s top position, the president and CEO role held by Nancy Martin, and substantially increasing budgets toward the office. It was clear where the money was headed, largely toward a higher salary to recruit a capable leader such as Martin.
Now, city council members are ready to increase the allocation by 50 percent – about half the cost of some city positions – without requiring specific details.
