New Questions about RBHSEF

Very quickly, the Landmark reported Friday afternoon, September 7 (same link as below), that RBHSEF proposed giving five selected years of check register to the paper if the Landmark and its reporter promised silence on all but a certain type of expenditure.

The Landmark, wisely, declined.

We are stuck with the knowledge that :

1. RBHSEF leadership is hiding something — why else would they seek reporter silence on expenditures not in the identified category?

2. RBHSEF leadership is selecting years for disclosure.  In light of #1, RBHSEF selecting some records increases suspicions about the records it is selecting not to disclose.

3. RBHSEF leadership is either not very bright, or it believes the Landmark is not very bright, for ever cooking up this cockamamie idea.

4. RBHSEF leadership thinks something other than full disclosure might get them through this self-inflicted problem.

Here is the answer:  Disclose all, if necessary — make appropriate adjustments, and get on with the purpose for which the community formed the foundation.  Stalling only makes the inevitable harder.

RBHSEF claims one status, and filed in another status.  All of this is about checking RBHSEF behavior during its out-of-status filing period to determine if it acted as a 501(c)(3) or as a 501(c)(4).  Disclosure is how that happens.  (This explained below, in “Questions about RBHSEF”.)

On that point, at the next meeting, I will request a copy of all founding documents and all by-laws under which RBHSEF has ever operated.

Explore posts in the same categories: Education, Riverside Brookfield High School -- Turnaround

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: