Statement:“They use that fund ($2 million for each Supervisor every year) to give out taxpayer money to their favorite people, organizations or causes,” the ballot argument, Yes on B, March 27.
Determination: Barely True
Analysis: In June, voters will decide on Proposition B, which would limit county supervisors to serving two terms, or eight years in office.
Yes on B, a group supporting the measure, focused much of its ballot argument on complaints about the current supervisors. In particular, it zeroed in on gripes about the supervisors’ use of discretionary funds.
Over the years, county supervisors have doled out grants from a fund now called the Neighborhood Reinvestment Program. They take requests from nonprofits around the county, and their decisions are rubber stamped by colleagues.
But they decided, March 23, to cut the program in half as part of budget cuts. Instead of $2 million, each supervisor will have $1 million starting in the 2011 fiscal year.
Does that cutback make the $2 million figure used in the ballot argument false? The statement says (emphasis mine) “they use that fund…”
I called Mat Kostrinsky, the campaign manager for Yes on B. He called the statement true because the cutback won’t technically go into effect until the end of the fiscal year this summer.
We decided Kostrinsky may be technically correct for now, but the statement left out some serious context — context that may significantly alter the impression the claim left.
And that makes the statement: barely true.
If you disagree with our determination or analysis, please express your thoughts in the comments section of this blog post. Explain your reasoning.
You can also e-mail new Fact Check suggestions to firstname.lastname@example.org. What claim should we explore next?
— SCOTT LEWIS