Attorney General Letter: Minutes regarding proper governance of the ATA

Minutes are posted from a Executive Committee teleconference. It appears to be one subject only.


20 It was also noted that:

21 ▪ Ex-Officio Rob M. Taylor from Kansas was absent and excused

22 Secretary Galloway noted for the record that proper notice was given of this Special

23 Meeting, and the Meeting was held by teleconference as per said Notice, and with unanimous

24 consent and agreement of the ATA Executive Committee members attending.

25 The purpose of this meeting was to discuss a letter received on March 17 from the

26 Illinois Attorney General. This letter states that there have been “several complaints regarding

27 the proper governance of the ATAA” and asks the ATA to provide information to their office.

28 An intensive review of how to respond to the aforesaid letter was conducted by Members of

29 the Executive Committee. It was the unanimous decision of the Executive Committee to retain

30 Alan Farris, attorney at law, to respond and represent the ATA in this matter. The information

31 requested by the Attorney General will be provided by Controller Michael Howell.


What does it all mean?

 

Doesn't mean a thing other than upon receiving a complaint/s the AG has asked the ATA for information to be provided in response to said complaints. Now if the ATA is dragged into court then you can say there is something to be concerned about. Until then it's nothing to worry about.

 

OK, I'll bite....

So the Attorney General of Illinois asks for information / papers ect. You then have a special meeting and hire and attorney to help you decide how you want to respond to that request. You characterize that review as "intensive".

Are these guys part of Hillary's email tech team?

On planet earth how many attorneys do you have to hire to tell you to turn the papers or information over? How much money do you pay an attorney to tell you which papers the AG gets? How much does an attorney cost that tells you how to respond?

Why isn't the letter included in the minutes?

Why would you hide that from the members?

Why is Taylor excused? Hmmm?

Why does an attorney have to represent the ATA?

 

OK, I'll bite....

So the Attorney General of Illinois asks for information / papers ect. You then have a special meeting and hire and attorney to help you decide how you want to respond to that request. You characterize that review as "intensive". Well yea. Its a State Attorney General. He/She can turn your world inside out. So yea it's intense.

Are these guys part of Hillary's email tech team?

On planet earth how many attorneys do you have to hire to tell you to turn the papers or information over? How much money do you pay an attorney to tell you which papers the AG gets? How much does an attorney cost that tells you how to respond? You hire as many attorneys as you need to do to defend yourself.

Why isn't the letter included in the minutes? It's litigation.

Why would you hide that from the members? It's litigation.

Why is Taylor excused? Hmmm? Sick, no phone service. at work . uninterested. maybe the lawyer said to exclude him. maybe he was shooting trap. Who knows.

Why does an attorney have to represent the ATA? When the Atty. General inquires about your operations the first thing you do is hire a lawyer. Basic common sense.

 

Why wouldn't the members get to know? Lady T please explain where the litigation is and why telling the members what the letter says hurts the members.

 

Well to be technical there is no litigation at the moment but one acts as if there is or will be when a State Attorney General comes a calling. Therefore one acts as if there is litigation. So if it does come to the point that a lawsuit is filed one can just get a copy of the suit and the documents filed in support of each side to see what the letter was about.

 

Huh? We were a members' based organization. Litigation or not why would you hide the letter, The purpose of the minutes was to inform us. They only told us we dont get to know. What minutes? Reads like seconds.

 

On or about May 17, 2016 the ATA sent out an update to all Delegates. The final paragraph spoke to this issue and according to our ATA Officials, the Office of the Illinois Attorney General concluded their review or investigation clearing the ATA of any wrongdoing. Here's the document sent to me by a friend.





Some still say the investigation is ongoing.

That 2012 Pull LLC should be thoroughly investigated in my view. A lot of questions need to be answered about how and who spotted the property located at 1105 E. Broadway, Sparta, Illinois and the reason for the speculative purchase in the hope that the ATA would lease and purchase this piece of real estate (which they did). Most ATA members would have simply informed the ATA of the property for sale and suggest they look it over as a potential office. Wasn't much due diligence done by those responsible to perform "due diligence." Just my opinion.

