I lost the thread of discussion about he/she/alone a long time ago .So I'm not publishing the tails.
I understand why the person with the passion for the food bank persists in making a connection to money provided by the town for free arts and culture. Which isn't free at all.
I make the same connection.
That's not to say politicians should decided for anybody which charity should be supported.
It's one of the few decisions still ours to make.
I acknowledge no person's right to put a hand in my pocket and take out whatever to support a charity.
But we do it all the same.
Every time a request is made to waive fees for a town facility, we are, in effect making a donation of the fee to the charity.
The books are not correctly kept.
A facility is used, a fee should be recorded..
If the fee is waived , it should be recorded as a grant.
Revenue for facility use should tally with times used and fees charged.
Funds raised for cancer might be $40,000. If user fee of $300 was paid, the tally would be $39,700.
What's wrong with that?
Why can't politicians say no ?
If we don't waive the fee, does it mean we don't care about families
dealing with cancer in their lives. I think not.
People I meet, who participate in raising funds in memory of a loved one, in the hope another family can be spared the grief, wonder more about what the Cancer Society is doing with the funds than about paying the user fee for a facility.
Monday, 15 October 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
But, you published another follow-up comment from this afternoon?!
Auroran.com has an article on the proposed agreement. Sounds like Grabe feels it's a done deal.
T'is a plethora. Christopher is up too. Sleep well.
Post a Comment