Santa Clara Vanguard 2024

[gbass598]

5 hours ago, HockeyDad said:

Are we gonna shoot the messenger?  That’s exactly what S-Ghost says happens to people who step forward.  

I'm not shooting any messenger. That messenger has fired many bullets here repeatedly already.

 

[Mello Dude]

16 minutes ago, MarimbaManiac said:

Because you have both implied and outright stated multiple times that you think people have "ulterior motives" or "other agendas" for being vocal about the organizations repeated failures. It makes people think what YOUR motives might be, that you can't accept the organization is in the wrong, and needs to face some accountability.

Absolutely; because if one has an IQ higher than a houseplant...or actually lives in the real world there will ALWAYS be those that sit waiting for their moment.  One only needs to look at the posts with people even threatening and/or doxing people just talking.  Including things that have ZERO to do with non-profit non-compliance.  The word you are looking for is malfeasance.  My motives (if any) are for there to be an SCV without the sneaking around by some trying to get their hands on power for their own motives.  With what I have seen from this thread alone I would heavily suggest they DON'T cave and open everything up (to everyone) until it's fixed THEN come out and show what happened.  The only good by showing everything right now, is open an endless can of worms.  Fix it with good people that are capable, reliable and trustworthy and have SCV's(kids) interests at heart (background checks would be great).  Hold the people responsible for this mess if there is a lawsuit based on said malfeasance, THEN come out and explain everything.  I've seen first hand what a small group of negative people seeking their 15 minutes can do to an organization.  Not pretty.

[MarimbaManiac]

9 minutes ago, Mello Dude said:

Absolutely; because if one has an IQ higher than a houseplant...or actually lives in the real world there will ALWAYS be those that sit waiting for their moment.  One only needs to look at the posts with people even threatening and/or doxing people just talking.  Including things that have ZERO to do with non-profit non-compliance.  The word you are looking for is malfeasance.  My motives (if any) are for there to be an SCV without the sneaking around by some trying to get their hands on power for their own motives.  With what I have seen from this thread alone I would heavily suggest they DON'T cave and open everything up (to everyone) until it's fixed THEN come out and show what happened.  The only good by showing everything right now, is open an endless can of worms.  Fix it with good people that are capable, reliable and trustworthy and have SCV's(kids) interests at heart (background checks would be great).  Hold the people responsible for this mess if there is a lawsuit based on said malfeasance, THEN come out and explain everything.  I've seen first hand what a small group of negative people seeking their 15 minutes can do to an organization.  Not pretty.

So, when confronted with an organization that has documented evidence of internal dysfunction, up to the point of no longer being able to provide the services they were created to do, and the very real possibility of losing their non-profit status, your response is what....that they are being TOO transparent? That they are somehow the victims of external 'bad actors' that is trying to take control, rather than of their own misdeeds?

You are really twisting the narrative here to blame outside parties, or at best you are absolving the board of any responsibility for creating these issues. 

In truth, it sounds like you are projecting your own negative experiences in non-profit administration onto this situation, rather than looking at what the actual situations is here. 

The people you are entrusting to solve the issues without any kind of oversight, are the same people that let this situation come to pass, and are the same people that have silenced members and staff for decades that try to shine lights on THEIR malfeasance. 

I hate to break it to you, but the can of worms has already been opened. It started opening when they pulled their champion cadets corps from activity last fall, and hasn't stopped since. However instead of trying to clean up those worms, the org has just been silently trying to stand in front of the can, waving their hands in the air and pretending it doesn't exist. 

 

Edited September 14, 2023 by MarimbaManiac

[IllianaLancerContra]

A wild-card in all this is that the Mayor of Santa Clara, who is on the BoD, has been called out publicly in the article.  She is now in a bit of a tough spot - how much of the non-compliance did she know about & when did she know it?   Are there other,  as yet undisclosed, issues she knows of?   Why is she actively involved in an organization with a documented recent history of financial compliance?   Does this financial lackadaisical-ness carry over into other areas where she has fiscal responsibility?  
 

Politicians hate bad press.  And this is bad press. 

[lawdn]

53 minutes ago, MarimbaManiac said:

Not calling you out specifically, but this was an easy quote to grab that I think details one of the main issues here. 

People are thinking about this too myopically. This issue with CA non-profit compliance is a symptom of a bigger problem, not the problem itself. The bigger problem being that the board has operated dysfunctionally and without oversight or accountability for too long, and the entire thing has started to come apart at the seams. 

In order to clear the air and show they really understand the issues, VMAPA has to:

• Become VERY transparent, and plainly acknowledge the issues that are currently facing the organization.
• This includes ALL issues, not just the financial stuff on the surface (transparency, abuse, HR issues, etc.). 
• Speak plainly about their plan for fixing these issues, including a timeline for when/how they will address them.
• Commit to a new process of transparency for communication moving forward, through open meetings, status updates, etc. 
• Commit to a new process for whistleblowers for staff/member abuse, accountability, inclusion, etc. 
• Speak PLAINLY about the status for 2024, and not hide it in behind vague promises of "taking necessary steps."

Not everything has to be a carefully crafted PR statement.

Not everything has to be cloaked in 7 layers deception and secrecy.

Not everything has to be communicated in a way that casts the org in the best possible light. 

