cixelsyd Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 On 2/16/2020 at 10:13 AM, garfield said: Retirement plans typically are excluded in bankruptcy. ERISA picks up any slack. My understanding is that GH's retirement plan is a defined-contribution plan, not defined benefit, so his value would just be rolled to his own rollover IRA. But the contention is that YEA! owes money to Hopkins because they were obligated to make matching contributions to his retirement account, and failed to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 On 2/17/2020 at 6:56 AM, garfield said: Who owes DCI $67,000? Cadets, the now stand-alone drum corps, or YEA!, the parent corp that just spit them out? I think in this case, it has to be the Cadets. The DCI relationship is with the corps. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the corps to maintain that relationship. The alternative would be to claim that the spun-off Cadets are a new entity, and that the debt belongs to the old entity. That may be fair play, but the new entity would have to be treated as a new corps. That would mean that the spun-off Cadets could look forward to spending the 2020-2021-2022 seasons in SoundSport and 2023-2024-2025 in open-class while jumping through all the hoops to make a case for promotion to world-class. Parent organizations are not third parties that DCI member corps can use as scapegoats to evade their DCI obligations, any more than you could split yourself and claim that the new you (Field) is debt-free, and it is that good-for-nothing Gar that needs to pay up. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 23 minutes ago, cixelsyd said: But the contention is that YEA! owes money to Hopkins because they were obligated to make matching contributions to his retirement account, and failed to do so. I don’t recall it that way, but it has been a while. I thought GH claimed he was owed extra payments based on years of service when he left in good standing based on his attempted resignation, that the new board rejected. The new board fired him for cause, eliminating that payment; I thought that piece was resolved already (though I may be wrong on that). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tesmusic Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Speaking of the evil one...is there a date coming up for his hopeful conviction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) 29 minutes ago, MikeD said: I don’t recall it that way, but it has been a while. I thought GH claimed he was owed extra payments based on years of service when he left in good standing based on his attempted resignation, that the new board rejected. The new board fired him for cause, eliminating that payment; I thought that piece was resolved already (though I may be wrong on that). Looking forward to a conviction. Need closure. Recalling the first time I saw Cadets. 1978, somewhere in the midwest, maybe Key to the Sea in Toledo or something. Having no frame of reference, I had no idea the anomaly I was watching. Two corps, Cadets and Cavaliers, not making the top 12. To me that was my normal. THAT certainly turned out to be wrong! Edit: I see Tesmusic and I are sharing the same brain this morning. Edited February 18, 2020 by HockeyDad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terri Schehr Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 12 minutes ago, tesmusic said: Speaking of the evil one...is there a date coming up for his hopeful conviction? You can follow along here: https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/CPReport.ashx?docketNumber=CP-39-CR-0005538-2018&dnh=ydjtESJlJf%2fH60wd1QajOg%3d%3d Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 22 hours ago, George Dixon said: I certainly hope (and assume) that 95% or greater of the folks posting in EITHER thread want nothing but the best for the Cadets. However, it's a bit important to be realistic - there are a small number of folks posting either aligned with GH or the folks that led the corps in 2018 & 2019. All are entitled to their perspective - however it would be GREAT if everyone was just honest with their feelings or "agenda" -- and here is where the discussion is lacking. Okay, then. My "agenda" is that I want nothing but the best for ALL CORPS. Since the Cadets are a corps, I want nothing but the best for them... as long as it is not at the expense of the other corps. For those of you who support the Cadets specifically, we will usually be on the same side of issues, but not always. Since I want the best for all corps, I also want DCI and DCA to succeed. I have a funny way of showing that sometimes, though, because IMO they continue to make decisions that are not best for all corps, and probably not even in the best long-term interest of the member corps. But if I seem critical, it is because I want them to succeed on behalf of as many corps as the activity can sustain. As far as who is running the Cadets, I have no "alignment" with past or present corps directors. As far as current issues hypothetical discussion regarding debt and reorganization, you can see why I take the positions I do. Any debt a corps incurs with DCI or with other corps should be the most important debt to be honored, as that directly affects other corps. After that, I would hope that any other creditors are sufficiently satisfied to preserve their working relationships with the activity, so as not to burn bridges. I am not as concerned about debts owed to former employees fired for cause. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 48 minutes ago, MikeD said: I don’t recall it that way, but it has been a while. I thought GH claimed he was owed extra payments based on years of service when he left in good standing based on his attempted resignation, that the new board rejected. The new board fired him for cause, eliminating that payment; I thought that piece was resolved already (though I may be wrong on that). The severance payments you describe were, at the very least, disputed. However, a news article claims that employer matching contributions to the retirement account were a valid claim. Per the Morning Call, January 30, 2019: "According to an order filed in federal court Tuesday, Youth Education in the Arts and Hopkins have reached an agreement on his claim that the nonprofit failed to make a matching contribution to Hopkins’ retirement account, as it was required to do. An attorney for YEA, Paul G. Lees, said he was not at liberty to discuss the settlement. Anthony Andrisano, who represents Hopkins, did not return a call. YEA board Chairman Doug Rutherford said YEA has never denied Hopkins was entitled to the organization’s contribution to his retirement account." (Reading this now, though, I have to wonder how that could happen. Since Hopkins was CEO/CFO, it must have been his own failure to make those employer matching payments to himself. So he should sue himself.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 3 hours ago, cixelsyd said: But the contention is that YEA! owes money to Hopkins because they were obligated to make matching contributions to his retirement account, and failed to do so. Well, I can guarantee that there are not $600m worth of matching contributions for the one year he's owed. If he didn't make the matches in the years where he controlled the finances, there is no provision that I'm aware of that would let them go back and credit for years past. It doesn't work that way. Most plans are 3% of employee contributions and, over age 50, GH was able to contribute as much as about $22m per year. 3% is about $660. And, this is hilarious. HE was the one who failed the ERISA rules by, supposedly, not making them. If anyone gets smacked from ERISA, it will be him and his BoD, but that will be after the debt cripples the org. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East9900 Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) The good news for The Cadets is that they owe GH absolutely nothing. This is YEA's mess. I watched the full meeting the new Cadets staff did on Facebook and was incredibly impressed by them. I feel like for the first time The Cadets are in good hands and feel very optimistic for the future. They aren't just looking at this year but the future of the organization and are saying and doing the right things. It will be an uphill battle as they have a LOT to take care of. They made it clear that The Cadets have zero debt and all donations that they receive go towards this current season. They are making an effort to be as transparent as possible with the alums and I am really appreciative. They didn't divulge anything about the show (as they are dealing with copyrights as everyone is). But they did make an effort to stress that this year will feel like The Cadets and I'm good with that. Edited February 18, 2020 by East9900 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.