rjohn76 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 8 hours ago, scheherazadesghost said: There are a few key differences between the YWCA/local PTA and VMAPA. Chief among them is the multiple millions of dollars earned by bingo annually. Most definitely there's differences between the types of organizations, but I'm not sure that's all that critical in the grand scope of things. From a procedural standpoint, the key difference is that an audit is required for VMAPA and not for the bulk of the other nonprofits that are delinquent because they don't have gross annual revenue of $2 million or more. As long as that audited financial statement is properly prepared by an appropriately licensed/credentialed CPA and submitted at some point before the clock runs out, it's my impression that it's just one of the many boxes that the DOJ has to check in the overall review process. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjohn76 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 38 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said: Question I have is did the drop in delinquent numbers mean organizations corrected things…. or status went from delinquent to denied (or whatever term is for having non-profit revoked). There's no way to really verify those numbers/progress through the search tools on the DOJ website, unless someone was physically tracking the number of organizations with each status from the start. I recall seeing an article online last year about increased staffing levels at the Registry of Charitable Trusts, with the goal of bringing thousands of organizations into compliance by the end of the year. Trying to find the article again to see if there were exact numbers listed, but the significant drop in delinquent organizations would seem to align with that goal. I do recall from the article that the emphasis was on bringing organizations into compliance vs. suspension/revocation. It seemed at the time that they were willing to give a lot of latitude and leeway to organizations in an effort to gain compliance. As long as the organization was operating in good faith to cure the delinquency, more time was being granted to accomplish that goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mello Dude Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 1 minute ago, rjohn76 said: There's no way to really verify those numbers/progress through the search tools on the DOJ website, unless someone was physically tracking the number of organizations with each status from the start. I recall seeing an article online last year about increased staffing levels at the Registry of Charitable Trusts, with the goal of bringing thousands of organizations into compliance by the end of the year. Trying to find the article again to see if there were exact numbers listed, but the significant drop in delinquent organizations would seem to align with that goal. I do recall from the article that the emphasis was on bringing organizations into compliance vs. suspension/revocation. It seemed at the time that they were willing to give a lot of latitude and leeway to organizations in an effort to gain compliance. As long as the organization was operating in good faith to cure the delinquency, more time was being granted to accomplish that goal. Makes me wonder if certain people with a vested interest in bringing a group down has been petitioning the DOJ.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 10 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: I bang my drum. Dad told me if i picked up a horn i’d be disowned. The one time he saw me messing around with a rifle he threatened to cut me out of the will. And well I want the Fleetwoods and his Yankee Rebels jacket. so sorry if I annoy you too. Well, ok, not really. But hey did I ever tell you about the time someone sent me the G7 presentation from the room while it was being explained by a now former director who changed a lot of it without warning the other 6 and basically backed them into a corner to go along with it? Haha well played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 11 minutes ago, Mello Dude said: Makes me wonder if certain people with a vested interest in bringing a group down has been petitioning the DOJ.... I’ve been reading the entire thread. I must have missed the person or persons who want to bring SCV down. Can you clarify? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarimbaManiac Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 16 hours ago, HockeyDad said: Since you’re talking about me, you would be very wrong. I ate up Jeff’s stuff about G7. I also ate up Richard’s info about SCV. So you couldn’t be more wrong. My point is simple - you want to get the message across and not detract from it by diverting focus to yourself. Stuff we learned in ninth grade English. I'm not speaking about you specifically, but people in general. Sorry if that wasn't clear. There are plenty of posts across platforms attacking RL for his messaging, to the point that anyone who says anything negative on reddit gets accused of being an RL sock puppet account. People use spurious reasoning to discredit the message because they don't like hearing it, and this is one of the tactics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scheherazadesghost Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 25 minutes ago, rjohn76 said: Most definitely there's differences between the types of organizations, but I'm not sure that's all that critical in the grand scope of things. I appreciate that you're looking so closely. 25 minutes ago, rjohn76 said: From a procedural standpoint, the key difference is that an audit is required for VMAPA and not for the bulk of the other nonprofits that are delinquent because they don't have gross annual revenue of $2 million or more. Love your literacy on the subject, yes. That's how those responsible for decades-passed bingo theft kept it hidden: they artificially kept income below that 2 milly mark. Significantly less oversight. I see your procedural standpoint and raise you a clarification. Gross income from bingo from the 2021 990 was $17 milly. California is gonna wanna make sure that finances are clear there cause otherwise they're owed taxes. Also, don't forget that RL has been diligently, intentionally pinging CA authorities for months now about all of this. Another wildcard to keep in mind with timelines. 11 minutes ago, Mello Dude said: petitioning the DOJ.... ... and the SC city counsel, SC police, and the CA Franchise Tax Board, and the mayor. Because the concern there is that laws are being broken and money that should be going to compliant nonprofits is being hogged by one that has been noncompliant for years. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarimbaManiac Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 16 minutes ago, Mello Dude said: Makes me wonder if certain people with a vested interest in bringing a group down has been petitioning the DOJ.... What would that vested interest be? Please explain. What reason would alumni, former staff, or former volunteers have in bringing the organization down. Honestly, I'd like to know where you think this line of reasoning leads. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 30 minutes ago, Mello Dude said: Makes me wonder if certain people with a vested interest in bringing a group down has been petitioning the DOJ.... “Petition the DOJ”??? Are saying it’s possible to get the DOJ to act differently to certain groups if you complain enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmyjames Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Just now, JimF-LowBari said: “Petition the DOJ”??? Are saying it’s possible to get the DOJ to act differently to certain groups if you complain enough? Kinda starting to sound like..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts