Today's SF Chronicle reported the following:

"Ballot measure packed with pork
Railroad museum, ranch road retrofit in state traffic plan"

..."Sacramento -- A November ballot initiative promises safer school buses, wider highways and a light rail system. But it also offers millions of dollars in perks for the developers and other special interests funding the initiative's campaign.

Titled the "Traffic Congestion Relief and Safer School Bus Act," Proposition 51 each year would set aside 30 percent of the taxes raised through motor vehicle sales for transportation programs and specified projects. "...

..."PROJECTS AND DONORS
Some examples of groups that have contributed and the projects they would benefit from:

-- The California State Railroad Museum Foundation has chipped in $75,000. Proposition 51 calls for a $7 million expenditure to create a railroad technology addition to the state museum in Sacramento and $1 million a year to operate the addition. "...

Anyone out there know what the tax-exempt status of the CSRMF is?

I seem to recall Newt Gingrich being in hot water over a similar situation where a tax-exempt group donated funds to a political campaign.

The link to this article was submitted for Flimsies.



rogerc38@aol.com

Those of you that have put together a 501(c)3 application know that your articles of incorporation must specifically state that your organization will not lobby to influence political candidates or legislation.

However groups like the Sierra Club and AARP regularly ignore these rules.

My assumption is that you can get away with this as long as you are big enough that the IRS enforcing the rules would be considered a political vendetta (can you image the uproar if the IRS attempted to revoke the Sierra Club's tax-exempt status?).

mlang67@siltech.com

Isn't CSRM a State Historic Site operated by something like Cal Parks and Rec? Looks like the right hand is just passing something over to the left hand......and I'd surely much rather see the imperfect but important work done on the new railroad technology museum at CSRM than to make school busses bigger or whatever.

Dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

CSRM is in fact part of the States Park system however the foundation is separate from and probably operated as a 501(c)(3)

Maybe this is just a first here in California?

Anyone know of any other railway preservation groups involved in promoting a political issue that directly benefits that organization?

I've never heard of any.

rogerc38@aol.com

> Anyone know of any other railway
> preservation groups involved in promoting a
> political issue that directly benefits that
> organization?

> I've never heard of any.

And if that is the case are we not all pretty much missing the boat?

Dave


irondave@bellsouth.net

> And if that is the case are we not all
> pretty much missing the boat?

Those smoke-filled rooms are filled with Indian-givers, double-crossers and bait and switch artists. CSRM has very politically astute management right next door to Ca's legislature. Many of our nearly-all volunteer organizations don't have the lobbying firepower to get that kind of job done...not to mention the favors required to see it through to fruition.

wyld@sbcglobal.net

> Those smoke-filled rooms are filled with
> Indian-givers, double-crossers and bait and
> switch artists. CSRM has very politically
> astute management right next door to Ca's
> legislature. Many of our nearly-all
> volunteer organizations don't have the
> lobbying firepower to get that kind of job
> done...not to mention the favors required to
> see it through to fruition.

Yes, the CSRM and the CSRM Foundation have a politically astute management. One of the key people served as a lobbyist before moving over to the museum complex.

And the CSRM seems to know now to work within the state government system. The other year when money came available to the state park system for defered maintenance and improvements CSRM already had projects indentified and costed (such as museum building roof repairs). So it was able to make use of its allocated money as soon as possible. I am told, that some park units did not use their allocated money before the unspent funds were taken away in a budget crisis.


bnorden49@earthlink.net

> Yes, the CSRM and the CSRM Foundation have a
> politically astute management. One of the
> key people served as a lobbyist before
> moving over to the museum complex.

> And the CSRM seems to know now to work
> within the state government system. The
> other year when money came available to the
> state park system for defered maintenance
> and improvements CSRM already had projects
> indentified and costed (such as museum
> building roof repairs). So it was able to
> make use of its allocated money as soon as
> possible. I am told, that some park units
> did not use their allocated money before the
> unspent funds were taken away in a budget
> crisis.

Brian:

All very nice, but I'm still trying to understand how a 501(c)3 organization gets away with such blatant political lobbying. Maybe I missed it someplace, but I still thought this was illegal, and could result in loss of the tax-exempt status.

Roger


rogerc38@aol.com

> All very nice, but I'm still trying to
> understand how a 501(c)3 organization gets
> away with such blatant political lobbying.
> Maybe I missed it someplace, but I still
> thought this was illegal, and could result
> in loss of the tax-exempt status.

No, it's not illegal, just highly regulated. Depending on what tax treatment the 501(c)3 chooses, it is eligible to spend a portion of its income (calculated according to a formula and subject to caps and phase-out) on a mixture of direct lobbying and grassroots lobbying. For details (it's really arcane), consult a tax attorney, which I am not.

The basic concept is that 20% of your first tier of donations can be spent on lobbying, and a smaller percentage of higher tiers until you hit the caps.



eledbetter@rypn.org

> No, it's not illegal, just highly regulated.
> Depending on what tax treatment the 501(c)3
> chooses, it is eligible to spend a portion
> of its income (calculated according to a
> formula and subject to caps and phase-out)
> on a mixture of direct lobbying and
> grassroots lobbying. For details (it's
> really arcane), consult a tax attorney,
> which I am not.

> The basic concept is that 20% of your first
> tier of donations can be spent on lobbying,
> and a smaller percentage of higher tiers
> until you hit the caps.

Well, I guess if it works, and you get way with it, why not?

Wish we all could get funding that way.

rogerc38@aol.com