Rose Kennedy Greenway

Suffolk 83 said:
Snow removal, trash removal, water, fertilizers, pesticides, equipment, a place to keep the equipment, materials, replacing vandalized and broken things (benches, lights, trash barrels, signs) money to pay the laborers, paying the management people (and if you think you can cheap out of that your crazy) etc etc etc. This assuming that the city doesn't do any of those things for them, that I don't know about I'm assuming it runs 100% on its own.
Click to expand...

So my numbers might be off.....
300k so we move it to a Million a year.
But 4.7 million dollar budget is insane.
 
You can't go around making blanket statements and assumptions about things you have no expertise about and then rail against them because it SOUNDS like waste or corruption.... I mean you can but...
 
Suffolk 83 said:
You can't go around making blanket statements and assumptions about things you have no expertise about and then rail against them because it SOUNDS like waste or corruption.... I mean you can but...
Click to expand...

Your talking about fertilizers, pesticides, equipment,, flowers whatever. The Greenway Conservancy should not be investing in equipment they should outsourcing the entire Strip to a well equiped Landscaping company.

What I'm saying is they are wasting useless money on something you can subcontract without employees for 500K on the HIGH END.
 
TheRifleman said:
Your talking about fertilizers, pesticides, equipment,, flowers whatever. The Greenway Conservancy should not be investing in equipment they should outsourcing the entire Strip to a well equiped Landscaping company.

What I'm saying is they are wasting useless money on something you can subcontract without employees for 500K on the HIGH END.
Click to expand...

Don't forget to add in the state mandated events and programs the Conservancy must put on as well as their youth apprenticeship program. You add all of this up, $4.7 million makes sense from my analysis.

As far as pay, salary is right on target with other non-profits of similar size and other park orgs managing similar public spaces (comparing Central Park to the Greenway is comparing apples to oranges, I'm embarrassed for the Herald reporter).
 
Suffolk 83 said:
paying the management people (and if you think you can cheap out of that your crazy)
Click to expand...

The whole post is seriously reaching, but this is where I take issue. You truly believe that taxpayers should be paying $1.8 million annually for management of the greenway? Since so many people here seem so knowledgeable about this subject, perhaps one of you could share your analysis? Why is it OK that it takes $1.8 million dollars to manage the greenway?

Why is it OK that a net loss on fundraising results in bonuses and plans to spend $3 million on a new overpriced carousel to replace the perfectly fine current profitable carousel already in place?

Do you honestly not believe this money could be better spent elsewhere?
 
Officials demand Greenway ‘transparency’
Conservancy’s chief under fire in PR flap
By Erin Smith, Richard Weir, Dave Wedge and Matt Stout
Thursday, January 26, 2012 - Updated 3 hours ago



Alarmed by the Rose Kennedy Greenway’s brazen attempt to dodge a Herald inquiry about its finances, top state officials are demanding that the embattled chief of the taxpayer-funded nonprofit open the books and hand over details of the conservancy’s hefty salaries, bonuses, expenses and contracts.

“I am concerned about the Conservancy’s transparency in providing information,” state transportation czar Richard Davey wrote to Greenway Executive Director Nancy Brennan yesterday, after a Herald report revealed her efforts to withhold the latest information on her own six-figure salary.

“We believe strongly that this organization should be held to the same standards of transparency as all quasi-public agencies,” Davey told the Herald.

State transportation funds pay roughly half of the Greenway’s $4.7 million annual budget to oversee the 15-acre park over the Central Artery tunnels. Brennan has earned up to $225,000 a year in salary and bonuses and employs nearly 40 people, while separately contracting out maintenance work.

“This is a real stinker,” said House Minority Leader Rep. Bradley H. Jones (R-N. Reading). “I certainly think someone should ask to see the books. We need a full accounting of what has been raised and spent and what taxpayer dollars were used directly and indirectly.”

Tuesday, Brennan accidentally sent an email to a Herald reporter, meant for her publicist, suggesting ways to avoid revealing her actual salary after a Herald request. Yesterday, Brennan refused to comment, ordering a reporter to leave the Greenway’s offices, after accusing the reporter of being “unprofessional.”

Davey’s letter to Brennan yesterday demanded “by the close of business today: 1. All Financial Statements; 2. Last six quarterly reports; 3. Salaries for all staff including bonuses or other compensation; 4. Employment contracts, if any; 5. Other sources of income ...” Davey also asked for a plan to reduce state funding to the conservancy over the next five years.

“This is why I proposed legislation with more transparency and checks and balances in the system,” said State Rep. Aaron Michlewitz, whose bill to extend state funding indefinitely has a hearing next month.

Michlewitz said after reading the Herald’s report he is considering requiring limits on the Greenway’s payroll: “All discussion points are on the table.”

But some top officials were reluctant to criticize the nonprofit yesterday.

“I don’t run the conservancy,” Gov. Deval Patrick said when asked about the Greenway’s hefty budget, adding he intends to keep funding it.

Attorney General Martha Coakley, who oversees public charities and has targeted nonprofit health- care pay, declined to comment on the Greenway, saying only: “We have begun requiring an increased level of transparency on compensation levels at public charities to ensure that funds are being effectively used toward the charitable mission.”

A spokesman for Auditor Suzanne Bump’s office also declined to comment directly on the Greenway, saying, “Any vendor that receives money from the commonwealth is responsible for being transparent about how that money is spent. While it’s not timely with our current audit plan, this is an appropriate subject to be included in our audit plan in the future.”

Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino said, “I think Nancy Brennan overall has done a good job. ... You look at the salary at some of the other nonprofits in the city of Boston, she’s done a heck of a job managing that property.”
Click to expand...

Nancy Brennan will announce that she is stepping down. The city & state can't even mow lawns without sometype of corruption. It's completely insane what is going on now.

Even listening to Mumbles on the Boston Herald he doesn't even make sense. It's not like he ever did. I think the people of Boston have become Immuned to corruption.

Martha Coakley is a disgrace.


http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1398857
 
Where is there any 'corruption' here? The article doesn't say she was bribing anyone or being bribed by anyone.
 
Ron Newman said:
Where is there any 'corruption' here? The article doesn't say she was bribing anyone or being bribed by anyone.
Click to expand...

If they can justify the money then their is no corruption
Somebody needs to justify the 4.7 million dollar budget for the Greenway strip. Dollar for dollar. When people are trying to keep secrets that is a bad formula. Also why does Nancy need a PR Company to answer questions

The entire budget needs to be accoutable and transparent. You can't keep govt workers salaries secret when the taxpayers are funding half the Greenway.

Martha Coakley should have announced and Audit investigation right away.
 
Ron Newman said:
Where is there any 'corruption' here? The article doesn't say she was bribing anyone or being bribed by anyone.
Click to expand...

It seems her only offense was making more money than the typical Harold reader. None of what I've seen implies outrageous or unreasonable spending. The harold decided the Conservancy was ripe for a which hunt, so they hammered away at her.
 
HenryAlan said:
It seems her only offense was making more money than the typical Harold reader. None of what I've seen implies outrageous or unreasonable spending. The harold decided the Conservancy was ripe for a which hunt, so they hammered away at her.
Click to expand...

A better discussion about the Conservancy (not that we can expect that from the Herald) would not focus on the money issue but on the governance issues:
  • Why should the Greenway be quasi-public?
  • Why are uses and programming so stringently regulated on the Greenway?
  • How accountable is the conservancy for failing to seal to the deal for any of the promised cultural institutions on ramp parcels?
  • Why was a new entrenched interest created that will essentially work to maintain the status quo (pretty gardens on a median strip)?
 
Why should the Greenway be quasi-public?
Click to expand...

Because half the city is pissed it not completely public, while the other half is pissed it's not completely private.

This way, nobody is happy!
 
^Shepard

GREAT POINTS. Governance and accountability are key.

As for salaries, etc., we either want a world-class City or we don't. If we start nickel and diming salaries, results will be less than stellar. I haven't seen Nancy Brennan's CV, and $250k for an exec director may sounds like a lot of money, but I suspect a HIGHLY qualified Greenway director might expect a salary in that range.

Public and civic spaces need GREAT people at the helm, and a shining City pays off in so many other ways. SHOOT FOR THE STARS BOSTON.
 
Sicilian said:
^Public and civic spaces need GREAT people at the helm, and a shining City pays off in so many other ways. .
Click to expand...

Great people dont need to email a PR firm to figure out how to answer a simple question.

Great people just tell the truth
 
So again, what has Ms. Brennan and the conservancy done to warrant $1.8 million dollars in salary?

Nickel and dime-ing? We're talking about millions. I feel like I'm arguing with Mitt Romney. :p

Have you considered that maybe spending $1.8 million on something else might be a smarter way to make Boston a better city?
 
That figure is payroll for 29 employees. That's a reasonable figure for a staff that size. What is a worthwhile question, and I think what you are really getting at, Justin7, is are they doing something that requires 29 employees? I don't know the answer to that one, but I do know that the pay grades seem right for an organization that size. On speculation alone, I'm willing to say that the number of staff doesn't seem unreasonable, it's just something that is outside of my expertise. Did the Harold check with any comparable operations? Maybe a college grounds keeper, etc.?
 
Sicilian said:
^Shepard

GREAT POINTS. Governance and accountability are key.

As for salaries, etc., we either want a world-class City or we don't. If we start nickel and diming salaries, results will be less than stellar. I haven't seen Nancy Brennan's CV, and $250k for an exec director may sounds like a lot of money, but I suspect a HIGHLY qualified Greenway director might expect a salary in that range.

Public and civic spaces need GREAT people at the helm, and a shining City pays off in so many other ways. SHOOT FOR THE STARS BOSTON.
Click to expand...

Sicil -- Salaries should be commensurate with responsibilities -- From what I can see -- after the construction is completed -- then just running the Greenway doesn't seem to require a person paid $225,000 and a staff of 40 -- especially since the maintenance is outsourced

You need people to:
1) look for donors -- 3
2) coordinate daily / weekly events -- 2
3) coordinate log-term art installations, seasonal licenses for food vendors, etc -- 3
4) purchasing -- 1
5) budget and books -- 2
6) Human resources -- 1
6) PR -- 1
6) web -- 2

= 15

I think that would seem to be sufficient for most things -- outside of the executive director and the lead person dealing with donors, budget and a couple of others (5) the rest could be college interns -- that would probably save another $million for programming and better plantings of shrubberies
 
It's hard for me to consider a cookie-cutter approach to figuring a budget out, whighlander.

At the tail end of WBUR's interview here, they ask a public greenspace planning consultant (or similar) in DC for an opinion and he suggests the RKG budget is in line with the Highline and comparable parks. In the interview with WBUR, Brennan herself suggests RKG budget is less per square foot than Highline, Battery Park and one other example.

I think Board governance and accountability (especially regarding public financing) remain issues, less so about budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top