Case of the Company / llc that never existed? Pull 2012 and the ATA

The ATA dealt with a company Pull 2012, which happened to have ties to an eventual ATA President. The ATA first paid mega dollars for a lease and had a deal to purchase before the property was owned by their future landlord.

You think that has a familiar smell to it?

As per a document from the Illinois Attorney General's Office, there is no smell or no scent of a license. According to the AG's office no company by that name was licensed to sell property in the State of Illinois.

Why would the real property committee want to do business with a company that is not licensed in the State of Illinois?

Why would the minutes hide the name of the company from the members?

 

My delegate never mentioned this.

 

Insider trading ..? Just a guess but if you want it, I buy it, then form a corporation and sell it to you at a nice profit then we all sit drink and have a good time on the members dollars again ... One for you, one for me, two for you, one, two for me and so on ... There's more than one way to skin a cat, the cat being the membership ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Merlo, gotta get your staff working OT going through those reams of paper they received. I'd think most questions here will be answered in those papers. I'm not sure what they mean by licensed to sell property in the state, usually a foreign entity simply registers with a state to have the right to carry on business in the state. I thought earlier posdts here indicated they were registered in IL, but maybe it was only KS, I don't recall. Would be nice to see the AG's documents, especially anything that mentions the closing of the investigation (or that it was not closed).

Not a big issue here, but for sake of accuracy for some posters and readers, 2012 Pull LLC was not a corporation.

 

Not a corporation licensed to buy and sell property in the State of Illinois.

 

Bat
Lets have you answer the question Merlo asked?

 

I don't think one has to be a reg Corp. or a part of a Corporation to sell a piece of property ... I have sold homes, not commercial property and am not a Corp, but did use legal council to complete the transactions and a Company to finalize the closings ... I'm not sure why they would of filed for and formed a Corporation to transact such a deal which would only create a RED Flag and cause people to wonder about the entire process being on the up and up ... If it walks like a DUCK, smells like a DUCK, and Quacks like a DUCK, its more than likely a DUCK ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Merlo, thanks I saw that. I meant any correspondence to ATA or their attorney as part of the investigation would be interesting, not the response AG sent to the parties making the FOIA request you posted.

butterly, not sure they would have even known of that. Other than title insurance issues etc., I'm not sure where the issue would even come up in a real estate closing.

Why would they hide the name - I don't have any idea. Could have been an error omitting the "2012." I certainly have not seen that they have such a great attention to detail in their writing skills.

I don't recall, did any of the earlier investigation on this site show the LLC was registered in IL? I thought it did but could certainly be wrong about that

 

WPT,

It was not a Corp. It was an LLC, likely an LLC treated as a partnership for tax purposes (assuming more than one member). I'm not sure what the issue is with a license to "sell" property in the state either, never heard of such a thing involving commercial real estate, but I certainly don't know much specific to IL. Would need to see the actual document Merlo's staff has. Again, in most state s a foreign LLC would simply register to do business in another state, and I thought this one did that, but based on Merlo's post, there must be some issue there. I don't see that specific issue having much to do with the concerns of the transaction with the ATA at this point though, as long as title is clear.

What I'd like to see is any AG memos in Merlo's box of documents that mention any of the AG's work related to the property transaction.

 

What does it matter?

That is the best you can do Bat. Don't have any idea? Is that what your pals expect you to say?

And you don't know how the real property committee could find out if Pull 2012 was licensed in Illinois?
Taylor was soon to be a president. He was part of Pull 2012. He was in the room. There might be a few people that cant see thru you BS. I am not one of them.

 

Bat, would you like the word "company" substituted for the word "corporation". I can have a mod do that. The questions in red remain the same.

Why would the real property committee want to do business with a company that is not licensed in the State of Illinois?

Why would the minutes hide the name of the company from the members?

 

Hey Merlo, as I said it was just for the sake of accuracy. Company is accurate.

butterly: actually it doesn't matter much at all unless it somehow taints the title to the property and I don't think that is the case. Where I was going with this is I thought some of the info posted here in the past showed the LLC was registered in IL, and I also stated I might be wrong about that, confusing KS info posted. Not having seen the AG document Merlo is referring to with his first red question, I can't tell what they mean.

Why would the ATA be concerned about whether the LLC was "licensed" in IL.? As long as their attorney and the title insurance company didn't have any issues, where would it even come up? That issue would be a concern for the LLC, but I don't see why the ATA would have been concerned with it. Explain that part to me? Why would the RPC investigate to see if the landlord/seller was registered in IL? is that some sort of requirement on the buyer's side?

