Many folks have contacted us about the PWC discretionary funds that are given to the PWC BOCS. Last week the Committee of 100 dedicated an entire evening to discussion about this practice. What are discretionary funds? Money that the supervisors get to pay for office, staff, supplies, charity and regional arts and entertainment. They can spend some, all or none of it. Before it goes to items not part of keeping the office, the supervisors announce their intentions a meeting before they donate. Usually the other supervisors rubber stamp their approval. I can’t ever remember when that didn’t happen.
Many citizens feel that this practice is just playing too loosey goosey with county funds. Others feel that the supervisors act like they are pulling out their personal checkbook and resent that there is no mention of the taxpayers when these donations are made.
The topic of discretionary funds came to a head when Supervisor Wally Covington attempted to give $100,000 to a charity run by his wife. The citizens and blogosphere errupted and Mr. Covington rightly pulled in his intention announcement. This episode in PWC history left residents with more determination than ever to put an end to the discretionary fund practice. The problem is, which of the supervisors will willingly give up the ‘keys to the safe?’ Will they be willing to vote themselves out of discretionary funds? Furthermore, PWC is the only county in the area that uses this financial system of public funds. What is a better way to handle this kinds of money. It also brings up the question of county support for charities and other worthwhile endeavors. Who gets money from the public coffers and who doesn’t?
Your input is greatly needed.
I did attend last week’s event. I only know of one other known poster that was there. I will say that there were as many private citizens taking notes as there were reporters, if not more. There was a Q&A after the panelists had given their views.
Unfortunately, I never got an answer to my question other than the painfully obvious things that **I** already knew and used regularly. I did ask Frank how would/could he work with the other supervisors to put an end to these funds. I only got the citizens could speak at citizens time, contact supervisors, etc.. The things he knows very well that I already do. As a side note: I do have to give kudos to Frank for participating in the panel.
We must not forget that good ole P-Dub is the locality still using such funds. We as citizens have to live within our budgets and pick and choose our charities wisely. The county should not be donating such for to organizations with our taxpayer dollars. Those funds when acknowledged by *any* organization should be thanking the taxpayers, not the supervisors. If they(supervisors) want to donate, let them do so with their personal funds. Finally, these funds should NEVER be given to any religious organization.
I’ve listened to, read, and written so much on the topic over the past week. I just don’t know where to begin here.
The problem is with the money that is left over at the end of the fiscal year. Each supervisor is allowed to squirrel this money away and the “give” it out to such things as their favorite charity. There is a requirement for them to present their proposed “gift” to the BOCS and there is an opportunity for public comment; and, invariably they are simply rubber-stamped (I’ll scratch your back if you’ll scratch mine arrangement) and so the “gift” is disbursed. I will have to get the numbers but there is something around $1,000,000 being held by supervisors. This is $1,000,000 of your tax money. Chairman Corey Stewart is the only BOCS member who does not seem to use this largesse.
To me the question is, “Why isn’t this money returned to the county before the end of the fiscal year to be used in other unfunded or underfunded areas?” I don’t know how it works at the state level or in all of the federal government, but in the Department of Defense, if you don’t use it, you lose it. Various departments, bureaus and offices track their money and if folks are not spending it, then it gets recouped to be used elsewhere. Other parts of the county government are required to submit and live by a budget—why isn’t this the case for the supervisors? Why shouldn’t they be able to spend your tax dollars willy-nilly as long as they stay within the dollars allocated to them? Why? Because it is not fiscally responsible. We elect officials to be our representatives and to husband our tax dollars and use them to the betterment of all the residents of the county. And to so in an open, auditable manner that is subject to public scrutiny. While what is done is not done in the dark of the night, it is done with very little fanfare until after the fact in some cases.
In Supervisor Covington’s case, the gift of $100,000 to the Rainbow Riding Academy, on whose board his wife sits, was as noted by Moon, so egregious that there was a public outcry and Wally withdrew his offer. But other gifts, though smaller are just as egregious but because they are generally much smaller, they go unnoticed. The most recent outrage is one involving supervisors Maureen Caddigan, John Jenkins and Marty Nohe who serve as board members on the board of the Boys and Girls Club of Greater Washington. Each of them gave at least $1,000 (or it may be $1,300) to the club to help fund their annual “Steak-n-Steak” dinner—an annual fund-raiser. There is a very obvious conflict of interest here and I strongly suspect the gifts will appear to have come from the supervisors personally when that is not the case. I am not putting down the Boys and Girls Club; it does great work, but if the supervisors want to give money to the club, let them dig into their wallet or purse just as we do. If the Boys and Girls Club wishes to receive some funding from the county, which I believe they do receive, let them put in a request just like other charitable organizations do.
