Civil Rights Museum Expenses

We have seen over the last couple of weeks the controversy over Guilford County's website purchase, and Skip Alston's role in that matter.  In addition, we witnessed Alston's attack on Billy Yow.   Finally, we learned that his civil rights museum is laying off its chief fundraiser-- after having made numerous other layoffs last year.

Yesterday, I made a request of the city of Greensboro to furnish information regarding the amount of the monthly lease that the civil rights museum and the Sit-In Movement organization pays for the real estate occupied in downtown Greensboro.  My opinion is that the city should be able to furnish this information because I think it had been providing funds for the non-profit.  This information is important, because Mr. Alston has been one of the owners of the building that houses the civil rights museum.

Last night, Keith Brown posted a document that demonstrates the civil rights museum's expenses as reported on a required federal tax form.  The only line item I found that might represent lease expense is the $49,200 spent for "occupancy".  It should be noted this was for the calendar year 2009, before the museum opened.  If this was, in fact, the annual lease expense, it is a reasonable question to ask for how many years the organization has been paying lease expense to the property owners prior to the opening of the museum.

My recollection is that Alston, Earl Jones and Skip Moore have been owners of the building in which the civil rights museum is located.  (Moore is the Weaver Foundation president who has been a key officer with Action Greensboro).  I ask readers to provide additional details on this point, and to correct me if I am wrong about those names.

In any event, it would be useful to know with certainty how much the owners of the building have been paid over the years; what they are being paid for the lease at this time; and whether they have been paid while civil rights museum employees are simultaneously being laid off. 

Some will make the case that they deserve an equitable return for their investment in the building.  And I know that at least some of the owners had made an investment in the building, and accrued little or no rental income for a significant period of time. 

But the fact is that the Melderec con Simkins crowd made the museum a high agenda item several years ago for public funding by the city.  The business aspects of the museum therefore must be open for public scrutiny; and the leasing arrangement needs to be fully explained to the public.

Some of us continue to think it is of questionable ethics if Mr. Alston were to chair the museum board, act as a high-ranking local elected official, be a key player in a local political machine/PAC,  and receive local governmental funding for the museum.  It would compound the problem if he were accruing rental income from the arrangement.  And it would be even worse if museum employees were being laid off, and he had been doing these things.

Comments

[James]

How does Skip Alston manage to hold on to so many of this positions and avoid being investigated? He is now selling cars at the East Market St outfit across from NC A&T. My goodness.

[DeSean Alston]

Because he owns the East Market Street Square shopping center, where the used car dealership is located. Since when are used car dealers or property owners investigated just for opening a new business. Get real. I try not to engage or comment, but sometimes I can't help but respond to stupidity. I don't see anyone ever questioning other well known business owners (Who yes, happen to be white) about their business dealings. If Quaintance-Weaver opens another hotel, oh well great. But don't let a brown skinned person seem the least bit entrepreneurial and savvy. Oh my, something must be up, something must be wrong. How did "they" get that.

If you would stop erroneously, irresponsibly and without merit quit throwing around terms like "thief", "scandal", and "corrupt", you would actually simma down and realize that Skip has done nothing wrong. But it's much easier to just call him a "criminal". I guess.

Oh, Joe...Keep diggin'

[Roch101]

DeSean, Joe's motives aside for a moment, Joe thinks we should be able to dig into the Museum's operations because the City "is providing funds for the non-profit." I agree that organizations that receive public money should be open to public scrutiny. But, if the City is not funding the museum... he'll have to come up with some other reason, maybe he will borrow one of yours.

http://www.news-record.com/content/2010/09/11/article/museum_s_focus_turns_to_attendance?page=1

[Ed Cone]

Alston's role in the website fiasco has been shown to be more limited and appropriate than originally reported.

[James]

My point is that while claiming to do things in the interest of others, his pockets seem to be the only ones feeling the impact. What efforts has he made that represent wise investments in the county? Do these outweigh the negative ones? Joe is racist, no doubt, but he can't understand that yet. Skip loves things that make him money but he needs to stop confusing them with things that enrich the community.

