Hi Michael,
Thank you for your note. I have not read the board or kept up with the changes to the building fund. What got me upset were several changes in the current club magazine. Mike Skelton’s Building Project Finance Committee Chair was eliminated from the club officials listing. Perhaps there were postings informing club members of this change, I guess I missed them. I don’t collect anymore so I just glance at the boards and do not pay much attention to them

In the past it did not bother me that the building fund name was changed to Museum of Gaming History. Name changes are usually meaningless and I paid little attention. I turned to the financial report and saw fees for the exhibits being paid from the Building (Museum) fund monies. The creating of the exhibits never bothered me and I believed it was a good idea to pursue. However, what I did not believe to be correct and still believe it isn’t was to pay for these exhibits out of a specific fund collected from club members for a specific reason. You being attorney might realize that a non-profit organization cannot by board vote take funded monies and pay for expenses under the guise the expenditures are somehow related to the specific purpose for what they were intended and collected.
Over the years many actions have bothered me from a fiduciary and financial accounting aspect. I discussed these actions with different club officers, officials, committee heads and members et al always with the same result, “Let me look into that”, “I’ll get back to you”, I really never had the opportunity to discuss in full with our current President Doug Smith my concerns. So in that regard it was unfair to Doug. Doug and I have always enjoyed each other’s company at the convention. I have always had the intention of covering these issues with him. Just never have. We always seemed to talk about other matters.

From its inception, I have ALWAYS believed the MOGH or whatever we wish to call it should have been formed by a separate 501(C) (3) entity. Apparently others believed it wasn’t necessary. This was a professional disagreement and I can live with that.
Our internal audits are exactly that internal. The results should not be published but made available to those club members who wish to see them. Publishing internal audit reports with the wording used create an impression that the audit was done by independent individuals. Of course we know that is not the case. I have never implied or said that the results were not achieved properly. If we are not going to have an independent audit then I believe it is necessary to disclose that this is an internal audit done by club members.

My last post on the club board was in haste. I did not mean to infer Doug controls the board. Obviously, he is only one vote. I realized a post cannot be eliminated once it is posted so I am left to tell Doug I am sorry. Also I stated I would not ever try to initiate change. That was a stupid remark. Not to try to make change would go against my personality. Anyway, I’m getting to old for this stuff so thanks again for you post Michael and it is always a pleasure. Man, I got to get back to work!
Jim