Looking for a ballot.

[RockyJ]

Originally Posted by Greg Hill

Julie, my scanner doesn't work but I will just copy it here.

February 17, 1981

Dear NHRA member:

Since it's origin in 1951, the National Hot Rod Association has been operated as a non-profit organization, incorporated in California.

Recent changes in California's corporation laws require modifications to our by laws, and further require that modifications to our by laws be circulated to the membership for review and ratification.

In order to comply with this new law, we need your cooperation. A copy of the bylaws is enclosed, along with a self mailer ballot which we would like you to fill out and return.

In order to be counted, your ballot must be received by March 25, 1981. Further the law requires that 7,000 NHRA members vote on these bylaws, and at least three-fourths of those voting must vote favorably for the adoption of the bylaws.

We will appreciate your prompt response and we thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

Wally Parks

President.

Ok i just can't let this go ,because i hate injustice. Caveat : I am not a bar assoc. lawyer but i have a pretty good legal mind, and have represented my own interests in court a number of times. So heres the 1st problem i see with this : full disclosure - vs. deception
Quote :Further the law requires that 7,000 NHRA members vote on these bylaws, and at least three-fourths of those voting must vote favorably for the adoption of the bylaws. Or what? They conveniently left out the part concerning the consequences. They basically decieved the membership into thinking that they must ratify or vote favorably [yes] in order for nhra to continue in business. This was most likely not the case but perhaps a condition to continue the non profit status.Or maybe not even that- since i have not seen the documents. It appears and i say appears that a fraud was perpetrated on the membership some 30yrs ago to get the membership to give up its say in how the corp. was operated.
If one could prove that a fraud was committed ,then there may be remedy,because it is negatively impacting members even today. But it would take a good Calif. attorney and some guts.
After all it does not state anywhere in that letter that the consequences of approving these changes would cause all of the members to lose any say in how the company was run. We all got screwed 30 years ago , butt [ha] we are just now feeling the pain. So either fight back or shut up and take it.

[Julie Jordan]

Here is Carl Olson's summary of what happened:

http://www.northernthunder.com/facing.html

[Ed Fernandez]

That interview with Carl Olsen took place in the early 90s.Fast forward to 2010.What worked then certainly hasn't worked in the 21st century.
They had a grip on the rules then,the economy was going along fine,multi crew teams weren't here yet,the payouts and contingency weren't rock bottom yet and Olsen was a master of understatement and smoke and mirrors in his assessment of the transition.
Soooooo,basically we (sportsman racer in general) got screwed for the benefit of the pros and the upper management of NHRA.That's how I interpret the situation.

[Jim Wahl]

Originally Posted by Ed Fernandez

That interview with Carl Olsen took place in the early 90s.Fast forward to 2010.What worked then certainly hasn't worked in the 21st century.
They had a grip on the rules then,the economy was going along fine,multi crew teams weren't here yet,the payouts and contingency weren't rock bottom yet and Olsen was a master of understatement and smoke and mirrors in his assessment of the transition.
Soooooo,basically we (sportsman racer in general) got screwed for the benefit of the pros and the upper management of NHRA.That's how I interpret the situation.

Well put Ed. Jim

[Bruce Noland]

Nice spin from the management side of nhra by Mr. Olson. In this interview he failed to mention the fact that the IRS had revoked nhra's not for profit exemption in early 70's. And that they had to scramble, stall and scramble some more to create a new "improved" nhra which included members with voting rights. In 1981 they produced yet another new and improved set of bylaws and asked the unwitting membership to give them the keys to the store. Apparently a majority of the members at the time were unaware of the predatory nature of the nhra executives. The good news is that most of this is well documented and subject to review. Yes, even after all these years.

[Mike Voth]

Originally Posted by Bruce Noland

Nice spin from the management side of nhra by Mr. Olson. In this interview he failed to mention the fact that the IRS had revoked nhra's not for profit exemption in early 70's. And that they had to scramble, stall and scramble some more to create a new "improved" nhra which included members with voting rights. In 1981 they produced yet another new and improved set of bylaws and asked the unwitting membership to give them the keys to the store. Apparently a majority of the members at the time were unaware of the predatory nature of the nhra executives. The good news is that most of this is well documented and subject to review. Yes, even after all these years.

I've asked this before on this forum, but is NHRA, today, a profitable organization? I had heard they lost there non-profit status years ago, as well.

[Bruce Noland]

Mike,
nhra is currently a 501(c)(6) tax exempt organization, however, it has several serious problems with prohibited activities for this exemption.

When we look at nhra we should be looking at the four men who currently "own" nhra. Dallas Gardner, Tom Compton, Peter Clifford and Graham Light. Along with being current/former paid employees of nhra they are the Board of Directors. Most of us should have no problems with nhra. It's the leadership of nhra that has created all the issues that we now face.

[Jim Wahl]

Originally Posted by Bruce Noland

Mike,
nhra is currently a 501(c)(6) tax exempt organization, however, it has several serious problems with prohibited activities for this exemption.

When we look at nhra we should be looking at the four men who currently "own" nhra. Dallas Gardner, Tom Compton, Peter Clifford and Graham Light. Along with being current/former paid employees of nhra they are the Board of Directors. Most of us should have no problems with nhra. It's the leadership of nhra that has created all the issues that we now face.

Also well said. Jim

[Bob Don]

I was a member at the time and I only vaguely recall a letter and ballot. I looked through my old stuff and found nothing. My guess is that I threw it in the circular file. If I find anything I'll post it.

[Greg Hill]

Originally Posted by RockyJ

Ok i just can't let this go ,because i hate injustice. Caveat : I am not a bar assoc. lawyer but i have a pretty good legal mind, and have represented my own interests in court a number of times. So heres the 1st problem i see with this : full disclosure - vs. deception
Quote :Further the law requires that 7,000 NHRA members vote on these bylaws, and at least three-fourths of those voting must vote favorably for the adoption of the bylaws. Or what? They conveniently left out the part concerning the consequences. They basically decieved the membership into thinking that they must ratify or vote favorably [yes] in order for nhra to continue in business. This was most likely not the case but perhaps a condition to continue the non profit status.Or maybe not even that- since i have not seen the documents. It appears and i say appears that a fraud was perpetrated on the membership some 30yrs ago to get the membership to give up its say in how the corp. was operated.
If one could prove that a fraud was committed ,then there may be remedy,because it is negatively impacting members even today. But it would take a good Calif. attorney and some guts.
After all it does not state anywhere in that letter that the consequences of approving these changes would cause all of the members to lose any say in how the company was run. We all got screwed 30 years ago , butt [ha] we are just now feeling the pain. So either fight back or shut up and take it.

The letter that was sent to the membership was certainly misleading and quite possibly fraudulent. Whether or not anything could be done now about it is uncertain because of the time that has elapsed. A statue of limitations probably would be in force to protect the management and board. The reason I'm looking for a ballot is to see what the wording actually was and try and determine if it was in fact fraud.