You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #63: Correctamundo! [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
TygrBright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-06-06 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #60
63. Correctamundo!
>>However there is no REAL requirement for them to listen/pay attention to the public. It would simply be in their best interst to do so. Correct?<<

Board members are liable for exercising their fiduciary power with due discretion. That means, at the very bottom line, that the organization is operating within the law, it's not abusing any financial support received, and it's remaining within its stated definition of charitable purpose.

However, the organization can stop getting operating funding if it's not "doing its job" effectively. When that happens, the board members are liable ONLY for ensuring that the organization doesn't incur debt as it swirls down the pipe-- because they'd be liable for that debt, personally. However, if bad management practices put the organization paws-up WITHOUT breaking the law or incurring debt, the board members can simply notify the IRS that it's shut down, create an asset distribution plan to be approved by the relevant state authorities, and fold their tents and steal away with no more personal consequences than being known to have been involved in the fiasco.

By and large, there's not much you can do if you're NOT a board member, and the organization is NOT disregarding funder requirements, breaking laws, etc. You can try going the 'air-the-dirty-laundry-in-public-and-shame-them-into-doing-the-right-thing' route, but in this particular case it looks like that could be putting a peashooter against an 88 mortar. And if you do, you (again) risk being written off as a crank, even by others who are actually on your side.

regretfully,
Bright
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC