Note: This was the text I had composed and sent to the board prior to being scheduled to appear.
…
It is fair to say that Brattleboro has asked about as much as it can of its citizens from property taxes. There is, however, another route to gaining more resources. It does not include taxation or fees. Rather, I am suggesting that the town take advantage of some key but under appreciated qualities it enjoys and raise money from contributions over and above the property tax. I am suggesting that Brattleboro do what many, if not most, charitable organizations do: invite, or appeal for, charitable contributions from those who appreciate the community and its services.
In particular, I propose that the town issue a general appeal for specific-purpose gifts of cash or appreciated securities.
Brattleboro already has a long history of benefiting from sizeable charitable gifts, a great many of which are readily apparent. Examples include donations made directly to the municipality and for establishing or supporting major local institutions. Municipally, the most obvious examples are the Brooks Memorial Library endowment funds and the high school’s several hundred thousand dollars’ worth of scholarship funds. Less obvious are the Hogle Wildlife Sanctuary near the Retreat Meadow and a number of private, non-profit foundations that support a variety of local services.
Everyone is familiar with the major local institutions that were begun for the public’s benefit with private seed money or which have been supported in part by continuing charitable gifts.
Major examples include:
· Brattleboro Memorial Hospital
· Brooks Memorial Libray
· Brattleboro Retreat
· Austine School for the Deaf
· United Way
There are literally dozens of other, smaller, local human service organizations that benefit from annual gifts and estate-planning legacies.
The town has also long benefited, both directly and indirectly, from citizens who have been prominent in their generosity to the town, including:
· Fred Harris, for whom the ski jump is named;
· Nelson Withington, for whom our skating rink is named;
· Bob Gannett, who with his wife Aldie are legendary for the family’s quiet generosity in countless ways.
There are also quite a few private foundations that benefit our community. The best known example is the Thomas Thompson Trust, which was inspired by Mr. Thompson’s wife, who, having grown up understanding personal hardship, persuaded Mr. Thompson to benefit Brattleboro and Rhinebeck, New York. That trust has been a major benefactor to many local non-profit organizations literally for generations. The list of other, smaller foundations benefiting Brattleboro is very long.
There are, in addition, dozens, if not hundreds, of people who have given selflessly and tirelessly for the benefit of the town throughout its history. Brattleboro as a community has a very active population of volunteers who give for the simple reason that they want better lives for their fellow citizens.
Our municipal government is in an excellent position to tap that longstanding and deep well of community spirit and generosity. Rather than put yet more emphasis on its taxing authority as the town’s needs expand, the town government can take advantage of its reputation for competence and integrity by activating its underutilized role as a fostering agent and generally soliciting donations of cash and appreciated securities just as other non-profits do. I suggest that the Selectboard and the Town School Board actually invite contributions over and above tax revenue.
This idea challenges an unfortunately common notion that not a dime more than necessary be paid to local government – and only enough for the town to provide its most basic services. However, given the long history of periodic but quite material evidence to the contrary, I suspect that launching a long-term but quite simple program of appealing to the community – to its members’ higher motivations – will yield lucrative, long-term results that could possibly even lead to a stabilization of the property tax rate, and, depending on the degree of the results, perhaps even cause a downturn in the tax rate.
Of course, not everyone will respond – or can afford to respond, for that matter. Who, you might ask, is likely to write an additional check when there are so many people who are taxed beyond their thresholds of financial pain? The well-known investor Warren Buffett, who is among the richest people in the world, has spoken out about the basic unfairness of the nation’s income tax structure, which lets him pay at a lesser rate than his secretary. But we all know that people like him are among the most generous in terms of his charitable intent. He is a good friend of Bill Gates, who formed the largest foundation in world history with Microsoft stock.
Like Mr. Gates, Mr. Buffett plans to leave the vast majority of his wealth to charitable causes. It is just that kind of person, only on a smaller, local scale, whom this initiative is intended to reach – someone motivated, well prepared and well advised to give but who has not yet been reminded of the local, municipal opportunity. As with a charity, the Internal Revenue Code permits an income-tax deduction for contributions to a municipality if made for a public purpose. (See IRC Sec. 170(c)(1). Also see See IRS Publication 526, “Charitable Contributions.”) I strongly suspect there is a sufficiently large population of generous people in our midst – of modest as well as handsome means – that such an appeal could be successful over time.
The necessary infrastructure of policy and accounting, and even marketing, is already in place to accommodate this kind of initiative:
· The town’s budget is already finely sliced into many budget lines, all the way down to copier expenses. Donors could make contributions for specific purposes as well as general ones, and the town could handily incorporate them into existing budget lines. There are many potential needs that can be filled from specific-purpose gifts. Some examples that readily come to mind are:
o The Withington Rink’s refrigeration upgrade and repairs;
o Highway Department capital items, such as trucks, plows, and graders;
o Road and sidewalk repairs;
o Recreation department items such as the equipment shed that has repeatedly been turned down in annual budget requests, and replacements to aging equipment;
o Longer library hours;
o Debt on the town’s various capital projects, which include water system improvements, school-related upgrades, heavy highway equipment, police and fire equipment and vehicles, and the cost of the forthcoming improvements to the police and fire facilities.
