Norris Square Both Expanding AND Showing a Loss?

Yes I am looking at them because of the demolition of St. Bonafice.

When I look on GuideStar, the last tax return available is for FY2009 [10-01-2008 thru 09-30-2009]
http://bit.ly/xj2is8

I can't find FY2010 on GuideStar. Hmm.

I wonder if they waited until after the filing date to file their return for FY2010. If they are still showing a loss, that will be interesting since they claimed they got $15MM to destroy St. B's and put up their housing project. Is that going to show that it's hemorrhaging money on the balance sheet, too? And I wonder how they're marking their fixed assets. Cost, I would assume.

They've got over 150 employees I believe and they're a multi-million dollar housing development corp, but they're telling the IRS in '09 (while they were expanding) that more cash went out than came in. Normally an active non-profit that's going downhill will show a loss if it's severely dipping into credit to keep things afloat and running, but NSCA is expanding. There's no motivation for a non-profit to show a loss, either. Surpluses they may have aren't taxable.

Something ain't right.

I'm doing the mental jump, but if GuideStar is 3-6 months behind, and the IRS says that 990s are due "the 15th day of the 5th month after the fiscal year", then their tax returns were due Mar 15th 2011. If you add 6 months extension to that with filing two Form 8868s, they could have dragged that out to September 15th, 2011. So I guess if I don't see their FY2010 return show up on GuideStar fairly soon in the next couple of months, things could get interesting.

I want to see if Norris Square is still telling the IRS that they're still ballooning in size but still showing a loss.

It must be nice to have a "civic association" that is so cash flush to build "Blattstein Big" yet be pobrecita on their income statement. Like I said: somethin' ain't right.

Oh well... sunlight is the best disinfectant.

PS: They also have a non-profit registration on the IRS is showing that the IRS revoked their status:
Revocation Date (effective date on which organization's tax exemption was automatically revoked):
15-Feb-2011
Employer Identification Number (EIN):
23-2536683
Legal Name:
NORRIS SQUARE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Doing Business As:
Mailing Address:
149 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19122-1719
United States
Exemption Type:
501(c)(3)
Revocation Posting Date (date on which IRS posted notice of automatic revocation on IRS.gov):
07-Oct-2011

Anybody know what that's about?

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

Kenzo's picture

Before an NSCA defender comes on here to detract from my post about Norris Square's activities, I will politely ask that you answer the questions I posed on this thread:

- What's with the FY2010 tax return and was it filed yet.
- Explain the loss on FY2009 while NSCA was expanding; was that due to dipping into credit to expand?

I really could care less about any altruistic activities at this point. The 990 I'm reading is leaving me with some questions that I would like answers. If I don't get any answers or just "noise", then I'll file an IRS Form 13909 asking those same questions.

After all, this is MY tax money that NSCA is playing around with. If they're so much as exhibiting symptoms of Germantown Settlement, then they need these questions directed at them to keep them honest. Seriously the conflict of interest in NSCA bothers me a great deal.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

Kenzo's picture

Wow look at page 9 of their tax return. Over $1MM in rent collections. That makes them less of a civic and more like a "Housing Authority".

Question 33 on page 4 was answered no. So I guess EIN 23-2536683 was not separate for those purposes?

I bet that once the Land Bank is set up under the RDA, NSCA will be waiting to suck up banked property like a vacuum cleaner to expand its mission. Kinda like the Borg. "Your block will be assimilated".

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

2014 york's picture

JOBS

Kenzo's picture

2014 york wrote:
JOBS

Sustainable jobs, or... until the party music stops jobs?

What sparked this? The announcement page linked from HiddenCity where NCSA splashed how much the new development is subsidized for. The grant is nearly the size of their entire balance sheet.

I have Germantown Settlement and Emmanuel Freeman on the brain.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

2014 york's picture

I'm a firm believer that CDC's and other organizations such as NSCA are a huge waste of taxpayer dollars. They spend huge sums of money with little accountability. One thing is for sure, consultants love them. Huge consulting fees are what you get when unqualified people spend other peoples money. I seriously doubt anyone in the organization could write an RFP for a simple sidewalk repair. The more you poke around you will start to see their defensive shields deployed.

codergrrl's picture

It'll be about two seconds before someone, (NSCA) starts screaming "Racists".
You ought to go over with your best Spanish flowing, and see if you can 'pass'.

"Je Suis Prest"

Kenzo's picture

I'm not going to deal with any of that. I don't agree with CDC's being a waste of time. Done by their orignal intent they do work. NKCDC is proof of that. But it's the exception in a sea of malfeasance. Spring Garden CDC run by Pat Freeland was a corrupt one-person CDC that was using money that was diverted (thanks to Vincent Fumo) to property squat in Francisville and Spring Garden.

I'm going to wait another month to see if their 990 for last year turns up where I can see it. If it doesn't turn up, that's way more than enough on its own to file an IRS Form 13909.

The IRS has Spanish speaking oficiales.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

lighterthief's picture

NSCA has completed a number of commendable projects and run some truly beneficial programs. I don't care to dig into their books but question the judgement of any organization that makes the choice to destroy the significant historic structures in their neighborhood. Demolishing St Boniface is criminal, short sighted and sad. NSCA despite their name is NOT a civic association and should not posture as one.

Imagine if NKCDC proposed demolishing St Laurentius to build affordable housing? No you can't, they would be run clear out of 19125

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

repolozob's picture

I wonder how much of the Taxpayers money will be squandered on this project. They are tearing down a beautiful Church to build ugly wefare apartments for the lazy and stupid.

2014 york's picture

They are demolishing a building that had serious structural issues and no tangible use. It was pretty...that's it. These old churches were not built to last centuries like those in Europe. The walls were made from stacked rubble and cement, then faced with a thin layer of brownstone. It served it's purpose and now something new will replace it...the end.

Kenzo's picture

2014 york wrote:
They are demolishing a building that had serious structural issues and no tangible use. It was pretty...that's it. These old churches were not built to last centuries like those in Europe. The walls were made from stacked rubble and cement, then faced with a thin layer of brownstone. It served it's purpose and now something new will replace it...the end.

Yeah that would be fun if I did that to Olde Swedes Church.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

repolozob's picture

Right on Kenso!

lighterthief's picture

I would like to see the cost per unit (including demolition) vs the cost of an existing good-condition house in the neighborhood vs the construction cost of a new for-profit market-rate rental (say like the us construction houses going up on the 2000 block of Susquehanna only a few blocks away) then be told that money is being well spent.

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

2014 york's picture

Kenzo wrote:
2014 york wrote:
They are demolishing a building that had serious structural issues and no tangible use. It was pretty...that's it. These old churches were not built to last centuries like those in Europe. The walls were made from stacked rubble and cement, then faced with a thin layer of brownstone. It served it's purpose and now something new will replace it...the end.

Yeah that would be fun if I did that to Olde Swedes Church.

Olde Swedes was constructed differently. It was built to last. Did you read what I wrote? I've been watching the demolition daily. My opinion is based on knowing a little more than most about this particular church. I hated to see it go but I understand why. What I wrote was not a challenge to you or anyone else. I thought you would appreciate having a different, and slightly more informed, perspective.

2014 york's picture

lighterthief wrote:
I would like to see the cost per unit (including demolition) vs the cost of an existing good-condition house in the neighborhood vs the construction cost of a new for-profit market-rate rental (say like the us construction houses going up on the 2000 block of Susquehanna only a few blocks away) then be told that money is being well spent.

I'm a little confused at what you are asking here. Are we off the subject of the church? I don't the the cost of demolition, with respect to the church, should be factored in.

lighterthief's picture

2014 york wrote:
lighterthief wrote:
I would like to see the cost per unit (including demolition) vs the cost of an existing good-condition house in the neighborhood vs the construction cost of a new for-profit market-rate rental (say like the us construction houses going up on the 2000 block of Susquehanna only a few blocks away) then be told that money is being well spent.

I'm a little confused at what you are asking here. Are we off the subject of the church? I don't the the cost of demolition, with respect to the church, should be factored in.

Of course it should. Why when there are other sites, and plenty of re-hab opportunities go out of your way and add cost to the housing by demolishing one of the most historic structures in your neighborhood? It's nonsense.

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

lstriar's picture

There aren't a lot of funding programs available for non-profits (or for-profits) out there that do scattered site rehab development. If they want to do affordable housing, they need a big enough site.

I won't judge whether or not the church should have been taken down. I don't have nearly enough facts to take either side. But the size of this site and the types of funding available are why they prefer this to rehabs.

