Posts: 2,466
Threads: 316
Joined: May 2008
More info:
IRS regulations prohibit 501©(3)
Private benefit/inurement --“ An organization may not permit an insider (someone with a personal or private interest in the organization) to benefit substantially from the activities of the organization.
Puna: Our roosters crow first
Puna: Our roosters crow first
Posts: 150
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2019
And some more info:
What would the IRS consider benefit substantially ?
Posts: 10,212
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
I know people don't like grammar nazis, I don't like them myself. However, one of the problems with HPP threads is no-one seems capable of explaining things in simple English.
E.g., I have no idea what this means:
"And some more info:
What would the IRS consider benefit substantially ?"
Stillwater - I picked your post as an example, but there are so many other examples from others I had to choose one, so not picking on you. In the meantime, I'm sure most of the posts in the HPP threads mean something to those involved in its management or politics, but it leaves the rest of us bewildered.
Posts: 14,105
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
no-one seems capable of explaining things in simple English
There's a saying: "how you do anything is how you do everything". They can't manage their subdivision in accordance with its bylaws, so it's hardly surprising that they can't form complete sentences.
I still can't figure out why they argue about it here when Facebook would be better able to manage a series of splinter groups which can all concurrently have their different viewpoints separately reinforced. That way they could all be right. It still wouldn't pave the roads or fix the management, but I'm starting to think that was never the point.
Posts: 10,212
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
Maybe Punatalk is a substitue for Facebook? If so, I'm so glad I don't go there. There is so much gobbledegook on the HPP threads it makes it impossble to form an opinion.
Posts: 150
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2019
TomK not offended at all! My grammar error Iwas in response to The IRS regulation and should have asked the question of what the IRS deemed to be a substantial benefit.
Posts: 402
Threads: 2
Joined: Jan 2017
quote:
Originally posted by Stillwater
Mermaid once again only sputtering with no transparency but hiding behind others views... transparency -a lack of hidden agendas or conditions accompanied by full information required for collaboration, cooperation, and collective decision making..... your words serve no purpose for this ... you answer with questions and wag the dog .
You say you're transparent. I see an incoherent response. You didn't answer any of mermaid's questions. Please answer some questions I have for you. How did your boyfriend get the paving job when you were a board officer. That's a blatant conflict of interest. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure that one out. I was at the board of directors meeting and saw you argue with the directors for choosing the other contractor. Then your boyfriend got the job. How did that happen when the other contractor was already chosen? I saw you working on the road paving. Did the general manager pay you in full? mermaid said the general manager told her there was no contract. So how did you guys end up paving when there was no contract?
Posts: 402
Threads: 2
Joined: Jan 2017
IRS regulations prohibit 501©(3)
Private benefit/inurement --“ An organization may not permit an insider (someone with a personal or private interest in the organization) to benefit substantially from the activities of the organization.
Especially when it's an officer, the treasurer of the board who benefits (the paving work recently done on 1st Avenue)
Posts: 2,151
Threads: 73
Joined: Mar 2007
As a stakeholder in HPP about to shell out $360 for another year of this bickering, I hope the court action produces some sort of way forward. Unfortunately, Judge Nakamura, who has a history with HPP, retired before matters could be resolved. A new judge will not have the full knowledge of the 1997 receivership that Nakamura had, and I fear the result will be a limited period of adult supervision followed by a return to self rule. If there's anything the history of HPP proves, it is the fact that it is utterly incapable of self government under the model the county allowed to be set up. Patching together a slightly reformed version of that model won't help.
Meanwhile, the recent rains have reduced many of our roads to crater land. This was a chronic problem when we had a functioning and less contentious board, but I don't know what to expect any more. If the GM and board president have imposed some sort of dictatorship as some claim, then this is a test of whether such a model lacking a "meddlesome" board works. I suspect it will not, but we'll see, won't we?
Posts: 150
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2019
Leo you still stuck on me being a director?
I will humor you and answer what I know -
The contractor you say was chosen was chosen -with stipulations -if they were not met it would revert to the other contractor.
The director you refer to being an officer and it not taking a brain surgeon to see this as a blatant conflict of interest - Please refer to the bylaws the definition ,what makes it a conflict ,and how a conflict of interest is to be handled -The director made it clear from day 1 as a director , the director had no vote on the Subject at all . Maybe it does take a brain surgeon
Did the contractor get paid in full? Well damn I hope so
Was there a contract? What legitimate business would be stupid enough to not have a contract? Think I got em all Leo