[Harold]

I thought they owned the building. They got building assets listed on their 990 form. Don't envision any museum investing these types of monies with the uniqueness of the facility leasing or renting their primary building. Perhaps so....but would be very unusual.

[Joe Guarino]

Roch, I am not sure if that article is correct; but my recollection is that the city has provided funding for the museum-- if not now, then within the last several years. If not, I stand corrected. (I have revised my post somewhat to reflect this.)

Ed, I am not sure the website controversy rises to the level of a "fiasco". And it does appear to be based largely on a misunderstanding and a failure of due diligence among the parties involved. I question whether it is appropriate for a chair of the board of county commissioners to intervene with county staff on behalf of a vendor.

Some of us recall the local "prohibition" on micromanaging the staff of local government. Some of us doubt the appropriateness of that prohibition, but if it applies to conservatives on the city council, then it should also apply to Mr. Alston.

[bubba]

"Alston's role in the website fiasco has been shown to be more limited and appropriate than originally reported."

Shown how, and with what verifiable facts?

[bubba]

"Joe is racist, no doubt, but he can't understand that yet."

,....says the newest jerk to make an appearance here.

[Robert]

I'm wondering what the $4.5 million development fee and $1.1 million guaranty fee listed on the form Triad Watch posted mean. Any ideas?

[Sue]

If I recall, we've already had the discussion about what entity owns the Museum's property and what that's all about. Hogg said it best - completely and clearly: http://www.hoggsblog.com/?p=2505

I don't know a thing about salaries paid to anyone; this addresses only your implied charges about payment for leases or land or occupancy via Hogg's explanation of what Historic Tax Credits are and museum property ownership. I'm not a tax accountant or a lawyer, but do understand and remember what Hogg wrote. Perhaps everyone should take a refresher and read his post (again), understand it, and drop this piece of the discussion. If you want to focus on salaries, do that, but I believe the "rent" question has already been answered. (There's nothing wrong with taking advantage of all possible tax breaks within the law and I'll bet most of us do just that.)

[Heavy Early]

Well it sure didn't take long for someone to play the race card. DeSean, you do realize your dad stated back about 8 years ago (or longer) that he would no longer speak to "the white media" about why it was taking so long for the museum to open. The only interview he would grant was with a young black female reporter on Channel 2 (who has since departed, can't recall her name).

Recall that the News & Record (AKA "The White Media" that Skip so villified) was simply asking some basic questions of a publicly-funded building and attraction, namely, "It's been nearly a decade; when are you going to open your doors?" And that was YEARS ago. Does anyone really believe Earl Jones and Skip Alston when they said their plan was to open in 2010 all along?

Look, I am not happy about seeing this Civil Rights Museum flounder and fail. They are pacing far behind their projected attendees. They have fired six employees. Their marketing campaign is non-existant. They are not even equipped for self-guided single tours; you have to be part of a larger group to even take the tour.

What I find most amazing is that Ms Parker actually lost her title of executive director, was apparently re-assigned to fund-raising (which to me sounds like a bit of a demotion, at least in name/title) and STILL made a $100,000 salary.

Questions are not being asked because of race, DeSean. Cronyism is color-blind.

[Joe Guarino]

Sue, while I do not doubt the veracity of David Hoggard's post, I am not confident that it demonstrates there is nothing about which to be concerned.

Heavy, the mere fact that the museum and the Sit-In Movement are non-profits enjoying federal tax breaks means to me their books should be entirely open to the public. And yes, all the build-up to the opening of the museum, and all the expectations created, have turned out to mere fizzle.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Joe, as I have hammered for YEARS (to the deaf ears of the more progressive folk in this blogosphere - Hi Sue!!!), non-profits in this state suffer ZERO oversight from the state of North Carolina and the IRS.

