Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Archive for August 2011

Chasing Down Charitable and Corporate Registrations for (more) Court-Connected Nonprofits… [publ. Aug 31, 2011; re-formatted re-post expected in late Dec. 2017]

with one comment

Post title with short-link (and to explain the 2011/2017 references in the title):

Chasing Down Charitable and Corporate Registrations for (more) Court-Connected Nonprofits… [publ. Aug 31, 2011; re-formatted re-post expected in late Dec. 2017] (with WordPress-generated, case-sensitive short-link ending “-Qp.”)

This long (18.7K words) post featuring among others examples in HOW TO and features from various places to check in the process of doing the lookups, the two nonprofits Kids’ Turn San Diego and Kids’ Turn (in San Francisco), both of which after being hit repeatedly in 2011 with simply talking about it, posting boards of directors (plenty of whom were judges), at some point one of them later submerged itself under another nonprofit running training classes to prevent child abuse, in a networked, proprietary-program sort of way across the country.  As I recall, and referring (as I recall at the close of 2017 — which is many years ago!) but will double-check, the surviving entity it merged into — thereby “disappearing” its California OAG charitable details record, some of which I posted herein, is SFCAPC (San Francisco Child Abuse Prevention Center or “Council”). For more details look this up at (now it’s called) BusinessSearch.SOS.Ca.Gov or “Verification” page at California OAG/RCT. ( Go to those sites for more details).  California OAG search results have added an EIN# field, but are not otherwise changed in a major way; however the California Secretary of State Business Search website (formerly “kepler.sos.ca.gov”) has been radically revised in both initial level search results, and possibly in reporting requirements.

I do not claim personal — I’ll call it — “credit” for having driven one of two California-based “Kids’ Turn” 501©3s underground, but at least one of them did go underground. It may be just coincidence, BUT the possibility that maybe I did (in addition to the general public-interest purpose of calling attention to how family-court-connected, and business-referrals-taking nonprofits organize and reproduce themselves over time) provides some minor compensation in terms of a sense of making an impact in the behavior of the court cultures nationwide,but in no way compensates for the damages the process inflicted upon my family line, and the legacy for my own children which this process re-directed away from them, and towards the professionals who make their livelihoods speaking on behalf of abused women (who apparently can’t speak), noncustodial fathers (for whom “fatherhood.gov” is still not enough help to “even out” the unfair advantage women supposedly have as mothers in divorce, or the public at large in (allegedly) reducing public debt through Post-PRWORA (1996) Welfare Reform policies scapegoating single motherhood itself and pretending to take into account that one cause of “single motherhood” is abusive fathers. No, encouraging and promoting RESPONSIBLE fatherhood will handle the danger situation, with appropriate and ever-more interventions and court-order therapies/treatments for the abused and the non-abused. etc.

One of the commissioners I stood in front of post-child-stealing event, in order to negotiate how to retroactively reduce my ex-batterers child support arrears (which I’d just been told in person in the child support offices right before, could not happen), I years later learned had been on a Kids’ Turn Board of Directors.  As with AFCC, it seems that the nonprofit gave everyone a shot at being listed on the board, which helps those who choose to do so, cite proudly to that community service. That ruling was no favor to our children, who pre-abduction at least had one stable, and consistently working parent (with whom they lived, namely me) although that work life was increasingly under attack once the restraining order had been stripped off and an apparently underemployed (and later admitted in court, wasn’t actively looking for work because he was “depressed” about not having a wife and supportive partner — an excuse I hardly was making at any point).

I worked on a re-formatted version of this post (under separate “cover” — title) earlier this season and am thinking it might be my charitable contribution (of a sort) for 2017.  This post is entertaining, and gets into layered foundations and venture capitalists directing their grants to groups like these which don’t even bother to stay current at their state level filings.

I see in hindsight from the part of the post dealing with San Diego Foundation (Gross assets in August 2011 shown as $666M) which in 2007 formed the Carlsbad Community Foundation (which then donated several thousand dollars to Kids’ Turn San Diego), and with the various dbas under which various Kids’ Turn (either SD or SF in this case) donors operated (referring to Taproot Foundation, a dba of “TapFound, Inc.”), with its (Taproot, Inc.s) third-generation venture capitalist startup funding, that the topics covered are still relevant even though many links no longer are intact.  Any more commentary from this perspective will be found on the updated, reformatted post.//LGH 12/29/2017…

For some of the flavor — after many of the lookups — a screenprint from the post below.  It’s in my voice, not a quote from some other website; “me” = yours truly…

Image from my 8/31/2011 post, complete with some typos and more sarcasm.

…Just describing what I was seeing…
Below this line is August 31, 2011, writing. If you want a better-looking version of the same information (with some, though not 100%, updates on the organizations mentioned below), wait for the 2017 update. //

And moreover, what about all these grantor/grantee relationships with corporations that don’t seem (note disclaimer) to be even operating legally in California?  While the promise is that 25 SF courthouses must be shut because of budget cuts….

And I don’t just mean Kids’ Turn /  San Diego, which at least were incorporated here legally, but is now (per the databases) on suspended status, charity registrations delinquent.

Kids’ Turn

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process

Incorporation status suspended for the SF branch (top row), but not the San Diego (which was a spinoff nonprofit).

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
KID’S TURN 075606 Charity Current SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity
KID’S TURN, SAN DIEGO 102902 Charity Delinquent SAN DIEGO CA Charity Registration Charity

Minor note:  The organization’s name is KIDS -apostrophe, so one must move the apostrophe (making it Kid, singular, apostrophe, S) to find on either database.

Also, California, unlike some other states doesn’t tell the on-line viewer WHEN the license was suspended, i.e., before or after outreach such as this:


Dateline:  San Francisco, California Kids’ Turn formally announces its partnership with Relate and National Family Mediation — two charities in Great Britain scheduled to pilot Kids’ Turn’s curriculum in Fall, 2011. This collaboration is the result of creative international colleagues who let go of ‘attachment to the facts’ believing in the value of shared ideas. We acknowledge the centuries’ old British social service system as the model for social work in the United States. The fact Relate and NFM are willing to implement innovations developed in San Francisco speaks to their commitment to offer evidence-based services to improve the lives of British children negatively impacted by parental separation.

Yes I do believe swallowing some of this would indeed call for release from “Attachment to the facts” such as that this organization has some really strange financial liaisons.

Or, I wonder if Linda Brandes was able to claim her $10,000 donation to Kids’ Turn San Diego, as their charitable status is delinquent, still, also in 2011:

Rancho Santa Fe resident Linda Brandes gives Kids’ Turn San Diego a $10,000 grant

(Posted May 25, 2011 in the Rancho Santa Fe Review)

Kids’ Turn San Diego recently received a $10,000 grant from Rancho Santa Fe resident Linda Brandes through the Linda Brandes Foundation. The grant will be used to support psycho-educational workshops for families going through high-conflict divorce, separation or custody disputes.

Linda Brandes

Kids’ Turn is a unique program of prevention and intervention dedicated to helping children whose parents have become opponents. A psycho-educational approach, focused on the whole family, helps children understand and cope with the harsh realities of divorce or separation and custody disputes. Kids’ Turn is a non-profit workshop for children and their parents with a proven record.

Kids’ Turn’s psycho-educational approach is the only one of its kind in Southern California.

“Serving the entire San Diego County, and reaching all who need Kids’ Turn are our top priorities, for we have a proven, effective and life-changing curriculum that makes a significant difference in the lives of these children and families,” said Jim Davis, executive director, Kids’ Turn San Diego.

For more information, visit www.kidsturnsd.org.

March 2, 2011 letter from the California Department of Justice (in file, on-line):

[From:] State of California DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1300 I STREET P.O. BOX 903447 SACRAMENTO CA 94203-4470

Telephone: (916)445-2021×5 Facsimile: (916) 444-3651 E-Mail: RRF1@doj.ca.gov


March 9, 2011



The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):

1. The $50 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587, please provide the requested information, together with a copy of this letter, to the above address, within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter.


Tony Salazar Staff Services Analyst Registry of Charitable Trusts

for:  KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General

Now that they have another donation, they can afford the $50 check. I see no “our check is in the mail” response, perhaps one was sent.  And another letter:

Another letter a week later, same file# (CT 102902) reminds Kids’ Turn San Diego, California needs KT to fill out (not just send partial details) their list of donors, i.e., a “Schedule B,” just like you have to file with the IRS (“oops!”).    Too busy with international expansions of the programs, or is list of donors too hot to touch?

RE: IRS Form 990, Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors

We have received the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF submitted by the above-named organization for filing with the Registry of Charitable Trusts (Registry) for the fiscal year ending 12/31/2010. The filing is incomplete because the copy of Schedule B, Schedule of Contributors, does not include the names and addresses of contributors.

While you and I don’t get this private information (barring anything on the web), it’s nice to know someone is keeping track.

The copy of the IRS Form 990, 990-EZ or 990-PF, including all attachments, filed with the Registry must be identical to the document filed by the organization with the Internal Revenue Service. The Registry retains Schedule B as a confidential record for IRS Form 990 and 990-EZ filers.

Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please submit a complete copy of Schedule B, Schedule of

Contributors, for the fiscal year noted above, as filed with the Internal Revenue Service. all correspondence to the undersigned.

I learned this from “Don Kramer’s Nonprofit Issues” (i.e., I looked up the IRS form # footnoted on the KT San Diego letter) and learned:

Is a nonprofit required to report anonymous donors to the IRS?  Several colleagues have said that it is illegal for a nonprofit to not disclose an anonymous donor to the IRS.  Schedule B of the Form 990 provides a listing of major contributors but I have seen 990s that list the amounts without disclosing names.

You are both right.  Nonprofits of all types, not just 501(c)(3) charities, that file a Form 990, 990-PF or 990-EZ tax information return are required to identify substantial donors (generally donors of $5000 or more) to the IRS on Schedule B, and must include the names and addresses of the donors.  But organizations other than private foundations and Section 527 political organizations may eliminate the names and addresses of donors when they make the Schedule available for public inspection. Therefore, you are undoubtedly correct that you have seen Schedule Bs without names of donors, and your colleagues are correct that the names must have been disclosed to the IRS.

this suggests (but of course doesn’t prove) that the charity in question here (helping kids and parents deal with divorce, right) may have failed to disclose donors of over $5,000 — possibly the figures didn’t add up to the grants received, I don’t know.

The fact that 501(c)(4) advocacy groups and 501 (c)(6) trade associations are not obligated to publicly disclose the names of their donors has made them a very attractive vehicle for people who want to engage in political campaign advertising anonymously.  In theCitizens Unitedcase, the U.S. Supreme Court said corporations could engage in campaign advertising. Since (c)(4)s and (c)(6)s are permitted to support or oppose candidates in election campaigns—unlike 501(c)(3) charities that can lose their exemption for electioneering—many have opted to use anonymous donations for this new activity.


Someone should maybe also contact the “Carlsbad Charitable Foundation” who awarded KTSan Diego $20,000 to do at least four workshops for about 100-120 families in Carlsbad “experiencing” divorce and child-custody “disputes.”

Carlsbad Charitable Foundation awards nonprofit grants
13 months ago | 449 views | 0 0 comments | 2 2 recommendations | email to a friend | print
From left, Carlsbad Charitable Foundation Grants Chairman Tom Applegate hands over the grant money check to Interfaith Community Services representatives Greg Anglea, Lara Velde and Mary Ferro, along with CCF Board Chairwoman Yvonne Murchison Finocchiaro. CCF also awarded a grant to Kids’ Turn San Diego. Courtesy photo
From left, Carlsbad Charitable Foundation Grants Chairman Tom Applegate hands over the grant money check to Interfaith Community Services representatives Greg Anglea, Lara Velde and Mary Ferro, along with CCF Board Chairwoman Yvonne Murchison Finocchiaro. CCF also awarded a grant to Kids’ Turn San Diego. Courtesy photo
CARLSBAD — The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation awarded more than $44,000 to Kids’ Turn San Diego and The Interfaith Community Services for their efforts in promoting a more civil society in Carlsbad. The awards were presented at CCF’s third annual Grants Award ceremony at the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Discovery Center in Carlsbad on June 29. 

Kids’ Turn San Diego will receive $20,000 to provide no less than four workshops, each lasting four weeks, for approximately 100 to 120 families in Carlsbad experiencing divorce or child-custody disputes. The workshops address the emotional impact that these issues have on children and provide guidance on more effective communication techniques for all members of the family, such as anger management.
And what’s more, they reduce parental alienation, right?
Interfaith Community Services will receive $24,545 to assess resources, existing programs and specific opportunities for social outreach at each Carlsbad faith center. ICS will conduct one-on-one meetings to identify discussion points for Carlsbad’s faith-based community and spearhead at least two community-wide town hall meetings to further galvanize all faith communities/congregations around specific issues.

CCF Grants Chairman Tom Applegate noted that collective resources of Carlsbad’s 40-plus faith communities will be more effectively utilized to help persons in need. . . .

with all those faith communities and enough finances to go around, one might think that there’d be fewer divorces and out-of-wedlock births to start with.  (:

CCF Board Chairwoman Yvonne Finocchiaro said that grants were made possible through the contributions of the members of The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation. “We’re extremely honored to support Kids’ Turn San Diego and The Interfaith Community Services commitment to our community,” she said. “The intent of these donations is to support activities and programs that unify and inspire Carlsbad residents to make a positive difference in the future of our city.”

Kids’ Turn SD has great reasons to be committed to Carlsbad’s Community — see median household income.

Carlsbad’s median income (per its site, whatever date), $92, 249, and there are 2.55 people per household.  I can see how that would be stressful, custody of that extra burdensome 0.55 child, occasioning many divorce “disputes.”   The Top 10 employers of this 65,000 population city & average employee salary of $49K, with 40 faith communities, 1% African-American residents, and almost every other adult having a bachelor’s degree, plus 12% master’s or higher,  being:

Top 10 employers (2007)

1,429 Callaway Golf
1,172 Life Technologies Corporation (Invitrogen Corporation)
1,169 Carlsbad Unified School District
1,014 La Costa Resort and Spa
874 Park Hyatt Aviara Resort
862 LEGOLAND California
854 ViaSat, Inc.
797 Gemological Institute of America
714 City of Carlsbad
694 TaylorMade (Adidas Golf)

The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation is an affiliate of the San Diego Foundation, apparently (nothing is listed directly under that name, as my searches below show):

703 Palomar Airport Rd , Carlsbad , CA 92011 | 760-269-3882


The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation’s mission is to “advance philanthropy in Carlsbad in order to build community excellence, stimulate innovation and enhance the capacity of nonprofits.” Every year the foundation splits the total amount of donations in half. One half goes to grants for the year; the other goes specifically to the Carlsbad endowment, which is for the advancement of the community. CCF is an affiliate of The San Diego Foundation.

Or, in their own words:

Inspired by the desire to build philanthropy in Carlsbad that would have impact immediately and forever, a group of citizens partnered with The San Diego Foundation to establish the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation in 2007. This community-specific effort helps meet the emerging needs of Carlsbad by encouraging and increasing responsible and effective philanthropy by and for those living and working in Carlsbad.

1. What is the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation?
Inspired by the desire to build philanthropy in Carlsbad that would have impact immediately and forever, a group of citizens partnered with The San Diego Foundation to establish the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation (CCF) in 2007. This community-specific effort would help meet the emerging needs of Carlsbad by encouraging and increasing responsible and effective philanthropy by and for those living and working in Carlsbad.

4. What is The San Diego Foundation?
Founded in 1975, The San Diego Foundation was created by and for the people of the San Diego region. Its purpose is to promote and increase effective and responsible charitable giving. The Foundation manages nearly $500 million in assets, almost half of which reside in permanent endowment funds. Since its inception, The Foundation has granted more than $600 million to nonprofits serving the community.
5. What does it mean that CCF is an affiliate of The San Diego Foundation?
As an affiliate, the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation benefits from the experience and management of The San Diego Foundation. The San Diego Foundation provides such back-office support as investment management, staffing, marketing and expertise. In return, the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation shares with The San Diego Foundation its local knowledge of the emerging needs and causes important to the Carlsbad community.
6. Who may participate in the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation?
The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation encourages everyone who lives, works, and plays in Carlsbad to participate in the Foundation.

7. What is an endowment?

(on the SAN DIEGO SITE):

For Nonprofits

The San Diego Foundation is honored to be able to claim $60 million in grants to community causes last year, but we cannot take all the credit. Over ninety percent of our annual grants are driven directly by our donors. These are individuals, families, and corporations recommending grants from Donor Advised Funds to the organizations and causes that are important to them.
In addition to Donor Advised Funds, The San Diego Foundation’s program grants fund nonprofits through a competitive application process. Program grants cover subject areas such as arts and culture, civil society, the environment, health & human services, and science & technology.

. . .

Donor Advised Funds

Donor Advised FundsDonor advised funds allow you to be actively involved in the granting process. Through an agreement with The San Diego Foundation, a donor’s contribution establishes a fund named by the donor. The Fund is managed and administered by The San Diego Foundation, but the donor may be the fund advisor and advise The Foundation about preferences regarding grant recipients and gift amounts. Distributions are made in the fund’s name and the donor receives regular financial statements. As the fund is considered part of The San Diego Foundation’s holdings, it receives the maximum tax benefits and the donor is not responsible for the tax filings.

Designated Funds  (note the photo chosen — things “kids” are great fundraiser causes).

Designated FundsDesignated funds are gifts that provides a source of support to a nonprofit organization selected by the donor. Often this gift is made in the form of an endowment fund. In an endowment, the principal is invested and only a portion of the income is paid out. The remaining income is returned to principal to protect the value of the endowment over time. This option provides support for your fund now and forever.
With a designated fund, at the outset, the donor designates one or more charities who will receive the earnings on the fund in perpetuity. Grant checks are mailed automatically once or twice a year, with the donor choosing the best time or according to The Foundation’s schedule of March and/or September. Donors may also opt to reinvest the earnings until the fund grows to an amount desired by the donor. Fees associated with the designated fund are particularly inexpensive, at 0.5%.
To establish a designated fund, or to learn more information, contact our charitable giving team at GivingTeam@sdfoundation.org or 619-235-2300.

The San Diego Foundation holds raffles, and registered for one in 2009 which raised “$42,564.66.”

It’s filings (under the OAG site) show this for 2002 (earliest year shown):

Annual Renewal Information
Fiscal Begin: 01-JUL-02
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-03
Total Assets: $361,600,036.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $717,938,952.00
RRF Received: 19-NOV-03
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted

and this for 2009 (latest year shown): (notice difference in revenue, but increased assets):

Fiscal Begin: 01-JUL-09
Fiscal End: 30-JUN-10
Total Assets: $466,087,961.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $63,742,314.00
RRF Received: 15-NOV-10
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted

Organization Details
EIN: 952942582
Name: The San Diego Foundation — Google
Location:  2508 Historic Decatur Rd Ste 200
San Diego, CA 92106
 Report Address Change
County: San Diego County
Ruling Date: 1975   (Approximate year when founded)
IRS Type: 501(c)(3) – Public charity: Religious, educational, charitable, scientific, and literary organizations…
Legal basis for public charity or private foundation status (FNDNCD): 15 – Organization with a substantial portion of support from a governmental unit or the general public
NTEE:  T31 – Community Foundations
Most recently completed fiscal year (TAXPER) 06/2010
Total Revenue $63,742,314
Total Assets: $466,087,961
Organization Mission Statement and Purpose
The San Diego Foundation improves the quality of life within the San Diego community by promoting and increasing responsible and effective philanthropy.

In 2003, it Amended its bylaws on two points:

2. Article VIII is added to the Articles of Incorporation of this Corporation and shall read as follows:

The Corporation is specifically authorized to obtain licensure as a grants and annuities society pursuant to California Insurance Code Sections 11520 through 11524 and to conduct a grants and annuities business once licensed.

I. of The San Diego Foundation, a California nonprofit public benefit

3. been duly approved by the Board of Governors.

The foregoing amendment of Articles of Incorporation has

4. The Corporation has no members.

Grants and Annuities means one can receive transfers of property, provided the business agrees to pay out to the Transferror — or the Tranferror’s Nominee — an Annuity.  Not just anyone can do it, an organization has to have been in operation for 10 years or more and qualifies according to this code:

SECTION 11520-11524 

11520.  The following organizations and persons may receive
transfers of property, conditioned upon their agreement to pay an
annuity to the transferor or the transferor's nominee, after
obtaining from the commissioner a certificate of authority so to do:
   (a) Any charitable, religious, benevolent or educational
organization, pecuniary profit not being its object or purpose, after
being in active operation for at least 10 years; provided,
nevertheless, that 10 years of active operation shall not be required
in case of:
   (1) A nonprofit corporation organized and controlled by a hospital licensed by the State Department of Health Services as a general acute care hospital pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section
1250) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code; and
   (2) An incorporated educational institution offering courses of instruction beyond high school, organized pursuant to Section 94757
of the Education Code, and which is, and for at least one year has
been, qualified pursuant to Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 94700)
of Part 59 of the Education Code to issue diplomas or degrees as
defined in Sections 94724 and 94726 of that code;
   (b) Every organization or person maintaining homes for the aged for pecuniary profit. . . .

This can be problematic, I imagine, if when elders are receiving public guardianship or being placed under a conservator’s care against their will or improperly, for the sake of access to their property.

What is an Annuity?  Investopedia explains:

What Does Annuity Mean?
A financial product sold by financial institutions that is designed to accept and grow funds from an individual and then, upon annuitization, pay out a stream of payments to the individual at a later point in time. Annuities are primarily used as a means of securing a steady cash flow for an individual during their retirement years.

The root word represents “yearly,” as in “ANNUAL.”

Women’e Enews puts in a few words about Annuities, their types and their purpose:

Annuity Funding Explained

When it comes to annuity funding and annuities in general many people are confused. The problem is often because there are so many different kinds. There’s single or flexible-payment, fixed or variable, and deferred or immediate.

Regardless the type of annuity funding you’re ultimately interested in, all annuities are financial contracts which have been created to provide you with a good source of income in your retirement years    & …..

You can choose from a number of annuity options which include a lifetime income, a guaranteed period income where your beneficiaries would receive any remaining payments, a joint and survivor option for couples as well as many other options that a financial advisor or insurance representative can tell you about

In many cases, options can be mixed and matched to provide you with the best kind of annuity funding possible.

The money contributed to any annuity funding may be in post-tax dollars. The advantage to this is that you can contribute as much money as you would like. However before you put any after-tax savings into any kind of annuity funding, it’s often advisable for you to put the maximum pre-tax amount into a retirement plan.

When an annuity is used to fund a retirement plan, contribution limits usually apply. Federal tax laws also generally require that you begin taking minimum distributions by April 1 of the calendar year following the year in which you reach age 70.

Annuity funding earnings are taxed as ordinary income.

A few more comments on annuities, endowments, and related financial/investment terminology;

I’m a novice in this and I’ll BET that Title IV-A people and others impoverished through violence (or the court battles) or just life, are not educated about these things.  That we aren’t is a factor of our school systems and family systems, most likely.

How interesting, because what the child support / fatherhood systems emphasize is getting everyone into a low-income job, garnishing the wages for child support (or don’t) and then, as I like to point out, lose track of it at the state or county level, while splitting the difference with the Feds 66%/34% for a well-behaved State SDU (Statewide Distribution Unit), or failing to report interest income — which can be considerable — if they are not.

How the HHS/OIG/OAS responds to the un-accounted for collected child support  is a concerted attempt to get their 66% but a hands-washing response to, they’re only overseeing, not controlling operations, when the situation is pretty much in epidemic proportions country-wide.   Where the child support programs WORK is when groups like Maximus, Inc. & MDRC, CPR and PSI etc. get their contracts in, their CEO’s get paid (a LOT) and stock values for shareholders manages to stay above water, even if it loses some value.  Meanwhile, what the children are getting, if they’re lucky is a child support allotment that makes it through, is not too substantially compromised, and may represent wages at (judging from what they program materials say they are aiming to help with) perhaps $8.00 to $12.00/hour, not including taxes withheld.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

While there are all kinds of plans for certain types or classes of people (including financially savvy and/or endowed, or sucessful businesspeople or investors) to figure out how to have monthly income — enough to live on, plus some — til they breathe their last breath, even at 80 or 90  years old — and typically its WOMEN living much longer — the philosophy for the vast masses being coached and think-tanked/policy-driven by people that live like this, is that the real cause of widespread poverty includes only one income earner in a household, i.e., fatherlessness and single-motherhood.

I do believe that even my children in elementary school (at least MY kids at that age) could figure out that if one wishes to end up with the number “5” one might add 2+ 3 or 4 +1.  Or one might even go, if x=4,    3x-7 and come up with 5, meaning what one needs to live on.  The factors can be adjusted.

But somehow we are not to calculate the possibility of variety in income when it comes to marital dissolution and fatherhood movements, or child support program evolution, and the need of judges and attorneys to run nonprofits teaching parents anger management, and (once we learn the background of this) giving them plenty of opportunity to practice, although not regarding the other partner so much as who is forcing this on couples already under financial stressor called divorce? and dealing with the family court’s elimination of the concept that a crime is a crime, even if it was committed by someone you previously had a sexual relationship with.

No mention of where that income comes from; the presumption is always jobs only,  or possibly jobs and child support.  Not, for example, ANY form of passive income such as may come from a trust, a foundation, investments, annuities, assignment of rents, royalties on books, or virtually anything that would NOT involve being easier to find and control (and/or threaten) by the IRS.  Not on any form of initiative taking by the single parent(s), or for that matter low-income married parents.

In other words, “wealth” knows how to consolidate, aggregate, distribute according to wealth’s understanding of how not to pay taxes, after which it can tell significant others (like employees in some of their corporations) how to work jobs in which taxes ARE paid.  Last I heard, such things are NOT taught in the public schools K-12; they are still working on reading, period, and basic math, plus how to stand in line without bullying someone else.


So, in 2003, The San Diego Foundation (still solvent, on the books) gets into the grants and annuities business around 2003.  They have every right to.  I’m just pointing it out they did….

The New York Times Reports:

Promising security, U.S. annuities business takes on a new life

By Paul Sullivan
Published: Tuesday, October 23, 2007
  • BOSTON — Wall Street swings between fear and greed. With U.S. stock markets hitting record highs this month, greed seems to be back in the saddle.

Still, the current wave of retirees, the first of the baby boomers, is as fearful as any group leaving the work force has ever been, many still shell-shocked from the bursting of the technology bubble five years ago, which wiped out huge paper gains.

This group is now looking at a future without gainful employment and only their often diminished portfolios to fall back on.

They do not like what they see.

“People are more fearful and realistic,” said John Diehl, head of the retirement solutions group for the Hartford, an insurance company. “There was no fear in the late 1990s. Being respectful of the markets is a good thing. People have started to think the market doesn’t always return 20 percent.”

Enter the annuities salesmen. The once-stodgy insurance product is having a resurgence. New York Life, one of the largest providers of annuities, has had an annual growth rate of 75 percent from 2003 to 2007, according to Mike Gallo, senior vice president in the guaranteed lifetime income department.

The growth in annuities has tapped into this fear. In the old days, people were wary of annuities because they locked up assets and distributed a payment only as long as the policyholder lived. But the industry has become more sophisticated. New products have guarantees for life, adjust for inflation and, at their most sophisticated, allow people access to some or, in extreme cases, all of the principle.

[Meaning “principal,” I think, right?]

ALL YOU NEED FOR $5,000/month in retirement is to put down $100,000, sure!

(not including what a $$ will buy at that time…..)

The difference, he said, is that the most popular annuities now offer a living benefit drawn from an income stream, which can rise with any increase in the value of the underlying principle, while carrying a guarantee that the payout will never fall below the initial amount.

The guarantee is financed by building derivative-style collars into the structure of the underlying portfolio to cap potential losses.

Yeah, like we all  know what is a derivative-style collar.  Some people in alternative lifestyle, about dog collars, from dog-walking & pet-sitting….

With such a variable annuity plan, “people aren’t as worried about inflation as they are with a traditional payout annuity,” he said. While the payout may remain constant in percentage terms, the cash amount will rise if inflation – or skillful investment – swells the amount of the underlying fund.

And this is what today’s retirees – without the pension plans their parents had, and uncertain of the continued existence of Social Security – want.

The top concern of the baby boomers nearing retirement is, ‘Do I have enough money to last for the rest of my life,’ ” said Doug Wolff, vice president for business development at Security Benefit, a provider of annuities in Topeka, Kansas. “We’ve seen a major shift from ‘Who can develop the best death benefits?’ to ‘Who can develop the best product to guarantee some minimum investment amount?’ “

Quite different from some people, with more than 0.55 child per household, whose concern is staying alive & housed/fed til next week.

Providers of annuities today encourage people to buy enough coverage for basic expenses, from food to taxes, plus a little bit more. The average portion of a portfolio placed in annuity is 25 percent to 33 percent and most insurers limit a 65-year-old to 75 percent, to ensure the retention of sufficient liquid assets. Coverage of basic expenses can be achieved with either a traditional immediate annuity – the buyer puts $100,000 in and receives a fixed percentage of the initial value, typically 5 percent, every month – or with a variable annuity that guarantees a minimum withdrawal benefit.

. . .   Can get a little complicated . . . . .

Something similar can be accomplished with a joint-survivor annuity – essentially paying out for two lives. A further refinement can be added in the form of a cash-refund feature that pays to the heirs whatever principle is left at death.

The next wave of innovation is expected to produce annuities that look to address the large health care bills that many retirees will face as they age, Wolff said.

Pricing all of these permutations of annuities can be complicated. There is one constant, however: The more guaranteed features that are attached – from joint-survivor to inflation adjustment – the higher the cost and the lower the percentage payout.

Jack Lemery, a former chief investment officer for Paul Revere Life Insurance, which sold annuities, maintained that this should dissuade people from putting any money at all into an annuity. Lemery is now a portfolio manager at Emerson Investment Management in Boston, where he has sworn off annuities.

Well, in 2006 “The Carlsbad Charitable Foundation” was founded (same EIN# as San Diego) and began raising some money, part of which they obviously gave to Kids’ Turn to run classes in THEIR neighborhoods, too.  Sounds from the description at around around  $200 per four-week session per family ($20,000 for four-weeks for 100 – 120 couples).




Since its inception in 2006, the Carlsbad Charitable Foundation has granted $142,731 and has grown to 147 members, with an endowment of $311,000. This year CCF will focus their grantmaking on the environment in Carlsbad.

Grantees 2007-2008
Carlsbad Unified School District $20,000
Biztown $23,780


Grantees 2008-2009
San Diego Hospice $28,406
North County Community Services $12,500
Interfaith Community Services $12,500

Grantees 2009-2010
Kids’ Turn San Diego $20,000
Interfaith Community Services $24,545

For more information visitwww.carlsbadcharitablefoundation.org.


BEFORE I FOUND OUT tHAT THE “Carlsbad Charitable Foundation” was an affiliate of The San Diego Foundation, I went looking for it, unsuccessfully, in the usual places and found a few more interesting groups.

I cannot locate any business, or charity, called “Carlsbad Charitable Foundation” on either site where they are to be registered.  There are 20 results to “Carlsbad Foundation” search.

Apparently this contribution was made, or at least announced, “13 months ago.” In the interim, Carlsbad Foundation’s charitable status seems to have held:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
CARLSBAD FOUNDATION 124543 Charity Current CARLSBAD CA Charity Registration Charity

Actually, that’s fairly strange as there is only ONE annual RRF (charitable registration) form on file, and for the first 6 years, no IRS filings, then after that approximately just about zero (or close to, relatively speaking) assets OR gross (not net) revenue.    For example, Apr 2009-March 2010, they reported a whopping $220.00 (so how did the $20,000.00 get to Kids’ Turn?  I am such a novice in this field, I don’t see it..)  From April 2010 to March 2011, they had zero revenue.

Carlsbad Foundation’s President (at least in 2010), Jim Comstock, (and the foundation’s address is his office, Comstock & Associates,) is a tax, financial and estate planning professional, so I assume he knows better than I how to pull that off legally:


There are also  least 75 Marriage and Family Therapists (probably some overlap with the 40 Faith Communities) in Carlsbad, including two in the suite right next to Mr. Comstock and, including them, 15 on the same street, perhaps within two blocks (judging by street #s only).  There are fully 20 foundations incorporated in Carlsbad (Search “Carlsbad Foundation) only 4 (and not this one) with “suspended” status:

Entity Number: C2530851
Date Filed: 04/24/2003
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 2755 JEFFERSON STREET, SUITE 102
Entity City, State, Zip: CARLSBAD CA 92008
Agent for Service of Process: JIM COMSTOCK
Agent Address: 2755 JEFFERSON STREET, SUITE 102
Agent City, State, Zip: CARLSBAD CA 92008

Though it incorporated 2003, the ruling date shows (NCCSDataweb) as only 2007.   In 2004, however, they filed with the IRS — only tax return showing here:

There are a lot of blanks and “x”s up, including (NOT checked)< “Check here if your receipts are normally under $25,000.”   There are 3 officers, Jim & Linda Comstock, plus Glen Blavet, who appears on Corporation Wiki (for what that’s worth) associated with 2 other corporations.

I looked under “CCF,” but don’t feel like laboring through the entire list.  However, under “Carlsbad Foundation” again, this entry is interesting:

Entity Number: C2980846
Date Filed: 02/13/2007
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 2755 JEFFERSON STREET, SUITE 102
Entity City, State, Zip: CARLSBAD CA 92008
Agent for Service of Process: ** RESIGNED ON 12/02/2010
Agent Address: *
Agent City, State, Zip: *

(see address).

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
CARLSBAD COMMUNITY FOUNDATION Charity Not Registered CARLSBAD CA Charity Registration Charity


There are, like, 3 people involved in this one, apparently.  I’m not going to track them down, now that I know the Kids’ Turn grantor was under some other umbrella.

It does make me wonder whether a Donor couldn’t just set up funding and then somehow direct it towards certain charities and not get very well monitored, so long as they keep the amount low enough not to call attention to itself (read on):




The San Diego Foundation, having been started original (it says) with 11 people, is still active corporate status: (There are 269 results for “The San Diego Foundation”), which shows you what good management can do.


Entity Number: C0735981
Date Filed: 05/09/1975
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 2508 HISTORIC DECATUR RD., STE.200
Entity City, State, Zip: SAN DIEGO CA 92106
Agent for Service of Process: MICHAEL PATTISON
Agent Address: 2508 HISTORIC DECATUR RD., STE.200
Agent City, State, Zip: SAN DIEGO CA 92106


And, yes, their 2010 IRS 990 does indeed acknowledge a grant of $22,500 to Kids’ Turn San Diego for “Human Services” (the form is 99 pages long, search the name!)      the grantees (for under $100,000) are asked, in return, to inform the foundation of their “Successes and Challenges” in meeting the conditions for the grant.  As KT is all about communication to start with, and the nonprofit clearly is very good with PR, I’m figuring they did this (although it doesn’t seem the registered as a california charity correctly).  FOr Donor Advisedgrants over $100,000, IF the Donor advisee requests, the foundation can do some more monitoring.  I don’t see that the IRS shows which funds were donor advised or not.  There are several to churches & religious schools, $8,500 to Focus on the Family and (interesting)

$10,000 to the “Los Angeles Family Law Help Center” 205 S. Broadway Suite 500, EIN# 26-1252578, filed under “Civil Society.”   and

$7,750 to the “National Conflict Resolution Center,” 625 Broadway, Suite 1221, San Diego, EIN# 33-0433314
($15,000 to Oral Roberts University in Tulsa) and many more groups, obviously.  The directors (mostly, but not all, unpaid) would not fit on one page, but those who were paid, salaries (not including retirement or benefits plans) was over $1,000,000; understandable for administering so much.

2006 (formation of Carlsbad Charitable…) was not a good year in San Diego,

at least in government circles:

Report calls San Diego’s finances reckless, ‘Enron by the Sea

[08-09-2006, found under USAToday]
SAN DIEGO (AP) — The city recklessly and deliberately mismanaged its finances for years, exhibiting disregard for the law and becoming “Enron-by-the-Sea,” according to consultants who investigated how it created a $1.4 billion pension fund shortfall.

San Diego “fell prey to the same type of corruption” that ruined companies including Enron Corp. and WorldCom Inc. and prompted Orange County to file for bankruptcy protection in 1994, said a report by the risk management company Kroll Inc.

The evidence demonstrates not mere negligence but deliberate disregard for the law, disregard for fiduciary responsibility and disregard for the financial welfare of the city’s residents,” the report concludes.

Good thing there are foundations to pick up the slack….

The $20 million report, presented at a City Council meeting Tuesday, offers one of the most detailed accounts of how San Diego created its $1.4 billion pension shortfall that has crippled its ability to borrow money.

The shortfall — the gap between the value of its pension assets and its obligation to retirees — soared after the City Council in 1996 and again in 2002 skipped payments to the pension fund and, at the same time, enhanced retirement benefits.

The fiscal meltdown that resulted sparked investigations by the U.S. Justice Department and the SEC in early 2004. Five former city and pension fund officials were charged with federal fraud and conspiracy in January.

The report outlines a series of recommendations, including creation of an independent audit committee and more authority for the city’s chief financial officer.

“You got a second chance here, folks,” said one of the authors, former chief SEC accountant Lynn Turner. “I think it’s a marvelous city, but you need to change it from being Enron-by-the-Sea to Emerald-by-the Sea.”

The report found that several former city officials likely violated federal securities law and others were negligent.

It says former Mayor Dick Murphy and members of the City Council failed to disclose the extent of the city’s problems to bond investors and for “knowingly and improperly” causing the city to violate state and federal law in its collection of sewage fees.

Arthur Levitt, former chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, was involved in Kroll’s investigation and said the city overcharged homeowners for sewage to subsidize large businesses.

Wow.  Reminds me of the Los Angeles issues with the Department of Water and Power, but that’s another subject.

ANYHOW, Kids’ Turn SAN FRANCISCO, states on its 2010 Annual report (December? 2010) that half its attendees are court-ordered, that it applied for a grant from the FY 2011 AOC (Administrative Office of the Courts) and is pushing a new curriculum, as well as teaching charities in the UK how to operate like itself, presumably:

The following representative results definitely affirm the efficacy of Kids’ Turn’s 2010 services:

• 50% of Kids’ Turn families are Court ordered

That’s efficacy, or that’s a court-connection?  ! !  Who’s on the Board of Kids’ Turn, generally speaking?

However, the first thing readers are told on this report is:

Program 1. Kids’ Turn sustained its very specialized services in five Bay Area Counties serving 700 participants over twelve months. Kids’ Turn enrollment is down slightly, likely attributable to the economy. It is our impression families are struggling to pay our fees and we are making every effort to negotiate reasonable tuition costs based on the particular needs of each situation. We still do not charge children to attend Kids’ Turn, and parents pay on a sliding fee basis depending on their income. Workshop records verify 60% of the families attending Kids’ Turn are in the low- to moderate-income range.1

(the footnote explains that this is because more wealthy people have less tendency to divorce, because there’s more money to support their families…In fact, let me quote it here:   “As per the Huffington Post’s new DIVORCE page (www.huffingtonpost.com), families with higher incomes have a lower divorce rate, likely attributable to the supporting resources available to them to sustain their marriages (therapists, counselors, mediators).**”

Which just goes to show that **It takes a a Village — of AFCC operatives —  for couples to stay married…..  Or so, those operatives believe!   Those who can’t afford it, might end up needing subsidy to attend Kids’ Turn classes by out-of-compliance nonprofits during their breakup.  I would just love to take classes on a sliding fee with people who attribute marital breakup among the not-so-wealthy to inability to pay for a therapist, quoting the Huffington Post…

Seriously now, how does the world manage to keep turning without the advice of these professions?   

Other factoids (again, this is the SF, not the San Diego, group):


Kids’ Turn Development activities have been shaped and modified in order to accommodate the recent recession while simultaneously continuing projects that will help improve and develop our trade mark.

1. Kids’ Turn launched its new logo in January, 2010. Development of the logo was the result of a grant from the Taproot Foundation and we are very satisfied with the universal image which emphasizes the protective role of parents for the children in their families.

Although it’s quite likely that many people come to Kids’ Turn after violence- or abuse-related separation, followed by family court involvement, court orders for child support, access/visitation grant diversion for fatherhood promotion, and voila — a parent education project….

2. Kids’ Turn launched its new website in December, 2010. This project was also the result of a partnership with the Taproot Foundation. The new website is cleaner and consistent with the unstated emphasis offered by the logo.










Tapfound Inc. Dba Taproot Foundation CA 2003 $436,604 990A 13 91-2162645
Tapfound Industry Dba Taproot Foundation CA 2004 $350,319 990 15 91-2162645
Taproot Foundation CA 2003 $187,547 990 13 91-2162645
Taproot Foundation CA 2002 $56,366 990EZ 7 91-2162645
Taproot Foundation CA 2002 $56,366 990ER 6 91-2162645
Taproot Foundation, Inc. CA 2009 $2,156,525 990 24 91-2162645



(Wow.  The earliest 2002 is missing page 1; the other, parts are handwritten (on forms), parts typewritten (on blank sheets, for example, the listing of Board Members).

The last board member listed is Jenny Shilling, who works for The Draper Richards Foundation, which apparently started Tapfound, Inc. (The Taproot foundation) with $50,000.  The group started with $79,000 assets, not including -$32,000 of “undeposited assets,” for a net assets of $48K.  Its “Liabilities & Equity” just about cancelled each other out, and program service accomplishments for this year were “Service Grant Program awarded 18 nonprofits (not shown) with volunteer teams” — $23K.

An “updated July 6, 2003” board of directors is attached.

The 2003 filing (at least the one above I clicked on) shows the act is rather more together, and service program accomplishments reads:

Service Grants were awarded to 63 nonprofit organizations with a total estimated value of $2.5 million (I’ll tell the IRS my return was “close enough for jazz also….”) 582 volunteers were recruited to deliver these services.  (at a cost of $148,872 Program Service Expense).



Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
TAPROOT Charity Not Registered SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity


and (I searched the EIN)


Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
TAPFOUND, INC. 120759 Charity Current SAN FRANCISCO CA Charity Registration Charity

I guess the OAG’s office maybe is behind in their database entry, because for a “current” charity, including tax returns showing revenue over $4 million in 2007, the only year the group’s RRF shows up is for 2008; they only reminded of an unpaid registration fee of $150 in 2010.   There is revenue of over $100K on IRS forms from 2003 through 2009, though.     OAG’s (then Edmund G Brown’s) office respectfully requests they send in their $150 fee in September 2010:

September 8, 2010



The Annual Registration Renewal Fee Report submitted on behalf of the captioned organization is incomplete for the following reason(s):

1. The $150 renewal fee was not received. Please send a check in that amount, payable to “Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts”.

In order to remain in compliance with the filing requirements set forth in Government Code sections 12586 and 12587, please provide the requested information, together with a copy of this letter, to the above address, within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter.

We’re coming up on a year from the date of this letter, so presumably they did, or they didn’t and OAG hasn’t noticed yet, or doesn’t care.  Secretary of State has corporate status active, too:


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process



Entity Name: TAPFOUND, INC.
Entity Number: C2374009
Date Filed: 01/18/2002
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 466 GEARY ST STE 200
Entity City, State, Zip: SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102
Agent for Service of Process: AARON HURST
Agent Address: 466 GEARY ST STE 200
Agent City, State, Zip: SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102


An independent audit states that for 2010:

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Tapfound, Inc. dba: Taproot Foundation as of September 30, 2010, and the changes in its net assets and its cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The Taproot concept, from which Kids’ Turn benefitted, sounds great:


Most organizations tackling social problems don’t have access to the marketing, design, technology, management or strategic planning resources they need to succeed. Without this talent, few are able to have their intended impact on critical issues like the environment, health and education.

Taproot is a nonprofit organization that makes business talent available to organizations working to improve society.

(is it also registering anually as a charity within California, or not?)

We engage the nation’s millions of business professionals in pro bono services both through our award-winning programs and by partnering with companies to develop their pro bono programs. One day, we envision all organizations with promising solutions will be equipped to successfully take on urgent social challenges.



Our mission is to lead, mobilize and engage professionals in pro bono service that drives social change.


While working to expand the impact of pro bono services nationally by leading the pro bono movement, we concentrate our efforts for social impact within five metro areas where we have offices: ChicagoLos AngelesNew York CitySan Francisco Bay Area and Washington, D.C.

Today, we offer three core programs to increase nonprofits’ access to pro bono services. Through these programs we provide millions of dollars in services annually aimed at best enabling organizations to address local social issues.

Service Grant Program

Our signature Service Grant program operates in five cities and, since its inception in 2001, has engaged professionals in over 780,000 hours of pro bono service on over 1,300 projects.


Advisory Services

With our Advisory Services and leadership resources, we support companies and organizations in designing and developing their own customized, high-impact pro bono programs. We apply expertise garnered through our Service Grant Program to design pro bono programs best meeting our corporate clients business needs while ensuring their employees’ service makes a meaningful impact in their communities.


We partner with leading foundations, universities, companies, coalitions and associations to host convenings and run campaigns where we collaborate to design innovative solutions bringing pro bono service to bear for progress on issues facing our cities and society

(July 2010 letter from founder Aaron Hurst….)


There are certain core values that I have made a point of formally celebrating at Taproot.  We close the office on Election Day to stress the importance of civic engagement and democracy.  We honor civil rights, and in addition to MLK Jr. Day we close the office for Matt O’Grady Day, commemorating the marriage of long-term Root Matt O’Grady to his partner in 2008.  The anniversary of every Root is also marked by giving them the day off showing our appreciation for their involvement in our shared success.


We also value the diversity of backgrounds and interests of our Roots and give the team three days a year to create their own holidays. For some people, they use these days for traditional holidays like President’s Day and others use them for their birthday or culturally meaningful days like Chinese New Year, Rosh Hashanah or Cinco de Mayo.


Draper Richards — which provided the first $50,000 for TapRoot (Tapfound, Inc.) is a venture capitalist company, also interesting — in high tech.

Draper Richards L.P. is a venture capital firm investing in early-stage technology companies. We fund entrepreneurs with the energy, vision, experience, and desire to build great companies.

I’m not so sure about making themselves the TapRoot being a great idea, although it’s great market positioning for nonprofits.  Are they as focused on screening who taps into them as they are on making the connections?  And I’ll just point out, this does spread tax benefits around nicely between foundation and nonprofits.


A “taproot” is the core root of a plant. It gathers nutrients from lateral roots and delivers them to a plant to enable it to flourish.

We see ourselves as a taproot for the nonprofit sector, drawing nutrients from the community and delivering them to nonprofits to enable them to thrive.

A bit more on the background of Draper Richards, that helped start Taproot, that helped revamp the logo of 1989 court-connected, court-official run (basically), CCSF nonprofit vendor and access/visitation grants beneficiary “Kids’ Turn” (“Kid’s Turn” on the state search sites…) update its logo.  NOtice all the companies involved.


Three Generations of Venture Capital

The Draper name is well known in the venture capital industry. Bill Draper’s father,General William H. Draper, Jr., became the first professional west-coast venture capitalist when he founded Draper, Gaither & Anderson in 1958. Formerly Undersecretary of the Army, General Draper was responsible for economic reconstruction of Germany and Japan under the Marshall Plan.

Bill Draper began his venture capital career in 1962 with Pitch Johnson, when he started Draper & Johnson Investment Company. In 1965, together with Paul Wythes, he founded Sutter Hill Ventures which was managed with great success until 1981, when he was appointed Chairman of the U.S. Export-Import Bank. In 1985, he was selected to be Administrator and CEO of the United Nations Development Program. While in the venture capital business, Bill Draper was a founding investor in Apollo Computer (acquired by Hewlett Packard), Dionex, Integrated Genetics (Genzyme), Quantum, Qume (I.T.T.), Activision (Mediagenic), Xidex (Eastman Kodak), Measurex, Hybritech (Eli Lilly), and LSI Logic. In 1995, he returned to venture capital by founding Draper International which focused on venture investments in India. In 1996, he turned his attention to technology companies in the U.S. and co-founded a new domestic fund,Draper Richards L.P., with his partner, Robin Richards Donohoe.

Bill Draper’s son, Tim Draper, left Alex. Brown & Sons in 1985 to become the third generation of venture capitalists in his family with the formation of Draper Fisher Jurvetson. Tim restructured a family-owned Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) that had been set up by his father in 1979 and then created a highly successful early-stage venture capital fund. Draper Fisher Jurvetson has become synonymous with early-stage venture capital. Among other successes, Tim Draper was a founding investor in Parametric Technology, Digidesign, Parenting Magazine, Upside Publishing, PLX Technology, Four-1-1, Hotmail, and Skype.

> > > > > > And Mr. Draper’s Partner, Robin Richards Donahue’s background:

Robin Richards Donohoe

Robin Richards Donohoe

General Partner

Robin Richards Donohoe has over fourteen years of experience in international venture capital. She has served on the boards of many portfolio companies including Kana Communications, Selectica and Digital Impact. Prior to managing the Draper funds, she served for four years as Managing Director of Seaboard Management Corporation, a venture capital firm based in Atlanta, Georgia investing in media and technology companies. Ms. Donohoe has also worked in Prague, Czech Republic for a venture capital fund and in Paris for an investment bank. Ms. Donohoe is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of North Carolina and has a Master of Business degree from the Stanford Graduate School of Business. She currently serves on the boards of the Stanford Business School Trust, University of North Carolina College of Arts and Sciences, Advisory Council of the Gladstone Institute at UCSF, Bay Area Discovery Museum, and Gateway High School. She is the Secretary for her Stanford Business School Class and an Advisor to Room to Read.

It seems obvious to me — if we really want to end “welfare as we know it” and eradicate poverty, we should encourage kids to get on the venture capitalist in high tech media track, starting with a college degree that will help them get on board, and perhaps take people out of inner city classrooms and let them see how the other half puts together a deal and structures a nonprofit corporation, possibly one doing business in grants and annuities, or catering to the grants-based marketplace.

This might cut down on “enrons by the sea” as we all begin to realize that the social services segment of the public-employee sector cannot be trusted (which, in truth) it can’t! to those setting policy and deciding who is naughty and who is nice in distributing contracts, business, and other grants.    Of course i could be entirely wrong, but I also would suggest that the white collar sector who have their noses to the grindstone for (venture capitalists and the risk-takers with more money to play with) start taking some personal holidays to figure out where their taxes are actually being spent, and do it with a KID old enough to understand watching…

But the two parallel sets of infrastructures — the tax-supported and the tax-exempt — both working together, and seeking clientele among the tax-paying low and moderate income, will help drive their incomes lower, and someone else’s wealth higher, leaving credibility in the dust.  Of course, with appropriate assets to spin off payments into old age, this may not matter, and if the US goes bankrupt, a b/millionaire can afford to live somewhere else, whereas a person living on social security alone, most likely can’t.

This of course would be a little messy at times, actually teaching ALL children (not just the offspring of venture capitalists and others where business knowledge including about the function of taxes and corporate identities, is absorbed from an early age) how to deal with the invisible, or at least underlying, intangible principles and  skillsets, that are the  scaffolding sustaining significant, life-supporting wealth (barring extravagances that lead to early death, such as pharmaceutical or other addictions).

OH WELL, more Kids’ Turn turnabouts:

3. Kids’ Turn took dramatic steps to downsize and reduce event expenses. We downsized the May, 2010 event to a cocktail party (not a sit-down dinner); all invitations were sent electronically (eliminating the need for an expensive invitation mailing). We exceeded our event net goal and will build on this success for 2011.

Yep, that would probably be good.  I’m looking at the 2006 return, and for fundraising activities (“Golf Tournament, “SF Event” (whatever that is), and “Other”) the ration of revenue raised to expenses is rather interesting:

(GOLF — someone contributed $25K, expenses were $24,423, leaving net income of $12,802 out of $62K receipts.  I’m sure golfing was fun.    The “SF Event” (great descriptor) gross receipts of $44,475, expenses $10,752, is it fair to say about 25%? or 11/44ths;       “Other fundraising events” (plural), raised $1,140, COST $13,618, resulting in a net loss of $12,478.  Essentially whatever those other fundraisers were wiped out the golf tournament’s profit completely, except for $530.    And there’s a CPA on the Board of Directors, too.)

Perhaps next time they should simply start raffles — of course this would require REGISTERING those raffles and providing signed receipts from the recipient that the funds were indeed distributed.  But they could also run raffles for themselves and the overhead is pretty low, right, on that….)

4. Kids’ Turn is developing its presence on electronic social networking. We have an active Facebook Fan page (currently 335 Fans); a Board member ‘tweets’ regularly and posts on our behalf on linkdn. Just recently, we began actively posting comments on the Huffington Posts’ DIVORCE page. Interestingly enough, our Facebook fan count has increased exponentially since raising our profile visibility on social networking sites.

5. We submitted our first grant to the Administrative Office (AOC) of the Court in November, 2011. (??) This grant was submitted in a partnership with the Rally Project. If awarded, the AOC will fund low-income, noncustodial parents and their children to attend Kids’ Turn services.

The “AOC” like “KT” contains AFCC members — and actually represents the “Administrative Office of the COurts” which is charged with administering FEDERAL grants to the states from which KT is likely to benefit.  As such, it’s not money from the AOC, it’s money via the IRS from taxpayers.

The Rally Project” – found in a 2006 obituary of architect Allan Levy 

I am posting in August 2011, and this is a FY2010 Annual report, so I’ll just hazard a guess that they mean 2011.  I hope there’s more accuracy when it comes to decimal points.

the “rally project” is actually a Family Visitation center, apparently at UCSF.  I remember trying to find this before.  There are still few references to “the Rally Project’ because that’s not what it’s name is.  And this nonprofit is teaching communication skills, too!

Allan M. Levy Died on Thursday, February 16, 2006 after a five-month battle with throat cancer. He was 60 years old. He died at home and in peace, in the company of family and friends. Allan was born and raised in Memphis, TN, and embodied all of the lovely qualities we Northerners associate with Southerners: he was kind and gracious, inclusive, an attentive host (no one ever left Pam and Allan’s house underfed or thirsty), and an avid storyteller. Allan was a creator of community. He had a small army of friends of all ages, sizes, ethnicities, and socioeconomic backgrounds from every conceivable corner of the globeHe had definite opinions. About everything. He gave quietly and generously of his time and energy to non-profit organizations like Kids Turn and the Rally Project. …Allan is survived by his wife, Pam; mother, Mrs. Emily Davis; sister, Diane and brother-in-law, Arnold Eger; brother, Donald and sister-in-law, Shelley Levy; brother, Steven and sister-in-law, Betsy Olim; sister-in-law, Kate DiGiacomo; six nieces and nephews, a whole bunch of cousins, the above-mentioned army of friends, and last, but not least, his dog Maggie. A Memorial Service is being planned for Thurs, April 6, 2006, 3pm, at the Officer’s Club at the SF Presidio. In lieu of flowers, it is suggested that donations be made to Kids’ Turn, Rally Family Visitation Services, UCSF Palliative Care Group, and The Women’s Community Clinic.

I should note here, as it came up, Rally Family Visitation Services is listed twice when it comes to “SVN” (Supervised Visitation Network) which I imagine is (yet another!) nonprofit — and people from “Rally Visitation Services” are mentioned on BOTH SVN Standards and Guideline Committee Chairs  & on the SVN Board of Directors, right next to the AOC.  I’m sure having a Kids Turn Friend & Rally Visitation Center friend who is networked with the people distributing the access visitation grants and setting standards for who gets them (ideally) — would probably help in obtaining this grant, even if someone can’t figure out which year they applied for it in and proofread their (taproot-foundation-assisted) new website to get it up there right.

Supervised Visitation Network Worldwide

SVN, Supervised Visitation Network, is an international membership organization of professionals who provide supervised visitation and access services to families.

SVN was Founded in 1991 to provide opportunities for networking, sharing of information, and training for agencies and individuals who are interested in assuring that children can have safe, conflict-free access to parents with whom they do not reside.

Providing resources for members and families in need of supervised visitation services

That 1991 date is kind of interesting;  NCCSDATAWEB says the ruling date was 1997.  So far I see it in Tennessee (for about 5 years) and then off to Florida (as of 2007ff) so presumably it started somewhere else, or AS someone else from 1991 to 1996.  Assuming it actually began in 1991…


Most Recent Tax Period EIN Name State Rule Date IRS Sub- section Total Revenue Total Assets 990 Image
2010  521831498 Supervised Visitation Network FL 1997 03 218,620 31,703 990




As of 2009, it self-describes (on the 990) as PURPOSE:

And like many nonprofits, simply repeats that paragraph when asked to describe its accomplishments, and then adds a figure — how much it cost:  in 2009 filing, specificallly $218,590 — funds raised from “Contributions” 67,409, “Program fees including govt contracts” $82,875, and “Dues” 62,307.”   This ALMOST adds up to what they spent, however, there’s that $92K of salaries and $5K of fees for contracting independent professionals, plus printing, occupancy ($10K) and did I mention “$143K” of “OTHER” expenses, a section I always enjoy looking at…… meaning they operated this year at a $37K loss despite all the help.  (The $143, unfortunately, displays sideways if I select & paste, but is predictably mostly on travel ($27.3) Conferences ($65.1), Committee meetings ($14.87) and a regional training ($14.68), plus a few other items.  Which makes me think that one great way to travel is to start a new professional, start a nonprofit (dues-based) in which we could meet to figure out how to promote our profession in pleasant locations across the globe, while doing business with the US government (if not a few others), soliciting from the public and/or grants, and write it all (plus some) OFF.

SVN Standards and Guidelines Committee Co-chairs:
Shelly La Botte, J.D., California’s Access to Visitation Grant Program, Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts, Center for Families, Children & the Courts, and Nadine Blaschak-Brown, former Program Manager, Rally Family Visitation Services of Saint Francis Memorial Hospital, San Francisco, CA.

SVN Board of Directors (Fiscal Years 2004-2006):
Jody Bittrich, Rainbow Bridge Safe Exchange/Visitation Center, Moorhead, MN, Barbara Flory (see above), Nancy Fallows (see above), Jane Grafton, (see above), Ona Foster, Faith and Liberty’s Place, Dallas, TX, David Levy, Children’s Rights Council, Hyattsville, MD, Teri Walker McLaughlin (President), Della Morton, Merrymount Children’s Center, London, Ontario Canada, Joe Nullet, Family Nurturing Center of Florida, Inc., Jacksonville, FL, Vayla Roberts (Vice-President), Sharon Rogers, Judge Ben Gordon, Jr., Family Visitation Center, Shalimar, FL, Virginia Rueda, Family Visitation Center, El Paso, TX, Rob Straus, (see above), Georgia Thompson, LA Wings of Faith, Los Angeles, CA., and Beth Zetlin, Forest Hills, NY.

I think it’s time to get another crack in about the field of “Supervised Visitation” and the “SVN” network.

First, it is a nonprofit incorporated in Tennessee.   These altruistic people (including David Levy of the Children’s Rights Council, which helped push the term “access /visitation” to start with, and which nonprofit includes several such centers, not to mention some close connections in philosophy with AFCC founder, it would seem, Jessica Pearson (see my recent posts trying to track down AFCC incorporations over the year, including one time it showed up in Colorado at the same address as Center for Policy Research (I believe) at the time:  Emerson Street, Denver).

This is a 2003 IRS form 990-EZ for “Supervised Visitation Network,” a TN nonprofit of moderate means and large influence:

90~IZ~~ Part III:

Primary Exempt purpose: Public education and awareness;professional development

28.SVNwebsite-provides information for both the general public and for professionals, averaging over 150 hits per week on the pages for parents and over 400 on the pages with information for professionals.- Expenses : $15,000

This blog — which is free, except for my time — gets close to that on a good day, and has been steadily for a few years — including from some sources I know are professionals (like the ones I report on) and others.    Note:  as with the field of “Parent Education” (court-supported) the interest is higher among the providers than the clientele….i

29.Conference-Trainingfor150professionalprovidersofsupervisedvisitationservices Expenses-Netgainof$14,410

30. Publications -Distributed 500 Handbook for Parents, 160 Handbooks for Professionals; 80 Sexual Abuse Curriculums;850 informational brochures;2 Newsletters, primarily forprofessional training, to 600 individuals;.

Expenses -$7.700

Its revenue is about $40,000 Program Service Revenue including government fees & contracts, and about $37,000 membership fees.  Their highest expense is “Products and Promotions.”

Most interesting is the variety of states (plus Canada) the board of directors are drawn from:  If you can’t see the graphic, the pdf is on-line for viewing:

(Karen Oehme also directs a family violence studies institute at Florida State; many of these names are well known) in family law circles, obviously.

At least one of these address shows up as the Office of the Attorney General (445 Golden Gate, SF) — no office given, though.

Shelly Glapion (at that address), 6th floor, at least in 2004, (as we speak?)   was Senior Program Analyst for

  1. California’s Access to Visitation Grant Program

    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    Shelly Glapion, J.D.. Access to Visitation Grant Coordinator. Senior Court 

As far back as 2004, there were concerns about financial embezzlement/fraud, shifting financial requirements for supervised visitation, at least in California.  This is part of a (available on-line) group email (I’ll post complaint and one reply) about the behavior of a supervised visitation monitor, from a mother, criticized for wearing flip-flops (in California…..) and giving her daughter a birthday cake.  it appears that the mother was under supervised visitation, although the typical auspices of this is increased noncustodial (FATHER) parent access, which was how Ron Haskins helped sell it to Congress to start with, as I understand:

Supervised Monitoring   Message List
Reply Message #17218 of 22083 < Prev | Next >
I’m in CA. I have had this supervised monitor that stated I’m a danger to my daughter because one time during the summer I was wearing flip flops and gave my daugther a birthday cake for her birthday.
Well, my question is this…now she is constatnly changing the financial agreement we signed several months ago. And she’s now back charging me for phone calls, emails to arrange visits and she doesn’t even respond to most of them. She is now threatening to take me to court if I don’t keep paying her for things I have never agreed to. Additionally, she charges me for cancelled visits and yet doesn’t even notify me that they are cancelled. Isn’t there any law of how she constatnly changes her fees and agreement? Originally it stated that the cancelle of visits is 100% resposnbile for the fees, well last weekend I was 100% resposnbile and she is refusing to credit her account that everyday she comes up with new fees or changes the agreement that was orginally signed. I’m hoping that when she does take me to court that I will not hav to pay for things that I never agreed to and for visits that is clearly stated that I am not financially resposnbile for. She also charges me $5 per min. to discuss any of this on the phone or email. And then she charges me a flat fee ontop of her min incurred fees. Please help me stop this insanity. I also believe that because my ex won in court because of past bribery that he must have also done this upon the monitor. The monitor did state once that the father told her to charge me more and make it exteremly difficult to see my daughter. And the monitor stated that if I wanted this information that I need to pay her for this.
I’ve given up all hope that I’ll be allowed to see my daughter – this justice system provides no justice…because the courts don’t care that they purjed under oath (saying I have a criminal record and a bunch of lies like that..that I can easily prove false), let alone CPS closed the case because it was unfouned..and now that the courts have allowed him to do this to me of taking 50% of all my wages. At least now I’m hoping that I can get this monitor to stop asking me for money that isn’t due and to stop fabricating these charges of $5 per min. to read an email and then her $25 fee to just have it in her inbox (even if she doesn’t read them).
Any suggestions????
THE REPLY is to contact Shelly Glapion (of SVN board of directors, which this person probably didn’t know, and program administrator, via CFCC)
Re: Supervised Monitoring

In a message dated 11/27/04 10:06:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, XXXXX@… writes:

Is she private or with a supervised visitation center?

Especially if she is connected to a supervised visitation center, you should make a public records request for all payoffs she is receiving, and also ask for her tax returns for the duration of time since she has been providing you “service”.

Then, go very public with the fact that what she is doing constitutes fraud, illegal and criminal misconduct, so that she will dump you as a client in order to try to conceal what she is doing wrong.

After she dumps you, go to the press with evidence of financial and other fraud operative through your case, saying that this is another example of the type of Access to Visitation Enforcement program fraud that is rampant as the means to promote a pro-abuser agenda in the guise of fatherhood and custody programs. Use this article from NY– re: Viola Stroud of CRC being under investigation for embezzlement — to bolster your case:  Click here: Guardian under scrutiny

Next, send a summary (brief and objective re: criminal misconduct and financial fraud) to Shelly Glapion, the CA adminstrator of the SAVP: shelly.glapion@…, asking her, as the person overseeing the AV program in CA, who has been monitoring your supervisor to ensure the integrity of the “service” she is providing. Be sure to tell Ms. Glapion that you hold her personally responsible and legally liable for the kickbacks and illegal payoffs you are sure were being used to cause intential and malicious harm to you and your child on behalf of your ex, using government program funding.

Be sure to send me a copy (use XXXXX not the FCR board) of your complaint, along with the name of the supervisor, the county you are in, your case number, the judges, lawyers and other appointees involved (especially any mediators or custody evaluators) and I will incorporate it into the complaints that we are putting together that are addressing AV program fraud and corruption at the federal level.

Cindy Ross
CA Director
National Alliance for Family Court Justice

To this woman, who says she does not have a criminal record, and apparently CPS was told she was some sort of perp, but closed the case — she is being treated like one, which she reports as basically being cursed (spoken evil of) by the supervised visitation monitor.  The other point of view — particularly from someone on this nonprofit SVN group and probably also running a program that provides these services, it’s not a curse, it’s a blessing!  Barbara Flory, in THIS message exchange (file under “PR”)   The URL is a Florida State University address:    http://familyvio.csw.fsu.edu/messageboard/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/BB_winter_04.pdf

The supervised visitation and exchange programs have truly been a blessingfor so many families.

First of all, monitored visitation provides yet another level of protection for the victim and the children. This

protection is essential to victims!

(not mentioned — often, the victims ARE children…. this happens when there’s molestation also):

Second, it allows contact between the perpetrator and the children, which would not have

occurred without said programs.

{{now that’s food for thought……  “contact between perp and children = good.”  (?)}}

This is especially important for those perpetrators who are truly trying to improve their lives and those of their children.

And the way to tell if a perp is REALLY sincere and wants to improve his(her) life is …..   ask a supervised visitation professional?

Or a judge on the board of a nonprofit benefitting from access visitation (or other) grantsmanship?

It is also extremely important for the children who sometimes do not understand why they cannot see one of their parents, but want to see that parent.

And one tells which children DO and which children do NOT want to see their perp parent?  (See Jack Straton; I get tired of reminding us….)

In many cases it is also the hope of being with the children and helping their children that motivates a perpetrator to understand the cycle of domestic violence.

It’s HOPED that HOPING to see one’s kids will produce character change for a perp.  I’m not even sure we can find definite validation that batterers intervention programs do that…..

These programs provide a safe environment for all involved and they further provide hope!

Yes, hope of virtually guaranteed (court-ordered) income for supervised visitation providers who pay into the system!

Other than that —

No they don’t.  That’s false!   They can become and have obviously become nightmares; moreover, some people have been killed at or around supervised visitation, or while the family was utilizing supervised visitation!   See this chart from 2001 (i.e., in recent memory of the above message), particularly 3rd from bottom row:  The chart is from “MNCAVA” something reasonably accessible to the people involved above:


Staff of the Clearinghouse on Supervised Visitation collected examples of behaviors commonly displayed by alleged batterers who were referred to supervised visitation programs in Florida in 2001. As the examples in the following table indicate, the same behaviors of batterers described in the literature, are observed in supervised visitation programs.


Table 1. Common Behaviors of Batterers Seen at Supervised Visitation Programs

Behavior Manifestation at Supervised Visitation Program
Denial of Abuse/ Minimizations Children may ask parent, “why did you hit mommy?” Visiting parent may deny hitting child’s mother, say it was accident or minimize his action. Or he may say it’s the fault of mother he has to see child at visitation program. One program reports a 12 year old asked his father why he chased his mother with a knife. Father denied doing it saying the mother told him to say that. This occurred despite witnesses to the knife incident.
Blaming partner Frequently supervised visitation staff report that a batterer will tell staff “this is all my wife’s fault,” “she’s the one who brought this on.”
Control/ Manipulation Often batterers will question, or challenge program rules or suggest exceptions to rules should be made of them. This is seen in examples of refusing to arrive or depart per requirements, bringing unauthorized individuals to visits, bringing gifts or food to visits which may be disallowed, attempting to take videos or photographs. Tearing up rules or throwing intake forms across room.
Attacking Parenting Skills Involving staff in apparent false allegations of child abuse against parent who has been abused, trying to use staff to call Abuse Registry. Makes disparaging remarks about mother, “you need to clean up better than mommy.”
Making Covert/ Overt Threats Program staff report incidents of batterers showing a weapons permit when asked for identification, driving around visitation site at time of scheduled visits but not coming into program as well as verbally threatening to harm staff, volunteers, judge, partner, etc. during visits. Law enforcement officers referred to programs have come for scheduled visits in full uniform wearing their weapons despite instructions to the contrary.
Involving Children During scheduled visitations, batterers may attempt to question children about their current living arrangements (particularly if they are staying at shelter or another undisclosed location); inquire about what their plans are, where they are attending school; or, may try and find out who the child’s mother is seeing. Additionally batterers may utilize visitation times as a vehicle to get children to convey messages back to other parent.
Stalking Following a parent who is leaving a program, recording information about parents car. One program reports two examples of cases when the perpetrator had custody. In one case he left with the child prior to his wife (non-custodial) but waited for her in a nearby parking lot. In another, a non-custodial mother picked up her child for a monitored exchange and was followed to a neighboring city by her abuser. Perpetrators may reveal stalking incidents during conviction with their children during visit Questions such as Where were you all last night? or Why weren’t you in school yesterday?
Financial Abuse/ Manipulation Refusing to pay for scheduled visits, not going to pay to see my kids. Paying in pennies or other small coins. Saying they will not bring food for visits because they’re paying child support to mother and she should make sure food is available for father’s visit.
Animal Abuse Batterers may inform child during visit that a beloved pet has died or had to be given away since the child was not longer in the home. One program reported a father bringing the child’s pet rabbit to the program knowing the child would not be able to take it back to the shelter where he was staying.
Physical Violence At least three murders of [WORD missing — Freudian slip?] have occurred on-site or in parking lots of supervised visitation programs in recent years. Other programs report murders or physical assaults by non-custodial parents off site but while family was utilizing services.
Suicide Visiting parent telling child and/or staff how depressed he is and how he might just end it all.



