National City leaders found themselves facing criticism two years ago after approving a program that allocated $100,000 annually for each council member to spend within their districts.
Initially, the absence of rules governing the use of these funds raised concerns over the legitimacy of various expenditures.
However, city officials contended that many of the funds had been used to fulfill one of the primary reasons behind the district budgets: hiring assistants.
Part-time council members, including one who opposed the funding, noted that employing assistants has significantly enhanced their organizational capabilities and engagement with constituents, facilitating the rollout of community programs.
Despite this, doubts linger amongst some residents regarding the appropriateness of having several thousand dollars in discretionary spending while the city grapples with a multimillion-dollar budget deficit.
Recent calls for increased transparency resurfaced last month after city officials presented a report detailing how much each council member had expended from July to January, marking the first half of the fiscal year.
Unfortunately, the report offered only summary totals for each district, omitting details about when, where, and how the funds had been spent.
“List what you do and let’s see it,” resident Edward Nieto implored the City Council during a March meeting.
“That way, people can judge what we got out of district budgeting.”
In response, officials agreed to enhance transparency and requested that city staff provide a detailed report.
The presentation of this report is slated for the upcoming City Council meeting on Tuesday, as indicated in an agenda released on Thursday.
The most recent breakdown of council members’ expenditures reveals that the following amounts have been spent from their $100,000 accounts:
– Councilmember Marcus Bush — $49,023
– Councilmember Luz Molina — $34,013
– Councilmember Jose Rodriguez — $51,464
– Councilmember Ditas Yamane — $47,923
A significant portion of these expenses has gone toward covering the salaries and benefits of assistants hired by the council members.
Additional expenses included office supplies, refreshments for district town halls, jackets adorned with city branding for office staff, and travel expenses for various events focused on housing and economic development in Sacramento and Mexico.
Notably, expenditures also included a $100 ticket that Rodriguez paid to attend the Chicano Federation’s 55th anniversary event and a $125 purchase by Yamane at H&M for blazers, which were tagged as “Yamane city apparel.”
Yamane further allocated $8,200 to implement a banner program within her district, covering the costs for over 60 banners, materials, and labor.
She explained that the banners aim to promote District 3 and encourage residents to support local businesses.
“There was no promotion that our city has gone to districting, and some of my constituents still don’t know that we’re a district,” she stated.
“So, this is one way to promote a district that has long been overlooked.
There’s a lot of businesses here.”
All council members except for Jose Rodriguez opted to hire one assistant each.
Rodriguez, meanwhile, employed four people, which drew criticism for bringing on two individuals who had previously worked on his unsuccessful 2022 mayoral campaign, as well as one who led a local Democratic club that endorsed him for District 2 shortly after signing a consulting contract with his office.
His colleagues publicly censured him late last year, with allegations including that he utilized city-funded staff for campaign-related purposes.
Rodriguez has consistently denied these claims, insisting that his office is more efficient in addressing local issues as a result of these hires.
He cited a recent problem as an example, noting that constituents have reported lewd acts taking place at various short-term rentals, which National City currently lacks policies to govern.
After a reported shooting incident at one rental, he and his staff began visiting neighborhoods to engage residents and inquire about their experiences living near short-term rental properties.
The feedback they received was mostly negative, which prompted them to recognize the need for a formal policy, with officials planning to review a proposed policy in the coming months.
His office has also undertaken the weekly inspection of defunct street lights, reporting them to the city and San Diego Gas & Electric for replacement.
Additionally, they plan to plant numerous trees along transit corridors in his district after securing grant funding.
“Stuff like that would never be possible if I did not have staff,” Rodriguez remarked.
“We literally are driving around at night and reporting lights that need replacing.
If we see a pothole, we should fix it immediately.
If we notice inadequate tree cover in a public space, we should address that.
We’re trying to be proactive about addressing issues.”
Molina echoed his sentiments, affirming that having an assistant has enhanced efficiency and broadened her outreach to constituents.
However, she remained skeptical about the propriety of the district budgets.
She and Mayor Ron Morrison opposed the allocation of these funds.
“One of the primary reasons it took me a while to utilize my district budget is because I was trying to figure out how best to do it without so much impact,” she reflected, adding that she believes she has found a balance.
Molina’s assistant, Pedro Garcia, previously worked full-time in the city’s economic development department and is now dividing his schedule between both offices.
They collaborated with City Attorney Berry Schultz to draw up a “strict contract” determining his responsibilities within the District 1 office.
Half of his salary is funded through Molina’s $100,000 budget, while the other half is covered by the city department.
“In essence, it’s budget neutral,” she explained.
“I am very happy with that outcome.”
This controversial district budget initiative marked a significant change in National City, as the full-time mayor traditionally had a larger budget than the part-time council members.
The mayor’s budget had previously encompassed the salary and benefits of a full-time assistant, as well as funding for events like the State of the City, travel expenses, supplies, and training.
Council members received an allocation of just $3,000 each for travel and training and shared a single assistant whose salary was included in the city manager’s budget.
City officials contended that given the full-time nature of governance and the equal voting power of the five City Council members, it was logical for the part-time officials to receive district funds more comparable to the mayor’s budget.
In June, a policy was adopted stating that funds can be utilized for staffing, professional services, travel, training, and conferences.
Notably, these funds cannot be employed for contributions to or support of nonprofit organizations, political activities, or gifts of public funds.
image source from：https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2025/04/13/how-national-city-leaders-have-spent-their-100k-district-budgets/
