Steve Taylor Now Oversees Milwaukee County Finances. His Record at the ROC Foundation Tells a Different Story.

 

By Dr. Richard A. Busalacchi
Franklin Community News

When Milwaukee County Supervisor Steve Taylor was named Chair of the County’s Finance Committee this past Tuesday, his message was clear.

“I am honored to be trusted with these roles and the responsibility that comes with them,” Taylor said in a recent press release, pledging to “keep pushing for responsible budgeting” and warning that the County faces serious financial challenges.

“We need to focus on our core services and make sure we’re being responsible with taxpayer dollars,” he added.

Those are the right priorities.

But they also raise a fair question:

What does Taylor’s own record show about financial management and decision-making?

From Public Office to Nonprofit Leadership

Before taking on the County’s top financial oversight role, Taylor served in public office during the approval and development of Ballpark Commons in Franklin.

During that time, he was involved in actions supporting zoning, financing, and the eventual sale of the former Crystal Ridge landfill—then owned by Milwaukee County—to ROC Ventures, led by Mike Zimmerman, for a nominal purchase price of $1 as part of a broader redevelopment plan.

Public records indicate that the transaction did not involve a traditional request-for-proposals (RFP) process or competitive bidding.

Following his unsuccessful reelection bid in 2018 to Patti Logsdon, Taylor later became Executive Director of the ROC Foundation, an organization affiliated with that same development.

This progression—from public official involved in development decisions to leadership of an affiliated nonprofit—provides important context for evaluating his record.

A Small Budget—But a Revealing One

The ROC Foundation is a relatively small nonprofit.

In 2024, it reported approximately $105,000 in total revenue.
By comparison, Milwaukee County’s annual budget exceeds $1 billion.

The difference in scale is enormous.

But financial leadership is not defined by size alone. The same principles apply at every level:

• Discipline
• Consistency
• Transparency

And the Foundation’s financial record offers insight into how those principles have been applied.

A Pattern of Inconsistent Performance

From 2020 through 2024, the ROC Foundation’s finances show:

• Multiple years of operating losses

• One year of near break-even

• One year of significant surplus (2023)

• A return to losses in 2024

Revenue rose sharply in some years, then declined. Net assets followed a similar pattern.

Rather than steady growth, the record reflects volatility and limited long-term stability.

A closer look at program spending relative to expenses and executive compensation highlights the imbalance in earlier years.

A closer look at program spending relative to executive compensation highlights the imbalance in earlier years.

In 2020, executive compensation was nearly 19 times greater than program spending, and only 3.9% of total expenses were directed toward mission-related activities.

The Foundation’s fundraising efforts generated significant gross revenue—sometimes exceeding $100,000 annually.

But expenses often rose alongside that revenue, reducing the net impact.

For example, in multiple years:

• Fundraising totals were substantial

• Yet net proceeds were significantly reduced after associated costs

This raises a fundamental operational question:

How effective is a fundraising model if a large portion of revenue is consumed by the cost of generating it?

IRS filings and public reporting indicate that the ROC Foundation’s fundraising activities extend beyond traditional donations and include event-based revenue streams such as:

• 50/50 raffles

• Raffles and prize-based drawings

• In-game promotions during sporting events

• Auctions and tournament-based fundraising events

According to IRS disclosures, the Foundation has also allowed other nonprofit organizations to participate in fundraising activities at Milwaukee Milkmen and Milwaukee Wave games.

While certain events—such as golf tournaments and auctions—are itemized in IRS filings, the Foundation’s Form 990 does not separately report:

• Gross raffle receipts

• Raffle-related expenses

• Net proceeds from gaming activities

• Distribution of funds to participating nonprofits

Instead, these revenues are often included within aggregate fundraising totals without detailed breakdowns.

This fundraising structure provides important context for the Foundation’s financial patterns:

• Fundraising revenue can appear substantial in total

• However, associated costs reduce net impact

• In some cases, revenue closely tracks expenses

This makes it difficult to determine:

• net proceeds from specific activities

• how much funding directly supports the mission

Event-based and raffle-driven fundraising models are not uncommon.

However, when detailed reporting is limited, they raise a fundamental question:

How much of the money raised ultimately supports charitable programming after expenses?

Executive compensation increased steadily from 2020 through 2023 before leveling off in 2024.

• 2020: ~$53,000

• 2021: ~$60,000

• 2022: ~$63,000

• 2023: ~$79,000

• 2024: ~$79,000

This trend reflects growth in earlier years followed by stabilization.

Notably, the Foundation’s 2024 operating loss cannot be attributed to rising executive compensation, which remained relatively consistent year-over-year.