 

Real Estate License Act of 2000 --Illinois Real Estate Laws
http://www.illinoisrealtor.org/sites/illinoisrealtor.org/files/downloads/LicenseLaw.pdf
It looks to me like you need to be licensed to lease or buy real estate in Illinois.

 

Great question Bat. It is a question I doubt you want answered.

d-u-e d-i-l-i-g-e-n-c-e

Confused Bat?

It is a requirement or bar for the honest. Need a definition:.
Merriam‑Webster
Definition of due diligence. 1 : the care that a reasonable person exercises to avoid harm to other persons or their property.

 

Sounds good butterly, but I'm not sure you are correct about that being something generally done in a real estate closing. You hire an attorney to represent you in a real estate transaction such as this. You receive the services of the title search company. That's about the end of it. If there was a problem for the buyer in buying property from an LLC not registered in the state, I'd expect that one of these professionals would bring the issue up. If there is no issue, it won't come up.

I think Ford's link is dealing with licensing of the real estate broker etc., not the owner of the property. Neither the owner, nor the buyer of a property would generally be subject to some specific "license" to buy or sell real property, other than the general requirement for an LLC to register to do business in the state. If the LLC was not registered to transact business in IL, they were certainly in violation of some laws. Maybe that is what the AG's wording is referring to in the FOIA cover letter Merlo posted when they mention ongoing investigation?

We have not seen the document Merlo is referring to as far as "licensed to sell property' is concerned, so I really have no idea what it refers to. I would understand if they were saying 2012 Pull LLC had not registered or applied to do business in the state, which is likely the case.

 

Was the ATA secretary Mr. Galloway, the Atty. who took these notes ?

I somehow don't think he would make this error. I guess I'll give him the benefit of the doubt though as I cannot attest to his or anyone else's writing skills ~~~

For all I know, he was not taking these minutes either, and had a substitute.

Not making any accusations at all, I am just asking if anyone knows.

 

Bat
Did the Real Property Committee do their due diligence? Check with your pals. That seems to be the subject here. What would they like you to post? How could no one know that the property and Pull 2012 were associated? Unless of course no one asked or no one cared. And how could anyone research using the minutes as the name was not published?

 

I was thinking minutes have to be approved.

 

"Did the Real Property Committee do their due diligence? Check with your pals." Why would any of my pals know anything about it? ...Oh yeah, I forgot about your hang-up where you think I'm an ATA insider!

"How could no one know that the property and Pull 2012 were associated?" I can see the Board not knowing, but the EC and the committee, both??? That one not so much!

"And how could anyone research using the minutes as the name was not published?" Well, I thought someone did make the connection based on what was published. Wasn't necessarily as easy as it should have been but Brad's Friend or someone else I don't recall figured it out. I don't know if it was intentional or not, but it is certainly reasonable that someone simply made a mistake and missed the "2012" part of the name when typing minutes.

Besides, what really matters is whatever should be in the documents Merlo's staff has. Somewhere in there the AG must have made a note of why they felt the ATA transaction with 2012 Pull LLC was not an issue, at least from the ATA's side of things.

 

Huh? Company name hidden? RPC doesn't do their job? EC member part of Pull 2012? That is enough me. I dont need an AG. Every EC member and RPC member should have already resigned. Not one of BOD did their job either. jmho

 

Not so sure these guys weren't snookered.

 

Many here were very vocal about the need for the AG investigation, and now nobody is interested in reading what the AG's paperwork says about the transaction? You don't need an AG?

I for one would like to see what the AG provided on this issue. Then again, maybe they didn't provide much of their analysis. Only Merlo's staff knows what the FOIA request provided. Give them some time to sort through the box of papers, maybe we will see something, maybe not.

 

Bat....I read this as Merlo and his group did not get all the information they wanted. Read what the AG's office wrote that is underlined in purple

The records we have that are exempt contain information that pertains to an ongoing investigation and reasonably contemplated law enforcement proceedings by this office.

I read that to mean the AG at the time of the above letter is keeping their cards close. I doubt Merlo has the smoking gun if there is one. At least that is how I read the above letter. But....it is clear that at the time mentioned the investigation is ongoing.

 

This was a deal that they all knew about and most likely all profited from. It was surely against the rules governing the tax free standing of a non profit organization. Were the people on the real property committee the same ones that were on the hall of fame committee? Roger C.

 

--------------------------------------------------

Was this shared by the ATA with the members?

Merlo out

 

Merlo,

Thanks, that's what I thought. The earlier posts of a "license" to sell property in IL didn't make any sense. That highlighted portion above is exactly what I was talking about in my earlier posts. 2012 Pull LLC apparently never registered to do business in the state. The earlier threads I was thinking dealt with IL registration must have been about Kansas, as I stated was a possibility earlier. This is an issue for 2012 Pull LLC, or its former owners, not the ATA though.

FG,

I understand the AG denied the request in part, but they appear to have provided at least 1,000 pages of info. Some of that must refer to the building deal. What were the communications after May 15th that were recently provided?

 

Bat---you have to have a license in IL to buy and sell and lease property in Illinois. If you dont have that you must go thru someone that does. If you are not registered to do business in Illinois the other is mute.

Okay.......this is where I call bullshit. This is an issue for all of us. On this forum it was exposed that a future president was part of 2012 Pull. (correct me if wrong) The real name was not given in the minutes. The EC certainly knew about it or they must be blooming idiots. The Real Property Committee ignored this too or they too must be idiots. And you Bat tell me this is an issue for people other than the ATA? People like you Bat have ruined the organization.

You can put your head up your butt and say it dont affect you but it damn sure affects the organization!

 

Bat, tell us how this transaction did not affect the ATA?

 

I am the wrong person to ask? I am sure Merlo will give us more.

 

Rocketfan,

You are telling me ATA needs to have a license in order to lease or buy that building? I don't buy that for a second. Just about every business in the state owns or leases property, and they don't all have a license for such activity. If you are a real estate broker, manage or sell property for clients etc, you have to be licensed, but you yourself don't need a license to buy or lease property. You generally do use a real estate agent or broker. Yes, an LLC, or a corporation, or any other business has to register to transact business in the state, that's true in every state I am familiar with, but they don't have to be licensed to buy their own property.

And what does the failure by 2012 Pull LLC to follow the business registration rules have to do with the ATA? I don't follow that at all. Why is the LLC business registration "all of our business?" The LLC is responsible for its own actions, that's not the ATA's problem. Could very well be a problem for that former ATA official though.

While that registration issue has nothing to do with the ATA, or "all of us" as you say, the issue that does involve "all of us" and the ATA is Taylor's involvement in the LLC. That is a problem regardless of whether fraud was involved or not. I agree, at least some of the EC must have known Taylor was involved, or Taylor was guilty of some real deception. Taylors involvement is an issue for us, the LLC's registration or licensing is not. I would very much like to see the documents discussing Taylors involvement, or the purchase in general, that is what concerns us. It is possible all of that material was denied, maybe they are investigating Taylor. Maybe he is in hot water, maybe it was determined that no real fraud occurred. That's why I would like to see what Merlo managed to get. There has to be some useful info in 1,000 pages, you would think/

 

butterly,

I don't follow you??? That transaction is a concern for the ATA and all members. I never said it wasn't. What is not a concern is whether the other party in the transaction had all of its state required filings taken care of or not. That has no effect on the ATA unless there is some reason it could void the transaction, which I doubt very much. That is a problem for the LLC and its former members, not the ATA.

 

You said it was a concern of the AG not the ATA.

 

Welther,

I assume that is only if no real estate professional is involved, correct? And no, I have not seen any closing documents so maybe there weren't any involved and that could be another violation for the LLC. That info would likely be in Merlo's papers though. But again, what does that have to do with the ATA? The problem for violating the laws is on the LLC, ATA didn't need any of these things. I would assume they had an attorney involved to rely upon.

 

A building in Vandalia was torn down after the purchase. Was all this to move the office away from Vandalia and closer to a certain gun shop? What was the plan? Who is making money off a non-profit while in a position to vote? It all sounds like it affects us.

Was it hidden in the minutes? If we have people at the top hiding issues then again of course it affects the ATA. Would they have spent $2 million on a HOF building they did not own if the other HOF building was needed as an office?

The ATA paid way over market value for the property. That affected us.

It was reported we had an agreement to lease with option to buy before the Pull 2012 owned the property. Tell me that does not smell like a horses ass.

It all affects us.

 

butterly, it's getting hard to follow you here. Above I stated that whether the LLC was registered or not in IL was not a concern for the ATA, it was a concern for the LLC. Then you asked me why the "transaction was not a concern of the ATA," which makes no sense in reference to my post which did not reference any transaction at all. I was simply talking about whether the LLC complied with a registration requirement or not.

The real estate transaction is certainly a concern for the ATA. That's why I'd like to see more documents posted. It's clear the LLC violated some IL requirements. Only thing I have read in regards to the ATA side of the transaction is that the AG found no violations by the ATA (admittedly in a release from the ATA, but that is all any of us has seen at this point). Somewhere in those 1,000 pages maybe there is something either supporting that, or contradicting that.

 

Where did the Attorney General say that?

