From the Fairfield County Community Foundation:
Foundation awards record-breaking $11.5 million in grants
Bridgeport nonprofits receive more than $1.2 million in grants
NORWALK, Oct. 12, 2010 — The Fairfield County Community Foundation and its donors awarded a record-breaking $11.5 million in grants and scholarships to nonprofit organizations and students in Fairfield County and beyond during fiscal year 2010. Grant and scholarship awards increased by $2.4 million or 26% over the previous year’s giving of $9.1 million.
In Bridgeport, the Foundation awarded 189 grants totaling $1,284.035.
Among the nonprofits serving Bridgeport that received grants were: Barnum Museum, Boys and Girls Village, Bridgeport Neighborhood Trust, Burroughs Community Center, Connecticut Free Shakespeare, Groundwork Bridgeport, Mercy Learning Center, Neighborhood Studios of Fairfield County and Visiting Nurse Services of Connecticut.
A full list of grants awarded in fiscal 2010 can be found online at www.fccfoundation.org.
“This past year was an incredibly difficult one for Fairfield County residents and the nonprofits that support them,” said Susan Ross, Foundation president and CEO. “The Foundation and our donors recognized this increased need and stepped forward as never before to provide critical support to strengthen our community and help those in need during this economic downturn.”
Grants and scholarships from the Foundation come from two principal sources: Charitable funds established by individual donors at the Foundation; and unrestricted funds given to the Foundation to address changing community needs in perpetuity.
*** Non-profits another tax vacuum draining the city of Bpt. *** FORGETABOUTIT ***
Sounds like Christmas in October with the Federal and Foundation infusions of revenues, doesn’t it? The sound of money that pays salaries and benefits, to provide services? But Mojo only hears the vacuum … would someone help him unplug the Hoover?
Federal revenues (courtesy of Washington that show up three weeks before an election to support a wobbly Congressional campaign) are paid for by you and me (assuming you pay Federal Income taxes, I do but a lot of those employed and City residents pay only payroll taxes like FICA).
The funds that flow from FCCF were private funds, contributed to the Foundation by people who care about certain issues, that in their opinion are not adequately funded from other sources. The American way, private initiative, philanthropic perspective, etc.
The only negative for the City is if the charity owns property and moves it off the property tax rolls because of Federal not-for-profit status. If they rent from a private owner the property taxes still are due.
So let’s see, we have employees located in the City, providing services in proximity to City residents who have such needs, who need auto service and gas, who buy lunches and dinners before going home maybe, who walk at break time and meal time putting people on the sidewalk giving a sense of a populated civic space. Mojo, what’s the problem? What is draining the City of Bridgeport? Or are we still back at the potential regional WPCA idea? But then, please remember that “the rain on Main flows plainly down the drain” in normal weather, but deluges create a strain and then a stain in Sound waters!
Beacon the tax drain of non profits are not offset by grants or by monies funneled to Bpt from the Pilot program.
We are inundated with non profits that benefit every know malady to men & women & children. We have churches on every street corner or so it seems. The locations where a vast majority of these places are located were formerly taxpaying properties. I will give you an example: On Huntington Turnpike a church is being erected on a site that formerly had 2 one-family houses on it. They paid in the neighborhood of $13,000 in property taxes. We now collect ZERO dollars from these 2 lots. It’s time for the suburbs to take on their own social issues.
*** Not to knock all non-profits because many offer city services @ minimal prices way below what it would cost local or state government. However when you have about 52% non-profits off the tax rolls with the state only backing about 30% in tax paybacks, it creates a “$” vacuum for the city in general. But then, who cares about taxpayers in general, it’s only money! ***
TC and Mojo,
Thanks for a comment or two. First, I have not mentioned PILOT payments. Frankly, I am not sure which organizations get what level of payments. Second, I did not mention churches, temples, synagogues, etc. because that is an entirely different subject it seems to me.
What I did say, and neither of you acknowledged the statement is that non-profit employees spend money for their automobiles, for food and other services in the City during the day. These are people with jobs and benefits for the most part. They provide necessary services to City residents who are more needy than the ‘burbs. So painting them all with the same negative brush is unfair at this time, unless they spend no dollars at our great bakeries, restaurants, entertainment venues, delicatessens, etc. Is that what happens? I don’t think so.
