What's wrong with SJ's nonprofit community?

Two years ago, local nonprofits stood in unison opposing racially tinged ads distributed by the SVO (Chamber of Commerce). This year, when local Labor groups distributed mailers that were even more explicitly bigoted in nature (in this case, anti-Arab, anti-immigrant), those groups sat on their hands. Only one local nonprofit, the Silicon Valley Public Accountability Foundation spoke up to decry Labor's ugly politicking.  Jonathan Fleming is the founder and director of SVPAF and explores what's going on with local nonprofits in a conversation with Opp Now co-founder Christopher Escher.

Opportunity Now: I have always felt that one of the most important roles nonprofit advocacy groups can play is to have a sharp focus on issues that would be beyond parties, beyond factions.  Did that sense of nonpartisanship play into your creation of SVPAF?

Jonathan Fleming:  We want the Silicon Valley Public Accountability Foundation to further the common good and general welfare of all people in our county. Everybody. Regardless of political persuasion or anything else.  Having a diverse executive board is important so that many ideas are presented and debated.  We encourage respectful disagreement and do not explore and issue from an outside group with a predetermined outcome. We don't rubberstamp anything.

ON: A lot of people think that local nonprofits, especially the ones in the orbit of the SV Council of Nonprofits, are just extensions of South Bay Labor--even when it has nothing to do with the nonprofits' missions. Many people were floored that environmental organizations like Our City Forest and Peninsula Open Space Trust were taking public positions on redistricting last year--lobbying for Labor's map, which was credibly accused of being anti-Asian. What's going on there?

JF: I can't speak for those nonprofits because I don't work for them. But it's hard not to consider this potential sequence and wonder if it applies here:

Step 1: Organize and create a bunch of local nonprofits loyal to South Bay Labor.

Step 2: Fill their boards with activists that you can count on.

Step 3: Overload commissions and government staff with these activists.

Step 4: Create boundaries that ensure victories for you over the next decade and move your toughest political opposition in and out of election races as you see fit.

Step 5: Win the election and control the City Council and Board of Supervisors.

Step 6: Pay these nonprofits with government grants controlled by your elected officials.

Step 7: Repeat.

Blatantly wrong, but very well executed.

ON: Many of the local nonprofits claim to be about racial, social, and economic justice. And they advocate loudly when organizations like the SVO run race-baiting campaign ads. But when labor runs arguably anti-immigrant and anti-Arab ads: Crickets. What gives?

JF: Politics is dirty and some organizations put ethics aside and do whatever they feel is necessary to win. The nonprofit sector is no different, but it is easier to see the corruption when you follow the money, especially with government grants. Many local nonprofits are only able to operate because our government hands them large sums of our tax dollars to stay in business and advocate for the special interests. That is why we oftentimes see nonprofits stepping out of their defined mission and becoming politically charged with the attitude of "what’s good for me is not good for thee..." because they have to in order to receive money to those whom they are beholden to.

I wish that San Jose had the power and the willingness to mandate that city elections can only be funded by the people living in San Jose. Take businesses, unions, special interests and every other third party entity out of the equation. Make harsh penalties for lying and let the people decide for themselves. Unfortunately, if you did that, the special interests would lose a lot of money for their executive officers and/or Board of Directors and they would fight tooth and nail to preserve their own paychecks.

The Silicon Valley Public Accountability Foundation will always stand up for what is just and ethical, regardless of popularity, because it is the right thing to do.

This article is part of an exclusive Opp Now series on hazy, shady, and all-out criminal relationships between local nonprofits/gov't:

  • Jonathan Fleming, founder and director of SVPAF, speaks to what's going on with SJ's nonprofit community.

  • Joel Kotin at Philanthropy Daily analyzes the worrisome dynamic of local left-wing nonprofits advocating for extremist policies while at the same time benefiting from taxpayer and ultra-rich funder largesse.

  • Nonprofit attorney Scott Hartley of Hartley Law clarifies the parameters that apply to nonprofits when it comes to political activity.

  • SFStandard.com reports on how nonprofits in San Francisco can leverage huge sums of taxpayer dollars for political activity while neglecting their core mission.

  • Planning Commissioner chair Pierluigi Oliverio offers a compromise in the ongoing dispute over whether local progressive nonprofits break regulations with their aggressive lobbying of City staff /politicians: treat all advocacy activity the same.

  • Josh Koehn explains in the SF Standard that many residents are urging for transparency in how NP partners address objectives and use taxpayer funds. However, local nonprofit lobbyists strongly request no additional stipulations be enforced—lest the paperwork adds up.

  • The HJTA's Susan Shelley untangles LA's recently-passed Measure ULA. Residents making high-value real estate transactions must fork over some big coin, but none of it will go to emergency shelters or transitional housing—just unaccountable nonprofits peddling the discredited Housing First mantra.

  • David Eisbach points out the consequences of COPA's underlying idea: that unhoused people must rely on larger entities to advance in life. Putting nonprofit orgs in a tremendous position of power over lower-income SJ residents/officials will compound conflict-of-interest problems.

  • Gov't misconduct expert Josh Koehn reports on a new lawsuit against SF nonprofit org the United Council of Human Services, which alleges that CEO Gwendolyn Westbrook has inappropriately used funds for personal benefit.

  • Local nonprofits act just like lobbyists (but retain their tax exempt status) and brazenly invite conflict of interest concerns. Joel Kotkin provides the backstory in Philanthropy Daily.

  • Local neighborhood coalition Families & Homes SJ wonders how it's okay that the city's Housing Director can sit on the board of a local housing nonprofit.

  • SF org Clean City Coalition is alleged to have engaged in highly illegal, dangerous money laundering behaviors.

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity

Image by IISG

Jax Oliver