Discussion in 'Trapshooting Forum - Americantrapshooter.com' started by Family Guy, Nov 10, 2019.
Were modifications or amendments to the July 15, 2011 Agreement drawn up after the September, 2015 closing of the WSRC?
You can search that using the word mou. Wtf phantom. Is your keyboard broke?
I apologize, I wrote the IDNR/ATA agreement date. The question should read, "were there modifications or amendments to the June 1, 2014 to December 31, 2039 IDNR/THOF Lease Agreement drawn up after the September 2015 closing of the WSRC?"
"said Trapshooting Hall of Fame Museum and Offices to be owned by DNR."
That is quite a clause. It could be interpreted to mean that the DNR owns everything in the museum. A museum is not a building, it is a collection of things housed in a building.
And, the definitions section adds further in (B) "Premises" means the Trapshooting Hall of Fame Museum and Offices building, other impovements and the land occupied by the Lessee and owned by DNR as described in Section 2, to be used for the Business Operation.
So, did the ATA just give the Hall of Fame Museum to the State of Illinois? That is the way it reads. Nicely done ATA!
Damn good post!
Say, what do you make of Section 21?
Phantom, Sorry it took me a while. I had to unblock you since you have spent a reasonable amount of time insulting me as you often don't like my opinions.
But, in answer to your interesting question focusing on a very interesting clause (which I had not noticed).
Section 21 is pretty clear that the Lessor (ATA) is to employ (pay for and manage) an employee to run the joint, for Illinois.
"...The Trapshooting Hall of Fame Museum shall be operated by an employee authorized to act and represent Lessee [Illinois] in all matters pertaining to the operation and management of the museum. ..."
And, the ATA gets to pay this employee, acting to represent Illinois, with specific terms as to how that employee should be dressed and act.
Damn. That just confirms who "owns" the museum.
Once again, well done ATA!
Hmmm...we have had this lease up on several threads. None of us caught this. I have phone call into HB. Big stuff here.
Thank you for the reply. I do, in fact, hold your opinions in high regard. Sadly, I am a notorious asshole and, as my father would say, an argumentative Bolshevik. He once said that I would "argue with a tree."
I thought you might appreciate Section 21, and I am glad you were kind enough to take you time to render an opinion. The ATA seems to have slipped its neck into a bit of a noose. Would you agree?
I see lots of folks slip their necks into nooses (especially recently) who then just walk. You know, what I am talking about.
But that lease is a flat out sell out. And, the only explanation is Pull LLC was a land deal rip off financially benefiting the folks who made the deal. They control the game and apparently are going to keep control.
I hate watching our wonderful and historic sport slowly die. All for greed and ego of a few who apparently make "executive orders" for their own benefit. Seems to be a trend.
#26 has me very concerned.
At one time I had thought that they extended the time limits for the THOF to vacate the premises.
I see 45 days listed which I believe was in the ORIGINAL contract presented to the ATA, but a modification of what was 45 days was added to give the THOF 90 days to vacate, or anything left in the building would become the property of the State of Illinois.
I hope I have missed something here in the agreement.
Trust me, 45 days wouldn't even begin to secure a site to store all those artifacts.
I am not positive but I believe the last Curator sought out the storage place when they vacated Vandalia, and making a record of all that was packed up and shipped to that location took a large amount of time.
Hope it never happens, but 45 days isn't going to cut it.
I just found that Family Guy had posted the 2011 Amended contract and it stated 120 for the removal of anything owned by the THOF or ATA.
What am I missing...Did someone (or am I reading this new one wrong) mess up and allow this wording of 45 days on the new agreement to slip by ?
Please correct me if I have missed something.
History Seeker, Jakearoo, HistoryBuff, The Phantom, (Merlo), and anyone else who cares I've been steaming about the HOF ever since August of 2009 when I went with Jack to present the OSTA and Cardinal's offer to have the HOF Museum move to the Cardinal Center. I knew that any group led by Jim Bradford would kill any offer but I made the trip anyhow. I kept letters and e-mails from various trustees between themselves talking about the offer and the response to that offer and I'm going to post them on a separate thread so you all can place names and events together.
Lynn Parsons, rest his sole, was the only Trustee that openly wanted to take our offer and as you read in his correspondence was really frustrated about the future of the HOF and Museum. I also have some of Kenny Ray's thoughts that he put to pen and paper about this and probably hasn't shared because he is to nice a guy. So as you read these don't think that the situation the Museum find's itself in today in 2019 was not warned about by concerned people back in 2009. Remember the names of the Trustees when blame is assigned, some are a lot more to blame than others.
