City Hall Watch
West Covina’s Measure A Homeless Funding: What Was Allocated, What Was Spent, and What Residents Still Need Answered
West Covina City Council is scheduled to consider an amendment involving Measure A Local Solutions Funding for homeless services. The item appears straightforward at first, but the original agreement and the new staff report raise several questions about prior-year spending, carryover, SGVCOG retention, reimbursement eligibility, and program results.
West Covina Measure A Homeless Funding: FY 2025-26 at a Glance
1. Original Allocation (FY 2025-26)
Awarded through SGVCOG
$338,802Reimbursement-based funding
2. How the Funds Were Planned to Be Used
3. Spending Requirements in Original MOA
50% must be spent by
April 1, 2026
If not met, plan required to spend 70% by June 15, 2026
$237,161Annual report due to SGVCOG by August 1, 2026
4. What the August 18, 2026 Staff Report Says
Amount actually expended in FY 2025-26
$66,306Carryover into FY 2026-27
$170,1465. Where the Numbers Stand
FY 2025-26 allocation vs. actual spending
The Unexplained Difference
Original allocation$338,802
Minus amount expended- $66,306
Equals remaining$272,496
Minus carryover shown- $170,146
$102,3506. SGVCOG Retention for Regional Program
SGVCOG will retain $104,635 of West Covina's allocation to implement the SGV Home Renter Protection & Homelessness Prevention Program through God's Pantry.
7. Amended Agreement on August 18 Agenda
New maximum reimbursement amount
$509,634$66,306 expended in FY 2025-26 + $443,328 available for FY 2026-27
What Residents Deserve to Know
- Did West Covina meet the spending requirements?
- Can the City account for the full $338,802?
- Was anything reallocated to regional programs?
- Was the required annual report submitted?
- What results did the funding actually produce?
West Covina City Council will consider an amendment on August 18 involving Measure A Local Solutions Funding for homeless services.
At first glance, the item looks straightforward: the City is receiving another allocation of Measure A money through the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, commonly referred to as SGVCOG.
But after reviewing the original agreement approved earlier this year and comparing it with the numbers in the new staff report, I found several questions that I believe deserve a clear answer before Council approves the amendment.
I want to be clear from the beginning: I am not alleging that money was lost, misused, or improperly handled.
What I am saying is that the numbers currently available to residents do not yet tell the complete story. When public funding comes with specific spending requirements, reporting deadlines, and measurable goals, residents should be able to follow that money from beginning to end.
Why This Matters
- Residents should be able to see what was allocated, what was spent, what was reimbursed, what carried forward, and what results were produced.
- The original Measure A agreement included spending deadlines, reporting requirements, approved uses, and performance goals.
- The new staff report says only $66,306 was expended during FY 2025-26, while $170,146 is described as carryover and SGVCOG will retain $104,635 for a regional program.
Where This Started
On February 3, 2026, the West Covina City Council considered an agreement with SGVCOG for Measure A Local Solutions Funding.
Measure A is the Los Angeles County half-cent sales tax approved by voters in November 2024 to fund homelessness prevention, housing, services, and related programs.
Instead of allowing SGVCOG to use West Covina’s portion entirely through regional programs, West Covina chose to become a subrecipient so it could use its allocation locally.
The original agreement awarded West Covina $338,802 for Fiscal Year 2025-26. The funding was reimbursement-based, meaning the City was generally required to incur eligible expenses, document them, and submit invoices before receiving reimbursement.
What the $338,802 Was Supposed to Fund
| Approved Use | Amount |
|---|---|
| Motel voucher program | $50,000 |
| Eight LA CADA interim housing beds | $50,000 |
| LA CADA case management and outreach services for people dealing with substance use disorder and/or severe mental illness | $170,708 |
| Administrative and operational costs supporting the LA CADA program | $68,094 |
| Total | $338,802 |
These were not simply broad categories with no expected results attached. The agreement also included performance goals.
For example, the motel voucher program listed a target of 100 unduplicated people experiencing homelessness placed into interim housing through motel vouchers, with a further target of 60 people placed into permanent housing within three months of receiving a voucher.
