Re: Most Important of the Bylaws Changes

[Teddy Lancaster <Teddy@runningbear.com>]

I'm with you.  Give me the details so I can intelligently decide.  Far too
often we are told "it is for our own good", or "it has to be this way" without
any good sound reason behind it.  Just because someone says it should or must
be, does not make it so.  There are far too many laws and rules being effected
without clear sound reasoning behind them.  It is our RIGHT to KNOW.  I, for
one, WILL NOT vote in favor of this or ANY change WITHOUT  good sound
reasoning.

We all also ought to know that the IRS usurps power, lies and cheats FAR more
than we realize.  They do NOT have the authority to do much of what they
claim.  It is another case of the "powers that be" telling us what we are
required to do instead of asking us for what is needed.  In fact, we do NOT
have to pay income tax or even file.  Nor are we required to have social
security numbers or take part in the census.

My life is mine to live, I am responsible to myself.  It is NOT up to our
government to dictate how I earn my money, how I spend it,  how I play with it,
or who I give it to.

I would certainly be interested in knowing the title and code that states
regulations that the BOD says we must comply with.

Teddy Lancaster  (see: http://save-a-patiot.org)

K S Swigart wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Randy H Eiland wrote:
>
> > Kat brought up several points about our upcoming Bylaws Amendment vote,
> > some are better answered by others, but I can answer her questions on the
> > Amendment required by the IRS:
>
> Let me see if I can explain my concerns about the changes outlined in
> Proposal 1, since Randy did not address them at all.  To say, "we have
> to do it because the IRS says so" is not what I consider to be a good
> answer.  This is being passed off as just some administrative bullshit
> that the IRS is making us do.
>
> However, we are being asked to vote, not only to change the Articles of
> Incorporation, but to abide by these changes as well.  And, in essence,
> we are being asked to adopt part of the Internal Revenue Code as part
> of our Articles of Incorporation (specifically sections 501(c)(3) and
> 170(c)(2)) AND "the corresponding provision/s of ANY FUTURE United
> States Internal Revenue Law" (emphasis mine).  So if the Internal
> Revenue Law changes, the restrictions in our Articles of Incorporation
> change too--without a member vote.
>
> And what we are being asked to vote on are restrictions of the
> activities of the organization (i.e. "shall not carry on any activity
> not permitted to be carried on. . .")  What are these activities???
>
> For instance, is it permitted for a tax exempt/charitable organization
> to distribute the funds of the organization back to the members in the
> form of valuable "awards"???  I DON'T KNOW.
>
> Do you?  I probably know more about what it says in the tax code than
> many of the members that are being asked to vote on this, but 501(c)(3)
> corporations is a whole separate sub-specialty for tax experts, and I
> don't know enough to know what I am voting on.
>
> I COULD go hunt down the applicable tax codes, but I would like to
> think that the Board of Directors has done this already (BEFORE they
> voted on it themselves).  Considering that Randy says that this is THE
> MOST IMPORTANT CHANGE that we are voting on (emphasis his), I would
> like to think that it was important enough for all of us to be informed
> about exactly what we are voting on.  Exactly what we are agreeing that
> the AERC won't be doing.
>
> I do not consider it reasonable to assume that this is not an onerous
> restriction.  If it were a simple restriction, all corporations would
> just adopt it and become tax exempt.  SOMEBODY ought to currently know
> what it is that we aren't supposed to be doing in order to retain tax
> exempt status (it is not merely a case of writing the Articles of
> Incorporation correctly).
>
> If nobody has bothered to actually investigate the sections of the
> Internal Revenue Code that we are voting to adopt, I will do it--and
> report back; but if somebody has already done this (which I HOPE is the
> case), could he/she/they perhaps enlighten the rest of us?  And to have
> it included ON the ballot that is sent out to the entire membership
> would be, I consider, entirely appropriate, so that all members can
> make an informed decision, rather than just those who read about it on
> Ridecamp.
>
> I DO NOT consider this just to be some idiotic, administrative
> technicality that must be gotten through; it is addressing the basic
> activities of the organization.  And I consider it a matter that
> requires careful and informed consideration.
>
> Because it is important, doesn't mean that we should just approve it with
> a rubber stamp.  I do not consider it prudent to just say, "whatever you
> say..." to the IRS!
>
> kat
> Orange County, Calif.
>
> > Again I state, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT OF THE BYLAWS AMENDMENTS AND
> > MUST BE APPROVED FOR AERC TO CONTINUE TO BE EXEMPT FROM FEDERAL INCOME
> > TAX.
>
> Nitpicky yet again, but this is an amendment to the Articles of
> Incorporation, not the By-laws (the reason I care about this is that I
> have in my book "AERC Rules and Regulations" c June 1997 a copy of the
> current by-laws.  I do not have a copy of the current Articles of
> Incorporation).
>
> And again I state, if this is THE MOST IMPORTANT, then it is most
> important that we be fully informed.