Yes, you are correct.
Thank you for explanining the situation more effectively than I did.

Often grants come with strings attached and expiration periods.
Many San Carlos residents thought using this money to pay for current expenses and help keep more of our parks open was a better use of that money at this time than installing the new artificial turf field at Highlands.
This could not be done or at least as Bob says The City determined it was not worth the risk to change the nature of the funding and so the money will be spent to install the new turf.

And we see this same scenario (govt organzaitions having to either spend money or lose it) play out in other areas.

We will see this “time” issue play out for the Hi-Speed Rail.
Either the funds raised from the recently passed CA bond or “matching” federal funding have a time limit.

I believe several cities and communities are considering legal action to fight the installation of the Hi-Speed Rail down the Peninsula. I believe Menlo Park and Atherton residents have already formed a group to do so.
Other communities may join in these efforts.

And one of the issues will be, folks in favor of the Hi-Speed Rail will push to make it happen before the funding committment expires. And if the issue ends up in Court, I am sure one of the arguments made in favor of building the Hi-Speed Rail will “if we don’t build it now, we will lose the money”.
I will try to find the exact details.

My overall point is that govt bodies are often incentivized (sp?) to spend rather than save money.

I don’t want to speak for Arn, but I believe what he is referring to is the grant from
PAMF to San Carlos which was earmarked specifically for field improvements to be used in conjunction with the Measure G money. There were questions which surfaced at the City Council meeting at which the synthetic turf was approved, as to whether PAMF would allow their grant to be redirected to other sources of need in the city. The opinion of the City Attorney was that in order to do this the City would need to re-open their agreement with PAMF and in doing so, anticipated that PAMF would also want to make changes that the City would not want to compromise on.

Thanks
Bob

As for the projected property tax growth for the City budget next year, the projection from Saturday’s Budget Workshop was zero – no increase over the current year.

On another note, I don’t understand why San Carlos thought it was doing its citizens a favor by lowering the amount of its local property taxes earmarked for schools. It strikes me as poor leadership.