Hmm, interesting to note that now ALL donations (checks) that the unit gets now has to be sent to the appropriate wing headquarters for deposit (paragraph 15). >:(
Now I've got to wonder, what is the REASONING behind this little kicker? Units can deposit all other funds locally and basically report deposits as to the category anyways.
Anyone care to offer an explanation on the WHY of this?
RM
Probably to make sure appropriate tax records are filed.
Quote from: arajca on December 23, 2009, 03:07:09 PM
Probably to make sure appropriate tax records are filed.
+1
Please, let's not start up any more Wing Banker --They're going take all our money-- conspiracies.
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on December 23, 2009, 02:39:50 PM
Hmm, interesting to note that now ALL donations (checks) that the unit gets now has to be sent to the appropriate wing headquarters for deposit (paragraph 15). >:(
Now I've got to wonder, what is the REASONING behind this little kicker? Units can deposit all other funds locally and basically report deposits as to the category anyways.
Anyone care to offer an explanation on the WHY of this?
RM
It's been policy for most wing and regions for a while now. The reasons are accountability, and that there are many wings out there pushing the limits with respect to the rules. Reg changes are usually the results. Think of some of them as reg versions of TO cautions/notes/warnings.
Not all units can deposit locally, anyway. Unless you have a branch of the same bank the Wing uses for WBP, you were SOL anyway.
I know when they set up the WBP that was a major hassle - finding a bank with branches everyone could reasonably touch, and in the end it didn't mean much to most units.
So put a stamp on an envelope and move on - for most units this is going to be a few checks a year. More work for the downtrodden WA's, less trips to the bank for the unit FM's.
Quote from: Eclipse on December 23, 2009, 05:18:55 PM
So put a stamp on an envelope and move on - for most units this is going to be a few checks a year. More work for the downtrodden WA's, less trips to the bank for the unit FM's.
Of course surely that's a great explanation, as to WHY. Makes no difference how many checks or if no checks. I think there may be an IRS requirement for a letter of acceptance given to the donor if the donation is $250.00 or more, but under that amount there's no requirements and therefore, the WHY of this requirement needs to be addressed.
Since squadron units are "self funded" at this time, I still fail to see what benefit the Wing Bankers program has to the local level and I think most of the "smart" members in CAP, are still skeptically awaiting the benefits of the so called "unqualified" audit.
RM
^If you read the "comment letter" that is published with the new reg, you will read this:
Para 15. Donations. "All donation checks must be sent to wing HQ for deposit."
This imperative should be rewritten to allow units to deposit cash or check donations directly into a wing bank account when the wing provides deposit slips.
Response: Although it certainly is easier to deposit checks locally, donation checks frequently require the wing commander to provide a letter to the donor. When the deposits are made locally the commander frequently does not have sufficient information to comply with this requirement in CAPR 173-4. We have found many instances where confirmation letters are not being remitted to donors.
Now you know the "why".
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on December 24, 2009, 12:58:58 AM
Since squadron units are "self funded" at this time, I still fail to see what benefit the Wing Bankers program has to the local level and I think most of the "smart" members in CAP, are still skeptically awaiting the benefits of the so called "unqualified" audit.
RM
If our leadership continues to ignore what is demanded by those at the unit level, there really won't be any benefit to having an "unqualified audit".
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on December 24, 2009, 12:58:58 AM
Of course surely that's a great explanation, as to WHY.
The "why" is easy - because NHQ said so, and considering the effect at the local unit level is essentially zero, why burn calories trying
to find some conspiracy?
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on December 24, 2009, 12:58:58 AM
I still fail to see what benefit the Wing Bankers program has to the local level
Hm...less reporting, no hassle with a local account, ease of payments and reimbursements, no worries that someone locally with the keys is going to make off with the money...
...and not a single negative in any wing following the program rules without local embellishment.
I can understand why you are confused.
Having read a lot of the Wing Banker threads, post and such I have to agree that a lot of the talk is nothing more than "conspiracy theory talk". I have to have been one of the biggest skeptics of the program sense I am one of those members/units the furthest away from my Wing HQ were you can't watch and see what goes on and as a result of a lack of communications or just being out of the loop generally have not trusted my past Wing officers to do their jobs.
But Wing Banker does work; it does cut out all the paperwork and hassle that a unit CO or FM had to deal with prior to Wing Banker. Life is much earlier from those standpoints. I have never had a problem with checks, deposits or reimbursements. It works. It seems much slower when the checkbook is out of your hands but it works.
However, all that being said, my biggest fear is that I don't trust in a general the program or in a specific case one members of the Wing FM committee. I feel that I have good reason not to trust them based on past Wing CC and FM abuse and in the specific case the committee members actions prior to being put on the committee. But Wing Banker should and has kept thing above board and legit to this point in all my dealing with it.
But I still have the fear in the back of my mind that one day I will wake up and our account will be cleaned out or significantly reduced to help pay for something that someone at Wing or on the Wing FM Committee deemed more important or was not fiscally responsible for and because we have money they will take it. I don't think it will happen but like the cat that has been kicked every time the owner comes home I am always a little skittish that something is going to happen when I hear the door open. And the longer the program goes on, the more trust I have of the people involved and the program itself is working as it should.
Quote from: RedFox24 on December 24, 2009, 03:04:44 AM
But I still have the fear in the back of my mind that one day I will wake up and our account will be cleaned out or significantly reduced to help pay for something that someone at Wing or on the Wing FM Committee deemed more important or was not fiscally responsible for and because we have money they will take it. I don't think it will happen but like the cat that has been kicked every time the owner comes home I am always a little skittish that something is going to happen when I hear the door open. And the longer the program goes on, the more trust I have of the people involved and the program itself is working as it should.
Interesting you bring this up, because the question has come up in our unit -- if wing decides to do an assesment to the squadrons, would it likely just be transfer of the funds with just a notification or would units have to concur? IF you hold the checkbook and write the checks if there's a disagreement, until resolved the money is still in the units acount, not so with wing banker. I don't see anything in the regulation that 'protects" units from "raids". Am I missing something?
I think legally units might be able to "bullet proof" their account from a raid, at least member dues wise, by having all members agree to calling this restrict donations to be used specifically for the operation of the unit and to specify what specific expenses the funds can be used for and the unit could just give a memo to wing hdqs with all the members signatures.
BTW regardless of what CAP leadership thinks there are individual statel laws regarding non profit financial operations and IF members are concerned about any assessment being taking without the unit's permission, they could complain to the state (generally the Attorney General's Office). So IF I were any wing thinking about just taking the units money without specific permission, you just might find yourself answering some tough questions from an investigative agency >:D
Also interestingly I checked about 6 State websites to see who the registered resident agent was for Civil Air Patrol Inc as a foreign corporation operating in those states, and could not find an entry for CAP, so there may be some state compliance issues not being met.
RM
If your worried about donations, have your donors specify how the money is to be used and where in a letter to the unit and to the Wing CC/FM. Asking our donors to designate is how we have handled that issue you bring up. Then there is a papertrail if you feel you need one. It also allows us to demonstrate how the funds were used when the donor comes back next year and wants to see where their money was used.
I think from reading the reg, wing cant take money out of your account without the unit authorizing it. That is the way I have it and understand it. Again my fear is not the process, but the people involved. I trust the process but not the people. And yes I feel I have a very good and legitimate reason not to, if that person was not in the process I would have no reason to worry at all.
As to the rest of your post, I have no idea and really am not worried about any of that. If there is a problem, then that is between the State SoS, AG and NHQ CAP. Note that I, my unit or my members are not in that loop.
Quote from: 173-1q. All wings will establish and maintain consolidated checking and savings accounts designated for the units below wing level. Checking account interest on subordinate unit accounts may be used to defray wing administrative costs of the Wing Banker Program. Interest and dividends on unit savings, certificates of deposit and investment accounts will be allocated at least quarterly. Except for unit deactivation, wings will not be permitted to co-mingle wing funds with subordinate unit funds nor use subordinate unit funds for any purpose not approved by the subordinate unit.
Once again......the wing CAN NOT take unit money with out either getting their permission or deactivating the unit. This is not new.
About the only complaint I have heard about the WBP is slow payment. AFAIK no unit has ever had monies disappear into the wing's coffer.
Greetings bunkhouse lawyers,
You are generally describing the concept of a "restricted gift" in which a gift is given to a charitable organization but the donor restricts the purposes to which the gift can be used; and if the charitiable organization attempts to use it otherwise, the gift reverts back to the donor.
Basic first-year Property Law stuff in law school.
In the CAP context, however, you're gonna find that in the great majority of states, donors do not have standing in court to enforce the restriction unless they have a written instrument of donation that contains a right of control over the gift (usually the right of reverter). Otherwise the donee is free to use the gift as they choose.
And here's the kicker - any such donation has to be specifically accepted by the donee, including acceptance of the right of reversion.