I get this in order and start posting, not all at once as I have about 10 pages of stuff. Brad Dysinger
Sunshine is the best disinfectant. This is a website that prides itself in telling the truth.
According to this they would not need 45 days. It appears the museum may belong to Illinois. The museum would include artifacts.
In section 23 (D) it says "Both DNR and lessee shall have the right to terminate this Agreement without cause and at either party's sole discretion prior to the expiration date by giving ninety (180) days [yep, that's what it says.] advance written notice of termination to the other party.
So, there is obviously a typo here. But under any circumstances the DNR can terminate on 180 days notice. Arguably on 90. And remember, the employee who runs it runs it for them, the owners.
Gotta love those sharp as a tack folks at the ATA who negotiated and signed this deal.
Section 38, subsection (c) is certainly interesting.
When or if the ATA HOF group leaves will a museum will still be there?
When an item is donated to the museum, it is donated to the State of Illinois? The person running the museum is to represent the IDNR.
At the moment I have NO CLUE as to who is overseeing the Museum, OR if it open any time other that during the Grand weeks.
When ever we were headed south we would stop into the museum in Vandalia and that wonderful girl, Tami Daniel was always there to greet us.
And it was even a real nice surprise to see our old friend Lynn Parsons sitting there chatting with her. Lynn spent more time at that museum than a lot of people knew.
We sure do miss that opportunity today.
Tami on the left, Lynn "Doc" Parsons, and my wife.
That day we walked in there here were Tami and Doc, changing light bulbs, now that was dedication to that museum.
Then again maybe the signer new exactly what was in the lease agreement. I assume he could under stand what he read.
Did the H.O.F. board not have legal advice on what they were doing? Or was this another Pull 2112 deal? Roger C.
I was just going to say the minute taker of the 2012 PULL meeting sort of "Forgot" to include the numbers 2012 and only put into the minutes PULL LLC.
Now that is what lead to the investigations by some to seek further information.
I was advised that the minute taker is also an attorney and could NOT have possibly forgot those numbers...OK, I didn't bite.
Even after repeated notes to Gipson to have the minutes amended to include 2012, nothing ever changed.
Now, how in the hell do they expect anyone to put faith in this organization we all loved so much for many years ?
It was just brought to my attention that #21 should be looked into in it's entirety. Wow, something smells that the State can dictate to the Trapshooting Hall of Fame how they will hire, and run this MUSEUM that is owned by the State.
Definition of a MUSEUM, not necessarily the building that houses artifacts, but the artifacts themselves:
For other uses, see Museum (disambiguation).
A museum (/mjuːˈziːəm/ mew-ZEE-əm; plural museums or, rarely, musea) is an institution that cares for (conserves) a collection of artifacts and other objects of artistic, cultural, historical, or scientific importance. Many public museums make these items available for public viewing through exhibits that may be permanent or temporary. The largest museums are located in major cities throughout the world, while thousands of local museums exist in smaller cities, towns and rural areas. Museums have varying aims, ranging from serving researchers and specialists to serving the general public. The goal of serving researchers is increasingly shifting to serving the general public.
MY concern, although I hope I am completely wrong on this, would be...Considering the State of Illinois OWNES the THOF MUSEUM, and dictates to the THOF on how they will hire employees, do they believe they would also own the contents of this MUSEUM ???
Any legal authorities on here that would like to give an opinion (of course not binding) would be greatly appreciated.
Jake's opinion probably holds. Does that lead to litigation? It could. Section 27 deals with jurisdiction, but I have not been able to find reference to remedies, or penalties, or settlements. Maybe the ATA can afford a lengthy court battle with the State of Illinois.
We all know that the ATA/THOF gave the building to the State. If the state wants to play hardball, things could get ugly.
I hope Jake comes back in on this thread.
The ATA/EC has boxed itself into a very blind canyon. If individual members ever had to testify, rats would start jumping ship.
The cancer has metastasized. It won't be long before one of the Bad Actors drops a dime. Oh, watch your back! There are Bad Actors here. Benedict Arnold comes to mind. You know the old adage, "Stay close to your friends. Stay closer to your enemies."
They keep saying it is two separate organizations..
ATA, and THOF stand all by themselves.
IF this is so, why is Bradford so insistent on charging fees to the ATA shooters to raise his billions ?
Let the THOF raise their own money without ATA intervention.
In a fight the State of Illinois could, and I expect would, take the position that they own the "Museum" which would certainly include the contents. Based on the Definitions Section (B) and Paragraph 21 as discussed above (and probably other sections as well if carefully reviewed), the contract reads that way. And Illinois would effectively argue that was the original intent as any decent lawyer for the ATA would have been specific in the contract and carved out that the contents of the Museum were not part of the agreement and would always belong to the ATA or its successor in interest if those contents were not supposed to be included in the "ownership" of "The Museum."
