This is about an example of a membership organization being required to register with the AG's office:
Club Contracts | The Office of Attorney General Keith Ellison (state.mn.us) Registration. Minnesota law requires health, dating, and buying clubs to register with the Attorney General’s Office and renew their registration annually. Minn. Stat. § 325G.23-.28. Such clubs register by completing and filing the required forms (see below), paying a registration fee, and filing a surety bond if they accept prepayments from members of $50 or more. Members of a club who lose a portion of their pre-paid membership fee because, for example, the club closes or declares bankruptcy may file a claim with entity that provided the club with its surety bond. The Minnesota Attorney General’s Office may also file a claim on behalf of any member who loses a portion of their pre-paid membership fee. Notice the part about a surety bond being required in case the club goes bankrupt. There is no protection like this for HOA's. If the association folds, the home owners are left on the financial hook on their own. This is about defining the language.
The Charitable Solicitation Act, Chapter 309 of the Minnesota Statues, states that nonprofits must register as a charity with the Attorney General Office, Charities Division. An organization does not need to register only if it meets one of the following three conditions: 1. does not hire staff or professional fundraiser and does not plan to receive more than $25,000 in total contributions; 2. is a purely religious organization; or 3. is a private foundation that does not solicit contributions more than 100 persons during a fiscal year. An organization must register with the Attorney General before soliciting contributions. Question: Our association (an others) are not found in the AG's database. The assumption is they are not there because they are not registered. How is "contribution" defined? Are dues included in this definition? Are assessments included in this definition? The amount of the settlement for the roof damage was well short of replacement costs, but we have never been able to get a straight, honest and full answer for why it was settled in the manner in which it was.
FSR was a named insured on the previous master plan policy. They drove the decisions and signed the contracts with the company that did the repairs. The assessment we are paying to cover the part the insurance didn't pay is being processed and managed through them. They make money each time they collect money, in addition to their regular fee. If it turns out that they legally should not have been a named insured on the insurance policy, is it possible for us to have a causeable action against them to get our money back?
|
AuthorCommunity advocate, Chief Capacity Builder |