Taxpayer funding of non-government functions | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: Jim Bispo's weekly column appears in the Beaufort Observer

    The County Commission gives away thousands of taxpayer dollars every year; just gives it away. They will raise taxes this year to continue that practice. Yet they do so without giving serious consideration to how that money is used. Many of the recipients duplicate services and functions that the County funds in other departments. And the majority on the Commission to the best of my knowledge have never questioned the results achieved by those receiving the handouts. Nor did they even look at how much of the organizations' budgets go for "management," which in some cases is rather substantial. Moreover, no conditions are placed on any of these organizations' use of tax dollars.

    To my knowledge the Commission has never really discussed the major issue here: Are these functions truly governmental functions i.e. those benefitting the entire population versus those which benefit only a select few?? Just because something is a "good idea" does not mean it is a responsibility of taxpayers to meet that need. There would be no end to such largesse if that rationale were used...or more precisely: continues to be used. What's wrong with this situation is that the Commission is using the power of government to confiscate money from individuals and then making donations to selected groups with little or no oversight simply because the recipients seem to be doing good and a majority of Commissioners think it is a good idea. Consider the consequences if we extend that reasoning. As former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher is reported to have once said: "the problem (with liberals giving away other peoples' money) is that eventually they run out of other people's money." The Commission has reached that point when they consider raising taxes to fund their "good ideas."

    The more one looks at the County's so called "outside agency" budget requests, the more muddled the picture becomes.

    The following information was gleaned from the Tax Forms (IRS Form 990) filed by each of the organizations included in the Outside Agency requests submitted to the County requesting taxpayer funding. A spreadsheet that can be downloaded by clicking here provides income and expenditure information, and the amount of County funding requested by each organization for most of the activities included in the Outside Agency Requests. URLs that will take one to each organization's 990 tax form are included on the spread sheet. Take a look at the spread sheet and look particularly at the Revenue, the Expenses incurred and the Year End balance carried in their books. The funding requested is another interesting figure. Even just a cursory look will likely make you want to rethink funding some of these organizations.

    The fact of the matter is that virtually all of the requests are for good sounding things. The problem is that there is no distinction made as to what activities are (or truly should be) the functions of government, i.e. those benefitting the entire population versus those which benefit only a select few. We will hear arguments to the effect that whatever is good for a particular segment of our population is truly a benefit for the entire population. There may be a connection, but it is so tenuous as to be little more than an imperfect rationalization or simply sophistry. I believe a fairly good argument could be made for funding (or at least considering for funding) those things that are functions of government; activities like the Sidney Dive Team which supports County law enforcement with all manner of water search and rescue activities. On the other hand those activities that benefit only a select few should perhaps be asked to support themselves through user fees from those who partake of the activity or fund raisers or private contributions. This is a conversation that the Commissioners need to have.

    In general, the Commissioners' discussions did not address what results these organizations achieve with the money that the Commissioners donate to them. A lot of information is available identifying how much funding has been provided in the past, but not much is said about what results are expected to be achieved with that money. The closest anyone came to describing a result was the Belhaven Museum which reported that it had 4578 visitors in 2008 (the latest year for which I could find one of their tax returns) and the Literacy Volunteers which reported a total of 74 clients served. The quantification of achievements is an area in dire need of attention. We need clearly defined output metrics for every organization seeking county funding - and we need. ongoing assessment of progress against those metrics. Both are currently lacking.

    In trying to make some sense out of all the "Help the Needy" activities seeking funding we see what would seem to be a lot of duplication between these good sounding activities and the Food and Nutrition Program (formerly The Food Stamp Program), the Women, Infant & Children (WIC) Program, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and likely other similar governmental programs.. Eligibility for these programs varies significantly depending on household size number and ages of children, and a number of other parameters. One thing is very clear and that is that the bar to qualify for theses benefits is quite low, which certainly leads one to question if the "Help the Needy" non-profits are not duplicating federal and state programs designed to help the needy. Are these predominately federally funded and locally managed operations being so poorly run that they must be supplemented by local non-profit organizations and County money?? The answer most likely depends on whom you ask. Even if those DSS programs were being mismanaged, would the solution to that problem be pouring more money on them in the form of non-profit organizations using county taxpayer money??

    According to a Wikipedia article we find that, "A chamber of commerce ... is a form of business network, e.g., a local organization of businesses (emphasis added) whose goal is to further the interests of businesses." Chambers of Commerce are clearly activities that are intended to benefit a rather select few. That would certainly raise the question as to why the taxpayers should be forced to support them. If the business community does not adequately support their local Chamber of Commerce, why should the long suffering tax payers be forced to support them?? If the rationale is that the Chamber promotes economic development then it would seem to be a duplication of one of the most well funded parts of County government. The County's Economic Development Commission (EDC) is certainly well funded and the director of the EDC is reportedly one of the highest paid county employees.

    A careful reading of the tax forms will identify a number of "Executive Directors", CEOs, or folks with other very important sounding titles who, although they came to do good, seem to have ended up doing quite well. Hmmm...

    The IRS seems to do little to monitor how these agencies spend their money. They apparently assume that by requiring the tax return information be made available to the public, those interested in the operation of the organizations will scrutinize the organizations. That could well account for the fact that many of those who prepare the returns don't appear to be overly concerned with accuracy and consistency. Our County Commission does not seem to believe it should determine what the organizations actually do with the money. For example little attention seems to be paid to how much of the taxpayer money they donate actually goes to provide the promised services versus how much goes to "administrative and management" costs. Those management costs are rather substantial in some of the organizations.

    The Turnage Theater presents a rather unique situation. The first question that might be asked is, "Why did we spend all that money to restore what some see as a monument to the good old days of segregation??". But that's another question for another day. Apparently at some point in time the Turnage foundation "engineered" a deal with the County to the effect that they would receive an annual grant equal to the amount of property tax they would otherwise pay. That is apparently the amount we see them requesting. (Let's hope the Committee of 100 doesn't hear about that deal or surely they will be going after the same thing for their organization.). What is not clear is how long the "tax reimbursement deal" is for. In their 2009 return the Turnage foundation reported a little over $207k of income and not quite $94k of expenses and yet they are still looking for a County handout. (Yes, I know. A deal is a deal. But...) The thing that is not only puzzling but a little worrisome about the Turnage operation is the existence of two (apparently) for-profit corporations involved in the operation somehow. Of course those tax returns are not open to the public (unless they elect to make them available) so there is no telling what's going on with them. It looks eerily like a similar "trick" that was pulled on the people of Belhaven a couple of years ago after the Wynne View building debacle.

    What value we are receiving for the money we are spending (some folks say "wasting") on the Highway 17 Transportation Association - for our very own (shared) lobbyist - remains a mystery. Another activity that sorely needs to identify specific, measurable outputs.

    The only thing about this budget review that is really clear is that it seems to be a whole lot easier to give away other peoples' money than it is to dig into our own pocket to fund these oh so important and valuable activities.

    D'ya think??