Jump to content

Santa Clara Vanguard 2024


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

well they aren't dead.

 

yet

No, and that's a good thing.  I don't believe their 501c3 status will be revoked, or even suspended by the state.  In terms of "dead" I was referring to this topic being beaten like a dead horse.  But it is the off-season and just my personal opinion. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, greg_orangecounty said:

No, and that's a good thing.  I don't believe their 501c3 status will be revoked, or even suspended by the state.  In terms of "dead" I was referring to this topic being beaten like a dead horse.  But it is the off-season and just my personal opinion. 

Wonder what CA track record is for not renewing non-profit status. Was in two PA groups that lost theirs for a while. One missed filing the paperwork (IOW someone screwed up). The other because they no longer met the non-profit qualifications. No idea how much warning they received as the board hid what was going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

Heck, even She Who Must Never Be Named was making accusations on RAMD about member abuse that at the time was ignored, likely because of the messenger.  I don’t recall details well enough to state, but I remember it happened.  😕

I can’t argue with that.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Wonder what CA track record is for not renewing non-profit status. Was in two PA groups that lost theirs for a while. One missed filing the paperwork (IOW someone screwed up). The other because they no longer met the non-profit qualifications. No idea how much warning they received as the board hid what was going on.

The charity registry tool has hundreds of listings with the status REVOKED and about 100 total with the current status SUBJECT TO CEASE AND DESIST ORDER. Looks like the SUSPENDED status has hundreds of orgs listed as well. There is no way to organize them by time, but the registry was started in the early-mid 00s IIRC.

I think lead time between nicey-nice notices and cease-and-desist is highly dependent on the org in question. The cease-and-desist notices are thorough legal documents so that makes sense.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, scheherazadesghost said:

Which is why it would be so cool if Vanguard stepped ahead of the pack, ya know in an avant-garde way, and said here, we messed up, but we invite our constituents to provide feedback on our thorough, open-ended, living document plan that we're using to get back on track.* Spirit invited public feedback on their safeguarding procedures after their rewrite.

It wouldn't even be the first time this org took big risks in hopes of high reward. This one should be a no-brainer comparatively IMHO.

*this is normally what a nonprofit strategic plan or annual report does

the time to do that has IMO passed without it looking self serving or CYA. this info has been out there for a while now....it's no secret. and still if they actually say something it's full steam ahead everything is great or will be fixed.

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MarimbaManiac said:

In my experience, when people don't like the content being discussed, but don't have an adequate rebuttal, it immediately becomes about the tone and the method of communication. After a number of decades trying to fit into a narrow definition of what is an "appropriate way" to communicate bad news, I decided that some people will never be happy with the messenger if the message is negative, no matter how they categorize their objection. 

So let the bad news fly I say. Bring the dark into the light and let's have honest discourse without pretense. 

look i'll say it and Richard can confirm....sometimes he's rubbed me the wrong way. but we communicate, and work through it. i'm not offended easily, but i do understand and appreciate sometimes how the message is conveyed can set people off, but in this case, honestly with Richard, it's all the message from the deniers and enablers that is what upsets people.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Old Corps Guy said:

Why do you keep bringing up Regiment on this subject? They have nothing to do with this one.

:dancin:

not that PR

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

Heck, even She Who Must Never Be Named was making accusations on RAMD about member abuse that at the time was ignored, likely because of the messenger.  I don’t recall details well enough to state, but I remember it happened.  😕

her problem was definitely delivery and personal offline attacks

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said:

the time to do that has IMO passed without it looking self serving or CYA. this info has been out there for a while now....it's no secret. and still if they actually say something it's full steam ahead everything is great or will be fixed.

My hope for a turn around is indomitable. 🤷🏽‍♀️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

but...he actually did it. for 13 years i've been saying i'm the guy that got the G7 stuff from inside the room and made it public.

Now that you mention it, that gets a little annoying too. 😏

Guess I’m not a fan of people tooting their own horn excessively. Sorry 

Edited by HockeyDad
  • Like 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...