So, if a corporate officer hasn't signed off on the donation and specifically noted the reverter, then it will have no effect and CAP, Inc. is free to use the gift without restriction for any lawful purpose. There is no such thing as a unilateral restriction on a gift that is not agreed to by the donee.
Just sayin . . . .
Ned Lee
(Former CAP legal officer)
Quote from: Ned on December 24, 2009, 04:37:16 PMAnd here's the kicker - any such donation has to be specifically accepted by the donee, including acceptance of the right of reversion.
But isn't that easily accomplished by placing the restriction in the memo field of the donation check? Or better yet, putting verbiage on the back to the effect that "Endorsement constitutes acceptance of gift restriction"?
Quote from: Ned on December 24, 2009, 04:37:16 PM
Greetings bunkhouse lawyers,
then it will have no effect and CAP, Inc. is free to use the gift without restriction
Ned Lee
(Former CAP legal officer)
Ahhh. There is the problem.
CAP Inc. Thanks Cowboy
For those who think that the are somehow "protecting" money from Wing through restricted funds, be warned, this is a double-edged sword.
Its one thing to receive a memorial scholarship fund, etc., but units that restrict the funds at too fine a level may well wind up being bankrupt with money in the bank they can't spend.
As Lord says, short of malfeasance, the corporation can't just "take" money from a unit any more (or less) now than they could before the
WBP.
Quote from: Ned on December 24, 2009, 04:37:16 PM
So, if a corporate officer hasn't signed off on the donation and specifically noted the reverter, then it will have no effect and CAP, Inc. is free to use the gift without restriction for any lawful purpose. There is no such thing as a unilateral restriction on a gift that is not agreed to by the donee.
Just sayin . . . .
Ned Lee
(Former CAP legal officer)
So legally anyone who is paying dues to support their squadrons' operations still could be SOL if a wing decided on some sort of assessment (and I'm not talking about bank charges).
BTW do you know what state CAP is actually incorporated in, because the Alabama state site only shows the education foundation and not CAP as a whole?
Also I always thought that any foreign corporation (profit or non profit) operating in a state they are not incorporated in has to have at the very least a resident agent with an appropriate physical address in the state so that in the event of legal process, it can be served at that address? Apparently this isn't so??
RM
Quote from: N Harmon on December 24, 2009, 05:02:25 PM
But isn't that easily accomplished by placing the restriction in the memo field of the donation check? Or better yet, putting verbiage on the back to the effect that "Endorsement constitutes acceptance of gift restriction"?
Generally not.
These kinds of notations on checks normally do not constitute effective notice and do not qualify as the kind of written instrument required for a donor's standing to sue in the first place.
And remember, only corporate officers can bind the corporation, and I doubt the wing commander is personally endorsing checks in any event.
QuoteAhhh. There is the problem. CAP Inc. Thanks Cowboy .
Since CAP was formed, there has only been one CAP - not a confederation of thousands of "little CAPs" (aka squadrons). That's no different than the Red Cross, Scouting, the VFW, or any other major charity.
There are no black helicopters here.
Ned Lee
(Former legal officer)
Strange as this may seem, my experience (multiple decades, before and since WBP) has been that wings & groups have given funds to needy squadrons, rather than trying to take it away from prosperous ones.
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on December 24, 2009, 06:17:47 PM
So legally anyone who is paying dues to support their squadrons' operations still could be SOL if a wing decided on some sort of assessment.
Legally? Its not a "legal" issues, per-se, and it has nothing to do with the WBP.
Every nickel collected by CAP in every account is corporate money. The corporation can take whatever they want from whomever they want, subject to internal rules. This is the way its always been, with no change because of WBP.
If a wing, for some reason, decided to start assessing charges to units, they would have to pay, period, whether its an accounting transfer within Quickbooks, or a check from the unit to the wing.
Ever heard of a wing doing this? I sure haven't.
Quote from: N Harmon on December 24, 2009, 05:02:25 PM
Quote from: Ned on December 24, 2009, 04:37:16 PMAnd here's the kicker - any such donation has to be specifically accepted by the donee, including acceptance of the right of reversion.
But isn't that easily accomplished by placing the restriction in the memo field of the donation check? Or better yet, putting verbiage on the back to the effect that "Endorsement constitutes acceptance of gift restriction"?
The legal implication of that is that units are not allowed to negotiate that sort of a deal. Only the wing commander as a corporate officer can do that. So we are back to square one.
Yes....someone can make a restricted donation to the Homer J. Simpson Squadron.....but it would still have to go to wing for approval.
Bottom line is that the corporation owns everything. From donations to squadron dues to intrest earned from squadron fundraising activities.
