LEAF blower?

The Golden LEAF Foundation was a good idea and still is. Formed in 1999, the foundation was charged with overseeing North Carolina's share of the national legal settlement with cigarette companies over the costs incurred because of the health effects of smoking.

That settlement has provided the state with hundreds of millions of dollars to be dispensed through grants for economic development in poor areas of the state, particularly those historically dependent on a tobacco-based economy. North Carolina has stayed true to the idea of using the money for that kind economic assistance, rather than funneling it into general revenues. In this state, the money does good, mostly in smaller grants to help nonprofit organizations or agencies that assist individual communities.

A critical report from State Auditor Beth Wood thus is troubling. Wood's office found the foundation needs to more closely monitor its business, including a more uniform accounting from those who receive grants, rather than reporting requirements that vary grant by grant. And, the auditor believes the General Assembly might want to bring Golden LEAF under ethics laws that apply to other agencies. The foundation, as a nonprofit corporation, is exempt from those laws.

Both recommendations sound like good ones.

There's no denying that Golden LEAF has a political tinge. Formed to conduct a worthwhile mission, its board members are appointed by the governor, the president pro tem of the state Senate and the speaker of the House.

Dan Gerlach, who is its president, was budget adviser to former Gov. Mike Easley prior to getting the foundation job. Board member Ruffin Poole is a former Easley aide recently in the midst of controversy over his fighting a subpoena to testify in an investigation by the State Board of Elections into Easley's campaign finances. And a Triangle venture capital firm, Hatteras Venture Partners, in which the foundation invested $30 million has as one partner John Crumpler, a long-time Democratic Party activist.

The 10-year point wouldn't be a bad time for legislators to take an overall look-see at this foundation to evaluate how it is doing its job, how it is structured and whether political connections play too great a role in its decision-making. This is not to suggest there appear to be grave problems. But such an examination might prevent potential trouble from becoming real trouble, or small challenges from becoming crises.