2014 york's picture

The plan to demo the church came well before the plan to redevelop the land it sits on. The demolition would have taken place either way. Therefore, the cost has nothing to do with the re-use of the land.

lighterthief's picture

there is plenty of other junk they could have demolished first as well.

Site availability is the only excuse for choosing this one and IMO it is not good enough when you have so much of this

xhttp://g.co/maps/ryyhv

http://g.co/maps/swbxu

http://g.co/maps/v8su5

short term thinking bad for the long term health of the neighborhood

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

Kenzo's picture

2014 york wrote:
Kenzo wrote:
2014 york wrote:
They are demolishing a building that had serious structural issues and no tangible use. It was pretty...that's it. These old churches were not built to last centuries like those in Europe. The walls were made from stacked rubble and cement, then faced with a thin layer of brownstone. It served it's purpose and now something new will replace it...the end.

Yeah that would be fun if I did that to Olde Swedes Church.

Olde Swedes was constructed differently. It was built to last. Did you read what I wrote? I've been watching the demolition daily. My opinion is based on knowing a little more than most about this particular church. I hated to see it go but I understand why. What I wrote was not a challenge to you or anyone else. I thought you would appreciate having a different, and slightly more informed, perspective.

Ok so the Church was a piece of crap trailer-park-esque matchstick construction that had to go. Got it.

I can't wait for the new building that's supposed to go up. What's it gonna look like? I'm sure it will the jewel of the Square.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

lighterthief's picture

I refuse to believe they hatched a plan to demolish a historic church on the neighborhoods main public space without thinking they were going to build something there. I am sure the money to tear it down is coming from a different source than the new construction to make the #s work but it's al still coming from our pockets.

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

2014 york's picture

It's difficult to discuss the demolition issue if you can't get beyond it being a great looking building. My initial reaction was the same so I decided to ask questions and take a better look at the structure. I spent a little time dreaming about what I'd like to see happen with the building but the simple fact that it was not economically feasible to restore it for re-adaptive use is the reality.

Kenzo's picture

The money would have been better spent if they actually got into the rehab business working on EXISTING houses, especially if they did it on the much mis-named Hope Street which is the hottest drug market in their area.

But whatever. Let them blow their wad on one big parcel. I'm sure it will bedazzle the neighborhood.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

lighterthief's picture

Well the "affordable housing" isn't really economically feasible either it requires huge subsidy and is likely built at a cost that is considerably higher than average housing. This particular time I would rather have seen my tax dollars go to restore the beautiful old building than build more and more housing. There are plenty of places to find opportunities for new housing in the area but once gone the church is gone forever.

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

2014 york's picture

Take a ride over before the front comes down and take a close look at what's left. Notice the tree growing out of the facade and how part of the structure is in danger of collapse. The scaffolding that was in front of the building was put there to protect people from falling objects. It was either spend millions to restore the structure or demo. There was not a, do nothing so that we have a pretty view, option. If you want to blame someone, blame the Catholic Church for abandoning the neighborhood or the parishioners for abandoning the church. Do you really want your tax dollars spent on saving churches to the tune of millions while vital infrastructure falls apart? I DON'T

2014 york's picture

One last point and I'll get off this. NSCA's mission is not to restore buildings. They would have never been given funding for that purpose.

EDIT: Why do most conversations have to turn into...You're an idiot? Maybe I caused it but it wasn't my intention. I suppose it's difficult to debate/discuss anything online.

lighterthief's picture

I Have no problem blaming the RCC their abdication from serving poor urban neighborhoods in the US is absolutely pathetic. The RCC is my church. I am completely disillusioned with their leadership and the choices it makes on global and local levels. So yes, the blame starts with them. Still does not make this project OK in my opinion.

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

bozoloper's picture

assuming it was saved and somehow repurposed, what would you do with it? who would pay to continue to maintain the structure?

nothin' bring you down like your hometown.

Kenzo's picture

2014 york wrote:
One last point and I'll get off this. NSCA's mission is not to restore buildings. They would have never been given funding for that purpose.

I'm wondering if was the original purpose when CDCs were first thought of as an idea, that they should become very large landlords who also hold zoning power in the neighborhood. I don't know if I would want to live in an area where one specific quasi-private entity owns a lot of blocks around me, basically has all the say when it comes to zoning--so if I want to do something to my property that results in a refusal... great I have to deal with them and their politics--and we get to practice Demolition By Neglect.

