BOT Agrees to Trim SOPAC, CCR Subsidies by 10%
The Board agreed to trim funding to SOPAC and the Community Coalition on Race by 10 percent but agreed to maintain 2009 funding levels for Main Street South Orange and YouthNet.
After months of meetings to hone the 2010 municipal budget, the Board of Trustees has managed to whittle the municipal tax increase down to 2 percent, according to data presented at a Monday night workshop.
The drop from 3.5 percent to the current 2 percent increase was largely accomplished through the allocation of a one-time $600,000 payment to the Village by Sterling Properties, the developer behind The Avenue at South Orange condos. However, Village Administrator John Gross was asked to look for savings in other areas, and he recommended cutting subsidies to the non-profits the Village currently supports—SOPAC, Community Coalition on Race, Main Street South Orange and YouthNet—by another 10 percent.
Gross recommended cutting funding to Main Street South Orange from $50,000 to $45,000 and for YouthNet—which is also funded by Maplewood—from $15,000 to $13,500. (In 2008, MSSO got $34,200, and YouthNet received $22,500 from South Orange, before cuts were made in 2009.) The Board decided to keep their funding at 2009 levels.
Gross's recommendation to trim funding to the Community Coalition on Race (which also receives funds from Maplewood) from $25,000 to $22,500 was accepted. Trustees Michael Goldberg and Nancy Gould expressed concern about continuing to fund a non-profit that's politically active. (CCR has been visibly supportive of the controversial proposal to de-level seventh grade classes in the school district, which was approved this month.)
Village President Doug Newman observed that the budgetary impact of withdrawing funding from a small non-profit would be enormous, and that the CCR has defended its advocacy work by contending that it doesn't meet the IRS definition for lobbying.
SOPAC was the most complex non-profit up for discussion, and the Board agreed to cut its funding from the originally proposed $255,000 to $229,500. (Last year, the subsidy was $195,000, with another $60,000 appropriated in the capital budget.)
However, the net funding from the Village to SOPAC stands at $279,712, up from $209,751 in 2009. In 2008 and 2009, SOPAC repaid the Village for short-term debt service—for $156,617 and $162,517, respectively. But officials say SOPAC's ability to repay this year's $140,710 amount is doubtful.
"My belief is they won't be in a position to provide it," said Gross. Newman added that his understanding was that SOPAC had tapped into donor support to make the payment last year, which doesn't appear to be forthcoming again.
robert chandross
8:50 pm on Thursday, September 16, 2010
Your math and that of the Board of Trustees with regard to SOPAC escapes me. If SOPAC is not going to meet its contract to pay the Village $140,710 which it agreed to under the terms of its debt roll over, then the correct amount of the subsidy for this year would be that amount plus $229,500, which comes to $370,210. That would be considerably more than the $255,000 subsidy provided in 2009, including the amount that was capitalized. It is outrageous that the subsidy to SOPAC is going to increase this much at a time of economic hardship for residents. If the BOT wants to subsidize SOPAC, the subsidy of $229,500 should be reduced dollar for dollar by the amount of debt service that is not paid.
Marcia Worth
11:28 am on Friday, September 17, 2010
Mr. Chandross: Thank you for your comment. While this particular story was written by my predecessor, I can respond on her and my own behalf. If you read through the budget packet available on the town website, you may note the subsidy for SOPAC is listed as an expense. Debt repayment appears as money coming into the coffers. The total impact on a taxpayer might not be different when a payment is not made, but it's important to note the distinction between budget lines.