Doesn't look to me that the Illinois Attorney General's Office has much interest in the complaint they received. That's evident by their May 2 communication advising the ATA that all is well and they are done with the issue.

HB

 

The quote is that..."the review did have some suggestions." They did have to have an emergency by-law passage as the decades-long gun giveaway was against the by-laws.

Gipson says is only what Gipson says. No letters from the AG? We take Gipson on his word I guess?

 

I am confused (as usual)

I just looked up this teleconference meeting to find the date....March 22, 2016

First post said they are holding a teleconference about a letter dated MARCH 17 th.

Then on or about May 17th the ATA (Lynn Gipson) sends a letter to Delegates telling them among other things, that the ATA delivered SEVERAL volumes of information to the ATTY. General's office on April 15th.

The Gipson letter also states the ATTY. General's office on May 2nd notified the ATA by letter that the review was complete and considered the inquiry closed, and the cost of which to the ATA for staff time and LEGAL expense was $3,800.00.

From what I am reading now, it looks as though this has all been settled.

Am I reading something wrong ???

IF SO, please correct me !

IS there a NEW inquiry taking place ???

 

I don't think the Delegate Update states the ATTY General's office notified the ATA May 2nd by letter. They may have and should have but I've heard no letter exists which is very odd to me.

Furthermore, I've heard rumor the AG's Office has denied requests for the communications between the ATA and AG's Office regarding the review/investigation and recommendations. I'm not sure of the reasons.

You might consider asking ATA Executive Director Lynn Gipson for a copy of the AG's communications. I don't see why he would not grant your request. I think some would be interested in reading the letter(s) for themselves.

Honestly don't know if there is a NEW inquiry, ongoing inquiry or no inquiry at all. But if the case is closed, there should be a written disposition on the findings, available to the public.

HB

 

Brad's friend,

It seem pretty obvious to me that this is all old news just getting a new life here. The minutes being referred by the OP are about six month sold. They are simply discussing a matter that has been already been discussed here at length long ago. Nothing new.

 

HB,

MY BAD...I reread and you are correct...It did not say by letter...I must have been on my meds when I thought they received this information by letter...

Sorry for stating that.

I agree they should have received this notice BY LETTER but may not have.

Again my BAD, thanks for setting the record straight...See what happens when one assumes !

 

What's wrong Bat? The minutes were only recently posted. Maybe you could put a list of items on the board that infuriates any crooks in charge? Discussing the minutes of executive meetings seems to be one. Please print the "do not discuss subjects."

 

Nothing wrong Butterly, Brad's friend asked a question, obviously taking the OP's post as some new info, when in fact it was just a release of the minutes of an old meeting that has already been discussed here.

 

Bat, these minutes were never discussed before. Why did it take so long for the minutes to be posted?

 

umm... Butterly, the minutes were not the issue in Brad's Friends post, it was the issue the minutes were describing, which involved the complaints filed by persons with the IL AG office regarding the ATA many months ago. The topic was copied here long ago and discussed quite a bit. For the sake of accuracy, just pointing out that Merlo's post above does not involve a "new inquiry" as Brad's friend was asking.

If you want to discuss the recently released minutes themselves, great, just not sure what new info appears in them.

You ask, why were they released so late? I don't know, were they later than normal? I'm not sure what their usual schedule is or if they release them after approval of the minutes at a subsequent meeting, which would have likely been in August?

 

Later than normal. Really Bat? Is that what your pals want you to say? "Later than normal?' How often does the ATA get investigated by the Illinois Attorney General? This is normal to you or just normal to keep the members in the dark?

Tell us Bat. How long does it normally take to publish a 3 paragraph set of minutes that was held in response to the AG's request? The meeting was held over the phone and the minutes could be approved via phone call.