You know what? Screw it I'm filing the 13909 today. I want to see their '10 return just to see how much $$$ they're getting showered with to do the square project.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

Kenzo's picture

bozoloper wrote:
assuming it was saved and somehow repurposed, what would you do with it? who would pay to continue to maintain the structure?

NSCA didn't get this property for free, they paid for it. They acquired the property with the intent to demolish it and build housing. The Church didn't mysteriously appear in their lap. Here's the deed recording and the BRT account:

Document Code Date Grantor Grantee Legal
52369388 DEED 07/18/2011 NORRIS SQUARE EDUCATIONAL CORPORATION
NORRIS SQUARE CIVIC ASSOCIATION
Consol/Sub S House # 154 Ext 72 Street Name DIAMOND Designation ST SUB OF 8,15,16,23,75,296 027N19-0297

Certified Values for 2012 Sales Information
Market Value: $220,400 Sales Date: 6/24/2011
Assessed Land (Taxable): $10,607 Sales Price: $643,500
Assessed Improvement (Taxable): $59,921
Assessed Land (Exempt): $0 Tax Information
Real Estate tax: $6,652.20
Assessed Improvement (Exempt): $0
Total Assessment: $70,528

You make this out like the church was going to collapse in everyone's living room and wipe out NCSA's offices over on the other side of the park.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

2014 york's picture

Kenzo wrote:
2014 york wrote:
One last point and I'll get off this. NSCA's mission is not to restore buildings. They would have never been given funding for that purpose.

I'm wondering if was the original purpose when CDCs were first thought of as an idea, that they should become very large landlords who also hold zoning power in the neighborhood. I don't know if I would want to live in an area where one specific quasi-private entity owns a lot of blocks around me, basically has all the say when it comes to zoning--so if I want to do something to my property that results in a refusal... great I have to deal with them and their politics--and we get to practice Demolition By Neglect.

You know what? Screw it I'm filing the 13909 today. I want to see their '10 return just to see how much $$$ they're getting showered with to do the square project.

I wonder the same thing myself. There seem to be no real checks and balances built into the system. Building an empire assures them continued existence well beyond the initial purpose. They should have NO permanent ownership of ANYTHING.

bozoloper's picture

Kenzo wrote:
bozoloper wrote:
assuming it was saved and somehow repurposed, what would you do with it? who would pay to continue to maintain the structure?

NSCA didn't get this property for free, they paid for it. They acquired the property with the intent to demolish it and build housing. The Church didn't mysteriously appear in their lap. Here's the deed recording and the BRT account:

Document Code Date Grantor Grantee Legal
52369388 DEED 07/18/2011 NORRIS SQUARE EDUCATIONAL CORPORATION
NORRIS SQUARE CIVIC ASSOCIATION
Consol/Sub S House # 154 Ext 72 Street Name DIAMOND Designation ST SUB OF 8,15,16,23,75,296 027N19-0297

Certified Values for 2012 Sales Information
Market Value: $220,400 Sales Date: 6/24/2011
Assessed Land (Taxable): $10,607 Sales Price: $643,500
Assessed Improvement (Taxable): $59,921
Assessed Land (Exempt): $0 Tax Information
Real Estate tax: $6,652.20
Assessed Improvement (Exempt): $0
Total Assessment: $70,528

You make this out like the church was going to collapse in everyone's living room and wipe out NCSA's offices over on the other side of the park.

i personally have no information on the church financially, structurally or otherwise. i'm also not making it out to be anything. i'm just wondering if it were to be repaired and reused what would it be used as? there's obviously not a need for another catholic church in the area. some kind of community center?

nothin' bring you down like your hometown.

lighterthief's picture

bozoloper wrote:
assuming it was saved and somehow repurposed, what would you do with it? who would pay to continue to maintain the structure?

http://www.churchbrew.com/

would be my vote also

music venue, performing arts space, indoor marketplace, exhibition space, event hall or... really out of the box, a church! so many of the old churches in town are no longer used by their original denomination or congregation.

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

2014 york's picture

Wanna continue this discussion over a beer? Our warehouse has a great view of the demolition and we just got a new (vintage) pool table. I'll be there working this evening. 2028 N Hancock St.

Kenzo's picture

2014 york wrote:
Building an empire

Speaking of...