 

Didn't say that, you inferred it. Looks like my edit and your post crossed paths. Only thing any of us has seen (except maybe Merlo's staff) is what was in the ATA statement. True or not, that is the only thing directly on point regarding ATA responsibility here.

 

If some ATA officials conspired to make personal profits or misappropriated monies from the ATA to purchase a building they could have had much cheaper I would think the AG would come down hard on us. I don't have information to say that happened.

If there was some actions to cover up an illegal act by our org's leaders we would have more issues.

 

I'm in agreement. I think the AG would have a field day in those circumstances. Those are issues that concern all of us. I don't have information to say that happened or not either.

 

"If you have nothing to hide, Hide nothing " ... Something is rotten in Denmark (Illinois) , sooner or later it will all come out ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Does anyone out there think that no EC members knew Taylor was involved in Pull 2012? How many out there in our trapshooting cyber world think the real name of Pull 2012 was accidentally omitted in the minutes?

How many of you are members of the flat earth society?

 

I doubt Galloway omitted anything. Sounds like he got the information right. It was given wrong intentionally. jmho

 

Bat, It is the lessor that must be licensed in Ill. not the party that is leasing the property. It also seems that the pull 2012 was not a valid Ill. corp.If these people get away with what they have perpetrated on the ATA, it is nothing more than theft by deception. Every one involved with this transaction is suspect of theft in office. History Buff, I hope you are keeping a record of these actions for future reference as to the honor of the people in charge at the time. Roger C.

 

Secretary Galloway was not given the wrong information, either intentionally or unintentionally. He was fully aware of the proper name of this company.

Actually, the lease agreement (No. 2012RO2123) was sent to him in February 2012 for his review and approval before being signed by our then ATA President.

​

I felt that Secretary Galloway just made a mistake by identifying the company as just Pull LLC, instead of 2012 Pull LLC. It is strange though that not one Officer or Director noticed this mistake in the minutes and asked for a correction.

In learning of a company with that name (Pull LLC) registered in Illinois and nothing to do with the ATA's business, I advised the ATA of the mistake in the minutes in November 2015, suggesting a correction. My communication was passed on to Secretary Galloway. I just read and printed pertinent pages from the ATA minutes (E. C. Minutes, April 8, 2012, pg. 14 and BOD Minutes, August 16, 2012, pg. 14-15) from the ATA's website and I saw no correction. Anyone searching for information on the company who leased and sold the 1105 E. Broadway St., Sparta, IL property will be led to a legally registered Illinois company that went out of business in 2011. Thus, dead-ending their search.

​

There seems to be much secrecy about 2012 Pull LLC. Last December, the Executive Committee was alerted of the possible "conflict of interest" related to the association a past president had with this company but for some reason, did not wish to delve into the past.

There remains many unanswered questions about the involvement of members of the ATA with 2012 Pull LLC. Unfortunately, none of our Officers and Directors seem to care.

I have the records on file and I have been told - so does the Illinois Attorney General's office.

HB

 

Thank You History Buff for confirming what I had uncovered some time back. You certainly have much better files than I do.

I have never seen in any of the ATA minutes where a "Correction" had been made.

Did YOU ever hear back from who you sent this letter to HB ?

Oh yeah, I forgot about why they may not have responded back to you ~~~~~

Us common members (you, me, and the rest on here) will be notified on a "NEED TO KNOW BASIS"...

 

UP as a refresher as it was mentioned on the Shaeffer suspension thread.

 

The real estate deal was not insider trading, it was a pure rip off of ATA money. Every EC member at the time should have their banking records looked at. Same as with the purchase of the trap machines for the start up of the fields at Sparta. The people that were party to the actions will never be tried for their actions, the authorities do not seem to care. We do not know what transpired with either deal because there has never been an official inquiry that we know of. Roger C.

 

How long was the suspension for any of these creeps? As much as Shaeffer?

 

Langer, Probably 75% of the members still think they are honorable men. They do not seem to care about honor and justice. Roger C.

 

Roger, I am not trying to kick the ATA leaders. Just saying that the recent focus on Shaeffer is more of a distraction. The problems are not with the alleged Shaeffers of the sport. The threat has been within. Who should be punished more? The fellow accused of being a jerk or those involved in Pull 2012? You tell me.

I told you so's are coming soon.

 

The people that profited from the Pull 2012 scam should all be in jail for fraud. That probably includes the entire EC committee. Shaeffer was set up by some very unethical people in and out of the ATA. That is my opinion. Roger C.

 

Has anyone seen any corrections to those minutes to add "2012" to the LLC that HB had requested ?

I have not, yet I may have missed it.

That's why I am asking.

Oh so true HB !

The leaders leave members no choice but to feel this way.