· The Selectboard already votes to approve receipts of contributions of grant money. It could easily accept contributions or express its concerns over the terms of a gift. It might well reject inappropriate contributions, such as tangible assets like automobiles and land that does not have clear title, or which come with unacceptable terms.
· The town communicates at least annually with its property taxpayers and can insert communications about gifting opportunities in any of its mailings. The school system communicates regularly with parents over the school year. The town’s website is a powerful tool and frequently viewed resource. No less valuable is its familiarity with local news media.
For these reasons, accomplishing this initiative would be quite straightforward. New work necessary to ready such an initiative would basically consist of the following:
· Putting together a brochure that explains the opportunities and articulates the income tax deductions available for gifts of cash and appreciated securities – simple and to the point, on a paper that can be included with tax and utility bills and with school communications.
· If they don’t already have brokerage accounts set up to receive gifts of securities, the town and school system treasurers can easily establish them. Gifts of appreciated stocks and mutual funds are commonly made and provide their donors with substantial income-tax relief.
· An individual skilled in development could also be brought on board to organize a longterm appeal program. Given the broad but simple scope of such a program, I would suggest a part-timer on a limited timeframe.
I realize that there are probably few precedents, if any, for this idea. However, I don’t think that fact should stand in our town’s way. And I don’t believe that local non-profits with ongoing donor development programs would be adversely affected. Rather, I believe that the aquifer of potential contributions is deeper than has ever been tapped. Charitable giving nationwide exceeds exceeds $300 billion a year, and we are only in the early stage of the largest transfer of wealth from one generation to another in the history of civilization, estimated to total approximately $50 trillion. We already have a strong culture of donation and voluntarism in Brattleboro. Let’s capitalize on it for the good of our community.
I propose that the Selectboard approve the following:
· Endorse the creation of a program of appeal to the community for charitable contributions;
· Encourage the cooperation of town departments in such an appeal;
· Appoint an unpaid, part-time development consultant for twelve months to articulate such a program and assist in its implementation.
Refine To Be Fine
I’ll repeat that the idea of accepting donations and gifts is a fine one, but that soliciting them may not be municipal business.
In 2001, neighboring New York State had a commission study the question. They and their Attorney General feel that while municipalities can collect donations and gifts from the public, they should NOT be in the business of soliciting for those gifts. New York says it is not a municipal function to solicit for gifts and fundraising. “Since a municipality cannot solicit funds, neither can it authorize its committees to solicit funds.” Instead, they suggest that private individuals or an outside entity do the work of solicitation.
So, that would point to the idea of interested citizens doing the soliciting and brochures, and the town accepting the results.
Of course, Vermont may feel differently. A check with state officials or a town attorney might provide a quick answer.
Donations
Seems a good idea, & tho not a Brattleboro resident I think all of our Town might consider this.
Some points:
No one has mentioned, but I’m fairly sure I’ve read that this exists, that there already is a small foundation that was set up a few years ago to support Brattlebpro Town Schools — possibly with a focus such as special programs for gifted & talented students. If so, this is a ready model for what you’re proposing.
Second, Towns already do receive gifts, donations, bequests, & in fact every Vermont town has a group of elected Trustees of Public Funds who oversee these permanent funds. I am one of the Trustees for Guilford and we have a number of small Funds that were set up to support either a particular cemetery, or the school, or the general Town coffers. Some of these date back a century or more, & were usually started by people leaving the money to the Town in their wills. We also have a Scholarship Fund stared as a memorial gift by the family of a resident. This year BUHS grads from Guilford will be able to apply for a modest, but useful, amount of scholarship assistance for their first year of college. All these Funds are the property of the Town.
If Brattleboro doesn’t feel it wants to get into the business of ASKING for the donations, how about having a separate, non-governmental organization/board/committee do the soliciting, & those choosing to donate would make their checks payable to the Town?
This is not the way
Thanks Mr. Chapman for you thoughts on this. There is a thorny question here about the role of government vs. that of philanthropists. It is true that since the late 19th and early 20th centuries wealthy individuals and families endowed libraries hospitals schools cultural institutions in this town and throughout the country. It is also true that volunteers have been a huge part of the maintenance and creation of the unique cultural and civic bodies that make life in this town rich and interesting.
