I hate to say this, but it seems to me that you need to file whatever it is
you are going to file now  I'll be interested to see what comes of
it-nothing good, I believe.  I don't expect any organization to release
details of internal investigations.  You've read as much as the press is
likely to publish about what actually happened.  You are a federal taxpayer,
I assume, so perhaps you have standing.  What precisely do you expect to
hear that you make you stand down and not file?

 

  _____  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 4:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [UC] Tom Fenton on ABC News

 

In a message dated 5/24/2007 4:27:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

I think Sharrif already answered that very well. UCD's accountable to the
people who are paying for it to exist. It's a private entity. In order for
it to be beholden to "the people who live in the area bounded by the UCD" it
would have to be funded by the public. Until that time, they can do whatever
they feel like as long as their funders are happy and don't stop sending
checks.

With respect to political activity, that's incorrect. As a 501-(c)-3
operation, UCD is tax exempt and therefore is getting support from the
taxpayers as a group. The IRS has strict rules prohibiting partisan
politics, the violation of which can not only take away the tax exemption
but make them liable for back taxes and penalties. We're talking about a
serious issue here, and big bucks. Thiose rules are there for a reason, and
have been in place long enough to have been honed by experience -- including
judicial decisions.

 

The "non-profit" and "not-for-profit" sector is neither the "public" nor the
"private" sector, but something in between. The managers of organizations in
the non-profit sector have an obligation to ensure that they strictly follow
the tight constraints under which they operate without paying taxes, and
therefore get indirect support from those who do. Wendell Lewis may try to
shove this off onto John Fenton and make a scapegoat or sacrificial lamb of
the guy. But Wendell is ultimately responsible for operating the
organization in such a way that this serious infraction (serious as defined
by the IRS) could happen -- if indeed it did happen as the reports appear
increasingly strongly to indicate.

 

And, of course, the reason I'm being such a nit-picker about it has to do
with the fact that it exposes the potential for abuse the NONID faction has
been pointing out since long before the NID initiative got onto the table. 

 

Al Krigman
Left of Ivan Grozny





  _____  

See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> . 

Reply via email to