And I know you have a handle on some facts I may not yet have grasped, but how many of the many service organizations actually own their buildings and pay no taxes? Are there any studies of this? What are the facts? It is only around municipal elections that we get someone with supposed answers but are they real? And what are the trends? For instance, if Southwest Community Health Center builds on Albion St now because of the infusion of $5 Million, is that good or bad? Better dental services for the poor? Better capacity for med services since they have been directed for over five years to vacate current site at St. Stephen’s? On transportation lines? Maybe the issue for Musto and Pia is to ask what they think about full PILOT payments? By the way, that question was raised when they spoke in Black Rock two weeks ago. We don’t have to ask for new plans or new monies, rather how about funding at appropriate levels instead of beggaring the City!!!
Beacon many many people who avail themselves of the halfway houses, homeless shelters and the like are from the ‘burbs. Drugs and alcohol are not just big-city problems as you seem to say in your post. The homeless centers are not just filled with Bridgeport residents. The veteran centers are not just for Bpt veterans. All the senior housing is not just for Bpt residents. Look at the ‘burbs and their senior housing it usually starts in the high $200K bracket.
So are you saying these are great additions to Bpt even though they don’t pay taxes but do buy a hotdog every now and then? Come on.
TC,
Let’s see what we agree upon. I think that our areas of agreement are quite broad.
*The suburban experience taxwise, relative to residential market value, clients of necessary services, etc. is different markedly from the urban experience of Bridgeport.
*And there are many social, health, economic, human service agencies based in Bridgeport. (Is that because we are the geographic center of a region, because more of our citizenry need or qualify for these services or some other dominant reason?)
*Substance abuse occurs across the spectrum, and it is a killer of hopes and dreams.
That’s big picture viewpoint. OK so far?
Now we take a look at who is served and you raise questions about the residency of service clients. Fair enough. When someone in Fairfield loses a job in a dual-income family that has run up too much debt, loses their health insurance because the COBRA premiums even at 35% seem too much, and gets behind on basic expenses, stress levels rise, same as in the City. Marital problems, substance abuse issues, depression or other related concerns may rise to the surface and all of a sudden suburban plight looks much like urban concerns. The community attempts to respond with government programs, faith-based initiatives, and/or private not for profit groups.
My main point that readers wish to diminish is that workers in Bridgeport, whether from profit or non-profit firms, have needs and are potential consumers of Bridgeport items, not just hotdogs (or are we going back to the Court House on Main Street)? That’s good. That’s what we want, isn’t it while we are waiting for the decades to pass for the big projects, that small businesses with owners risking their own capital to generate revenues through providing good services?
And, if we are not getting the property tax payments then why aren’t we, as a City administration or as candidate seeking election, documenting the issue more clearly as to the extent, and the burden on the Bridgeport taxpayer who in that case is subsidizing the suburban taxpayer? And if the issue is very clear, and very serious, why isn’t a Mayoral candidate using it, not to divide folks in Bridgeport from friends, family and others in the ‘burbs, but rather getting our delegation to hammer the problem on the door of the State Capitol Building and ask for full PILOT???
We need to drill down into issues. That is what Bob Walsh has helped with. And we have enough issues in Bridgeport that have been juggled for emotional appeal with voters, rather than rational solution, that we knee-jerk a response and ridicule comments and opinions offered seriously. If the other person does not agree with me, then I must oppose them? Is that what is going on?
Not for me. I have learned much from several regular OIB contributors and look to do so in the future.
BEACON2: I am not ridiculing your position, I hope I did not come across that way. Our city is filled with halfway houses and the like. I think at a recent zoning meeting it was pointed out there are 44 non profit operated houses in the Clinton Ave area alone.
All I am asking is that the ‘burbs take on some of their own social issues and not send all of them to Bridgeport.
Off the subject a little but I think a good example. In Bridgeport we build a lot of affordable housing which the average working man can afford (I have no problem with this). But in the ‘burbs when they build a funded development that requires X amount of affordable housing what do they do? They designate the right number of units but the price tag is usually in excess of $250K. Now tell me how that is affordable housing.
BEACON2 you mention our state delegation, have you seen anything positive this band of misfits has brought back to Bridgeport?