Not to mention, see Joyce Welch / Brian Tippe case, where the supervised visitation monitor was in a bestiality relationship (criminal!) with DOGS and a slave/master relationship (as the slave, i.e., fairly “deviant” behavior for someone involved with children, and around the field of domestic violence, which is itself characterized by inappropriate slave/master behaviors, only without the designated slave deriving (?) sexual enjoyment from the degraded status).  The mother was ordered supervised by a commissioner who was at the time on the Board of Kids’ Turn, too….

Guess under what banner I found that:

Strategies to Improve Supervised Visitation Services in Domestic Violence Cases

M. Sharon MaxwellLCSW, Ph.D.
Karen OehmeJ.D.

authors commissioned by
Violence Against Women Online Resources [logo]

Barbara Flory, MSW, LFMT (or whatever) and 2003 at least SVN board member, wrote the above glowing recommendation of supervised visitation; Karen Oehme, here, chairs the FLorida Clearinghouse on Supervised Visitation.  They are talking about strategies to have less abuse and murder occurring around supervised visitation (no mention made of financial fraud, etc., although it’s been found repeatedly) — and not whether it’s a good or bad idea, based on the fact that murders and further abuse HAS occurred around it!

ACTUALLY, Familylawcourts.com has a page on the “AOC” and says it better than I do; it’s funny, but right:

2.  The Elkins Task Force, which was headed by the AOC supposedly to promote accountability and listening to children, was an expensive and expansive white wash.

How else to explain why the AOC commissioned a 50k research project to ask family court litigants questions for the entire state; and the results featured only 53 litigants and 83 AOC staff personnel?

3.  One lasting, inept brainchild of the Judicial Council, again working in conjunction with the AOC, was to decriminalize crime via a “Supervised Visitation,” form in which kidnapping becomes the more civilized “parental abduction.”

Thus, 12 years after the Judicial Council working in conjunction with the AOC, created the non-professional field, there remains no oversight. Which con artists have discovered.  Which explains how suspected pedophiles are now serving on the boards of some Supervised visitation agencies; and why Supervised visitation monitors are awarding custody to the suspected pedophiles.

As such, if the AOC wasn’t so damaging to the point of lethal, it would be listed as a sub-category to Comic Gold.

Is there anything where AOC excels?

Yes.  The AOC excels at wasting enormous amounts of taxpayer funds for slick, expensive conferences, most of which are designed to continue prohibiting access to any real justice in the courts, such as the one below.


(note:  I don’t agree with author in GPS issue, though).

She sarcastically notes:

Practice Hint:  Due to the increased number of custody exchange murders, we recommend attorneys request judges order any custody exchange to be made at the local police department.  Should a murder occur, not only is it likely the crime will be recorded on a number of video cameras in an around the area, but any number of police officers would already on hand to effect a quick arrest.  The video could later be used as part of a plea deal, which would save the state trial costs.

Actually, I experienced so-called “parental abduction” (call it what you will) AT a law enforcement station, after having asked (in vain) previously for supervised visitation or something to prevent this (as I recall the LONG case history).  Apparently the problem is I wasn’t willing to cut some deal with CPS and let my children go into foster care needlessly to get revenge on my ex.   So, they did nothing, knowing it would be off their plate and safely in family court anyhow.   This custody-switch kept the case going, which also (FYI) meant a significant delay in child support matters, probably resulting in a little interest accumulation (at least from program funds) on the side, too.  The possible profitable (except to the children) permutations are endless in this system.

I figured I’d just hop on over to Tennessee to look up this nice nonprofit I learned was incorporated there:  Surprise:


Search:       1-1 of 1
Search Name:  Starts With Contains
Control #:
Control # Entity Type Name Name Type Name Status Entity Filing Date Entity Status
000454811 NCORP SUPERVISED VISITATION NETWORK, INC. Entity Inactive 09/29/2003 Inactive – Terminated



000454811: Corporation Non-Profit – Domestic
Old Name:
Business Type:
Status: Inactive – Terminated Initial Filing: 09/29/2003
Formed in: Putnam County Delayed Effective Date:
Fiscal Year Close: June AR Due Date: 10/01/2007
Term of Duration: Perpetual Inactive Date: 01/11/2008
Principal Office: 2804 PARAN POINTE DR
Annual Report
Mailing Address:
AR Exempt: No
Public Benefit Corporation: Yes
Skip Navigation Links

Name Status Expires
  No Assumed Names Found…


WELL, they apparently kept it going about 5 years — with the exception of AFCC, that’s pretty average for nonprofits catering to therapeutic-jurisprudence professions in the courts, which is probably why new ones (such as COllaborative law practice) must constantly be created. ….  Maybe the moved to Florida… or just went extra-USA terrestrial…..

TypeDateImage #DetailTermination01/11/20086178-2677Articles of Dissolution01/11/20086178-2675Administrative Amendment12/05/20076164-2457Detail Notice of Determination12/03/2007ROLL 61612006 Annual Report Due 10/01/200612/19/20065902-1491Notice of Determination12/01/2006ROLL 58932005 Annual Report Due 10/01/200510/07/20055578-01582004 Annual Report Due 10/01/200409/14/20045233-08802003 Annual Report Due 04/01/200402/10/20045032-2914Detail Initial Filing09/29/20034922-0943

Registered as a Charity in Tennessee?

Financial Reports for Registered Charities

(I didn’t find out whether or not).

I THINk the first address listed as  c/o Nancy Fallows, who shows up as someone probably good at getting grants, and on the board of a substance-abuse-prevention group, “Putnam (County) Power of One

Nancy Fallows Secretary,
(Grant-Writing Sub-Committee Chair)
Tennessee Community Services Agency,
Upper Cumberland Director
1000 England Drive, Suite F,
Cookeville, TN 38501(work) 931-646-4087; (fax) 931-520-0080


Joe Nullet (also on Board, and the registered agent? in Florida for the TN corporation also) is Harvard, JFK School of Government, father of 3 boys, and:


and obviously someone who knows how to obtain funding for a program.  This one is selling educational curriculums, isn’t everyone these days?

Joe Nullet

Joe Nullet, a graduate of Harvard University, is the Executive Director of the Supervised Visitation Network, an international membership organization of professionals who provide supervised visitation and access services to families. Joe was also formerly the Executive Director of the Family Nurturing Center of Florida, *** an organization committed to creating a community of nurturing care for our children.


As recognized Trainer/Consultant for the Nurturing Parenting programs, Joe’s area of strength is in the administration, support, and successful implementation of the Nurturing Parenting programs. Since 2001, Joe has successfully obtained financial support from the Jaguars Foundation, the Community Foundation of Jacksonville, the Reinhold Foundation, the Rice Family Foundation, UPS, Publix, the Martin Foundation, and others for the implementation of Nurturing Parenting programs.

As a father of three beautiful boys, Joe is passionate about nurturing his family and the world in which they live. Joe is available to train your agency staff to facilitate the Nurturing Parenting programs or as a consultant to develop innovative strategies to foster community collaboration, solicit financial support, and manage the effective implementation of Nurturing Parenting programs within your organization and/or community.

Joe Nullet, Executive Director
Supervised Visitation Network

*** per ‘SUNBIZ.org” -a site I really appreciate where you can look up florida organizations — actually, this was incorporated in 1993 as “Family Visitation Center, Inc.” and in 2000 they did a name change (adding the “nurturing”) as we can see in 2001, Mr. Nullet helped them expand the concept, or at least get funding for doing so.     The group’s current address, 2759 Bartley Circle (same city) is apparently owned by the City of Jacksonville  (a community center) and listed with the courts, or taking business from them:

Family Nurturing Center of Florida
Supervised Visitation, Dependency and Family Law

2759 Bartley Circle
Jacksonville, FL 32207
(904) 389-4244
(904) 389-4225
Provides a multifaceted supervised visitation center for children to visit with their non-custodial parents when there have been allegations and/or confirmation of physical or sexual abuse, neglect, or domestic violence.
Services: Information and referral; Other
Victims Served: Child Victims of Physical Abuse; Child Victims of Sexual Abuse; Domestic Violence Victims
Counties Served: Duval, Clay, Nassau, Baker, St. Johns
Circuits Served: 4, 8, 7
Fee: Yessliding scale for Family Law clients.
Hours of Service: Please see website for hours of operation.
Web Site: http://www.fncflorida.org


That site shows them in the 2 primary businesses supported by A/V grants:  Parent Education and Supervised Visitation and yes, they are a nonprofit; their “For Parents” link hopefully points to the SVN, and has a hastily (or at least crookedly) scanned “handbook” coaching parents on how to pick the right type of visitation center, i.e., one of ours, listing the SVN at 1223 King Drive (although it’s not been there for a while…..)


FNC is proud to partner with a number of local service providers to offer comprehensive services to clients. We have relationships with each of the certified domestic violence centers within the Fourth Circuit, and we also partner with Family Foundations, Youth Crisis Center, and many others. If you have a question about additional resources which may benefit your clients, please contact us or you can conduct your own search using the 2-1-1 system.

Like Kids’ Turn (etc.) it is described as the 1993 brainchild of a judge — only this one, responding to complaints from parents with children in foster-care:

We opened in 1993 as the Family Visitation Center, the first of its kind in Florida. It was the brainchild of the Honorable Judge Dorothy Pate, who was moved to act after hearing frequent complaints from parents who were not being allowed to see their children who had been placed in foster care.


Representatives from the Department of Children, the Children’s Home Society and the Junior League of Jacksonville met with Judge Pate to discuss a new concept called “supervised visitation.” Since that meeting, we have expanded our agency to include three programs at four locations and changed our name to reflect this growing commitment to improving the lives of families throughout Northeast Florida.

(NoTE — that predates the 1996 welfare reform, the 1994 national fatherhood initiative and violence against women act).


GONE SOUTH — literally, to FLORIDA — or at least here’s another corporation by the same name, in the same city (Jacksonville) that decided to get started up around the time the Tennessee incorporation shut down (or was shut down):

Florida Non Profit Corporation
Filing Information
Document Number N07000010935
FEI/EIN Number 521831498
Date Filed 11/09/2007
State FL
Effective Date 11/15/2007
Principal Address
Changed 01/06/2010
Mailing Address

By the former address, yes, this is the same corporation (see files):

EIN# 521831498

IT’s purpose (see sunbiz.org if this doesn’t show, click on bottom link below Annual Reports) is fairly clear — business promotion and collaboration on how to obtain access visitation funding, basically:

Article III ” The specific purpose for which this corporation is organized” — “Provide a forum for networking and sharing of information

between CHILD ACCESS PROVIDERS and OTHER PROFESSIONALS.  Advocate for adequate public and private funding for Child access and visitation programs.”


Others at the first Jacksonville Address (1223 King STreet)  address include a window-washing service.  Now, 3995 Riverside Avenue, Jacksonville, FL appears to be a particular real estate group, “Bo Bridgeport Brokers“) which I only figured because google-mapping zooming in on the address contained that label.

Bo Bridgeport Brokers is the premier Commerical and Residential Real Estate Firm in Jacksonville Florida. We specialize in residential and commercial real 
3955 Riverside Avenue
Jacksonville, FL 32205-3312
(904) 358-3955



It’s also listed in “Family and Child Services” in a VERMONT (how’s that for the other end of the east coast?) Child Support / Commission on Women office.  Cute:

  1. Family Division and Office of Child Support | Commission on Women

    women.vermont.gov/…/family-court-and-office-of-child-support – Cached

    1223 King Street JacksonvilleFL 32204 904-389-7800 http://www.svnetwork.net/ . SVN is a multi-national non-profit membership organization that is literally a 

1223 King St Jacksonville, FL 32204

http://www.corporationwiki.com/Florida/Jacksonville/1223KingStJacks – Cached
1223 King St Jacksonville, FL 32204. Companies at this address: Vision Window Washing, Inc. Alzheimer’s Care, Inc. Supervised Visitation Network, Inc. 
As explained nicely on the VERMONT government site, after one reads about the child support contacts:

Family Division and Office of Child Support

Vermont Office of Child Support

http://dcf.vermont.gov/ocs/Provides free assistance to those paying and receiving child support. The office keeps track of child support payments, can help with getting a child support order, collects overdue payments, locates absent parents, helps change child support amounts, can help determine paternity, and offers help to child support payers


Vermont Parent Representation Center, Inc.
77 Charlotte Street
Burlington, Vermont 05401

An interdisciplinary team of an attorney, a social worker, and a peer navigator (a parent who has direct experience with child protective and foster care systems) represents parents at risk of experiencing the removal of their children into state custody and foster care or kin-care. A Community Action Team (CAT) works with the custodial parent to address issues that threaten the children’s safety to prevent a petition from being filed in court  (Family and Probate).


VPRC is a {{YET ANOTHER…..}} not-for-profit public interest law and policy organization. VPRC’s goals include:

To reduce the number of children removed from their families into state and other out-of-home custody; to shorten the length of stay in state and other out-of-home custody for children who have been removed, and to reduce the number of children re-entering state and other out-of-home custody after being reunified with their families.

This says nothing about “custody-dispute” Parental alienation situations, but I’d be surprised if they didn’t handle such things and get some grants or contracts to do so.


This is clearly more directed at CPS & Foster Care uses, but notice how SVN can springboard that into “custody dispute” or “estranged from the other parent” situations . . …




Supervised Visitation Network
1223 King Street
Jacksonville, FL 32204


SVN is a multi-national non-profit membership organization that is literally a network of agencies and individuals who are interested in assuring that children can have safe, conflict-free {{AFCC code language;  not ‘High-conflict”}} access to parents with whom they do not reside. Some of the children who need these services live in foster homes or with relatives. Some live with one parent who is estranged from the other.

Wonder what the percentages are.  Notice, it doesn’t even pretend to be a grass-roots organization, or even parent-originated.    “The “is-estranged” could be either, has a restraining order on because of criminal conduct, or is judged to be guilty by allegation — from a PAS-saturated official — of the “crime” of parental alienation.  See in New Hampshire, parent coordination association (and my posts on it) for HOW to allege parental alienation and cut the children off from their mothers, after obtaining parent coordinator status.

6. The City and County of San Francisco initially reduced our 1011 grant award by 10%, but the amount was re-instated in September, 2010 raising our contract award to the original $50,000. This funding is for our very specialized, Nonviolent Family Skills Program for Juveniles.

I presume they are probably meaning the year 2011; someone has a little data input trouble here…..    If the SF Courts ever pay off what it is SFTC has a lien for (see my other Kids’ Turns posts) perhaps they can hire a proofreader for their new website, and get their license back.  Oh, this may be a little difficult though, because so many SF Courtrooms are being closed, soon, for lack of funding, budget cutbacks, etc. . . . .   You know how it goes….

I think that MOST businesses and charities understand (as well as shouldn’t most attorneys who are going to be sometimes doing business with them, or incorporated themselves as an LLP) that one has to register as a nonprofit with the state, and also file annual reports with the secretary of state whether for-profit or not, if doing business in that state.  But here it is stated explicitly:


Florida Charity Nearly Ruined

Sun Coast Law Enforcement Charities (Sun Coast) is a police charity benefiting police officers and their families in several Florida counties. Recently, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (Department) served the charity’s president with a lawsuit.

Why? Because the charity failed to renew its registration with the Department, even though it had sent letters and made phone calls reminding the charity to do so. In Florida, any charity that asks for donations in the state mustregister with the department each year. It costs between $10 and $400, depending on how much money the charity raises. Sun Coast’s registration fee was $75.

The Department’s lawsuit wanted to impose a $10,000 fine against Sun Coast. Paying that fine would have ruined the charity. According to its IRS filings, the charity’s 2008 total revenue was only $11,000. Luckily it avoided the problem.

It explained to the Department that a former bookkeeper had ignored calls and letters from the Department. The Department took into consideration that Sun Coast had been registered since 2000 and kept up its renewals until the 2009 incident. In the end, Sun Coast paid a $1,000 fine and remains in operation.

Registration Laws

Many states are like Florida and require registration of charities. ArizonaConnecticutColorado, and Pennsylvania are good examples. The rules usually are different in each state, though. For example, in some states, a charity must register:

  • And pay a fee each year if it “does business” in the state
  • And pay a fee only the first year it “does business” in the state, but must submit financial and other records each year
  • Before it accepts donations, before it asks for or “solicits” donations, or both
  • By completing forms provided by the state, by submitting a copy of the charity’s IRS form, or both

(Courtesy “Charities.lawyers.com“)

Apparently being able to look it up on-line is new? http://www.800helpfla.com/socbus.html

Back to the Division of Consumer Services' Homepage

Solicitation of Contributions
Information for Businesses

The Solicitation of Contributions Act requires anyone who solicits donations from people in the State of Florida to register with the Department and renew annually. This applies to charitable organizations, sponsors, professional solicitors, as well as professional fundraising consultants. The Department collects registration fees and has authority to impose penalties for non-compliance. The Department provides financial disclosure regarding organizations on the online Gift Givers’ Guide or you can obtain information about a specific charity by calling our Consumer Assistance Call Center at 1-800-HELP-FLA (435-7352), or out of state 850-410-3800.

