Users need to pay “fully-loaded costs” - so says Bob!

I was looking over Bob Trizna’s PublicWatchdog today, looking for a specific comment not associated with this post, when I came upon comments (former two-term PRPD Commissioner & 1-year President Bob) made, regarding the covering of fully-loaded costs of Park District, School District and Public Library activities.

Now, to be fair to Bob, he is nothing if not consistent.

From: D-64’s Subsidized Babysitting to Continue -05/29/12 

“Many/most taxpayers might expect parents who already are getting $10,000+ per year, per kid, of what amounts to “free” education not to beef about paying the fully-loaded costs of the after-school program (a/k/a babysitting) that enables them to work and afford the property taxes to obtain that almost-free education for their kids in the first place. Unfortunately, such an expectation would be wrong, at least as to those shameless-but-vocal parents who seem able to make a relatively spineless administration and school board quake in their boots.” “Yet currently, in addition to the after-school babysitting program, D-64 offers a variety of “elective” extracurricular activities, such as athletics and music, for which it does not even attempt to recover the fully-loaded costs. Instead, those activities are designed only to cover supply expenses, not the expenses for the personnel who teach/coach/administer them.”

From: No Need For Spineless Pk. Dist. To Litigate With Shameless Seniors – 04/16/2012  

“But while you’re at it, Park District, you also might want to re-visit the rules and regulations for your “affiliated” organizations – at least some of which are private 501(c)(3) corporations like Seniors Inc. – to make sure those organizations are paying their fully-loaded costs; and to prevent what happened with the Kemnitz bequest from happening with any future bequest to one of those affiliates. Because when it comes to taking advantage of government, the “shameless” come in a variety of packages besides “seniors.”

From: Time To End The Library’s “Free Lunches”? – 06/02/2010 

“Don’t get us wrong. We’re big fans of the Library and believe it to be a significant community asset, well-deserving of continued taxpayer support to cover the basic cost of maintenance and operation. We also like the idea of interlibrary borrowing, which creates synergies that should breed money-saving efficiencies – but only if that savings isn’t frittered away on the costs of the program. Which is why there should be a “convenience” charge that covers the actual, fully-loaded cost of the deliveries. And while the librarians are at it, they should start looking at ways to cover the fully-loaded costs of all those “free” programs, too: if those programs truly have any value, residents should be willing to pay for it.”

Let’s see if I have this right. 

If every user from this point forward (since properties have been purchased by prior taxed monies) pays the fully-loaded costs associated with the activities they utilize, the Park District, and other taxing bodies like School District(s) or the Public Library would not need additional tax money. 

Old Bob might actually be on to something! 

The Seniors could take their $400.00+ in PRPD’s tax money and apply it toward their new Senior Center.  The other non-Center-use seniors could just keep their cash.  Local parents would pay fully-loaded costs of their child’s education and those without kids could spend their money any way they like; and the Library, well, let them rent out those books! 

Bob, it’s brilliant!

I wish I’d thought of it!

Of course, its just my opinion.