Jump to content

CA Department of Justice sends Vanguard second delinquency notice as of Aug 25, 2023


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

Do you think there are DCI staff or BoD members that lurk on DCP?
 

I definitely have talked with my corps director about stuff I have said on here. Haha

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DSpruce said:

Not logical to reply to my explanation on why I think I’ll be harassed if not anon by trying to harass me. Absolutely nothing useful to anyone on any side would be accomplished by that in any case. 

Editing to add: I never said those documents were falsifications. I said I heard from cited sources xyz about what they meant and that I understand xyz about what happened on fb. I explained I’m a volunteer. Earlier posts were less measured as I was gaining a learning curve about expectations on DCP, still primarily focused on defending the alumni base and clarifying information. Confused what anybody thinks I’d even *possibly* taken to legal task about. I don’t want it, but worse come to worst for me it would at most be a mild pain in the butt.

from what i have seen here and elsewhere, the alumni association can't agree to defend itself well. 

Edited by Jeff Ream
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boss Anova said:

 Its seems logical to assume that at the very least, DCI will need to be satisfied that SCV is in good standing with the state of California  taxing and non profit oversight Gov't  authorities before SCV's quest to return in 2024 ( or any future year ) is granted by DCI. SCV at the moment  however seems a long ways off from resolving their current delinquency status in the State, especially now given the reported resignation of their Treasurer there. 

 Dan A. has one foot out the door now at DCI, and waiting until his position is filled, and probably now hoping SCV comes to their senses, and reports out that they have voted not to seek return to DCI in 2024. That would at least take this matter off the hands DCI and its BOD at the moment. Besides, even in the unlikely scenario now that SCV could even field a Corps for 2024, 'not sure SCV would want to go on first in all of them until Regionals later in the season. ( as DCI rules now would require ). SCV should just vote next rescheduled meeting to stop any further pretense for a return in 2024, and either disband, or spend the rest of 2023 and 2024 seeing if they can get their organization out of delinquency with the State of California, and their Corps up and running there again in 2025.

the DCI Board and Dan slammed the door on Troop for not givng them pertinent tax information. not the state, the DCI Board. and the more that comes out, there more SCV looks even worse. the silence is beyond deafening. 

 

not all corps are created equal indeed.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Richard Lesher said:

I played nice. I think it is impractical that SCV can rebuild itself. 

What I want, and what I have said explicitly in my complaints to regulators is that SCV's Bingo License be revoked. The consequences of that will cause the purge that needs to happen. 

There is no reason that SCV needs to be sucking up $3,000,000 of bingo market share taken away from other non profits in the Santa Clara Community when SCV itself isn't providing a non profit mission. 

I offered to be on a Bingo Committee

I offered to fix the audits. 

Both of which I have done to much success. 

I've held off my final bingo complaint until after the season. Then to find the 2nd delinquency notice was released by the DOJ. Come on......................

What

Is

Going

On...................

****************

Whatever we think it going on (whatever I think) it is much worse. 

 

***************

If all SCV did was operate legally I'd have nothing to rant about. 

 

 

 

It is troubling. Other than giving an established nonprofit an opportunity to come back into compliance while delivering on its charitable mission, I don't know why the State of California would let a nonprofit not in good standing continue to operate a bingo game. If VMAPA had ongoing educational programs it would be different. If VMAPA doesn't come back into compliance I assume the State might excuse operation of the bingo game but would view it as a for-profit activity with taxes being levied. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

the alumni association can't agree to defend itself well. 

Que? 

There are different rough groupings of alumni in these tough times. Many I am in ordinary connection with barely know anything is happening on DCP. 

Edited by DSpruce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Grandpa Joe said:

Yep, you're not from the south...

I'm from Southern California and I doubt you care anything at all about the Santa Clara Vanguard or what they mean to this activity.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now the community sees some of the ways we alum harm each other. The ways we don't trust each other.

This has always been happening. Either directly via abuse, or indirectly via the risks that come with mismanagement.

This has always been sad.

It's much much worse when it happens during a member's young, formative years, but for some, it didn't stop there. It continued when we tried to come back and offer donations of service or money.

When whatever future is in store for the org happens, I'll still be here, ready to help those alum pick up the pieces of themselves shattered by this org whenever they're ready. That was always my mission. The monitoring of organizational governance is merely my professional skillset.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Richard Lesher said:

I played nice. I think it is impractical that SCV can rebuild itself. 

What I want, and what I have said explicitly in my complaints to regulators is that SCV's Bingo License be revoked. The consequences of that will cause the purge that needs to happen. 

There is no reason that SCV needs to be sucking up $3,000,000 of bingo market share taken away from other non profits in the Santa Clara Community when SCV itself isn't providing a non profit mission. 

I offered to be on a Bingo Committee

I offered to fix the audits. 

Both of which I have done to much success. 

I've held off my final bingo complaint until after the season. Then to find the 2nd delinquency notice was released by the DOJ. Come on......................

What

Is

Going

On...................

****************

Whatever we think it going on (whatever I think) it is much worse. 

 

***************

If all SCV did was operate legally I'd have nothing to rant about. 

 

 

 

So it sounds like you want SCV to not field a corps again and to not exist anymore.  And for a purge of I assume BOD and leadership. Is that a fair assessment?

Edited by AzEuph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, AzEuph said:

 

So it sounds like you want SCV to not field a corps again and to not exist anymore.  And for a purge of I assume BOD and leadership. Is that a fair assessment?

I can’t speak for him, but my view is that VMAPA’s current leadership is highly unlikely to succeed in bringing SCV back to the field or to enable VMAPA to continue to exist in its current form. As a drum corps and Vanguard fan and supporter, I want this organization to rebuild and field a successful corps, and that will require new leadership, hopefully before any more potential damage is done.

As a Californian, I would ask the AG how long his office will allow a non-compliant nonprofit to operate a money-making bingo game when it is currently not in a position to serve an educational mission.

Edited by lawdn
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, AzEuph said:

So it sounds like you want SCV to not field a corps again and to not exist anymore.

I know you didn't ask me so feel free to not read...

But I don't want a corps that hurts members and alum anymore. In my overall interactions with current leadership and fellow alum close to them, AND upon objective critical review of their skillets and across, AND upon witnessing their rigidity when faced with verifiable safeguarding gaps, I don't see them as capable of achieving this benchmark without outside consult at this point. I have never given up hope though and I've tried to engage them about this but their response has consistently included victim blaming, silencing, or extraction. Such responses to my advocacy are well-documented here on this forum. Intentionally.

If this is happening to me, it's much more important to consider how they might be treating younger, less experienced whistleblower-alum?

As for a purge, I've already attempted to post my reasoning here for being concerned about some long term board members on April 21... it's noted on my profile as having the highest reactions on DCP that day, but it was censored. I was in copacetic communication with the mods about this.

I'm at a loss about what else to do to express my concerns in a way that alum will find palatable.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...