The LA CADA portion was intended to provide eight interim housing beds and case management aimed at connecting people to supportive services and ultimately permanent housing. So the agreement was not just about spending money. It was supposed to produce measurable results.
The Agreement Also Had Spending Deadlines
The original agreement required West Covina to spend 50% of its allocation by April 1, 2026. Fifty percent of $338,802 equals $169,401.
If the City could not meet that requirement, the agreement said West Covina had to submit a written plan explaining how it would spend 70% of the allocation by June 15, 2026. Seventy percent equals approximately $237,161.
The agreement also required West Covina to submit an annual report to SGVCOG by August 1, 2026, including an accounting showing whether the City had reached the 70% spending level by June 15.
What Happened If the Spending Target Was Not Met?
The agreement addressed unspent funding. It states that if West Covina failed to meet the required target, funding above the allowed 30% unspent threshold could be reallocated and transferred to regional programs.
The MOA also required monthly invoices with supporting documentation and gave SGVCOG authority to reject reimbursement for untimely or unsupported claims under certain circumstances. That is why the exact amount actually spent matters.
Now Compare That With the August 18 Staff Report
The new August 18 agenda report says West Covina's FY 2026-27 Measure A allocation is $273,182. It also says the City is carrying forward $170,146 from FY 2025-26, giving West Covina a stated total of $443,328 available for FY 2026-27.
But the same report says only $66,306 was expended by the City during FY 2025-26.
If $66,306 represents the City’s complete FY 2025-26 Measure A expenditure, West Covina spent approximately 19.6% of the original $338,802 allocation.
That is well below both numbers written into the original agreement: the 50% target of $169,401 and the 70% target of approximately $237,161.
That does not automatically prove the City violated the agreement. There could be additional accounting information, approved modifications, timing differences between expenditures and reimbursements, or SGVCOG actions that are not included in the agenda materials I have reviewed.
But based strictly on the numbers currently presented, there is a major question that needs an answer: how does $66,306 in reported spending line up with the spending requirements in the original MOA?
There Is Another Number That Needs to Be Reconciled
Start with the original allocation of $338,802. Subtract the amount the new report says was expended, $66,306. That leaves $272,496.
But the new report identifies only $170,146 as carryover. That creates a difference of $102,350.
At this point, I have not found a document in the agenda materials clearly explaining that $102,350 difference. I have also not found a document stating that the amount was returned, forfeited, withheld, reallocated, redirected, or otherwise made unavailable.
That does not mean one of those things happened. It means the public record I have reviewed does not yet clearly tell us what happened.
The New Agreement Adds Another Piece
The August 18 staff report also says SGVCOG will retain $104,635 of West Covina’s allocation to implement the SGV Home Renter Protection and Homelessness Prevention Program through a contracted service provider, God’s Pantry.
That amount is close to the unexplained $102,350 difference from the previous-year accounting, but it is not the same number. Because the figures are different, I do not believe it would be responsible to assume they are connected. But it is fair to ask whether they are.
Why Is the New Maximum Reimbursement Amount $509,634?
The proposed amendment increases the maximum reimbursement amount from $338,802 to $509,634.
The staff report explains that number as $66,306 expended during FY 2025-26 plus $443,328 available for FY 2026-27. That totals exactly $509,634.
The math works. But the structure raises another question. The amended maximum recognizes only the $66,306 actually expended from FY 2025-26, rather than carrying forward the original $338,802 maximum.
That makes it reasonable to ask whether West Covina is still eligible to seek reimbursement for the remainder of the original FY 2025-26 allocation. If not, why not? And if some of that funding was reallocated elsewhere, residents should be told exactly how much and why.
Could the City Simply Move the Money Somewhere Else?
Not freely, according to the original MOA. The agreement required West Covina to use the funding only for the approved Scope of Services and project budget.
If the City wanted to amend that project budget, it was required to submit a request to SGVCOG no later than April 1, 2026. SGVCOG, in turn, was required to submit budget amendment requests to Los Angeles County for approval, and the agreement specifically stated that approval was not guaranteed.
So if money was substantially reprogrammed from the uses originally approved, there should be documentation showing what changed and whether the change was approved.
What About the Actual Homelessness Results?
This is another part of the story that matters just as much as the money. The original agreement included specific performance measures.