They can do whatever they like - to whomever they want . . . they can lie all day long to individuals and the general public . . . yet NO ONE BLINKS . . . when, as you say, their books and their methods should be entirely open to the public.

[Joe Guarino]

Precisely, Mary.

And Robert, that is an excellent question about the huge development fee and guaranty fee. I saw also a line item for >$1,000,000 for "museum support". What does that mean?

[Brenda Bowers]

Folks haven't we all known for years that the Civil Rights Museum was merely a cash cow for skip and cronies? If it happened to become a tourist attraction then all to the good and more money, but no sweat if it didn't go over it would still pay them all nicely for their devious shenanigans in getting the idea and running with it. BB

[Joe Guarino]

Now, Brenda, it was only about a year ago that we were all expected to genuflect at the very idea of the museum.

[Spag]

Alston et al have the right to receive fair rental proceeds from the property and what is fair is between the parties contracting.

I think Joe's larger point- and it is a valid one that is not unique to Skip Alston- is whether private entities should receive government funds to assist in their investments, especially if they are capable of turning a profit without it.

Alston is an elected official so the direction of government funds to a private project that he is involved in deserves higher scrutiny. Every dollar the government contributes is a subsidy to the private individuals involved. I don't approve of such things whether it is for Roy Carroll's condos, the proposed hotel, or the museum.

[triadwatch]

anyone on public dole needs to open up their books, project homestead comes to mind. It would be interesting to lobby our state representatives for a bill that would do something like this.

[anonymous]

"But don't let a brown skinned person seem the least bit entrepreneurial and savvy."

Notice the change in language from the past, the NAACP is aggressively courting the 13+ illegal Mexicans here in the US.

Very interesting.

[Jack Hart]

Sure would LOVE to know the whole story on that Homestead thing too!
Jack

[Joe Guarino]

Sam, I agree. And I also believe there are ethical dimensions to this situation. Finally, we need to be concerned as to whether an excessive rent is being charged and collected. I understand your point about the two parties being in agreement, but where public funds have been involved, and there is non-profit status...

Keith, great point. Let's modify state law to force them to open up their books.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Joe, in terms of modifying state/Federal law to force "non-profits" to be more transparent, that has been one of my goals all along. I came to the blogosphere hoping that accountability and transparency were more than just pretty buzz words for the Edwardses (Hi Sue!!!) and Sleazelys to dole out when it was convenient. Meanwhile, Brad Miller had medical "whistle-blowers" (NOT) from Pennsylvannia to champion.

But Mary's story did not fit the progressive agenda of government-run healthcare . . . no matter what proof there may be out there locally (another buzzword) that if it does not work at the micro-level, there's not a snowball's chance in Hades that it will work at the macro-level.

If the IRS could not/would not make it right for Doctor Mary Johnson when in-your-face, well-documented CRIMES were involved, what makes anyone think they can oversee the much bigger picture when patients are involved?

In terms of something to rally around, the Museum and Homestead are "hot-potatoes" that most politicians-with-survival-instincts are going to avoid getting anywhere near lest someone pop up in a thread like this can call them "racist". But what happened to me at the hands of a non-profit has no racial connotations [well, unless you count the part about my non-profit bosses preferring not to market to the East side of Asheboro - because that would be dipping into the health department's "business" . . . or questioning the tactics employed by local mill owners when it came to dumping "anchor children" of their cheap laborers on the public school system and Medicaid].

I should be North Carolina's poster child for the Republicans' efforts in Raleigh to clean up the act after decades of irresponsible "anything goes" Dem rule.

But in the end it's not about black or white . . . it's about power and money and "right people". John Robinson and Ray Criscoe and Ed Cone would all have EGG on their face. And Harold Brubaker has to "live in this town" (Asheboro). So we won't be seeing my face on any milk cartoons until/if I sue somebody.

