[BCNnet] FW: taxes & 501c3

[Kristen Berry]

All - There are reasons to be concerned about 501c3 status and
electioneering and lobbying.  You may want to investigate the Tides Center
and other groups that have generated about what c3's can do regarding
electioneering.  

 

The bottom line of course is that 501c3's cannot endorse or oppose ANY
candidate or party.  Period.  The rules that allow 501c3's to scorecard and
participate in voter outreach are tricky and difficult.  Lobbying, and what
constitutes lobbying is a different story, but electioneering is strictly
forbidden.

 

For those reasons, and more, we started a bird conservation focused
political action committee or PAC - BirdPAC (www.birdpac.org
<http://www.birdpac.org/> ).  You are right when you write that few
conservation groups CAN be vocal about candidates and participate in
elections.  Therefore, we believed that a group that represented bird
enthusiasts was needed to be vocal and engaged and involved with state and
federal elections.

 

If I can answer any questions please do not hesitate to post to this list or
contact me directly at 202-549-1032 or Kristen at birdpac.org.

 

Good birding!

 

kb

 

Kristen Berry

719 G Street, SE

Number One

Washington, DC 20003

202-549-1032

Kristen at birdpac.org

www.birdpac.org <http://www.birdpac.org/> 

 

 

  _____  

From: bcnnet-bounces at ece.iit.edu [mailto:bcnnet-bounces at ece.iit.edu] On
Behalf Of Randi Doeker - Chicago
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 9:37 AM
To: BCNnet at ece.iit.edu
Subject: [BCNnet] FW: taxes & 501c3

 

For people not named Donnie, read from the bottom up.

 

There may come a time when we want a way to be vocal about a candidate.
There are so few conservation groups that can.  

 

I think paying taxes is a small price to pay for that capability.  Instead
of giving up the right, we should be turning our $s into expense-able
activities.  

 

Given the new thrust to put wind turbines in the City, which follows
discussions about the collar counties, I think bird conservation would
benefit by creating a very detailed map of the locations that birds use ---
for example.

 

I don't think it would be appropriate to 'test' the 10% rule regarding
501-c-3 politicking.  It seems like waving a red flag to get an audit.

 

The least amount of paperwork is as a regular corporation that does not get
donations (key point).  (Donations then cause paperwork trails with the
Attorney General, even when you pay tax on the donation.)

 

  _____  

From: Donald R. Dann [mailto:donniebird at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 8:23 AM
To: 'Randi Doeker - Chicago'
Subject: RE: taxes & 501c3

 

At my request would you please circulate your thoughts and the following to
all ExCom?

 

As I think about our activities, and relate them to what I understand to be
501-c3 restrictions, I don't think there would be too much we would be
giving up.  For example, TNC is 501-c3, yet is a major sponsor of PPW and
IEC both advocacy organizations.  My understanding is that advocacy of
issues like birds, wetlands, clean air, etc. is OK but political lobbying,
e.g. for a candidate is verboten.  Moreover even that is allowed if it
comprises less than 10% of total outreach efforts.  

 

Please let me know if my facts are wrong, otherwise I think we should file.

 

Having said all that, I agree we should be spending the $.

 

Donnie  

 

  _____  

From: Randi Doeker - Chicago [mailto:rbdoeker at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 5:20 AM
To: donniebird at yahoo.com
Subject: taxes

 

The 501-c-3 application form is not difficult; just long.

 

The trade off on an on-going basis is that the document filings with the
state increase.

 

But I think there is a big / huge value in having BCN not be restricted in
its political activities.  If we have to pay taxes it's because we didn't
spend the money, which is what we should be doing.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://screamer.ece.iit.edu/pipermail/bcnnet/attachments/20050701/2f9abd9e/attachment.htm