Having said that....the corporation's rules say that what a squadron deposits "belongs" to the squadron and can't be diverted for other uses with out the squadron's concent.
One of the great things about the WBP is that we now prevent monies from just disappearing. There are lots of horror stories of units folding and lots and lots of money just not being there anymore. We also have the added benefit of oversight from wing over spending. If the Homer J. Simpson Squadron raised $1000 from washing cars and decides to spend it on something they should not (say buying M-16s for Marksmanship Training) the wing has the ability to intervene before the money is spent.
I got no problem with the WBP.
Quote from: Eclipse on December 24, 2009, 06:30:17 PM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on December 24, 2009, 06:17:47 PM
So legally anyone who is paying dues to support their squadrons' operations still could be SOL if a wing decided on some sort of assessment.
Legally? Its not a "legal" issues, per-se, and it has nothing to do with the WBP.
Every nickel collected by CAP in every account is corporate money. The corporation can take whatever they want from whomever they want, subject to internal rules. This is the way its always been, with no change because of WBP.
If a wing, for some reason, decided to start assessing charges to units, they would have to pay, period, whether its an accounting transfer within Quickbooks, or a check from the unit to the wing.
Every heard of a wing doing this? I sure haven't.
They could bill the squadrons for services....but they can't commingle monies. That is if squadron A puts in $1000 and squadron b puts in $1500 wing can't cut a check to squadron A for $1200 unless squadron b says it's okay.
173-1 says the intrest from the squadron accounts can be charged an overhead to pay for the WBP accounting....but the balance of the intrest goes back to the squadron's account.
If the wing were to impose some sort of "dues" on the squadrons to pay for wing operations....I would assume that that could be done...but I don't know of any wings that do that.
Again...I go back to my main point.....173-1 says they can't just take a squadron's money unless the squadron is disbanded or it gives the wing concent to do so.
At least with our Corporate Partners, CAP makes the following statement:
Quote
Unlike most other corporate partner programs, one of the greatest benefits to the Civil Air Patrol Corporate Partner is the:
• Knowledge that their funds will go directly to the organization,
• Knowledge of how their funds will be used
• Notice in a timely manner.
Civil Air Patrol Guarantee:
• Civil Air Patrol guarantees the use of all Corporate Partner funds will be determined within thirty (30) days of receipt
• Our Corporate Partner will receive notification of the specific need that their funds will be used to support
Funds Determination:
• Should there be a particular mission or CAP wing / squadron that the Corporate Partner wishes to support, Civil Air Patrol Corporate Partner funds can be so designated in their name.
Quote from: RedFox24 on December 24, 2009, 05:14:00 PMAhhh. There is the problem. CAP Inc. Thanks Cowboy
You don't want to do finances the way the USAF does! How would you like to see your entire budget disappear mid July because someone 3 states aways wants to fly more?
Where you have deal with different "colored" money that can only be spent on one mission even if you have a critical need for it else where.
I kid you not. In my 22 years on AD I have been in places where the O&M money got sucked up by a flying unit but the carpet and furniture money was not. Can't buy spare parts and can't fix non critical equipment...but we can get you new carpet and chairs. Roads getting repaved because the "Have to spend the money" not because the roads need to be fixed.
No....you don't want to go there.
^ The Air Force is the worst (and always has been) at monetary management within the Services. The Army and Marine Corps appropriate within their requests money for operations and very little for everything else.
Five years ago, the Army cut over 40 million toward MWR services, because of the wars. AAFES was generous enough to make up the difference. However, the Air Force is undergoing the largest construction boom since 1985. I say....AF looses its money to the Services expending so much in Stan and Iraq. They also need to scrub many experimental programs, or at least let the civilian sector take them over completely.
Heck, the Army and MArines were the first to privatize on base/ post housing, because they could no longer spend money to keep the residences up to standard. The Air Force spent double what the Marines and Army spent in 2005.
I will direct you to the budget offices of each Service, should you like to see for yourselves.
I only know this, because I choose this subject for a Masters paper I wrote 2 years ago.
So, perhaps instead of CAP taking a look at how AF spends $$ it should look at how the Army and Marines spend $$
Quote from: Spike on December 24, 2009, 07:25:02 PM
^ The Air Force is the worst (and always has been) at monetary management within the Services. The Army and Marine Corps appropriate within their requests money for operations and very little for everything else.
So, perhaps instead of CAP taking a look at how AF spends $$ it should look at how the Army and Marines spend $$
CAP has been very fortunate in the recent past in getting end of year "fall out" money to fund quite a bit of its' priority unfunded requirements. Generally, monies have to stay in the appropriate major force program funding, but can actually be used for just about any expense within that MFP.
