Senate Republican Leader Advococates for Stricter Oversight of Oregon Food Bank: What This Means for Our Community

Oregon Food Bank has faced criticism from some Republican lawmakers for stepping into political discussions, diverting from its main goal of fighting hunger. Recently, Sen. Daniel Bonham called for more oversight of the food bank and similar nonprofits that receive state funds.

Bonham introduced Senate Bill 644, which aims to form a legislative committee to audit the food bank. However, this proposal was met with skepticism from the Democratic majority in the Senate Human Services Committee. They questioned its necessity, given that the food bank already conducts annual financial audits. Conducting additional state audits could also mean costs for taxpayers.

Tensions between the food bank and Republicans grew following their vote against a $7.5 million allocation for the organization in 2023. This funding was crucial as it came after the federal temporary boost to food benefits ended. Republicans were also unhappy with the food bank’s statements against the war in Gaza and its support for certain legislative initiatives focused on climate and agriculture. Bonham mentioned that a food bank ad in The Oregonian featuring him made him feel that tax dollars were being misused.

The food bank insists its mission includes addressing root causes of hunger, which is why it sometimes engages in broader legislative issues. For instance, it backed bills related to reproductive health, arguing that access to such care can affect food security and poverty levels. In 2024, the food bank distributed over 91 million meals.

Andrea Williams, the food bank’s president, highlighted that they comply with all necessary audits. In 2023, the organization noted expenditures of over $90 million on food programs and only $3 million on advocacy. She stressed that no government funds are spent on political advocacy. Williams argued that Bonham’s proposal could waste resources that are urgently needed for hunger relief, especially as demand rises.

Sandy Chung from the ACLU warned that the bill could lead to lawsuits, suggesting it violates constitutional rights by targeting nonprofits for their political views. She expressed concerns about the potential misuse of power against organizations advocating for their communities.

In response to ACLU’s feedback, Bonham considered expanding the bill to include more nonprofits; however, this could become financially burdensome. Auditing thousands of organizations could cost millions, as audits typically range from $15,000 to $20,000 each.

Jim White of the Nonprofit Association of Oregon pointed out that the legislation would discourage nonprofits from participating in democracy for fear of audits. This could create a chilling effect, making organizations hesitant to express their positions on policy issues.

It seems unlikely that the bill will progress any further. Sen. Floyd Prozanski voiced his disapproval, seeing it as a way to retaliate against nonprofits with differing beliefs. He affirmed that the food bank has adhered to all regulations required by the state.

Sen. Sara Gelser Blouin emphasized the importance of dialogue over audits. She suggested discussing how nonprofits use state funds during budget discussions instead of resorting to audits.