Be CLEAR, be HONEST, be TRUTHFUL, and engage the alumni and fans as stakeholders that will hold them accountable. Otherwise 2024 starts to look like a Fyre Festival fiasco where VMAPA promises the world and delivers cold cheese sandwiches and FEMA tents. 

 

I just gotta say it's SO FRUSTRATING to watch an org I really respected just run from the truth over and over again, rather than taking responsibility for its missteps and making amends. 

 

Not very classy Santa Clara. 

 

I too would like more transparency from VMAPA, so thank you for stating what you think is appropriate and signaling to me that my intentions may have been unclear. 
Two things I am following: (1) can VMAPA get right with the state, removing officially the cloud over the bingo operation, solicitation of donations, and expenditure of charitable funds. My guess is they are very close on this and have been reluctant to say too much for fear of angering the state legal authorities - the negotiations can be sensitive. I think they were over cautious and with RL's statements at council meeting were forced into making an explanation. But it can be hard to know where to draw the line on public disclosure in such a situation.

once (1) is resolved, (2) will VMAPA operate and communicate transparently and fearlessly along the lines you outline? It could be healthy and healing and restore SCV to a model of how to be a drum corps. Gavin may well be a great CEO choice for this, and all the board would need to be aligned with this  

You are a clear strong voice on here and you have my attention, and hopefully others' as well. 
 

[lawdn]

45 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

A wild-card in all this is that the Mayor of Santa Clara, who is on the BoD, has been called out publicly in the article.  She is now in a bit of a tough spot - how much of the non-compliance did she know about & when did she know it?   Are there other,  as yet undisclosed, issues she knows of?   Why is she actively involved in an organization with a documented recent history of financial compliance?   Does this financial lackadaisical-ness carry over into other areas where she has fiscal responsibility?  
 

Politicians hate bad press.  And this is bad press. 

The mayor is in a long-term battle with the 49ers who are based in and now play in Santa Clara. VMAPA is small potatoes compared to that, but your point is correct - she can ill afford giving foes more ammo. 

Edited September 14, 2023 by lawdn
Typo

[kathy_serksnis]

On 9/9/2023 at 10:49 AM, scheherazadesghost said:

Confirmed here: https://labyrinthinc.com/texas-fundraising-registration-requirements/

Ew, my home state is, guess what, pretty lax on this stuff. No one is surprised.

Edit to add:

However, bingo is not their only revenue source. Donations and grants are also revenue. So are services provided, like those provided in exchange for member fees, which come from all over. I don't think member fees are donations... but I could be wrong and welcome correction.

This is why having a weathered nonprofit pro (not just board experience, but admin, outside of insular drum corps) or lawyer in their ranks might be wise. 'Cause people like me thrive on learning more about this stuff and dig our heels in when we aren't provided transparent information.

Correct, member fees are not classified as donations.    Nor are they tax deductible.    They're "tuition" fees so to speak.

[MarimbaManiac]

25 minutes ago, lawdn said:

I too would like more transparency from VMAPA, so thank you for stating what you think is appropriate and signaling to me that my intentions may have been unclear. 
Two things I am following: (1) can VMAPA get right with the state, removing officially the cloud over the bingo operation, solicitation of donations, and expenditure of charitable funds. My guess is they are very close on this and have been reluctant to say too much for fear of angering the state legal authorities - the negotiations can be sensitive. I think they were over cautious and with RL's statements at council meeting were forced into making an explanation. But it can be hard to know where to draw the line on public disclosure in such a situation.

once (1) is resolved, (2) will VMAPA operate and communicate transparently and fearlessly along the lines you outline? It could be healthy and healing and restore SCV to a model of how to be a drum corps. Gavin may well be a great CEO choice for this, and all the board would need to be aligned with this  

You are a clear strong voice on here and you have my attention, and hopefully others' as well. 
 

Thanks, and again I wasn't necessarily calling you out. It was just the closest comment with similar wording to what other people have been saying. I just want people to acknowledge that the issues are deeper than the details that are poking through the surface. 

[IllianaLancerContra]

18 minutes ago, lawdn said:

The mayor is in a long-term battle with the 49ers who are based in and now play in Santa Clara. VMAPA is small potatoes compared to that, but your point is correct - she can ill afford giving goes more ammo. 

So I just did some googling of her.  Money concerns w 49ers stadium. A few years back she is quoted as saying:

”We are not able to verify the numbers they gave us”, Gillmor said.  “They lump them together without detailed financial information in dozens of areas.  Dozens.”  

Perhaps she used her knowledge of how 49ers accomplished this obfuscation as a SCV board member.

here is link. https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2713805-santa-clara-mayor-says-we-cannot-trust-the-49ers-over-stadium-issues.amp.html

[JimF-LowBari]

8 hours ago, OldSnareDrummer said:

Mercy. Some colorful reader comments.

 

Wow shades of Spirits FB page when they went inactive. See the SC paper doesn’t have obscenity filters or check for personal attacks. 
Amazing how people see the problem is not that bingo might be run illegally. To them the problem is someone said it out loud. And of course SCV BoD is totally blameless. Wonder how many of the papers readers are getting an eye opening about the corps reading the comments. 😱

Oh hades just reminds me of Penn State and Sandusky. Too many “fans” flipping out about the schools “image” instead of the problems 

Edited September 14, 2023 by JimF-LowBari