"Bad Association"
Hammer and Sickle Leadership Style - Private For-Profit

"Compliance?? Not On The Agenda"

Totalitarian democracy is a term in which lawfully elected representatives maintain the integrity of a local association and membership in good standing, while granted the right to vote, have little or no participation in the decision-making process of the association.

According to the Infernal Revenue Service, "not-for-profit" refers to a specific activity, such as a hobby. "Nonprofit" refers to an organization established for purposes other than turning a profit. This definition does not necessarily mean charitable, but encompasses any organization that does not intend to turn a profit. Amateur athletic leagues, quilt guilds, social clubs, and charitable organizations all fall under this definition.

There are sports associations that need the manpower of others to exist. Some are run in such a way that they seem as though they are "private nonprofits". Meaning they have not changed the bylaws and open other the association so more members can participate in the governance of the organization. A total of five people, on the board of directors, their second cap is that of "executive committee". So any amendments, changes, additions have to get their approval before any debating by the general membership. The totalitarian board of directors take it upon themselves to include what they want in the constitution and bylaws, send it to members as a first reading.

CEO Assignor
CFO Treasurer
SEC Secretary
AGT President
?? Vice-President

State law requires that changes, amendments, additions to the Articles of Incorporation are to be reported to the Secretary of State Office of Incorporation. THIS HAS NEVER BEEN DONE!!

Wanna improve the bylaws by submitting a change, forget it... there is no bylaws committee, you have to submit your suggestion to the secretary, who then forwards it to the each board member. Those 5 peopole, including the secretary vote on approval or disapproval weather the suggestion goes before the general membership. This I know for a fact, because I submitted a 21 page rewrite of the Constitution and Bylaws. The only thing they approved was the indeminification article, that was missing from all constitution and bylaws previously.

A bylaws committee of 3, would at least read the suggestion for an amendment, determine if it conflicts with current bylaws and the state association. Prepare the amendment for reading before the general membership. The membership gets to debate the amendment, then approval or disapprove. Oh...I forgot, we do not meet enough to do that. Meetings might be once a month during the season, lucky to get 20 or 30 members to show up.

Self-policing of any group or association is also a conflict of interest. If any organization, such as a corporation or government bureaucracy, is asked to eliminate unethical behavior within their own group, it may be in their interest in the short run to eliminate the appearance of unethical behavior, rather than the behavior itself, by keeping any ethical breaches hidden, instead of exposing and correcting them. An exception occurs when the ethical breach is already known by the public. In that case, it could be in the group's interest to end the ethical problem to which the public has knowledge, but keep remaining breaches hidden.


In short...Have your board, but do have committees where 3 to 5 members serve per committee. An executive committee is a hinderance to an association. Borders on conflict of interest. Board of directors and executive committee composed of same people. Take a look at a good way to govern an assocation >>>> Good Association