Petrelis Files

SF Chron: Results from City-Funded Charities? (Hello, Charlotte Shultz?)

Our local major daily's resident conservative crank columnist, C.W. Nevius, on Saturday penned a essay about the Nonprofit Industrial Complex and how much City money it eats up:

[T]his year the cost is above $500 million.

Needless to say, the tricky problem is to decide how funds are allocated. Some groups are doing wonderful, valuable work, and some, frankly, are wasting our time and money.

Fortunately, over the years the city has hit upon a surefire system.

"It's whoever yells the loudest," said a former City Hall insider who spent years at the forefront of budget battles.

Speaking of groups wasting taxpayer dollars, I've been following how socialite and Protocol Chief Charlotte Shultz has a charity called the San Francisco Host Committee and the annual $250,000 grant it receives from the City, for invitation-0nly parties and without producing itemized receipts. 

The San Francisco Chronicle's anonymous City Hall source is wrong. I don't Ms. Shultz yells in order to keep receiving taxpayer dollars. She's been a friend to various mayors and has other powerful friends who attend her soirees.

I've tried to get the attention of the Chronicle's reporters about the evidence the City has provided me about the waste and rule-breaking of Ms. Shultz's charity, but they've ignored demands to hold the host committee accountable.

 (The 2009 Diplomat's Party was paid for with City money. Photo credit: SF Chronicle.)

One Chronicle writer who does pay beaucoup attention to the host committee is their social-scene-and-party columnist Catherine Bigelow who can be counted to gush over Ms. Shultz's soirees and never once raise the distasteful matter of who's funding the fun. 

Nevius went on to say:

So here's a crazy idea. Suppose the social service network were run like a business. Suppose that at each round of funding, clear and definable goals were set.

And finally - and you'd better sit down for this one - suppose the nonprofits that weren't cutting it were told: "Sorry, this isn't working. We're not funding you this year."

Um, Mr. Nevius, why not get specific about a few charities that don't run like businesses and keep receipts or have goals that benefit the taxpayers, starting with the San Francisco Host Committee?

Not only has Ms. Shultz failed to produce itemized receipts, but her charity has violated the City's sunshine nonprofit law and her lawyer pleaded ignorance in writing about the law's existence and application to the committee, even though the annual grant includes the law's language and requirements.

There's also the matter of the 1999 Prop F ballot initiative that barred City funds from being spent on diplomatic purposes and functions of the Protocol Office, that apparently is no hindrance to our tax dollars paying for Ms. Shultz's diplomatic parties. 

Will Nevius and the Chronicle ever follow the money flowing from City coffers to the host committee?