Editor’s Note: This questionnaire is part of an ongoing series publishing candidates’ opinions on how they would run the government if they were elected county supervisor. All questionnaires are archived on the Voice of OC Elections Page.
Orange County Supervisors have faced growing questions over the past year about their use of discretionary funds as they start to dwindle down.
The funds were launched during the COVID-19 pandemic, but supervisors have continued to spend them for years after lockdowns were lifted, awarding hundreds of thousands of dollars to handpicked community organizations, nonprofits and events in their districts.
They only beefed up disclosure of where that money was going after a public scandal involving former Supervisor Andrew Do, who used some of his funds to illegally support a nonprofit his daughter worked at, crimes which he later went to prison for.
We asked candidates for county supervisor if they would support making those discretionary funds permanent or not.
Would you support an effort to expand or replenish county supervisors’ discretionary budgets?
Dixon, Fifth District: I would not support expanding discretionary budgets under the current system. With the county facing a structural budget imbalance, any additional spending needs to be carefully justified. The Andrew Do scandal also showed why stronger safeguards are needed when individual supervisors control taxpayer dollars. There are worthwhile community organizations and local needs that deserve county support, but taxpayers should be able to see where that money goes, why it was awarded and how it was ultimately spent.
Foley, Fifth District: We must address the County’s structural budget imbalance, obtain a third-party independent audit of the county financials, and protect essential services before considering additional discretionary funding for supervisors.
Shaw, Fourth District: Given the county’s fiscal challenges, expanding discretionary spending accounts would not be one of my priorities. If the county’s budget remains imbalanced, I would consider leading by example and foregoing discretionary funds.
Traut, Fourth District: No. Individual elected officials should not be able to independently direct taxpayer dollars. Recent abuses have shown the risks of that system. If discretionary funds ultimately do remain, they should be subject to public criteria, written scoring, conflict checks, independent review, real-time disclosure, and regular audits.
Do you think it is appropriate for county supervisors to have discretionary budgets?
Dixon, Fifth District: I think there can be a legitimate role for discretionary funding to address specific community needs, but there needs to be strong safeguards on how that money is spent. Public trust in government is already low, and the Andrew Do scandal only made that worse. Any discretionary funding should have clear rules and require supervisors to publicly disclose who receives the money, how much they receive and what it is being used for. These are taxpayer dollars, and the public should be able to follow the money.
Foley, Fifth District: Yes. But, discretionary grant funds must only be approved with a vote of the Board, strict oversight, clear funding criteria, and transparent reporting of use of funds. I’ve reported my office grant funding annually online and in my annual year in review update.
Shaw, Fourth District: There can be legitimate circumstances where limited discretionary funds allow a supervisor to respond to a specific community need. Any such funds should be reported publicly, with the public able to follow every dollar.
Traut, Fourth District: No. I do not believe individual supervisors should control separate pots of taxpayer money. Legitimate community needs should be funded through the County’s regular budget process or a transparent grant program with objective criteria, professional staff review, public disclosure, and Board oversight. That preserves responsiveness to local needs without concentrating spending authority in one elected official.
If you do support discretionary budgets, describe the benefits to the community and where you would allocate funds.
Dixon, Fifth District: The benefit of discretionary funding is that it gives supervisors the ability to address local needs that may not fit neatly into a countywide budget. In the Fifth District, I would look at needs involving public safety, homelessness, veterans and local infrastructure, as well as partnerships with cities and nonprofits that provide services directly to residents. I would focus on projects where county dollars can solve a specific problem or fill a real need. Any funding I would ultimately approve would be first vetted through a public application process, tied to a specific county purpose and recommendations publicly disclosed.
Foley, Fifth District: I prioritize funds to meet basic needs, protect public safety, address housing and infrastructure gaps, and support programs lacking traditional funding sources. Examples include funding Second Harvest Food Bank and contraceptive care to offset the Trump administration’s cuts to food assistance and women’s health services. I supported helicopter water refill stations for wildfire response and housing for domestic violence survivors. For children, I funded shoes, school musical instruments, community gardens, arts, dance, ocean science, and Title I education programs at Crystal Cove, the Orange County Museum of Art, and the Holocaust Museum of Orange County.
Shaw, Fourth District: I would focus it on clear public purposes and measurable community benefits. Examples could include parks and recreation improvements, infrastructure, public safety partnerships, homelessness services and community organizations providing demonstrable services to residents.
Traut, Fourth District: I do not support discretionary budgets. If the Board nevertheless keeps them, I would require objective criteria, professional review, public scoring, conflict checks, real-time disclosure, and audits so funding decisions are based on demonstrated community need rather than political discretion.
Noah Biesiada is a Voice of OC reporter. Contact him at nbiesiada@voiceofoc.org.