Gift Givers Guide


Looking at the SVN site, describing the backgrounds of its current Board of Directors, here’s a nice connection to “responsible fatherhood” if you don’t get it yet:


Robert B. Straus, DMH, JD

Cambridge, MA

A psychologist and lawyer was Senior Psychologist of the Family Service Clinic from 1982 to 1988, conducting custody and visitation evaluations for the Middlesex County Family Court. From 1988, he served frequently as Guardian ad Litem in high-conflict custody and access disputes.

In 1991, Dr. Straus started Meeting Place: Supervised Child Access Service, a program of The Guidance Center, Inc. in Cambridge, MA, providing a safe setting in which children in high-risk situations can visit parents with whom they are not living.


Entity Name Identification Number Old Identification Number Principal Office
Address, City, State, Zip, Country
GUIDANCE CENTER, INC., THE 042199861  000013371  5 SACRAMENTO ST., CAMBRIDGE, MA  02138  USA 

Some details about the organization, including its name change:

The exact name of the Nonprofit Corporation: GUIDANCE CENTER, INC., THE

The name was changed from:  CAMBRIDGE MENTAL HEALTH ASSOCI on 9/17/1997

Mergered into :  RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY CARE, INC. on 8/21/2009

Entity Type:  Nonprofit Corporation
Identification Number: 042199861

Old Federal Employer Identification Number (Old FEIN):  000013371


He is a founder of the Supervised Visitation Network. He was President of the Network in 1993-94, helped draft the Network’s Standards and Guidelines for practice, and has served several terms on the Board of Directors.


So maybe if I want to find what state it first incorporated in, I should go to Massachusetts?


From 1995 through 2000 he was Co-Chair of the Massachusetts Coalition for Supervised Visitation, and in that capacity worked with the Governor’s Commission on Responsible Fatherhood and the Supervised Visitation Task Force of the Probate and Family Court, helping draft the Guidelines for Court Practice for Supervised Visitation.

Dr. Straus has a private psychotherapy practice, working with couples and children, and remains the Program Consultant to Meeting Place.



Dr. Straus (psychologist/psychotherapist) published in 1994 (as cited in AFCC publication) on traumatized children in supervised visitation.  Maybe if the kids are so badly traumatized, they shouldn’t be there to start with?  Anyhow, this abstract for the cite:


Copyright (c) 1999 Sage Publications, Inc.
Family and Conciliation Courts Review of AFCC

ARTICLE: Traumatized Children in Supervised Visitation: What Do They Need?

Authors’ Note:

This article was presented as a plenary paper at the First International Conference on Child Access Services, Paris, France, November 4-7, 1998.

April, 1999

37 Fam. & Concil. Cts. Rev. 135


Janet R. Johnston and Robert B. Straus


The purpose of supervised access, also known as supervised visitation and exchange services, is to provide a protected setting for parent-child contact when such contact presents risk following parental separation, child abuse, or neglect, or after an extended interruption of contact. There has been a remarkable growth in such services over the past two decades, in the United States and Canada, 1 as well as internationally. 2 Although there is a growing literature on the functioning of child access services (see, for example, Pearson & Thoennes, 1997; Straus & Alda, 1994)**, to date there has been little concentrated attention in the field on how better to respond to the vulnerable children who are the primary clients of visitation services. It seems likely that several factors have contributed to the relative invisibility of children’s individual and developmental needs in designing access programs. These factors include the urgency with which the needs of these distressed parents and their advocates call for the attention of decision makers and service providers, the fact that visitation orders (usually made in family courts where children lack their own voice) take precedence in defining how children are served, and, most important, the lacunae in clinical and research findings about the special needs of this population of children.

Whereas supervised access is used to provide supportive services and reunite parents with their children when there has not been trauma, the majority of the child clients of supervised visitation services have not been so fortunate. This article …

** of course there was even then a growing literature from certain sources on access services, particularly with the CRCKIDS.org organization on, and the nonprofit board-member multiple inter-relationships in place from the start.  Abstract is from “Lexis-Nexis



Dr. Straus in Cambridge, “RSJ Corporation” filing (OLD ein# 043061365) corresponds with these dates, somewhat.


RSJ CORP. Summary Screen 
Help with this form

The exact name of the Domestic Profit Corporation: RSJ CORP.
Entity Type:  Domestic Profit Corporation
Identification Number: 043061365

Old Federal Employer Identification Number (Old FEIN):  000312860

Date of Organization in Massachusetts:  09/11/1989 Date of Revival:  05/29/2007
Date of Dissolution:  08/31/1998
Current Fiscal Month / Day: 12 / 31 Previous Fiscal Month / Day: 00 / 00  
The location of its principal office:

No. and Street:  22 BERKELEY STREET
City or Town: CAMBRIDGE State: MA   Zip: 02138 Country: USA


Supervised Visitation Access is not suitable for long-term, has been acknowledged (?) since 1999.  Therefore, I can see how if business is to keep coming there would need to be new customers.  THEORETICALLY a good bit of supervised visitation access will heal all relationships, reform perps of course (Except parentally alienating ones?) and lead to a reunified family.  (Alternately, see Warshak….).  OR, it could provide a nice excuse to terminate relationship with the offending parent, possibly the one most offended at (and/or paying for) the supervised visitation to start with.  Another Lexis-Nexis abstract, delivered in Paris again — here:

Copyright (c) 1999 Sage Publications, Inc.
Family and Conciliation Courts Review of AFCC

ARTICLE: Supervised Access: A Long-Term Solution?

Author’s Note: This article was originally presented at the First International Conference on Child Access Services, Paris, November 5, 1998.

October, 1999

37 Fam. & Concil. Cts. Rev. 478


Martha Bailey



Supervised access is ordered to develop, reestablish, or maintain a relationship between a child and a parent, or other relative, generally with the expectation that unsupervised access will at some point become possible. Some courts and commentators have said that supervised access is not appropriate as a long-term measure. Ontario Provincial Court Judge Norris Weisman wrote that supervised access is “a temporary and time-limited measure designed to resolve a parental impasse over access,” not “a long-term remedy.” 1 Lawyer Karen Oehme, cochair of the Family Visitation Program of Tallahassee, Florida, said, “Attorneys should realize that institutional supervised visitation is not a long-term solution in most family court cases, and that the programs should not be thought of as a substitute for addressing the underlying problems that resulted in the need for supervised visitation in the first place.” 2

In a 1992 case, the Ontario Court of Appeal also emphasized that supervised access should not be “a permanent feature of a child’s life” and decided to terminate access, rather than ordering supervised access, where it was not foreseeable that unsupervised access would ever be possible3 A year later, the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia, in a case called Bieganski v. Bieganski, said: “Supervised access is not appropriate as a long term measure.” 4 In 1996, the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia clarified that the Bieganski decision did not mean that …



WELL, if one looks at the history and membership of the Children’s Rights Council (which does have a chapter in paris, and the link I clicked seemed to indicate, since about 1999 — not that my French is very good.) and remember who active David Levy (also on board of supervised visitation network is) none of this is too surprising except that it’s not about time to make up some new terminology about now, because Collaborative Law is pretty well established, as is Parenting Coordination.    It’s recommended to do this before the U.S. goes bankrupt and the $$ is inflated into worthlessness and no longer the world’s reserve currency, which I can see why considering what we DO with it!


David Levy

David L. Levy, Esq. is a CRC co-founder and former CRC President. He has directed 16 CRC conferences, was editor of the 1993 book entitled “The Best Parents is Both Parents®”, and has recently published an eco-novel entitled “Revolt of the Animals.”



Michael Oddenino, member of the CRC's Board of Trustees



Michael L. Oddenino has been the CRC’s General Counsel since its inception in 1985.  He practices family law full time in Arcadia, CA, just outside Los Angeles.   He has written numerous amicus (friend of the court) briefs and journal articles on family law.  His CRC brief in the 1989 Michael H case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where the court agreed with the CRC that never-married fathers were entitled to a hearing to determine visitation rights to their children, even if the child was born within a marriage of the mother to another man.




Margaret Wuwert, CRC's Chief Operating Officer


Margaret A. Wuwert, Chief Operating Officer, is a retired social worker and serves as Director of CRC of Northwest Ohio. Her agency is one of CRC’s largest chapters with eight Access Centers in Ohio, Michigan and Indiana.  In 2002, Ms. Wuwert was recognized by the Lucas County Domestic Relations Court for her untiring dedication and supportive access services to the children and families in the Toledo area.



Mark S,. Inzetta, member of CRC's Board of Trustees


Mark S. Inzetta, J.D. is the Senior Vice President and Associate General Counsel for Wendy’s International, Inc., based in Dublin, Ohio. Before the CRC, Mark served on the Ohio Child Support Guidelines Commission, the Supreme Court of Ohio’s Task Force on Family Law and Children, ***and Board of Directors of the Franklin County, Ohio Chapter of Court Appointed Special Advocates.

*** Lots of AFCC influence on that one, I think I blogged it.  To get input, they simply flew the task force out to Arizona (home to an AFCC organization) to sit on AFCC presentations; I may have even blogged that.  Given Ms. Wuwert, and others, I can see possibly why CRC shows up on the Indiana Child Support site.



Just to show how “totally” unrelated AFCC is from this SVN (that’s bouncing its corporation status from state to state?) here’s what’s scheduled for the October 2011 SVN conference, I guess tax-deductible for the SVN because it’s a regional training, and probably for attendees under education, and probably who knows what else.



“Working with High Conflict and Violent Families, Implications for Supervised Visitation”

Hyatt Regency Hotel Indianapolis, Indiana

October 26,2011

This One Day Institute will focus on the issues presented in Supervised Visitation when Domestic Violence is present. This Institute will provide information to help professionals who work with SV providers, and those who provide direct services, to understand how domestic violence may require changes to their services to respond to the complex dynamic involved.


Scheduled one day before the AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts) Regional Conference:

“Working with High Conflict and Violent Families: A Race with No Winners” at the Hyatt Regency.

For more information about the AFCC Conference, go HERE

(and you can see the great race-car graphics, too….)


I don’t know about that “no winners” part.  It seems like great retirement planning if you’re in the business, particularly if you have published something that could be marketed as “parent education” or how to work with flawed parents, or such .  . . . .

Cost: $125 for SVN Members, $150 for Non Members (Includes Breakfast and Lunch):

Register HERE

A rate of $135/night at the Hyatt Regency is available through the AFCC Conference: HERE



I think we should look at the current list of AFCC Board Membership, starting with Linda Fieldstone (of Florida), now President:  Is your judge on it?

AFCC Board of Directors


Linda B. Fieldstone, MEd, Miami, FL

President Elect

Arnold T. Shienvold, PhD, Harrisburg, PA

Vice President

Nancy Ver Steegh, JD, MSW, St. Paul, MN


Richard L. Altman, JD, Napoleon, OH


Annette T. Burns, JD, Phoenix, AZ

Past President

Robert M. Smith, JD, MDiv, Windsor, CO

Hon. Peter Boshier, Wellington, New Zealand Hon. Diana Bryant, Melbourne, VIC, Australia Andrea Clark, MSW, St. Louis, MO patti cross, JD, Toronto, ON

Robin M. Deutsch, PhD, Boston, MA Hon. Dianna Gould-Saltman, Los Angeles, CA Hon. R. John Harper, Toronto, ON Grace M. Hawkins, MSW, Tucson, AZ Mindy F. Mitnick, EdM, MA, Edina, MN Hon. Graham R. Mullane, Newcastle, NSW, Australia Marsha Kline Pruett, PhD, MSL, Northampton, MA Matthew J. Sullivan, PhD, Palo Alto, CA Larry V. Swall, JD, Liberty, MO

AFCC Staff

Executive Director

Peter Salem, MA

Which reminds me, some time, to do a post or two on the Hofstra University (NY) connection to AFCC.

Associate Director

Leslye Hunter, MA, LMFT

Program Director

Candace Walker, CMP, CMM

Business and Administrative Director

Chris Shanahan, BA, CPA

Office Manager & Registrar

Dawn Holmes

Program Coordinator

Nola Risse-Connolly, BA

Program Coordinator

Erin Sommerfeld, BA

Administrative Assistant

Jessica Murdy, BS

AND IF YOU LIVE IN INDIANA, be comforted to know they have the violence/danger thing all under control:

Co-sponsored by the Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Judicial Center


I notice that the Duluth Abuse Intervention Programs (aka “Minnesota Program Development, Inc.)-related “Battered Women’s Justice Project” has fully enmeshed itself now with AFCC (and continuing to receive preventing violence discretionary grants, no doubt) and as such will be just about useless when it comes to objective critiques of the AFCC and its impact on our culture and the culture of divorce in re:  murder/suicides around exchange of children or the filing of protective orders (so to speak) (I’m referring to Loretta Frederick:  Go to TAGGS.hhs.gov and see if you can find the  name, or search my blog on the organizations it’ll make more sense):


4. Judicial Officers institute— interparental conflict and domestic Violence: structuring Parenting arrangements that account for the implications of abuse

The basic implication of “abuse” is danger to the abused, or if access to hurt the abused is cut off, attempts to hurt HER children instead.   The most common sense solution would be separation.  But that concept has an “irreconciliable difference” with the fathers’ rights and perpetual new professions contingents, so we need to create more tax exempt entities to confer and rehearse how to make these situations work, even if the idea is ridiculous.

You beat a person — you shouldn’t be around children.  GOT IT?  Why should everyone else pay an adult to be supervised in the presence of children rather than get that adult AWAY from children and let them deal with their life in an adult manner somewhere else.  This is called deterrence.

COMMON SENSE though, wouldn’t support the word “institute” which there seems to be always another one of …….

Research has documented that interparental conflict and violence have multiple negative effects on many aspects of parenting and family functioning and on children’s psychological functioning and dysregulation. It is also associated with multiple adjustment problems in children, including internalizing and externalizing problems, PTSD, sleep problems, and school adjustment problems and performance.


IT  meaning “interparental conflict and violence.”  Is conflict the same as violence?    VIOLENCE is directional, and just might have self-defense counter-moves.  Two can have conflict, but generally one starts the violence.  ACEStudy.org (Kaiser/CDC study, an old one, but a large and 10-years-long one) talked about adverse childhood events having these impacts, two of which such events included physical violence and sexual abuse.

Presenters in this institute will tie the latest research on [how to rename/reframe partner and child abuse] the impact of interparental conflict and domestic violence on children to the practical task of structuring parenting arrangements that account for the implications of abuse. As a result of this institute, participants will be better able to structure and evaluate parenting arrangements that account for the unique nature of the violence and conflict in the family and link the abuse to the parenting capacities of the parties.

Loretta M. Frederick, JD, Battered Women’s Justice Project, Winona, MN

Hon. Denise McColley, Henry County Family Court, Napoleon, OH

E. Mark Cummings, PhD, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN

Pamela A. Hayman-Weaner, JD, Defiance, OH Gabrielle Davis, JD, Battered Women’s Justice Project,

Minneapolis, MN


And be sure not to miss this pre-conference institute cliff-hanger:

7. domesticabuse,co-Parentingand Parenting time

The rubric of utilizing multiple hypotheses is essential to ensure appropriate interventions, services and parenting plans while addressing any shifts in parent-child estrangement vs. alienation. This workshop will help participants grapple with the complex and sometimes changing dynamics of families in conflict, particularly where domestic abuse is alleged or identified. Various typologies of abusers, victims, and relationships will be examined. Presenters will explore how to conduct initial assessments while elucidating the importance of ongoing assessment and monitoring of any progress.

Amy Van Gunst, MA, Fountain Hill Center, Grand Rapids, MI

Randy Flood, MA, Men’s Resource Center at Fountain Hill, Grand Rapids, MI


Make sure to read aloud the portion in red 3 times fast.  Then cogitate on the concept of putting “abuse” and “parenting” in the same place at all.  Then think about whether you’d like to have people who speak like that to decide where your child lives, or influence others who do.

SUPERVISED VISITATION very linked in with the AFCC and with, at least the California Courts



  1. [PDF]



    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    of the Supervised Visitation Network (SVN) Standards Task Force (the “Task …. 1 TheSupervised Visitation Network acknowledges that the concept of both 

  2. California Courts: Self-Help Center: Families & Children: Custody 

    Jul 28, 2011 – Why can supervised visitation help in cases where there is or has been  and education requirements of the Supervised Visitation Network



WELL, that’s enough fun for one post….  Perhaps it will illustrate a few points for my next one, about the SF Courthouses closing down, but still there are ongoing grants to SFTC from a very interesting few sources….

Hath God spoken in San Leandro, California?

leave a comment »

From a site in Seacacus, NJ:

Earthquakes Hit U.S. Throughout The Nation

In the past 24 hours, a whole lot of shaking has taken place. Tuesday morning, the most powerful earthquake to strike Colorado in forty-four years struck close to the town of Cokedale. In the mid-day, the Eastern Coast roiled with shock at the strongest quake to hit Virginia since 1897. West Coasters immediately began to mock the shaken and nervous Eastern Coast, but they also got a chance to be part of the experience when a 3.6-magnitude quake hit close to San Leandro, Calif. plus a 4.2-magnitude quake near Mammoth Lakes.


Biblically speaking, earthquakes and natural disasters, are part of the vocabulary — Jericho (walls came tumbling down) Sodom & Gomorrah (hell from skyward), and the Egyptian cavalry drowned the Red Sea while fleeing Israelites walked through dry shod. . They are indications it’s time to repent, but to the faithful it’s supposed to be good news, whether in Haggai 2

 6For thus says the LORD of hosts: Yet once more, in a little while, I will shake the heavens and the earth and the sea and the dry land. 7And I will shake all nations, so that the treasures of all nations shall come in, and I will fill this house with glory, says the LORD of hosts. 8The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, declares the LORD of hosts.

in context of rebuilding the temple, the prophet said, “Fear Not!”  Of course, neglecting the temple had caused the drought and famine to start with:

Be strong, all you people of the land, declares the LORD. Work, for I am with you, declares the LORD of hosts, 5according to the covenant that I made with you when you came out of Egypt. My Spirit remains in your midst. Fear not.

Of course a little fear kickstarted the work (Haggai 1: and this represents prophecy, i.e., God speaking)

9You looked for much, and behold, it came to little. And when you brought it home, I blew it away. Why? declares theLORD of hosts. Because of my house that lies in ruins, while each of you busies himself with his own house. 10 Therefore the heavens above you have withheld the dew, and the earth has withheld its produce. 11And I have called for a drought on the land and the hills, on the grain, the new wine, the oil, on what the ground brings forth, on man and beast, and on all their labors.”

Be patient, I’m getting to the point….  Hebrews 12 (following the well-known Chapter 11, on faith, perserverence, etc., and the future hope of glory):   Moses was even afraid:   ” 21And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake:)

and again a promise of more earth AND sky shaking …. (KJV)

12:26Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. 27And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.

So, people of the Christian faith everywhere should be in expectation of the return of their savior, and hit the streets telling about him, given some of the recent earthquake activity. Thankfully these earthquakes didn’t hit Reliant Stadium in Texas the other weekend, as thousands gathered to fast and pray for our country to repent (or whatever — see “Rick Perry” or “TheResponseUSA.com”).

As this post will show, alas, they are more likely to be found running around forming nonprofits to defeat the wicked LGBT causes, promote fatherhood, lobby legislatures to repeal too-tolerant laws, and file lawsuits (under nonprofits) that complain the public schools are too intolerant of Christian proselytizing by youngsters trained up in the right way to convert.  Or too enthusiastic about it.

They are building a LOT of their own “houses” and sanctuaries, in-fighting between pastors and congregations, and between traditional congregations and mega-churches.  I suppose the return of Christ will have to wait til they figure it out, but before the end of the post I’ll show some of this — and hopefully start to shake loose some understanding in who SOME of these groups are indeed, if I may engage in a pun, shaking down.

I’m as gullible and future-oriented as many people, and I HOPE that some groups currently smug in their habitual noncompliance with tax laws which benefit them as nonprofits, will start acting like Moses and “exceedingly fear and quake.” I hope that something starts a shakeup of the corporate shakedown of the public through economic shock and slush funds.  Before the entire US population is under dog-like trained submission to accept the next version of the Holocaust because someone else a has the patent on “thinking.”

Actually, the book of Hebrews, which I allege was written before the income tax code, begins like Genesis, with the word “God,,” then explains to those interested how He {{naturally, communicates to us now, as opposed to the fathers, then}}:

1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; 4Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

(from http:/www.bible.cc, KJV)

Among the “divers manners” in the Bible reminds me of when God made a female ass speak to the prophet that was riding her, because she perceived an angel (with drawn sword) in the path, and the prophet-for-hire (Balaam) didn’t. In fact, she was saving his (and her) life, but the spiritually blind prophet, not realizing this might have beaten her to death for failing to go where he wanted her to.  Better (and more concisely) narrated in the text of Numbers 22, starting with:

21And Balaam rose up in the morning, and saddled his ass, and went with the princes of Moab.

Who says God doesn’t have a sense of humor?  (see the account).

Perhaps there is a God, because, however it was done (I wasn’t there), someone finally got through to Balaam that he wasn’t so smart as he thought he was, prophet status or not. And if I do have at times in doubt my God’s existence, some of those key anachronistic-for-the-culture indicators throughout the old (and new) testaments make me think who else could’ve better described men (as a gender’s) extreme difficulty understanding that sometimes women (or even female animals) just might know & perceive something obvious and life-saving that the divinely ordained ruling gender does not, at least not when they get accustomed to in the morning, saddling up their female beasts of burden on the way to prophesying something noble and important, for hire, for example, about how the plague upon the land is fatherlessness.

As we can see, these divers manners very well include bringing water from a rock, a flood upon an army, and disaster upon a city, so as I allege, it might be very well God right now speaking in all the quaking, including that in San Leandro. After all, fire and shaking accompanied the giving of the 10 commandments on Mt. Sinai, right?

Of course, I’m ignoring the part in the Hebrews 1 that God FORMERLY spoke “to the prophets” but has now by his Son, i.e., the initiated versus the masses. Throughout the Christian ages, the various leaders of “the church” couldn’t agree on who the Son was, anyhow, and tended to settle the matter by either council, excommunication, executions, and particularly after the invention of the printing press, book burnings, etc. Nowadays in the U.S. they simply incorporate as a nonprofit, set up another website criticizing the religiously incorrect, and draw away customers.

Re-arranging via this amazing internet tehcnology into megachurches has the same effect on those who can’t keep pace and customers.  Excommunication by Economic Competition.   And it’s easier than writing or getting personal inspiration for new sermons and local congregations and communities that actually know each other (let alone inspired outreach techniques) on a weekly basis, when the old stale ones can simply be downloaded en masse, thus making Holy Spirit a little more optional equipment.

In the interim, between the writing of Hebrews 12 and 1913 in the USA, of course we have Muhammed whose religion says God has no Son, and didn’t need one either, and Israel which says at a minimum that it wasn’t Jesus.

Pacific Justice Institute & Faith Fellowship, San Leandro verus San Leandro*:

(*City of)

(May, 2011):

City to Take Faith Fellowship Case to Supreme Court

San Leandro City Council voted 5-2 this week to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Faith Fellowship decision.

he City of San Leandro is taking its battle with Faith Fellowship Foursquare Church to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The City Council voted Thursday night in closed session to petition the nation’s highest court to review the case, in which the church alleges the city violated a federal law by denying it permits to relocate to a larger building in the city’s industrial zone. The vote was 5-2, with Mayor Stephen Cassidy and Councilmember Pauline Cutter

The City Council also decided to retain as co-counsel in the case Marci Hamilton, a professor at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law and an expert in the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, or RLUIPA, the law at the heart of the lawsuit.

Hamilton, who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Conner in 1989 and has represented many municipalities in religious land use cases, will join the city’s legal team from Oakland-based firm Meyers Nave.

Hamilton said she was optimistic about the Supreme Court’s interest in reviewing the case, saying the religious land use issues raised in Faith Fellowship’s lawsuit “have been percolating for a decade.”

“The issues in the case are prime for a Supreme Court review,” Hamilton said. “This is a national issue. It’s important to cities all over the country. That’s the kind of issue the Supreme Court is interested in,” she said.

Nevertheless, Mayor Stephen Cassidy said in an email to Patch that he opposed the decision because he is concerned the litigation could go on for several more years. “I believe the city should seek to resolve the dispute through good faith settlement negotiations,” he said.

Faith Fellowship, which has more than 2,000 members, filed suit against the city in July 2007 after the city denied it permission to open a new church in an industrial area not zoned for such uses. The church had purchased a property in the area and was forced to sell it at a  loss after the city denied the proper zoning and use permits. 

To date, Faith Fellowship claims it has lost $3.7 million in the ordeal.

Well, maybe next time they should get permits before they buy — or get a contract conditional on a zoning change by the city!  Among their 2,000 members, are their some businesspersons and real estate agents who know about these things, or were busy mentoring and recruiting new members?   How much was taken from local attendee families’ pockets for this cause, to accumulate enough to LOSE $3.7 million?

Later in this post, I am going to be searching — and not finding — for Faith Fellowship’s charitable filing for operation in California; for such a sizeable outfit one would think it’d be under its own location and name.  There are plenty of others, but so far, I haven’t located this one.  (feel free to enlighten me through comments field if you can).

Under the federal religious land use act, which was passed by Congress in 2000, governments are prohibited from imposing or implementing overly burdensome land use regulations on religious institutions unless there’s a “compelling governmental interest” for the regulation, and it’s the “least restrictive means” of furthering that interest.

How is it overly burdensome to actually have zoning laws in a city?

A federal district court judge originally granted the city summary judgment in the case.  However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco reversed the decision in February, saying the issue of whether or not the city imposed a “substantial burden” on the Church’s religious exercise under the law should be decided in court. The appeals court has since upheld that decision, following a petition for reconsideration filed by the city in March.

Hamilton {for the City} said the appeals court’s ruling in the case “was not persuasive” and said the court had taken an overly broad interpretation of the “substantial burden” threshold of the federal law.   The city has until July 21 to file its petition with the Supreme Court. Hamilton said the court would likely decide whether to review the case sometime in October. If the court does decide to take the case, oral arguments could begin in early 2012.

. . . (see also — same writer:  A Man and His Megachurch, including what appears to be a family pentecostal background, 7 years of disinterest, a conversion at age 22, and within 30 years, with support from Foursquare Denomination, here we are, reading to build, again:)

Mortara left that Monday night football gathering in the fall of 1980 and went straight to the All Nations Pentecostal Prayer Clinic, a small church in North Oakland where his father, a devout Christian, had worshipped. During the service, the pastor asked the attendees which of them wanted to give their lives to the Lord.

“And I walked down to the front and cried for like 20 minutes,” Mortara said. “And that was it. Guys don’t cry. But the love of God is a pretty powerful thing.”

Today, Mortara leads one of the largest churches in San Leandro, one whose rapid growth, thanks largely to Mortara’s charismatic leadership, has landed it in a legal battle with the city.

Since taking the reins nearly 18 years ago, Mortara52, has turned Faith Fellowship from a nearly bankrupt, neighborhood church with a shrinking 65-person congregation (over one-third of them children) into a 2,000-member strong, media-savvy megachurch.

Mortara’s reach stretches well beyond San Leandro: His sermons are broadcast on television and cable in the Bay Area, Chicago and Las Vegas, as well as on the Internet, with a viewership of between 200,000 and 300,000 people weekly, according to Mortara.

WELL — the other day, San Leandro had a few earthquakes.  This is not unprecedented — after all, it’s right next to Hayward, which is on a major fault line.  This is California, and it’s what we live with:

Hayward Fault is our deadliest – a ‘tectonic time bomb

East Bay sits on a ‘tectonic time bomb’ where big quakes occur about every 140 years – the last was 139 years ago

October 18, 2007|By Carolyn Jones, Chronicle Staff Writer (found in “articles.SFgate.com”)
    • HAYWARD: The railroad depot above was flattened by the 1868 quake, which is estimated at magnitude 7. Photo courtesy of Hayward Area Historical Society
  • HAYWARD: The railroad depot above was flattened by the 1868 quake, which is estimated at magnitude 7. Photo courtesy of Hayward Area Historical Society

The last time a major earthquake ripped along the Hayward Fault, San Leandro and Hayward were nearly leveled, but, in a shock to seismologists, the most populated stretch of the East Bay was relatively unscathed, according to a new map released Wednesday.

The “shake map” of the devastating 1868 quake, which scientists now believe was about 7 in magnitude, provides a dramatic glimpse at the damage and size of the nation’s 12th-deadliest earthquake.

But it offers few clues to what a major temblor on the Hayward Fault would look like today because predicting when and where quakes will occur is still beyond scientists’ reach.

“The earth doesn’t exactly repeat itself,” said Jack Boatwright, a geophysicist with the U.S. Geological Survey who compiled the map. “Next time the patch under Piedmont could be triggered. We just don’t know.”

Yep, I live in California, Northern, and felt this one:   “East Coast/West Coast tremblors remind Earthquake Country {that’s California, at least] to Have a Plan:  (by Angela Hart, Rohnert Park “Patch.”)

Scientists say there’s a 62 percent chance of an earthquake with a magnitude 6.7 or greater will strike the Bay Area in the next 30 years, and the worst place to be is on the southern part of the Rodgers Creek Fault — in Petaluma, Cotati and Rohnert Park. …

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the 3.6-magnitude earthquake struck the Bay Area at 9:47 a.m. yesterday, with its epicenter about three miles north-northeast of San Leandro and six miles east-southeast of Oakland and had a depth of 5.7 miles.

There were reports that the tremor was felt around the East Bay as far away as Martinez, throughout the Peninsula and in parts of Marin County.

An earthquake of the same magnitude struck in San Leandro on Tuesday at 11:36 p.m., and shaking was felt across much of the Bay Area. The USGS reported a 2.3-magnitude aftershock late Tuesday night. The aftershock was recorded at 11:41 p.m. in an area three miles from San Leandro, about five minutes after the initial quake.

But San Leandro had an earthquake, and this morning in my in-box, Pacific Justice Institute has a news release that they are backing a church in San Leandro to the Supreme Court level, for the city’s discrimination against the church for money-making reasons, treating it “worse than secular” organizations. Tsk, tsk! And we are to believe, along with such groups, that churches as corporately defined in the U.S., are somehow sacred?

So this post is largely around Pacific Justice Institute and some of its friends, including but not limited to this church.  As we can see, they are always gunning for the “underdog and under-represented” when it comes to causes, like megachurches and conservative Christians  who hate & fear homosexuals, and in the company of the vast minority of certain religious ilk who truly believe that if a woman stands in a pulpit, or gives birth outside marriage and isn’t repentant about it, the sky just caved in.

while aware of this situation, I’ve not been actually following it so here is, I think, a local writer’s primer on the situation.  The church wants to put all its congregation in one spot.  The only spot they can find was in an industrial zone.  They put down $100,000K nonrefundable on:

 a 46,000 sq. ft. building on four acres on Catalina Street in west San Leandro…  ()this is actually a well-written step by step account, it seems the church was out $250,000 and that it was the city’s idea, originally, that the church propose zoning changes.))

One of those criteria was that the property not be located in certain “General Plan Focus Areas“, more specifically, in downtown San Leandro, Bayfair, Marina Blvd/SOMAR or all of west San Leandro. Another criteria was that the property be within 1/4 mile of an arterial street. Clearly, the Catalina St. property did not meet those criteria. The church petitioned to have the church rezoned, but the Planning Commission and later the City Council turned it down based on those criteria and others, including one that the Catalina St. property was within 1/4 mile of businesses withHazardous Materials Business Plans (HMBP). . . .

. . .

The City claimed that churches are allowed in more than half of the city and that there are a number of properties within this area that are large enough to accommodate the church. While none of those properties were for sale, the City asserted that RLUIPA does not protect churches from the “reality of the marketplace.” The City also contended that the Church does not need to have all its members congregate at once and that it could have different church activities happen in different parts of town. * * * The City maintained that its zoning code is religiously neutral and therefore any burden it imposed on the church was to be considered “accidental” rather than “substantial.” Furthermore, it claimed it had a compelling interest in maintaining the industrial base of San Leandro and that the facility in question was key to that, having once employed 400 people.

(again, irony — Jesus:  “where two or three of you are gathered together in my name, there am I.”  I guess, however, there’s more of Jesus — or people feel there is — if it’s closer to thousands at a time.  I can see why the City had an economic concern!)


Here’s the PJI information, proving that I can tie almost ANYTHING into this theme of profit / nonprofit, and that this organization benefitting (like the church it’s backing) from tax-exempt status is complaining that it’s not fair for the city to discriminate against tax-exempt organizations in seeking an actual FOR-profit to buy a certain property over the church.


It’s a matter of where the profits go. But here’s the PJI article, after I remind us who’s sending it out, asking for donations:

About The Pacific Justice Institute:  Pacific Justice Institute is a non-profit 501(c)(3) legal defense organization specializing in the defense of religious freedom, parental rights, and other civil liberties. Pacific Justice Institute works diligently, without charge, to provide their clients with all the legal support they need.  Pacific Justice Institute’s strategy is to coordinate and oversee large numbers of concurrent court actions through a network of over 1,000 affiliate attorneys nationwide. And, according to former US Attorney General Edwin Meese, “The Institute fills a critical need for those whose civil liberties are threatened.” “Through our dedicated attorneys and supporters, we defend the rights of countless individuals, families and churches… without charge.”

To donate $10.00 to Pacific Justice Institute, text “PJI” to 20222

Alerts on-line found by googling the Title.  I’ve linked to one that seems to have a number of Christian Newswire Services, these ones are based in either D.C. or NY:

Religion Newswire

(etc.  I think we get the picture….)

and under this “Alliance Alerts” (blogspot) banner, it made one of 5 announcements under “Religious Freedom USA”

Religious Freedom – USA

  • “Santorum Q&A: Marriage for gays threatens religious freedom”
    August 25, 2011
  • CT: Pro-Lifers ask judge to end clinic buffer zones
    August 25, 2011
  • MS: Faithful won’t bow to prayer law
    August 25, 2011
  • Pacific Justice Institute: Church Raises Alarm Over City’s Push for More Control of Private Property
    August 25, 2011
  • Fla. teacher exonerated, reinstated
    August 25, 2011
  • Catholic League: ClergyBanned from 9/11 NYC Ceremony
    August 25, 2011

Conservative Patriot


Church Raises Alarm Over City’s Push for More Control of Private Property

Washington, D.C. – A California case being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court raises nationwide concerns that cities are trying to seize unprecedented authority over private property, according to attorneys involved in the case.

Pacific Justice Institute represents a church in San Leandro – across the bay from San Francisco – that was prevented from moving into a building it had purchased on the open market, because the city wanted a moneymaking enterprise to get the property.

(I’d like to see the proof that this was the motivation)

The church filed suit under a federal law that prohibits cities from treating houses of worship worse than secular, for-profit uses in land use decisions. After the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the city this spring, it appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. In a response filed this week, the church is urging the Supreme Court not to take the case, warning that the city is claiming unprecedented authority to control the use of private property.