The ROC Foundation’s stated mission is:

“to provide support and unique experiences for youth, high school, and young adults… and create impactful outcomes in the communities where we live, work, and play.”

IRS filings confirm that funds were directed toward mission-related activities.

However, the level of that spending varied significantly:

• Minimal in early years

• Moderate in some years

• Significantly lower in 2023 despite strong revenue

• Increasing sharply in 2024

This inconsistency raises an important question:

Are financial resources being aligned with measurable mission impact over time?

The Foundation’s most recent filings highlight a sharp shift between 2023 and 2024:

• 2023: High revenue and a significant surplus, but relatively low program spending

• 2024: Substantially higher program spending, but a decline in revenue and a return to operating losses

This contrast illustrates a key point:

Program efficiency percentages alone do not tell the full financial story.

Higher program spending in 2024 occurred alongside reduced revenue, while lower program spending in 2023 coincided with a financial surplus.

Together, these results suggest that the organization’s financial performance is driven by year-to-year variability rather than a consistent operating model.

Recent filings also show direct financial transactions between the ROC Foundation and ROC Ventures, an affiliated entity. In 2024, the Foundation reported approximately $23,000 in payments to ROC Ventures for expenses including rent and management services, compared to roughly $10,000 in 2023.

• ~$10,000 in 2023

• ~$23,000 in 2024 (including rent and management fees)

While such arrangements are not uncommon, they reflect a financial structure in which the nonprofit relies on services provided by an affiliated private entity—highlighting the importance of transparency and clear governance.

Public materials also show overlapping structure:

• Taylor as Executive Director

• ROC Ventures–linked email domain

• Board leadership connected to the same network

These relationships are not inherently improper—but they underscore the importance of transparency and clear governance.

IRS filings indicate:

• No formal conflict-of-interest policy disclosed

• No independent compensation review process

• Limited documented board oversight

These are not violations of law.

However, they are widely recognized governance standards—and their absence raises reasonable questions about internal controls.

The Foundation’s program spending can be compared to widely accepted nonprofit benchmarks, which generally expect at least 65% of expenses to support mission-related activities.

Based on filings:

• 2020: 3.9%

• 2021: 24.2%

• 2022: 25.9%

• 2023: 12.3%

• 2024: 85.7%

In multiple years, the Foundation falls well below industry benchmarks.

While 2024 reflects a significant increase in program spending, it also coincides with a year in which the organization operated at a loss, making it unclear whether this level of spending is sustainable.

What This Means

These comparisons do not establish wrongdoing.

But they do provide a framework for evaluating effectiveness.

Over time, the Foundation’s spending patterns appear:

• Inconsistent

• Below benchmarks in multiple years

• Improved in one year, but without clear evidence of sustainability

The Bigger Question

Milwaukee County’s budget exceeds $1 billion—more than 10,000 times larger than the ROC Foundation’s.

But financial management is not about scale alone. It is about approach.

Across five years, the ROC Foundation’s record shows:

• Inconsistent financial performance

• Fluctuating program spending

• Revenue volatility

• Fundraising inefficiencies

• Financial ties to a related private entity

That record does not answer every question—but it does raise one:

What does this approach look like when applied to a billion-dollar public budget?

Final Thought

Taylor has warned that Milwaukee County faces serious financial challenges and has pledged to ensure responsible use of taxpayer dollars.

Those are commitments worth taking seriously.

They are also standards worth applying consistently—whether the budget is $100,000 or $1 billion.

Because in the end, financial stewardship is not defined by size.

It is defined by discipline, consistency, and accountability.

This piece reflects the author’s personal opinion and experiences. All statements are presented as commentary protected under the First Amendment. Readers are encouraged to review public records, filings, and documented evidence referenced throughout this article.

Dr. Richard Busalacchi is the Publisher of Franklin Community News, where he focuses on government transparency, community accountability, and local public policy. He believes a community’s strength depends on open dialogue, honest leadership, and the courage to speak the truth—even when it makes powerful people uncomfortable.

🕯️ The solution isn’t another insider in a new office. It’s sunlight, scrutiny, and the courage to vote differently.

Because until voters demand honest, transparent government, the corruption won’t stop — it will only change titles.

Elections have consequences — and Franklin’s next one may decide whether transparency makes a comeback.

💬 If you value hard-hitting, fact-based investigative reporting about our hometown of Franklin — follow Franklin Community News on Facebook.

Together, we can keep local government honest, transparent, and accountable 

— for the greater good.

© 2026 Franklin Community News. All rights reserved.

Join Us at:

 https://www.facebook.com/share/g/1a3NsgvAGn/