Merlo on a new "BIG STORY" & Gun Give Away Attorney General (title edited for drift)

Bat,
You are kicking a dead horse. The gun give away was a crime against the ATA's 501-C corp. charter. The bylaws are a moot point in the discussion. They were giving them selves expensive gifts and were not paying taxes on the items on their income taxes. Also the BOD can not vote to grant any compensation to the EC, by their own admission the BOD are employees of the corp. By federal law they can not vote any compensation to the EC. Now how can you justify your opinion on this using 501-C money for self gain? Roger C.

 

I'm totally for the return of or paying for the guns in question. I don't understand Bat being threatened with a vacation or called stupid by a Moderator. If Bat doesn't understand he either chooses not too or in his mind he is right. All gun clubs have that guy that is never wrong as do websites. I thought this site wasn't like the other site. Perhaps I was wrong.

 

I'm also hoping we can agree to disagree. This site must not begin the degeneration to what the other site became. Let's just say by-laws are often ignored in most organizations and jails would soon be loaded with by-laws miscreants. I'm still waiting to see my first.

 

You are not "wrong" ...... This site has very little "restrictions" ...... The biggest being using the actual name of the "other site"....

This "site" you CAN post anything you desire, as long as it is clear it is "just an opinion", or, something you can provide support for .....

The "ATA" can continue with their propaganda campaign where they desire, except for here ......

 

User why is Bat being threatened with a vacation? Why call him names? If this site continues in this direction I'm afraid it will have fewer members willing to post questions and opinions. We may have grown in members but having members who won't post for fear of retribution is worthless.

 

Your exactly right oleolliedawg, sometimes you can't change a persons mind. People have different views on subjects, sometimes we have to agree to disagree. Name calling and threats of being banned won't help grow what's been built, it will lead to its demise. Look at the ATA, they do what they want and if the members don't agree, too bad! Is that where this site is going? I hope not, we are the voice of reason, let's not ruin that.

 

Honest questions that deserves answers .....

The "vacation" comes from repeated "warnings" about something ......

The "name calling" comes from information that can not be seen by most forum members ......

 

Thanks for answers, I'm not trying to cause trouble but I can't see where any of this helps this site. I hope everyone understands. I am a founding member but chose to start posting only recently. I was on the fence on a lot of topics and not sure where I stood. I'm a convert I guess, so this site works! Please don't throw it away over belittling people. Keep up the good work and we will get something done!!!!

 

You are not causing trouble by questioning the actions of others ...... Feel free to do so if you see the need ...... Just remember to not take everything at "face value" .......

 

Oh believe me I'm not going to take what anyone says as Gospel. I simply want a site that will continue to grow.

 

What are you talking about User? You are making that up again. ATA bylaws are the same as the bylaws of any other nonprofit organization for purposes of this discussion. I have never stated any differently. You have never posted anything supporting your bashing of my point that a club (or any other nonprofit) violating its own bylaws is not guilty of a crime simply by way of violating a bylaw.

What ATA bylaws are certainly not, is "Municipal bylaws" which is what you have been quoting, without mentioning, which is very misleading to everyone here. In the section you quoted that started all of this, a "crime" for violating a bylaw can occur when violating a municipal bylaw. Nobody here is talking about any municipalities.

 

Roger, I don't care if they are forced to give the guns back, I personally would not require them to do so, but have at it.. I'm just trying to get the fact through that a bylaws violation is not automatically a crime. Yep, it sounds like at one time they were not paying tax on these, that is not necessarily a crime either, although tax issues CAN become criminal at a certain point. Maybe some of them have filed amended returns by now and paid the taxes, who knows. Underpaying your taxes is generally a civil matter, not criminal. Although that can work the other way also.

The BOD are the directors, and directors are not employees. Officers are employees but directors are not, unless they provide services in addition to board duties. The BOD has responsibility for ALL matters related to the ATA, and the BOD is the party responsible for setting the "compensation" of any person working for the organization, unless they sub it out to a committee. There is no federal law prohibiting the BOD from voting on compensation of the officers of an organization. The BOD is fully empowered to eliminate the gun issue. All they have to do is vote it out, and it is gone. If they do that, and someone secretly uses ATA funds to buy a gun for themselves, that would be a criminal matter. Right now, the bylaw allow this form of compensation, and they have basically stated that was their intention all along by way of changing the bylaws to conform to past practice. They are not using ATA money for "self-gain" if the BOD allows the payment. Get the BOD to remove this benefit, and the whole issue changes.

 

Ahhh, and there you have it boys and girls. Against the bylaws, without the permission of the members, these creeps awarded themselves free K80's and their representative says to get over it.....no municipalities?

Note to you BAT. I don't give a rat's ass who you think may or may not go to jail. You are as creepy as the fellows that gave each other K80's.

Tell me Bat that you think no one is investigating this. I want to see it typed. Remember I TOLD YOU SO!

 

Smithy, I have no idea if anyone is investigating this.

 

"Bat" ...... I can only guess that there is some type of medication you should be taking, and you are not .....

Having said that, and your refusal to provide something other than more long posts with nothing new, makes it hard to keep extending your time before enforcing my "threat" .....

 

"Underpaying your taxes is generally a civil matter, not criminal." .....

So ..... in your twisted mind NOT PAYING A TAX on something, is EQUAL in the eyes of the "IRS" to "Underpaying your taxes" .....

"Underpaying" would imply that you paid some "tax" on the "gun", just not enough ...... Dumb-Ass ......

