Santa Clara Vanguard 2024

[MarimbaManiac]

17 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

Got it. Yeah, if they were financially healthy and fielding both their corps every season, and the only problem was someone forgot to file the paperwork, there wouldn’t be any discussion. But as things are now, it’s definitely one of the many symptoms of the underlying problem - incompetence. 

Yes, thank you. Stop focusing on the one visible issue, and look deeper into what is clearly an organization in crisis that can no longer serve the community or its mission. 

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, Brian Tuma said:

I’m confused. Why wouldn’t it be important right now? 

because until the organization in Wisconsin makes the required management changes, DCI has expelled them.

Edited September 15, 2023 by Jeff Ream

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, dcifanforlife said:

Capital Regiment is still running  a bingo operation seventeen years after shutting down   990 fillings say they are operating a drum corps.   Show two employees Executive Director and is girlfriend and all funds go toward their salaries.

All proceeds from Pioneer bingo go toward Roman;s living expenses.  Now days the smart Executive Directors have retirement plans setup before they are hired. 

or before they are ousted after a national news scandal

[Jeff Ream]

24 minutes ago, MarimbaManiac said:

Yes, thank you. Stop focusing on the one visible issue, and look deeper into what is clearly an organization in crisis that can no longer serve the community or its mission. 

and as seen, the problem has been building til it hit critical mass.

[IllianaLancerContra]

24 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

and as seen, the problem has been building til it hit critical mass.

Sort of like the Demon Core (Demon Corps?) 

[fighterkit]

34 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

Sort of like the Demon Core (Demon Corps?) 

Let us hope that SCV does not have a screwdriver nearby...

[2muchcoffeeman]

On 9/13/2023 at 9:09 PM, fighterkit said:

Saw this today. 
https://www.svvoice.com/santa-clara-vanguard-accused-of-operating-illegal-bingo-operation/

Yeah okay, this article has issues. It has the feel of a blog, not a journalistic enterprise. Some vigorous editing could have strengthened it. There are leaks and gaps in it that make it less than 100% reliable.

Quote

Santa Clara Vanguard makes millions of dollars a year operating bingo. . . 

"Makes"? Meaning what? Gross revenue? Operating profit? EBITDA? It's one thing to generate millions of dollars in top-line revenue each year; it's another to clear millions of dollars in net profit. It's possible to ring up millions of dollars in sales and yet still lose money at the end of the year. This is sloppy writing in the very first sentence that sets an uncertain trajectory for everything that follows.

Quote

 allowed hundreds of young artists to perform at the nation’s highest levels without spending thousands of dollars to do so. 

Wait, what? SCV members did not pay tuition? Membership was a free ride? We're still in the first paragraph here, and the wheels are coming off. Remember, this article is meant for general-public consumption; most readers don't know the ins and outs of DCI operations. Journalism for a general audience needs to demystify things for the drive-by reader. But so far in this article, the general reader thinks SCV had been providing a free/subsidized experience to kids on the back of millions in bingo profits.
 

Quote

potential office mismanagement has put the Santa Clara institution in a position where it may be breaking the law

Says who? Journalism 101: You do not even hint that someone even might be breaking the law (it's defamatory on its face) unless you have the goods: a prosecutor's report, say, or a police report, or even a named source by someone who is in a position to make such a claim. But this writer just puts it out there without attribution. This is a fundamental fail.

And: "potential"? Talk about weasel words. Using it only underscores how rickety this structure is.

Quote

In a letter dated Sept. 11, 2023, former Vanguard Board Member and Treasurer Richard Lesher 

Ah, okay, so this might be the source of the allegation of possible illegality? Let's see what Mr. Lesher has to say:

Quote

asked the Santa Clara City Council and specifically Mayor Lisa Gillmor, who sits on Vanguard’s Board of Directors as an Honorary Member, to take action. Lesher includes documentation that shows Vanguard is not a charity in good standing with the California Department of Justice.

. . . but no. He has written "a letter." He asks the mayor to "take action." Like what? What kind of action? And, crucially, where is the evidence of illegality? Is being not in good standing a crime?

We are not even 3 paragraphs into this article. So far, the author has suggested, without attribution, that SCV might be on the wrong side of the law, and has backed it up with "a letter" whose contents are not described but apparently asks the mayor -- not a member of law enforcement -- to "take action," also not described. This letter is provided by a former board member, which is another chapter in Journalism 101: Be skeptical of allegations made by former employees.

Which isn't to say Mr. Lesher isn't acting in good faith. He very well may be. But the article doesn't provide any information to establish his untainted sincerity. The reader has no information on which to judge Mr. Lesher's motives, let alone the veracity of his allegations.

Quote

Lesher says that Vanguard’s inability to solicit donations, combined with the cancelation of the 2023 season, has left the organization in a situation where it could be breaking the law.

Okay, at last we get a description of the nature of the alleged violation of the law. But who is Lesher to say whether anyone is a lawbreaker? What credential or authority does he have to make this charge? Can we get someone in here, like maybe an actual charity regulator for the State of California, or maybe the compliance specialist for the CA association of nonprofits, who can say whether anything sketchy is going on?

Anyone?

No?

Sigh.

Quote

California law states that only certain organizations are allowed to operate bingo games (CA Penal Code Sections 326.3 and 326.5) – most specifically ones that are considered tax-exempt under federal law. 

And does Vanguard fit this definition? It's not a frivolous question; the reason the article even exists is to report what's going on. So far in this article, the writer has not connected the dots between being a "charitable organization" under CA law, and being a "tax-exempt" organization under the IRS code. Are these terms equivalent in CA? The article doesn't say.

Quote

By not maintaining its charitable designation, Vanguard may be in violation.

CAN WE PLEASE GET SOMEONE INTO THIS STORY WHO IS QUALIFIED TO MAKE THIS ASSERTION AND NOT PUT OUR NEWSROOM ON THE HOOK FOR A DEFAMATION CLAIM?

Quote

there are strict laws governing how the funds from bingo are spent. Specifically, that money only be distributed to certain parties and that does not include bingo employees.

Huh? Really? A bingo operation can't pay its own employees? That sounds weird. Plenty of charities all over America are allowed to pay their employees. This bingo rule may be true in CA, but I'm from Missouri: Show Me. Give me the statute that says this. Let's include some of that language in the article for the 99% of the rest of the readers who are going to scratch their head over this, too.

Quote

Vanguard bingo pays its bingo staff.

. . . and the reporter knows this, how? With this statement the writer has just accused SCV of another violation of the law; this information must be attributed to a source.

Quote

Lesher says that in the past, the money from membership dues and donations was used to offset the employee costs, keeping Vanguard compliant.

Wait wait wait wait wait: We're making the reader dizzy. First of all, the lede says that SCV members didn't need to pay to participate. But now they're paying membership dues?

Second, just think about what the article is describing here:

There's a drum corps. Its members pay dues. Because of the state's bingo law, those dues pay the salaries of bingo employees. . . who run a bingo game to raise money for . . . . wait for it . . . the drum corps.

What kind of wacky circular setup is this? Why is there even a bingo game in the first place? Why are corps members paying bingo employees to create bingo revenue to pay for the drum corps? Why not apply the members's dues directly to the drum corps, and cut out the bingo part?

All of which is to say: I suspect the reporter has it wrong about the law forbidding the bingo operation to pay its own employees. I do believe there are strict guidelines in place (because it is gambling and because charity is involved), but I have a hunch the way the rules are characterized here is not a complete picture. Go back to the regulations and check again. And if the reporter does have the rules right, then the article needs to explain why there is this merry-go-round of money, from corps members to bingo and back to the drum corps. It's not logical to the uninitiated and the mechanics of it all will need explanation to even grasp why something might be awry.

Quote

He talked to The Weekly about Lesher’s comments. Gavin says that the State’s website is not up to date. He admits that Vanguard is not considered a charity in good standing at the moment but says “delinquent” is not an accurate depiction of the current status. Gavin says the state recognizes that the organization is taking steps to return to compliance and the organization’s status with the state is considered in process.

First, why isn't the reporter talking to Gavin herself? Why is she skimming off another publication? And why is she relying on Gavin's interpretation of the situation when she could just ask the state regulators herself? For goodness' sake, pick up a phone.

Quote

He also says that he has been “assured” by Vanguard’s lawyers. . . 

How about the reporter does her own reporting and calls the lawyers herself? If they give her a "no comment," THEN she can rely on Gavin's testimony. The reporter is cheating the readers here.

Edited September 15, 2023 by 2muchcoffeeman

[GBugler]

18 hours ago, lawdn said:

That sounds like a very sad story but one I am not familiar with.

This thread serves as the coda on Howdy's RAMD/DCP presence. Weird guy. I guess we are all weird, somehow or another.

 

But probably not as weird as Howdy was.

 

 

[scheherazadesghost]

5.48.220 Receipt of profit by a person a misdemeanor under State law. It is a misdemeanor under Section 326.5(b) of the Penal Code of the State for any person to receive a profit, wage, or salary from any bingo game authorized under this chapter, a violation of which is punishable by a fine not to exceed $10,000, which fine shall be deposited in the general fund of the

City. [Ord. 1001 § 12, 1995. Code 1987 § 5. 29.220].

It's linked in the article. Or am I misreading this? And yes the bingo funding the corps funding the bingo is how it works. We are assured by VMAPA lawyers that this wasn't happening but we don't have documentation to validate this. Something any stakeholder should be free to ask about.

Also, in reading this, I realized as a minor, I was participating in bingo as a volunteer worker BITD to help pay off my member dues, like many others. Been wondering how long that's been against the law.

Edited September 15, 2023 by scheherazadesghost
typos

[HockeyDad]

SCV alumni to complaining Madison Scouts alumni:  “Hold my beer”

Ugh.