However, over time, the town government and the taxpayers have seen fit to take on the ongoing financial responsibility for services they agree are for the “public good” like the library parks, the rec leagues etc. The town has also granted property tax exemptions to organization that are part of our social fabric and provide both services and jobs like the hospitals, various non profit nursing homes, schools, churches the land trust etc. All of those organizations are already supported by the private fundraising of interested committees like i.e. the Friends of the Library, The Friends of West River Park etc. etc. All you have to do is look in the paper or on-line to see how packed the calendar is with fundraising activities and events.
All fundraising comes with costs – effective fundraising takes investment in expertise and time. (Mr. Chapman proposes and new position in the town office) To think that established charities would not be affected by competition from the town begging for donations seems unlikely. To suck up the time and energy of great volunteers who once may have coached youth sports or helped out at the homeless shelter but are now spending all their free time asking for donations to fill the potholes on western Ave seems like we are perhaps creating bigger holes in our social fabric.
Towns should not be in the business of asking for “donations” from the few for the services citizens have agreed are for everyone’s benefit- and that everyone should pay for. Government here is to collect taxes and to spend the money while being accountable to the voters. If the town is collecting donations from the “rich” – they become accountable only to them and their pet projects.
The town government this year is running up against a problem of proving that their spending plan is fair and that the projects repeatedly approved by the Select Board and Town Meeting are the right way forward. In my view they have a political problem that is bigger than the supposed funding problem.
Maybe a year with less library hours less park access, no ice rink, pool or garbage pick up will show citizens that these are things we need; or maybe we will learn to live without them. Maybe folks will do the math and see how much taxes that really can pay. Maybe there will be a reconsideration of usage fees for garbage pickup,fees to use the library and parks, or an extra fee for fire protection. Maybe Town meeting will approve a 1% sales tax or an income tax. Who knows? Siphoning off money and energy from non-profits however does not seem like a way forward.
This proposal is one that
This proposal is one that certainly requires some well thought out consideration and discussion and may well be a direction that the town decides it wants to move forward with.But, if, in fact,that comes to pass I would hope that the town would not decide to insert letters asking for donations for public services into any communication that is now being sent out to residents. I can imagine that any tax payer opening their water or tax bill – which, in all probability is already too high -and finding a letter asking for them to give the town yet more money would probably not be met with a feeling of generosity. And,I would imagine that parents finding such a letter in any communication sent from their child’s school may also not react in an entirely positive way. If the town is going to consider this proposal (or any other proposal that requires asking people to donate money) that they would view it as a separate project and not just stuff their request in with other town communications.
And, if what the town is looking for are philanthropists- those who can generously give significant sums of money – why not seek those people out in a more dedicated manner? I’m not sure sending out thousands of letters asking for residents to donate money – which many if not most of us can’t afford to do- is the most efficient way to solicit donations.
Having to solicit for donations
is an embarrassment. We are saying that despite yearly tax increases we still cannot manage our budget. We are saying that we want expensive improvements that we cannot afford. We are saying that there are no expenses we can cut back on.
There was an article in The Commons about the meeting at Oak Grove to discuss the Union Hill, Western Ave, Cedar and Green St intersection. The consultant/engineering firm was represented as was our Dept of Public Works. During the discussion an audience member asked that they try 4 or 5 way stop signs as that would be the least expensive solution. The DPW director responded that couldn’t be done “as the state probably wouldn’t pay for them”. I thought….whatttt? How expensive would they be and why couldn’t we do them ourselves without state intervention or the need for a consulting/engineer.
When we were driving on Western Ave today the DPW was putting up those “things” in the center of the road (I have no idea what they’re called). My understanding is the purpose is for safety. I guess it would need to be asked how many accidents/injuries were there in that area during the winter when these “things” weren’t there?
I definately do not support Mr. Chapmans proposal and feel we need to give our support instead to the Finance Committee who is really trying to reduce town expenses and eliminate the waste so that soliciting never happens.
But, if it's true that the
But, if it’s true that the Finance Committee is trying to reduce expenses and eliminate waste in what areas is that being done? I’m not being sarcastic or argumentative – it’s a sincere question. What concrete steps is the the Finance Committee taking to achieve the reduction in expenses and waste and , if they are taking steps to do that are their actions being supported by the town government?
Regarding the question asked about stop signs in the Union Hill area: I feel that the “go to” answer from many of our town departments is “That can’t be done”. You have to wonder how they know it can’t be done if they haven’t tried?
Money, honey
I’ve wondered too why government solutions have to be so complicated and expensive. Why not put up a few stop signs? But then it seems like there was something about going to the state for funding, which they had to do, but then the state won’t fund it, and that’s why it can’t be done. Or something like that. The common sense thing would be to pay for the stop signs ourselves. If we’re too broke to do that, then I guess we really do have problems.
The Finance Committee is advisory, I’m pretty sure. They make recommendations but town meeting reps aren’t obliged to follow them.