 

Bat,
You are ignoring the fact that the EC stated the BOD does not represent the shooters of the state that elected them, they work for the EC and ATA to inform the shooters what the EC expect from them. They are not a unaligned board, THUS they can not vote to give perks or cash gifts to the EC.
What do you not understand about that? Are you that thick headed or are you devious? I do not think you need a vacation, you need to admit that you are just wrong about the rules of the 501-C corp.
I do not care if they give the guns back or not. My problem is with the idea that the BOD can vote gifts and perks to the EC. Federal law does not recognize the BOD is an independent arm of the ATA. They are for a better description, unpaid employees of the ATA. they do get paid expenses for their travel and shooting, lodging, and meals when working for the ATA at shoots. The people that took the guns and did not show them as income, are not the ATA's problem. not 1099 forming them is.
My suggestion to you is quit trying to bull shit your misaligned ideas as facts, most on here know better. Roger C.

 

Roger. I realize User is just antagonistic, but I feel you at least think things through. Listen, all I'm telling you is that the BOD is, according to all of the ATA's organizing documents, and they are the only things that matter in this issue, responsible for all matters of the organization. They appoint the EC to make decisions during the year between BOD meetings, but the BOD has the power to overrule any actions the EC takes. It is not the other way around.

Do some research on directors and whether they are considered employees or not, it is easily available just using Google. The delegates are elected by the state's shooters to a position with the ATA, so of course they are not state assoc. employees, unless they perform some other duties for the state assoc. outside their position as State ATA delegate. They do not work for the EC, since they clearly have the power to reverse anything the EC does. What do you mean by "federal law does not recognize the BOD is an independent arm of the ATA?" I'd get a vacation for stating an opinion like that as a fact? What does an "independent arm" of the ATA have to do with anything? They are the board of directors, of course they are related parties. Maybe you are thinking of "independent voting members?" That is something reported on the 990, and the BOD fits the description. You say that they are "an unaligned board" and thus cannot vote on comp for the officers. My question to you, is where can I find that exact rule? Maybe you can find something , but I have never heard of such a term, and I do not believe you will find any mention of "unaligned board" in any statutes, regulations other controlling documents that describe what a board of directors can, or cannot do.

I'm not thick headed and I'm not devious, I just have a lot more experience than you do in working with the laws for not for profits.

 

User, I have addressed it several times already. You simply do not comprehend well. You post a quote from the internet that says that violating the bylaws of a municipality's bylaws can be a criminal act. Well, we all know that nobody here is talking about any municipalities.

You posted . . . "NOT A "THREAT" ...... I am giving you little time to support how a "ATA bylaw" is "far removed" from ANY OTHER "bylaw" ...." And I have repeatedly stated that I said no such thing. I have clearly stated that the ATA bylaws are far removed from what you quoted as being criminal, namely municipal bylaws, which obviously have nothing to do with this site at all. I'm not really sure you even understand your error yet, considering the repeated threats about something that has already been answered.

You should be on vacation for posting such misleading info. Is it your "opinion" that the bylaws of a organization, corporation etc. are subject to the same criminal rules as a municipality as you are saying? You will not find any support for that in my opinion. So, if it is a fact as you must be saying, since you have not said it was your opinion, find some statute that says that any violation of an exempt organizations bylaws is a crime. Was everyone arrested at your club when they mistakenly voted without making sure and documenting that they had a quorum? Did anybody receive free tickets for pulling or scoring? All crimes? I don't think so.

 

The legal profession (courts) are reluctant to get involved in private matters within an organization. That's a fact you can take to the bank.

 

"I just have a lot more experience than you do in working with the laws for not for profits."

Does your "working with the laws for not for profits" involve your working for or advising ANYONE including yourself, paid or unpaid, that was or is a "member of the ATA" ??? You have to be or have been a "member" to "serve the ATA" .....

You seem to have much more than a "passing interest" in these cyber-conversations ......

Save the long dissertation answers, and give simple CLEAR ONES ..... What are your "professional qualifications" to "work with the laws for not for profits", and are you working for or advising ANYONE, paid or unpaid, about this matter ????

 

Bat you are not following the rules set down by the fed"s for the action of a BOD. The BOD in this case according to your interpitation can vote restitution for the EC. They in turn can bestow restitution on the BOD. I'm sure that can not be legal in the eyes of the 501-C corp. rules. I do think things thru, and common sense tells me that there is a snake in the wood pile, their lack of transparent operations is the first clue that something are being hidden. Honest people have no reason to hide their actions. Roger C.

 

I always say " If you have nothing to hide, hide nothing " ... There are several virtues missing in the organization today and for the past many years that were the attraction to the Organization at one time ... Integrity, Honor, Sportman ship, honesty and desire to make the Association better for all members not the selected few have been set a side rather than built for and into the future ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Ahhhh….there it is again students. This is what happens when a bunch of creeps are found when they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar. But in this case the jar was filled with K80's, Perazzi's, or a Seitz. Take your pick.

According to BAT creeps running away with $16,500 K80 combos are like someone not paying for a round of shooting.

 

Conflicted much? Your rants sound very much like you are representing these guys.

 

Crickets????

 

Just an FYI for anyone who may not know ..... "Bat" is not on "vacation status" ...... So any refusal to answer anything is his choice .....

 

This sheds a only a little light on the matter:

https://www.501c3.org/what-is-a-501c3/

It seems to me, the “organization” places its exempt status in jeopardy if an officer or director “unfairly” benefits from his/her position with the knowledge of others holding a similar/dissimilar position of trust within the organization. So how and where is “unfairly” defined?

Here is something of interest:

https://wagenmakerlaw.com/blog/pay-or-not-pay-compensating-nonprofit-directors-and-officers

If correct; 990s are available for public inspection.

I like the part here concerning transparency:

https://cullinanelaw.com/nonprofit-...ive-director-serve-on-the-board-of-directors/

Maybe the EC should rethink their “need to know” policy.