148 W CUMBERLAND ST
152 W CUMBERLAND ST
142 W DAUPHIN ST
144 W DAUPHIN ST
184 W DAUPHIN ST
186 W DAUPHIN ST
102 DIAMOND ST
106 DIAMOND ST
154-72 DIAMOND ST
174 DIAMOND ST
1904-22 N FRONT ST
2111 N FRONT ST
2114 N HANCOCK ST
2128 N HANCOCK ST
2136 N HANCOCK ST
1925 HOPE ST
2029 HOPE ST
2053 HOPE ST
2144 HOPE ST
2121-37 N HOWARD ST
2139-41 N HOWARD ST
2143 N HOWARD ST
2315 N HOWARD ST
2322 N HOWARD ST
2327 N HOWARD ST
2341 N HOWARD ST
2345 N HOWARD ST
2351 N HOWARD ST
2353 N HOWARD ST
2355 N HOWARD ST
2410 N HOWARD ST
2430 N HOWARD ST
2438 N HOWARD ST
1916 MASCHER ST
2417 MUTTER ST
2419 MUTTER ST
2445 MUTTER ST
135-41 W NORRIS ST
150 W NORRIS ST
152 W NORRIS ST
1929 N ORIANNA ST
2020 PALETHORP ST
2056 PALETHORP ST
2240 PALETHORP ST
2242 PALETHORP ST
2244 PALETHORP ST
2246 PALETHORP ST
2247 PALETHORP ST
2248 PALETHORP ST
2250 PALETHORP ST
2252 PALETHORP ST
2258 PALETHORP ST
2263 PALETHORP ST
2264 PALETHORP ST
2266 PALETHORP ST
2352 PALETHORP ST
2354 PALETHORP ST
2356 PALETHORP ST
2201 N PHILIP ST
2217 N PHILIP ST
2219 N PHILIP ST
2221 N PHILIP ST
2223 N PHILIP ST
2225 N PHILIP ST
2227 N PHILIP ST
2229 N PHILIP ST
2231 N PHILIP ST
2233 N PHILIP ST
2235 N PHILIP ST
2237 N PHILIP ST
2239 N PHILIP ST
2241 N PHILIP ST
2253 N PHILIP ST
2255 N PHILIP ST
2263 N PHILIP ST
2265 N PHILIP ST
2267 N PHILIP ST
2269 N PHILIP ST
2273 N PHILIP ST
2275 N PHILIP ST
137 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
147 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
149 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
169 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
312 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
316 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
318 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
320 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
402 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
404 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
406 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
408 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
410 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
413 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
419 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
421 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
423 W SUSQUEHANNA AVE
1945 WATERLOO ST
2263 WATERLOO ST
2409 WATERLOO ST
2201 N 02ND ST
2213 N 02ND ST
2215 N 02ND ST
2217 N 02ND ST
2241 N 02ND ST
2247 N 02ND ST
2436 N 02ND ST
2438 N 02ND ST
2440 N 02ND ST

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

2014 york's picture

NKDC attempted something similar with their proposal to build 45 rental properties in East Kensington. It was presented as a rent to own scheme but the small print was laughable when it came to actual ownership. I forget the details but the concept would have assured NKCDC be around for many years. I'm not knocking NKCDC but I don't agree with this type of redevelopment. I think CDC's should only exist to jump start revitalization then either move to another distressed area or close shop.

th's picture

2014 york wrote:
Wanna continue this discussion over a beer? Our warehouse has a great view of the demolition and we just got a new (vintage) pool table. I'll be there working this evening. 2028 N Hancock St.

Beer, vintage pool table, renovated warehouse with a view of a demolition? Pfft, what time? I'll be there.

You wanna dance? LET'S DANCE!

2014 york's picture

I'm on my way over now (4:15) Should be there till 8 or 9

th's picture

I'll stop by around 6.

You wanna dance? LET'S DANCE!

Kenzo's picture

I'll stop around midnight. Wearing a mask. In a van with no windows.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

2014 york's picture

Kenso, you are really odd. I like you, I think, but I'm not sure how much I could take before you got on my nerves.

Kenzo's picture

2014 york wrote:
Kenso, you are really odd. I like you, I think, but I'm not sure how much I could take before you got on my nerves.

Don't believe anything th says when he's sober... or drunk. BTW I couldn't come over I'm stuck running tests that have to be finished.

On the advice of someone who probably queened-out, this signature has been deleted.

2014 york's picture

Kenzo wrote:
2014 york wrote:
Kenso, you are really odd. I like you, I think, but I'm not sure how much I could take before you got on my nerves.

