|
[The Nature] Conservancy Criticized by
Senate Committee
(Note: While the handslapping goes on, little if anything is done about this 'non-profit' land baron, because The Nature Conservancy is deeply in cahoots with various federal agencies, from the Environmental Protection Agency to U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the Forest Service, and beyond. Taxpayer dollars -- also known as "federal grant funding" -- are being given to TNC, while TNC becomes a self-appointed "willing seller" for the government. Are "sharp words of criticism" enough to exact change? What is the incentive for those entrenched in Congress to change this? Only the very real fear of losing their place in government, should the voters learn of this cauldron of cooperation, collaboration, and collusion, will force Congress to stop this unholy alliance. In fact, many former elected officials move on to "the private sector," where carefully feathered nests await them with just such organizations.)
"Time and again, The Nature Conservancy's Forms 990 provide only
bare bones information -- if any at all -- regarding its
participation in transactions with insiders ... " - Senator Chuck
Grassley (R-Iowa), Senate Finance Committee.
August 1, 2005 By James Hoare jhoare@mcgivneyandkluger.com
Managing attorney at the Syracuse, New York, office of McGivney,
Kluger & Gannon. http://lapa.legalstaff.com/profile/co_search_employers_detail.asp?id=17611
Published In: Environment News Publication, August 1, 2005
Publisher: The Heartland Institute
19 South LaSalle Street, Suite 903
Chicago, Illinois 60603
312-377-4000
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) must make a firm commitment to
ending recent abuses that have called into question its compliance
with federal laws bestowing economic favor on charities, concluded a
U.S. Senate Finance Committee report issued June 7, 2005.
Post Exposed Abuses
The committee began an inquiry into the Nature Conservancy after the
Washington Post in 2003 published a series of articles exposing
large-scale financial improprieties and activities running counter to
the tax-exempt purposes of the organization.
According to the Post, the Nature Conservancy -- which
had amassed $3 billion in assets by pledging to save precious,
environmentally pristine lands -- has logged forests,
arranged for the construction of opulent houses on fragile grasslands,
drilled for natural gas under the last breeding ground of an
endangered bird species, and made what appeared to be sweetheart
financial deals with board members and their families.
"The nonprofit organization has bought land and services from
board members' companies," the Post noted, "and it has
declined to release property appraisals from the deals. It has sold
choice Conservancy land to past and present trustees through its
'conservation buyers' program, which offers steep discounts in
exchange for development restrictions. It has lent cash to its
executives, including $1.55 million to its president."
'Legitimate Concerns' Raised
Senate Finance Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) had sharp words
of criticism for the tax-exempt group.
"The report and attached documents show that The Nature
Conservancy at times approaches tax matters affecting it and its
donors in an aggressive manner that can result in substantial tax
benefits [that are] no different than many large
corporations," said Grassley in a June 7, 2005, statement to
the media.
"Transparency and full disclosure are cornerstones in reassuring
the public that charities and those who donate to them deserve the
favorable tax benefits they receive," Grassley said. "Time
and again, The Nature Conservancy's Forms 990 provide only bare bones
information -- if any at all -- regarding its participation
in transactions with insiders as well as unique and complex programs
such as the emissions credits arrangements and its conservation buyer
program."
Tax Shelter Shell Game
"The Nature Conservancy, with assets of $4 billion, is one of the
largest environmental groups in the country," said Gretchen
Randall, senior partner at Winningreen public policy consulting group.
"However, it has used conservation easements and other programs
for the benefit of officers and donors. TNC has also been lax in
overseeing the easements as required by the Internal Revenue Service.
"Congress needs to tighten the law regarding tax-exempt
charitable organizations and provide stronger oversight," Randall
added.
"We need to consider whether 'advocacy groups' should
[continue to] be tax-exempt or whether that status should be reserved
for schools, hospitals, churches, and true charities."
"The organization made some serious mistakes," said Jane S. Shaw,
senior fellow at the Bozeman, Montana-based PERC (The Property and
Environment Research Center http://www.perc.org).
"The Post rightly criticized the organization for giving special
treatment to some people that enabled them to benefit from the use of
conservation easements.
"But this is different from complaining about the Nature
Conservancy for drilling gas wells or cutting down trees," Shaw
continued. "One of the good things about the Nature Conservancy
is that its managers are willing to look for 'win-win' situations in
which the environment is protected and economic activity is also
conducted. We need more organizations doing that sort of thing. It
would be a shame if Congress discouraged nonprofits from such
activities."
"When the Nature Conservancy was started in the early 1950s, its
goal was to find special little areas and preserve them privately, in
the Toquevellian tradition of private, voluntary action and
association," noted Robert J. Smith, senior environmental scholar
for the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
"But as the conservancy grew and accumulated wealth, it began to
work ever more closely with the federal government, acquiring land in
any manner possible, and then selling most of it to the government at
a substantial profit. They had become little more than a real estate
arm of the federal government, and often a rather shady and
strong-armed agent. The Nature Conservancy is no longer a friend of
private property or a free society."
"On environmental and economic grounds," said CEI President
Fred Smith, "the tax subsidies for 'environmental purchases'
should be repealed. To many, environmentalism has become a religion.
This is fine -- but the cathedrals of nature, like those of God,
should not be financed by taxpayers, but rather by the faithful."
|