If I were advising the ATA, at this point, I would see if there was a means of registering each and every individual item in the Museum in the sole name and ownership of the ATA. But even if there was a way to do that (Which there may not be as chattels, other than cars and things which are licensed, generally do not have any kind of registry. Possibly there could be some protection under trademark laws.) the State of Illinois could, and probably would, take the position that the later registration or trademarking of the items in the Museum in the name of the ATA was a direct attempt to violate the original contract signed with Illinois.
That contract is problematic, to say the least, if the ATA ever gets sideways with Illinois.
And Phantom, you asked if that leads to litigation. That is a fight the ATA should probably not initiate as they are in a weak position for many reasons, not just the contract itself. I mean the entire grounds for the Grand are on some weird loan deal from Illinois. They hold all the cards.
I have had one of our illustrious (and smart) founders ask me to be sure about the terms Lessee and Lessor. I swear I did, and do, know those terms in a legal context. None the less, I confused them above.
A Lessee is the party paying the rent. The Lessor is the owner of the property. The employee in Paragraph 21 who runs the Museum will run it for the benefit of the Lessee. That is for the ATA.
That does not change the primary problem in the lease in the preamble (the final "Whereas") stating "said Trapshooting Hall of Fame Museum and Offices to be owned by DNR." (Emphasis added.) This is repeated in Definitions Section (B) defining Premesis. And, I do not see any carve out for the content of said "Museum."
I am a bit red faced to be so blatantly wrong about the employee in Section 21. But the main point remains.
The "employee" question, as a stand alone matter, is very interesting. The lessee must "employ sufficient and qualified personnel to operate the Trapshooting Hall of Fame Museum in a businesslike manner." Has anybody ever seen the "job description?" If there was one, was it published? Who published it? The State of Illinois? or The ATA? How many applicants? Were there interviews? Is it a 40 hour per week job? Is it a year-round job? Are there benefits? Who handles the FICA, etc.? What is the average annual salary?
Most importantly, was the position filled in compliance with applicable Equal Opportunity Employment laws.
Is there a record of the history of employment for the position since the opening of the Museum? Were any of the employees related to any of the members of the families of the EC, BOD, or ED?
Or the Trustees?
I do know that there was an extensive record of each and every article within the former Museum logged before the artifacts went into storage. If memory serves me correctly, there was even an appraisal of items put into the records for insurance purposes.
After they were placed in the STATE owned Museum, I have no idea.
The main people who knew all of this were the former Curator, and the other was the gal (Tami Daniel) who actually was at the Museum in Dayton weekdays, and would open up on weekends for any visitors who contacted her.
I don't even know if there is insurance carried on these articles now.
I do also know that before the last curator in the Vandalia Museum had come on board, there was none.
HE, though his covering all the bases of his job, found this out.
I had thought that Bradford being the big businessman he was, would have known about the lack of insurance on the contents.
We sure do miss those people who kept that place and records so meticulous back in the day.
They CARED !!!
Are there any people doing this today ???????
I don't know, but somehow doubt it.
My crystal ball says this is all a disaster waiting to happen (if not already).
H.S. When you look at who is in charge, your confidence level drops considerably. For a business man Bradford, did not show much ability when being in charge of the building of the H.O.F. building. Makes one wonder where all of that building fund ended up, and still owing a considerable amount on a gifted building. Roger C.
Has anybody ever seen an annual operating budget for THOF building? Is the building is disrepair? Is there an hourly employee on duty at all times. Who writes the payroll checks? Who pays the person that writes the payroll checks?
You guys need to remember that certain pesky STATE and FEDERAL tax laws apply here. Is the HOF, or any of its assigns, breaking the law? There have to be RECORDS. If the records are being monitored by a State entity, there has to be some evidence. The has to be some accountability.
Many of you know a lot about the workings of the Hall of Fame. Why is it so damned hard to get answers to these very simple questions?
Has any one of you ever talked with an employee at the HOF building? Is the same person there day after day and year after year? Is the ATA/HOF honoring the terms of the lease agreement?
Is it possible as I suggested earlier, that nobody, and I mean NOBODY, has a freakin' clue? About ANYTHING?
Say it ain't so.
There is an employee to my knowledge. I think the sign says its open for all shoots and weekends if I remember correctly. I think the gentlemen that works at the HOF has been there quite some time.
That is good to know. At least something is being done to let shooters see the place.
I "think" the operational financial records are posted somewhere the year following for the THOF.
I will check on this.
Brad M and History Seeker,
Thank you very much for the answers.
Separate names with a comma.