Don't believe anything th says when he's sober... or drunk. BTW I couldn't come over I'm stuck running tests that have to be finished.

He didn't say much. We had a couple of beers and shot a couple of games.

th's picture

We didn't have time to look at the church, but I'm certainly willing to believe what York says about the structure. I'm also willing to accept that sometimes old structures just need to come down.

My only hope would be that they gave access to someone like Stock to salvage as much of the woodwork and glass and old fixtures as possible before hand.

You wanna dance? LET'S DANCE!

codergrrl's picture

My mom and dad were married in there. It was a beautiful church.

"Je Suis Prest"

2014 york's picture

NCSA allowed several salvage companies and individuals to remove items before demo. Unfortunately not everything that could have been salvaged was.

th's picture

2014 york wrote:
NCSA allowed several salvage companies and individuals to remove items before demo. Unfortunately not everything that could have been salvaged was.

That's good to know.

I guess my pie in the sky wish for these kinds of project would be a more creative use of what is salvageable in terms of the actual building structure/facade. You don't need to keep or rehab the whole building, but it would be interesting to incorporate parts of it, like the ornate entrance, into the architecture of what is to come.

I'm sure it's easier said than done and probably ads costs. It also takes a lot of willpower and vision. Like I said - pie in the sky.

You wanna dance? LET'S DANCE!

Dulce1981's picture

Plus, since the project is using HUD and state dollars, there is a plan to use materials not salvaged prior to demolition in the new construction.

There were talks to keep more of the current facade, but there were structural issues that made those proposals too cost prohibitive.

Dulce1981's picture

All of that is public information. The city gave money for demolition. HUD gave money for affordable housing. And the state office of economic development gave money for rehabilitation of the community center and rectory as well as any public green space additions. None of this has been secret. There have been community meetings and surveys done since 1996 to find out what community residents wanted for the site. At NSCA's annual meetings, they presented some of the conceptual drawings for people to give their opinions on and presented the financials on the project. There was a community meeting last month about the scattered sites planned for Susquehanna Ave. If people want to know whats going on, why not ask NSCA or go to a community meeting?

lighterthief's picture

I think the point was that NSCA runs the community meetings AND controls the "community voice" for it's own developments. Hardly an objective environment. Nobody said it was secret, that it was announced and publicly funded does not make it good.

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

2014 york's picture

I seriously doubt the voice of anyone living beyond the boarders of NSCA would be welcomed at their meetings. Not saying that FNA, ORCA or ENKA would be any different. I really dislike these artificial borders to the community at large. Historic structure demolition or large scale development in any of the surrounding community has a large impact on all. One border (Front St) shared by all but ORCA should really get the attention of all civics. Redevelopment of this corridor would have innumerable positive impacts on the entire area.

kdlewis6's picture

just wanted to chime in to this conversation a little late but in 2009 51% of NSCA expenses were in salaries. Of the 174 employees listed on the payroll, the average salary of 174 employees was approx $11k per year. NSCA did not have any volunteers, only paid employees. Additionally, of the approx $3million in grant money received, almost 2million was paid out as salaries for the year, not including payroll taxes and employee benefits such as healthcare, workman's comp, etc.

I am surprised that public funds can be used to pay salaries at 51% of the funds going to employees. It looks like almost all of revenue from grants and rental property is spent on adminstrative expenses only. Is that normal for a non profit?

lighterthief's picture

I dont find the percentage for salaries odd, cdc's often pay much of their $$ in salaries because those salaries are going to people who's work is serving the community most of the money should be to pay people to do work. It's the 171 employees that seems excessive.

Empty factories to the east and all our waste
The shape of things that came shows on the broken workers face

HAZMAT's picture

lighterthief wrote:
I dont find the percentage for salaries odd, cdc's often pay much of their $$ in salaries because those salaries are going to people who's work is serving the community most of the money should be to pay people to do work. It's the 171 employees that seems excessive.

You worded it perfectly cdc's would spend highly on planning and business growth ~civics are usually spending most of there grants and funding on improving quality of life issues and seeking a sustainable agenda for the community. !

To be ones self and unafraid, right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to conformaty. Irving Wallace.

kdlewis6's picture

it's odd to me because nothing is being produced from that payroll that I am aware of for civic use? The would be given the $ which is public $ intended for public goods as written in their mission statement or the reason given that allowed them NSCA to be awarded that money. So if I give you 100 dollars salary to build a community garden, because the city gave me $100 for community gardens and you don't build a community garden, just sit there and keep the $100, it's an abuse of public funds right?

Why would a not for profit have 174 employees?? how do you tie those employees salaries to work that they have completed? What are they being paid to do?? What was the $3 million in grant money for and what results are there to show how it was spent tying back to what the public $ was granted to be used at. The $3million wasn't given to just hand 174 people money and not do anything, it's not welfare $ right it has to be for something. What did these 174 people do when they received a salary from the public funds, what public work can be tied back and evidenced as a result of paying 51% of the money you received to to employees?

HAZMAT's picture

The staff all got new shirts and a neat bbq in the park yesterday!

To be ones self and unafraid, right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to conformaty. Irving Wallace.

kdlewis6's picture

Normally I wouldn't look this closely but after being threatened makes me wonder what's going on? Especially since opposition should be something that a civic group should be used to negotiating professionaly with the interest of the community at its heart. Would HUD have a similar payroll % and behave towards its constituents the same way? Curious if anyone knows?

kdlewis6's picture

lol, guess that's what the payroll was for then, to attend a bbq? glad to see thats what the grant money was for then...

2014 york's picture

It's a grant black hole. They do provide numerous services to the community like day care, school, a computer lab and some other stuff. I'm not sure why they need a computer lab when the library on Dauphin provides that service.

It seems many of the other programs overlap or were created just to spend grant money. Some of it goes to bus their employees downtown, while on the clock, to yell at various meetings. I really would love to see a full accounting. It should be public record.

kdlewis6's picture

Grant money is usually for a specific purpose and you don't get 3 million dollars for a day care unless that day care is free. Given that I live in the area, I am not aware of ANY services they offer based on the $3 million in grant money they received. You don't write and request grants to run a daycare, especially when CCSI subsidizes day care costs for people in this city. A civic center doesn't run a school either, either the city or a charter school runs it, or its a private school charging tuition and having investors and fundraisers...not public grant $ for green spaces, or community cleanups.

51% in labor costs alone for a 501c means it's a poorly run organization. That is not standard for a 501c3. This is not a labor intensive organization with a lot of hands creating daycares or teaching computers...that means the other 49% of cost goes to maintenance on their rental parties, supplies, travel, and unknown other. They have pretty high depreciations costs, which is unusual wonder what that is for... Who is the independent auditor?

HAZMAT's picture

You can do it request this information and see what you can dig up !

To be ones self and unafraid, right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to conformaty. Irving Wallace.

2014 york's picture

HAZMAT wrote:
You can do it request this information and see what you can dig up !

From whom? I doubt you can walk into their office and ask for a full accounting. I'm not sure anyone on this site would be qualified to understand the information if we had it.

I noticed that Pat has a huge stack of marble panels, from St Bonifice. in her back yard. I wonder what other perks she has managed to acquire. One would think that these things should have been sold to help finance their operations. What gives her the right to take them? I know of others who had access to take building materials for free. I don't recall hearing that the community could salvage. Must be nice to be tight with the queen.

HAZMAT's picture

2014 york wrote:
HAZMAT wrote:
You can do it request this information and see what you can dig up !

From whom? I doubt you can walk into their office and ask for a full accounting. I'm not sure anyone on this site would be qualified to understand the information if we had it.

I noticed that Pat has a huge stack of marble panels, from St Bonifice. in her back yard. I wonder what other perks she has managed to acquire. One would think that these things should have been sold to help finance their operations. What gives her the right to take them? I know of others who had access to take building materials for free. I don't recall hearing that the community could salvage. Must be nice to be tight with the queen.

Noticed those also sure would like to have those for my home ! maybe I should have been nice to her ?
Not a chance lol she can keep them they are stolen merchandise as far as I'm concerned !

To be ones self and unafraid, right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to conformaty. Irving Wallace.

Pure_Fishtown's picture

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

HAZMAT's picture

I like dislike this issue !
One thing that is a clear sign to me is the fact that the district council has to step in and put the brakes on a so called activist who proclaims to be fighting for the same agenda !
Maybe Pat Decarlo is over the top in her thinking and needs to be replaced with someone who is able to complete the Norris sqr. agenda with out bias and with a fresh thought on the way things are done today not the way you did them 40 years ago !

To be ones self and unafraid, right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to conformaty. Irving Wallace.