As Moon has noted, there is little hope that the supervisors are going to give up this seemingly unending pot of gold. Prince William County is perhaps the only county that still has this arcane system—other counties have given it up for the very reason Prince William County should give it up. That reason—the opportunity to abuse the system, which is the case here as it was in Supervisor Covington’s case and in every case where “discretionary funds” are used for something other than county business. Not some whim of a supervisor.
As an added note, I have written to the Prince William Commonwealth Attorney asking him to review this particular Boys and Girls Club incident as to any conflict of interest and if there should be charges brought against the three supervisors for what may be the fraudulent use of tax dollars. I don’t expect to hear anything from him but I am concerned enough that I had to make an attempt and to put the supervisors on notice that they are being watched.
It’s not even the donations to pet charities but also the publicity that goes along with it. These funds are used during campaigns to buy favors and the local media has always ignored where these monies really come from. Mr. Covington in particular was more generous in the months leading up to the election than in previous years. Articles and announcements documenting his gifts to school PTAs, the school system, the senior center, and others were always touted as being a gift from Supervisor Covington as though he was personally pulling out his own wallet and giving $10,000 cash instead of using $10,000 of taxpayer dollars. Some of these were worthy causes but if PWC citizens are “giving” the money, shouldn’t we as a citizenry at least get the public credit.
Good point, WBTM!
The total carryover in “discretonary funds” was $950,852 for 2011. The actual amount the three supervisors gave to the Boys and Girls Club was $3,900 ($1,300 each).
@welcome back to me
You’re absolutely right WBTM–the $3,900 donation was a big deal in the WaPo Local–complete with pix of the supervisors.
The B&G Dinner based on the website – before B&G pulled off the information and replaced with contact names – was a “sponsorship” level of $300 for 1 person and $1,000 for a table. My questions left unanswered is does the dinner also include a seperate charge/donation for the meal? Or once you “sponsor”, the meal is “comp’d”? My experience in other times, other places is once you sponsor, the rest of the ride is free.
I somewhat feel bad for the B&G Club as they got caught in the crosshairs…but then again, when you want to play in local politics, get ready for the fallout when questions are asked.
I am somewhat confused and think I have been unnecessarily easy on some folks. @Ray, from what I am reading, the $1300 was for adults to eat? I thought it was for deserving kids to celebrate. Well, I have been duped.
Anything I said about “I am ok with this” I withdraw.
This is something that should come out of adult pockets, not the tax payer. Why not just donate in the name of taxpayers and leave the steak dinner out of it?
I have noticed that several organizations have removed the directors from their website. Rainbow Riding is one such organization. That happened after the negative attention from the $100,000 almost donation. What’s to hide? Could it be the well-heeled list of directors, some of whom could easily write a check for that money rather than have the executive director come beg from the county? Now they want $85,000 to pave a lot.
I am sorry to see B & G now doing the contact names thing.
Organizations that take tax payer money had better list all information and that include boards of directors etc. Transparency.
Right now it looks like we are dealing with a bunch of sneaks.
Don’t take my word for it. Go see for yourself.
“Why not just donate in the name of taxpayers and leave the steak dinner out of it?”
Because then you don’t get the photo op, sponsor listing in the dinner program and all associated perks that you can cash in on come campaign time. Same thing with donations for Christmas concerts at the Hylton Center that provide seats and “sponsorship” listings in the program, etc., etc., etc. This is simply the taxpayer paying for a spotlight on the various Supervisors and feeding their egos.
And that is exactly what needs to stop. There is never a mention of the taxpayer. There is never a drawing for one of those seats. How about sending some person down on their luck to one of those things at least.
I know supervisors don’t make much. I would rather this money go for a full time position so they don’t have to …I won’t use the word, on our money.