For the motel voucher program alone, the target was 100 unduplicated people provided interim housing and 60 placed into permanent housing within three months.
The City’s program also included LA CADA interim beds, case management, outreach, substance-use treatment connections, severe-mental-illness services, and housing assistance.
Before another year of funding moves forward, residents should be able to answer two simple questions: how much did we actually spend, and what did that spending accomplish?
The Annual Report Should Help Answer This
The original MOA required West Covina to provide SGVCOG with an annual report by August 1, 2026. That report was supposed to include information necessary for SGVCOG to meet its own reporting requirements and specifically include an accounting showing whether West Covina spent 70% of its allocation by June 15.
The August 18 Council meeting comes after that deadline. One of the most important questions now is whether that annual report was submitted and what it says.
What We Know
- West Covina was allocated $338,802 in Measure A Local Solutions Funding for FY 2025-26.
- The original budget included motel vouchers, LA CADA interim housing beds, case management and outreach, and administrative/operational support.
- The original agreement included spending deadlines, reporting requirements, approved uses, and performance goals.
- The August 18 staff report says $66,306 was expended during FY 2025-26, $170,146 is being carried forward, and SGVCOG will retain $104,635 for a regional homelessness-prevention program.
- The proposed amended maximum reimbursement amount is $509,634.
What We Don’t Know Yet
- Whether West Covina met the spending requirements in the original SGVCOG MOA.
- How the full $338,802 FY 2025-26 allocation reconciles between spending, reimbursement, carryover, retention, reallocation, or unavailable funding.
- Why the amended reimbursement amount recognizes only $66,306 from FY 2025-26.
- Whether the $104,635 SGVCOG retention is connected in any way to prior-year unspent or unreimbursed funding.
- Whether the required August 1 annual report was submitted and what it shows about expenditures and results.
Questions Residents Should Ask
- Did West Covina meet the spending requirements in the original SGVCOG MOA? If not, what action was required or taken?
- Can the City reconcile the full $338,802 FY 2025-26 allocation? How much was spent, reimbursed, carried forward, retained, reallocated, or otherwise became unavailable?
- Why does the new agreement recognize only $66,306 from FY 2025-26 when calculating the amended reimbursement amount?
- Is the $104,635 being retained by SGVCOG for the regional homelessness-prevention program connected in any way to West Covina’s prior-year unspent or unreimbursed funding?
- Was the required August 1 annual report submitted, and what does it show about expenditures and actual results?
What I Am Not Saying
I am not saying West Covina lost $272,496. I am not saying the City violated the agreement. I am not saying the City improperly moved money. I am not saying SGVCOG punished West Covina. I am not saying anyone misused Measure A funding.
The documents I have reviewed do not establish those things. What the documents do establish is that the available numbers create reasonable questions.
What Happens Next
The West Covina City Council is scheduled to consider the Measure A amendment on August 18, 2026. The recommendation would authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute the first amendment with SGVCOG, execute related documents and future amendments, and approve the associated FY 2026-27 budget amendment.
I will be watching for staff's explanation of the prior-year spending, the carryover, the SGVCOG retention, and the required annual performance report. Once those answers are provided, StayJustIn will update this story so residents can see exactly what happened.
StayJustIn Bottom Line
West Covina was awarded $338,802 in Measure A homelessness funding for FY 2025-26. The original agreement included specific spending deadlines, reporting requirements, approved uses, and measurable outcomes.
The upcoming staff report says only $66,306 was expended and $170,146 is being carried forward. That does not automatically mean anything improper occurred.
But before another year of Measure A funding is approved, residents deserve a simple accounting: what was spent, what was reimbursed, what carried over, whether anything was reallocated, whether the agreement requirements were met, and what results the funding actually produced.
Community Reporting
Help Improve This Story
StayJustIn relies on residents, public records, and follow-up questions to help complete the picture.
- Have additional documents or public records?
- Notice something happening in your neighborhood?
- Think something important was missed?
- Have a question you want StayJustIn to investigate?
Tips are reviewed before publication and may help guide future reporting.
Please do not send private personal information, confidential records, or anything you do not have the right to share.
Send a Tip →