BTW it is always possible that the AF could put out to bid whatever CAP mission support it currently does for the AF/DOD etc - that would be interesting!!!
RM
I don't think any for profit organisation could do what CAP does any cheaper.
CAP got the SUAV program because the contractor was too expensive.
Quote from: Spike on December 24, 2009, 07:25:02 PM
So, perhaps instead of CAP taking a look at how AF spends $$ it should look at how the Army and Marines spend $$
I have looked and was not impressed. The mismanagement I saw at the local level far exceeded anything I ever heard of in the AF. This includes having enlisted personnel sleep on the barrack's floor instead of issuing them cots because that would have meant breaking into the stuff stored away for inventory inspections. Issuing plumbing supplies for self-help work orders of such poor quality they kept failing - in the hope that people would just give up and buy their fixtures off base. Or assigning you a vehicle to drive on a TDY trip that breaks down at the far end of the trip - then demanding you make all the arrangements and pay to get the vehicle towed back to the Army base.
The AF budget requests compete with all services budget requests for funding. The Army and Marines concentrate on the Ops side and lets the rest of the force suffer. All the money comes out of the budget submitted by the SECDEF and approved by Congress - if you don't ask for it, you will not get it.
Gentlemen, the process is fine. If someone at wing was dumb enough to take unit funds without permission, the WA or WFA would soon find out about it and NHQ would step in to rectify the situation. There are enough checks and balances in place to catch such a deed and rectify any situation. I really would not worry about this at all.
The regulation was written so we can be in compliance with all our obligations as a 501C3 corp. It was also written with the knowledge that any type of FWA of the system would be very difficult to pull off. So far, CAP/FM has caught every single "perp" (I think less than 5 in the 2 complete years the program has been in place).
Quote from: lordmonar on December 24, 2009, 06:31:53 PM
The legal implication of that is that units are not allowed to negotiate that sort of a deal. Only the wing commander as a corporate officer can do that. So we are back to square one.
A potential donor wouldn't know that. And if the check was endorsed by someone other than a corporate officer, the "contract" would be null and void and the money would have to be returned to the donor. No?
I'm just asking because as a finance officer I have received donation checks for members with things like "For electric bill" in the memo field. Perhaps I should not have cashed it?
Quote from: N Harmon on December 28, 2009, 08:22:47 PMA potential donor wouldn't know that. And if the check was endorsed by someone other than a corporate officer, the "contract" would be null and void and the money would have to be returned to the donor. No?
I'm just asking because as a finance officer I have received donation checks for members with things like "For electric bill" in the memo field. Perhaps I should not have cashed it?
I don't know.....I would think it is a buyer beware sort of thing. If the donor assumes that his money is going to be spent somewhere but makes not positive effort to make sure that happens, I think he is just SOL.
IIRC the Red Cross went through something like this during Katrina.....people poured money into the ARC thinking it was going to go to Katrina victims but most of it went into the general coffers for future disasters.
I would assume that the donor could sue CAP to get the money back...but he would probably have to show fraud.
Maybe Ned knows.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 28, 2009, 09:05:36 PMIIRC the Red Cross went through something like this during Katrina.....people poured money into the ARC thinking it was going to go to Katrina victims but most of it went into the general coffers for future disasters.
I recall it was the New York terrorist attack that stuffed the ARC's bank account, but their response was fairly limited in scope and there was no way they needed all that money for that specific disaster. The ARC went broke after Katrina and I believe got a federal bailout - even though the bank account was full of 9/11 money they couldn't use.
At any rate, the concept of narrowly specifying how donated funds can be problematic. Overall a non-profit organization needs to have a reputation as a solid steward of donated dollars, asking donors to specify how funds are used to prevent others in our organization from relocating the money against our wishes will not instill a lot of confidence in the donors.
Which is not what is happening here.
Money your squadron brings in....will be deposited in your squadron's account.
No one is trying to "steal" your squadron's money.
Quote from: lordmonar on December 29, 2009, 01:02:45 AMNo one is trying to "steal" your squadron's money.
They say money talks but all mine ever says is, "Goodbye!"
When you get donations into the squadron, isn't the check made out to CAP anyways?
Even if it is to the local unit, have them include the CAP name. In our wing (at least it used to be) each squadron had a bank card that was deposit only. You could withdraw a buck, but good luck finding that ATM......Take your checks, deposit into the ATM, send email to administrator so they know what to look for.
Its that easy fellas.....