Citizen Portal
Sign In

Board signals support for 1 Team 1 Dream small‑business program; asks staff for MOU and accountability terms

Lake County Board of Supervisors · November 6, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After hearing from organizers and businesses, the Lake County Board of Supervisors agreed Nov. 4 to support the 1 Team 1 Dream small‑business competition with a proposed initial county allocation of $25,000, contingent on a staff‑drafted MOU that spells out public purpose and reporting requirements.

Lake County supervisors on Nov. 4 expressed support for a local small‑business competition known as "1 Team 1 Dream" and gave direction for county staff to prepare an MOU and system of controls for an initial county contribution of $25,000.

Organizers described the program as a multi‑club Rotary and community effort to support food‑and‑beverage small businesses and culinary training, and said sponsors and in‑kind partners at cities and community colleges were helping reduce costs. During public comment Olga Martin Steele and others detailed that sponsorships fund cash awards and business support services for winners and stressed the program’s local economic development value.

Supervisor comments repeatedly raised legal concerns about the California doctrine prohibiting gift of public funds. County Counsel and CAO staff advised that if the board chose to provide discretionary funding, it should be tied in writing to an enforceable public purpose and documented in an MOU or contract specifying deliverables, allowable uses (venues, training, marketing, youth internships) and reporting obligations. With that guidance, supervisors agreed by consensus to a $25,000 initial allocation and directed staff to return with an MOU and recommended contract terms to ensure funds are spent only for specified public purposes. Several supervisors also suggested attaching reporting and receipts requirements and limiting awards from county funds to venue, training, or marketing rather than direct cash prizes if legally required.

Staff said they would draft the MOU as quickly as possible to allow the organizers time to meet program timelines and would include auditing or receipts provisions to document public‑purpose expenditures.