BOCS salaries will remain at $45,256 for the Chairman and $39,737 for the other supervisors (same as FY 07) for board members taking office on January 1, 2008.
B&G Club also received $2,900+ as a part of the county budget.
The whole point of all of this is: Why do t he supervisors still have the right to keep left over discretionary funds at the end of the year? We are the ONLY county doing this.
County last got a B- on government transparency. It is easy to see that when you try to decipher the budget!
A table usually entitles the table sponsor to 8-10 dinners at a reserved table. So the taxpayers are actually paying for 24-30 steak dinners which will be enjoyed by 3 supervisors and who know who else. I just know I was not invited.
I would feel it was less inappropriate if the top students in PWC were invited to attend, or a raffle from the senior center, or the top 30 community volunteers, or some of the neighborhood watch people. I wouldn’t mind buying any of those people a steak dinner.
“A table usually entitles the table sponsor to 8-10 dinners at a reserved table”, sounds like hors d’oeurves for Supervisor Jenkins so I wouldn’t hold your breath for an invite.
@George S. Harris
“The whole point of all of this is: Why do t he supervisors still have the right to keep left over discretionary funds at the end of the year? We are the ONLY county doing this. ”
The point shouldn’t be that they can “keep” discretionary funds at the end of the year but that they have them to begin with.
The BOCS spends taxpayer monies like drunken sailors on shore leave. Fiscal liberals.
@marin, I would agree if we hadn’t put a label on it.
If they were liberals they would assess what was needed to run the county and just do it without saying they werent raising taxes which they actually are. The assessments went up. Therefore even holding it where it was…tax increase, which is ok with me. If that’s what needs to happen to run the county effectively, then so be it.
@marinm
I resent the “drunken sailor” remark–we don’t have to be on shore leave! As I noted earlier–any excess monies should be recouped and spent on other underfunded or unfunded items. These folks have almost a million dollars of our money tied up. I am beginning to think people are missing the point–it’s not about inviting anyone, it’s about the fact that they are spending our dollars on things THEY want. If someone want to buy a deserving person a steak dinner, such as Moon says she would do, then do so. What we are talking about here is the sanctioned THEFT of your tax dollars.
George is right. There are plenty of underfunded/unfunded legitimate expenses that could benefit from the supervisors stash. I think many would be very surprised to see how some of our fire station are functioning way over 100 capacity. For example last time I read the Stonewall Jackson Volunteer Fire Dept was operating at about 154% capacity. This is just one of many things that those county taxpayer funds go towards. Instead they squirrel it away for what they want.
@Lafayette, please be more specific. Tell everyone what it means to be operating at about 154% capacity.
Does that mean too many housing units for personnel or equipment? What needs to be done to fix the problem?Does it mean too wide of an area to cover? How do we make things better and how can discretionary funds help? It sounds like we need to raise the tax rate a little so we can safely function as a county.
Has Corey ever honored the promises made in the wake of the death of Kyle Wilson? The fire over in the City at Sumner Lake should have been a wake up call to all local leaders. You know, the only elected official I still hear talking about inadequate equipment and the need to improve is Andy Harrover. Andy, please consider a move to the county to shake things up.
Corey, what about that promise made to the fire and rescue folks? I bet things have gotten worse instead of better. Who has info? Mom? What can you add to this discussion?
“I resent the “drunken sailor” remark–we don’t have to be on shore leave!”
Touche!
“I noted earlier–any excess monies should be recouped and spent on other underfunded or unfunded items.”
Any excess monies should instead be provided to the taxpayers with an apology.
“…it’s not about inviting anyone, it’s about the fact that they are spending our dollars on things THEY want.”
I hear you. I’m saying they shouldn’t have been given the money in the first place. Everyone is going to have their favorite social or charity program. Why are taxpayers paying for this?
“What we are talking about here is the sanctioned THEFT of your tax dollars.”
No truer words have been written about taxes in general and the role of government…
Marin, the older you get, unless you are off living in the woods, the more you will think some govt. is good. I particularly am pleased that they are involved in food inspection, national parks and other forms of protection for national resources, drinking water, and snow removal. I like that they provide schools and libraries.
I don’t like govt in the bedroom. Anyone’s!
Um, no. What our BOCS does is far worse. Last time I checked, drunken sailors only spend their own money.
Great point Cato!