[Heavy Early]

Good intentions, grand gestures, big huge openings that attract national attention and dignitaries are all well and good. But the bottom line of any attraction or destination location for a city is this: Is the attraction worth the money you pay to get in? Is it user-friendly? Is there enough to make you want to come back? Have the people running the enterprise gone the extra mile to take into consideration what the public wants and expects? And once you have been there, has your experience been positive enough to recommend it to your friends?

If the answer to these questions are "no," then your enterprise will be out of business before it can really get started.

This museum had nearly a decade and a half of baggage, bad publicity and questions about the motives of the chief operators. Look how long it took Skip and Earl to partner with A&T State University. Recall how they reacted to questions about delays in construction and about how the money was spent. Skip and Earl's first visceral reaction was to brand anyone asking legit questions as "racists."

Meanwhile look at the other attractions that sprung into existence during the time the Civil Rights Museum was under construction, floating one delay after another: The Children's Museum, Triad Stage, the downtown baseball stadium, Center City Park...

Had Skip and Earl retreated into the background and hired people who knew the business, this museum would have been open for at least 10 years and would be doing well. But their egos would not allow that to happen, and here we are.

Building a luxury hotel across the street from the museum would be the very definition of throwing good money after bad.

[Joe Guarino]

Heavy Early, great post. Thanks. I could not agree more.

It is not unusual for new businesses to have to make adjustments in mid-stream after an initial period of learning about the market in which they operate. But as you suggest, there have been so many question marks about this particular enterprise that I am not sure what its future will be. Ultimately, I suspect the taxpayers will be hit up for much more operating expense.

It turns out that the involvement of NC A&T and even the Smithsonian both represented a false sense of security.

[Reggie Greene / The Logistician]

PROFIT, PROFIT, PROFIT.

As with most things in life, there is a good and a bad side associated with any form of organization. Governmental entities and non-profits have their limits.

That being said, despite all their problems and the opportunities for abuse, private entities, at least for some portion of their legal lives, are more likely to get things right.

Why? Although some may dispute this, in my opinion, there is no greater human motivator than the drive to make a profit. Just saw a History Channel piece called "Blood Diamonds," which reminded me of that.

If a private entity had initiated and run this project from the beginning, you wouldn't see the same problems. (Perhaps different problems.)

The problem is that a private entity would not have entered this market. A private entity would not operate a museum.

Additionally, although a private entity might have been able to generate a profit for some undetermined period of time, once it encountered excessive, consecutive periods of red ink, it would make a change or go out of business.

However, if you want continuity in society, private enterprise does not guarantee that.

As a general proposition, elected officials do not have the time to run anything properly; they're too busy being "political" and trying to get re-elected.

Operating a private enterprise, properly and to maximize profit, requires 100% of a business leader's time. There is no balance for other pursuits.

We all have to make choices in life. That includes the form of organization or legal entity that we encourage to pursue certain societal goals.

[Joe Guarino]

I agree, Reggie.

It is clear this particular entity has received governmental/taxpayer assistance on at least several levels. It has received funding through the city of Greensboro. (More about that later.)

It is a non-profit, and its contributors therefore enjoy a tax deduction. That is a major benefit, and a de facto taxpayer subsidy.

Finally, there is the tax credit arrangement about which David Hoggard reported.

This may be only a partial list. There may be other sources of governmental/taxpayer support-- direct or indirect-- of which I am unaware.

I think it is clear that an organization such as this should be compelled to open its books to the public completely, and disclose all the dynamics of its finances. I am not sure what the law requires, but there needs to be complete and utter openness and transparency. Dr. Mary Johnson is right.

[jaycee]

The sham that is The Money Pit on Elm Street was never anything more than a political vehicle for the community activists who began it.
They made a buttload of money, and, more importantly, spread a buttload of money among their cronies/friends/family to purchase political allegiance.
Any endeavor involving a politician revolves around money or power or money and power. This never changes.

[Joe Guarino]

Jaycee, there was a determination made by the Melderec crowd and the local media culture that the museum is Good For Greensboro. The things you mention were no longer regarded as being of consequence.