Is it really unprecedented authority? The IRS controls the use of the profits from private property and our entire society is structured around this. PJI being a nonprofit, and the church, being a nonprofit, actually profit from not having to pay taxes. Are they themselves defending the First Amendment rights of their individual congregants? This particular church is called “Faith Fellowship” and is most definitely expansionist. From “http://www.faith fellowship.us/about-us“:

About Faith Fellowship

In 1993, Faith Fellowship Church had dwindled down from an all time high of 550 to just 65 people, all of which were faithful saints who had prayed and labored to see God use them to reach their community.  They had just completed building a brand new sanctuary in 1991, the first to be built in the City of San Leandro in 17 years. Unfortunately their pastor resigned shortly after finishing the project and now this once thriving church was in desperate need of a Shepherd. They began to pray like never before.

While this was going on, the Lord was preparing a young man who was pastoring a pioneer church that he and his wife had started in the city of Oakland about 15 miles away. This man was Pastor Gary Mortara. He has a deep passion for the Word of God and operates in faith for healings and miracles. Yet, everything is done with balance and integrity. In September of 1993, the leaders of the Foursquare denomination asked Pastor Gary and his wife Tisha to come and take the helm at Faith Fellowship.

{{There’s a reason I put in that link to the Foursquare foundation…}}

Since 1993, Faith Fellowship grew from those faithful 65 saints to becoming one of the fastest growing churches in the Bay Area.  They currently have approximately 1,400 in attendance each week. In addition, they have sent out four pastors in the past two years to either start up or take over churches. According to Pastor Gary, “It has been an absolute “God thing”. As it says in the book of Isaiah, “All that we have accomplished oh Lord, thy hands have done.

April 2003 was an exciting time for this powerful church, they completed and moved into their new sanctuary on Easter Sunday with nearly 2,000 people in attendance.

Pastor Gary and the pastoral staff are committed to the uncompromised preaching and teaching of God’s Word. Should you attend, you will be challenged and encouraged as each and every week you will get a healthy dose of the Bible.

This church has four pastors, showing ethnic variety — but no women. This is not accidental.
I am wondering whether their 2,000+ members (or however, many) including all the “females” are (yet) aware of any of the laws against domestic violence, assault & battery, and what position they take up on it. And whether wife-beating is, as to ranking in the category of “sin,” when compared with, say, a woman preaching in public to an audience with men in it? After all, this is a foursquare denomination. Do their congregants know anything about the legal developments in the 1990s, such as the VAWA act, the NFI, Welfare Reform, and the Fatherhood grants’ relationship to the child support industry? I tend to doubt it, yet this pastor has come from Oakland, a high-homicide city known for some high-profile domestic violence-related homicides. Given that women are I’ll bet supporting, probably employed by, and certainly attending the church with their kids, what is the safety factor of the women attending if there has been violence in their home? At what point does the sacred/secular designation begin to break down, except that churches can do and teach certain things that might end up a for-profit, non-church employer in a lawsuit, as happened to Casey Gwinn while running the San Diego Family Justice Center — for attempting to cover up extreme violence upon on of his employees by telling another (female) employee to just handle it.

There is a focus on the personality of the 4 leaders and their saved experience. Their wives and families (if any) are barely mentioned. On the home page, left there is a telling link to the “BE A MAN” conference, leading to an on-line signup page ($30/$37) Actually, the URL files this under “giving.” IT is hooked (by internet) to graphic on the September 10, 2011 (!!) “BE A MAN CONFERENCE, subtitled, “Teaching men to be Leaders in their Homes, Churches and Communities.”

While I doubt this would specifically endorse physical violence as a means to “Lead in the Home,” I do wonder what it would do to STOP it when their (inferior, of course) advocates feel that this leadership must be maintained at any cost, including to their wives? Do they inform men of the law? Are pastors among the conference informed of their mandatory reporting requirements?

Search “Be a Man!Conference” for the incredible outpouring of conference with buzzwords like “real men” “manly men” and etc. This one rejoices in their pig roast, and I hope they will come back (or did come back) having learned to rejoice in their testosterone and more sensitive to their relationships, but I have a feeling this ain’t gonna happen. Actually more than a feeling (see rickross.com, The Sterling Institute and a few related groups on some of the results of initiation-rite type of gatherings on young men who attended them).


And this appears to be related to the 9/10/2011 conference (wouldn’t it make sense for men to be with the women in their lives, and any family, on AND around the 10th anniversary of “9/11” ? ? ?

Actually, this 2009 BNN1.com article says a lot: “Be a Man Conference helps churches connect with Black Men.” This conference? (or the conference center?) explains that church attendance is down because men perceive the church as feminine. And tells what they plan to do about it — appeal more to Old Testament role models. Which is funny, because (as Bible readers should know) one of the problems related in the gospels is that people were expecting a more “masculine” and warlike leader than Jesus Christ, and hence didn’t recognize him the first time around! In short, they are going to read both Old and New Testament very selectively, the emphasis will be on the old because the new doesn’t have enough military references, blood & guts warfare for the most manly of men. When I also see the backing of the same conference that ex-President Jimmy Carter LEFT, stating he could not endorse its handling of women (Southern Baptist), I think we have an approximate ‘where are they coming from?).

The conference seeks to provide resources for churches while countering the negative stereotypes that keep many men from attending church, described by two speakers as “60 percent women and 40 percent men acting like women.”

“You’re trying to reach the first generation of African American men that have never been touched by the church,” Edward Johnson, pastor of Greater Galilee Church in Louisville, Ky., said, adding that many older, unchurched men previously attended church. “Did you ever think about asking them why they left?”

Johnson and other speakers said many men avoid church because of stereotypes and a congregational culture that is more suitable for women.

Dozens of men come forward during an invitation at the “Be the Man” conference and rededicate their lives to Jesus.  Photo by Kent Harville.

“Jesus is seen in ‘the hood’ as an effeminate cartoon caricature and the possession of the majority culture,” Johnson said.

Kevin Smith, pastor of Watson Memorial Baptist Church in Louisville, urged churches to reach and disciple young men. “We have got to gain [understanding] that the church is hurt when men are not where men ought to be,” Smith said.

{{well, what’s happened is that men are coming back, attending church AND continuing to hurt their women, only with more impunity because it’s a “guy” thing, and the leadership is more concerned about attendance than integrity.}}

A study of Old Testament characters would help church leaders better portray a biblical view of manhood that is more attractive to most men, Smith said.

By all means, if it’s the Word of God — but attendance (hence, profits — see the crisis Faith Fellowship found themselves in, in 1991, with a new sanctuary and a pastor that just quit! — make sure to adapt it to please the audience. . . .. The fact is that “real men” probably figured out quite a while back that many church groups ARE primarily about authority/ hierarch / and money, and had enough of it.


You know approximately where I’m about to go with this one. I will not be going in too much depth because today’s on-line access vehicle, the copy/paste function is troublesome and I can’t even view pdf files, such as the tax returns are stored in. However, these are the “Faith fellowships” registered as charitable trusts in the state of California. I’m figuring that perhaps the one in San Leandro would be under one of these? It should be:

For a clear view, till I revise (from a different input screen), key the term “Faith Fellowship” into this page:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
FAITH FELLOWSHIP EX594975 Charity Exempt – Active EL CAJON CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP BAPTIST CHURCH EX598421 Charity Exempt – Active VALLEJO CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP BIBLE CHURCH OF CORONA EX600598 Charity Exempt – Active CORONA CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP CENTER EX580113 Charity Exempt – Active WEST COVINA CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP CENTER OF FRESNO EX576833 Charity Exempt – Active KERMAN CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP CHAPEL EX578711 Charity Exempt – Active TULARE CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP CHRISTIAN TV. MINISTRIES EX592002 Charity Exempt – Active CORNELIUS NC Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP CHURCH EX575457 Charity Exempt – Active SALINAS CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP CHURCH OF SAN JOSE CORPORATION EX575570 Charity Exempt – Active SAN JOSE CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP CHURCH OF WHITTIER EX604898 Charity Exempt – Active WHITTIER CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP COMMUNITY CHURCH EX600367 Charity Exempt – Active NORTH HIGHLANDS CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP FAMILY BIBLE CHURCH EX618028 Charity Exempt – Active SAN ANDREAS CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP FOUNDATION EX616486 Charity Exempt – Active SAN DIEGO CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP INTERNATIONAL, INC. EX610772 Charity Exempt – Dissolution Pending BAKERSFIELD CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP M.B.C. EX594950 Charity Exempt – Active EMERYVILLE CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP MINISTERIES, INC. EX580413 Charity Exempt – Active EL CAJON CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP OF LA PALMA, CALIFORNIA EX567655 Charity Exempt – Active LYNWOOD CA Charity Registration Charity
FAITH FELLOWSHIP OF SADDLEBACK VALLEY EX579905 Charity Exempt – Active LAGUNA HILLS CA Charity Registration Charity

{{Again, it takes just a few seconds to click the link and type two words into the Organization field.))

wow — they’re doing MUCH better than court-affiliated nonprofits, on average.  See my last few posts!

For comparison with mainstream denominational charitable organizations:

rganization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
CATHOLIC CHURCH OF AMERICA EX602148 Charity Exempt – Active SAN DIEGO CA Charity Registration Charity
CATHOLIC CHURCH OF APOSTOLIC TRADITION EX584172 Charity Exempt – Active LAKEWOOD CA Charity Registration Charity
CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE AMERICAS Charity Not Registered RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA Charity Registration Charity
CATHOLIC CHURCH OF THE HOLY TRINITY EX596853 Charity Exempt – Active LAKEWOOD CA Charity Registration Charity

(Life’s simpler when you’re oh so centralized!)

Now, for the “Corporations” search on Faith Fellowship. Other recommended searches (both corporate and charity) include Foursquare, Pacific Justice Institute, and PJI’s parent? Capitol Resource. I also blogged recently on what sense does it make for anti-religion and pro-religion nonprofits to duke it out legally about behavior in the common area, at expense to the public?

Actually I just searched “foursquare.”

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
FOURSQUARE FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS, INC. CT0174141 Charity Exempt – Active LOS ANGELES CA Charity Registration Charity
FOURSQUARE FOUNDATION EX604277 Charity Exempt – Active LOS ANGELES CA Charity Registration Charity
FOURSQUARE GOSPEL LIGHTHOUSE OF EL MONTE Charity Not Registered SACRAMENTO CA Charity Registration Charity
FOURSQUARE GOSPEL LIGHTHOUSE OF FLORENCE Charity Not Registered UNKNOWN CA Charity Registration Charity
FOURSQUARE GOSPEL LIGHTHOUSE OF ORLAND CT0166393 Charity Exempt – Active ORLAND CA Charity Registration Charity
FOURSQUARE LOAN FUND, INC. Charity Not Registered LOS ANGELES CA Charity Registration Charity


Out of 10 outfits above (mostly appear to be church related, i.e, have the word “Gospel” in title) — 6 were not registered. But — unlike those in the family law area — none where delinquent, also true of the “faith fellowship” church. Apparently there is at least one thing church groups are better at, and this is, when they do sign up, at least registering occasionally with the Secretary of State a little more often.

(after just scrolling through all 155 search results on SOState site, “Faith Fellowship” — from Abounding Faith (still active) through XTreme Faith (not quite “alpha to omega” when it comes to their range of titles — only up to the letter “X”) — it appears that either faith failed, or that “time and chance” happens to us all, as the polygamist and eventually idolatrous Old Testament figure, Solomon, the son of David, notes in “Ecclesiastes.” The “Xtreme Faith” group listed “Legal Zoom” as registered agent.I wonder if he was one of the old testament figures the Baptists “Be a Man” conference used to up their attendance. . . . . These groups are suspended and dissolved, or in a case forfeited/resigned as well — including some who apparently kept their charity status up to date, but not their corporate. (or, our state government, being so broke and swamped, just didn’t post the information yet.

One thing is clear — this isn’t the best database for extensive research because its public face doesn’t seem to allow search by incorporation agent, date of incorporation, place of jurisdiction/incorporation, etc.


Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE 5502-2007 Raffle Expired SACRAMENTO CA Raffle Registration Raffle
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE 5502-2008 Raffle Expired SACRAMENTO CA Raffle Registration Raffle
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE 5502-07-1 Raffle Complete SACRAMENTO CA Raffle Report Raffle
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE 5502-07-2 Raffle Complete SACRAMENTO CA Raffle Report Raffle
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE 107574 Charity Exempt – Active SACRAMENTO CA Charity Registration Charity
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE 5502-08-3 Raffle Complete SACRAMENTO CA Raffle Report Raffle

Raffles are fundraisers; these appear to have raised from between $2 to $4,000 each.

“Pacific Justice Institute” — Corporate (SOS site) search results:

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process

Note: years formed 1997, 2008 and 2008 (I’m figuring the last one probably unrelated, although I did search on all 3 words) registered agent Kevin T. Snider.

* * 1997 corporation:
Entity Number: C2014207
Date Filed: 06/23/1997
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 9851 HORN RD., SUITE 115
Entity City, State, Zip: SACRAMENTO CA 95827
Agent for Service of Process: KEVIN T SNIDER
Agent Address: 9851 HORN RD., SUITE 115
(All 3 entities are at the same street address, both entity & agent addresses.

They have an institute, a center for POLICY & a center for SERVICE. I wonder what’s next.

NCCSDATAWEB.URBAN.ORG (same search) shows all of these are nonprofits:

2009  911823641 Pacific Justice Institute CA 1997 03 1,593,360 419,836 990
2008  943296000 The@Curtin Pacific Institute for Criminal Justice CA 2000 03 0 0
 262401873 Pacific Justice Institute – Center for Public Policy

“Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.”

“not req’d to file: income <$25,000″CA20090400

263640034Pacific Justice Institute — Center for Public ServiceCA20090300

Curtain P I (I searched the EIN#) is a PO box in SF:

Filing 990 – Not required to file Form 990 (income less than $25,000)

and classified as “Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis”

I suppose some of us might use:EIN Finder .com but it’s not free, except for a free trial

PJI also makes an appearance here, at Regent University….

© 2011 CrossandGavel.org, a joint project of Regent University School of Law & Christian Legal Society

In case you’re not familiar with Regent University , yet:

Regent University School of Law

Regent University School of Law’s mission is distinctive among accredited law schools and provides an attractive option for students pursuing the study of law from a Christian perspective. The mission of Regent Law School is to bring to bear the will of our Creator, Almighty God, upon legal education and the legal profession.

The purpose of the “Center for Public Policy” (a 501(c)4, not 3) per press release is to take on the CPS.

PJI Launches Center for Public Policy, Efforts to Reform CPS

 Sacramento, CA

Date:  08/21/2009 Pacific Justice Institute


For Immediate Release August 20, 2009
Contact: President Brad Dacus (916) 857-6900

PJI Launches Center for Public Policy, Efforts to Reform CPS

Sacramento – The Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) is launching its new Center for Public Policy (CPP), a 501(c)(4) organization, this week in an effort to assist California legislators to enact laws benefiting all Californians.   First up on CPP’s agenda: reforming Child Protective Services. Created to protect California children from abusive home environments, the agency has garnered a reputation for abusing its power, particularly where minorities are concerned.

Notice they were smart enough to keep this separate (though at the same street address?) organization so as not to be filing those pesky tax returns and founding documents on-line so much.  At least to date.

Perhaps if Brad, Kevin, and others would hang around with more people who let mothers speak — from the pulpit, and to men — in church, or thought their input worthy one on one if they were not theologically PC, they might learn something from some of the abused wives of clergy, or former wives of clergy, or congregants.

I can’t find Center for Public Service yet on-line.  I’m sure they’ll be issuing some press releases shortly, no doubt.

Now about one of their close associates in anti-gay and pro-mega-church activities:


I had heard that “Capitol Resource Institute” (nb. Sacramento, State Capital) was related to or parent of PJI, so looked it up. Alas…. they are no more.  At least, legally:

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
Entity Number: C1588387
Date Filed: 06/12/1987
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 660 J STREET, SUITE 250
Entity City, State, Zip: SACRAMENTO CA 95814
Agent for Service of Process: JAMES SWEENEY
Agent Address: 9381 E.STOCKTON BLVD #218
Agent City, State, Zip: ELK GROVE CA 95624

Sweeney and Green, LLP got served this document protesting the denial of a right of an adopted child by a same-sex couple to his/her birth certificate (?) it’s notice (proof of service) of an April, 2011 letter to the California Chief Justice of a Fifth District  slip opinion.  Browse the law firms involved, including this one, Mr. Sweeney’s, PJI is also on there, page 3, left column, under “Liberty Center II.”  In other words, the registered agent is an attorney.  In fact, you have just “got” to take a look at his bio on their website (which requires “Flash” to view) to understand how very well-connected this Sacramento attorney (SF/Berkeley educated as to law) is — and his particular interest including:

“Mr. Sweeney and his firm have particular success in defense of sexual harassment and sexual abuse claims against businesses, churches, and schools.  ”  He graduated with a double major in B.S./Physics and B.A. History, “summa cum laude” from UCSF before going on to law school.  He worked as a prosecuting criminal attorney deputy district attorney, then “senior legal consultant to the California State Assembly” then “Chief Counsel to the Secretary of State.”

This, plus summa cum laude in physics tells us something about how his mind probably works, and I wouldn’t like it in a courtroom on the opposing side.  With defending religious groups from sexual abuse claims and a preference for  high-profile work, they will not be running out of business any time soon!

NEVERTHELESS, Capitol Resource Institute has for some reasons declined to stay current with the OAG and has had its business license suspended (Guess they was just too busy), yet this doesn’t appear to have discouraged its continuing, and somewhat high-profile (i.e., press-release) operations, as I will show.  It has received (or was mailed, the 2nd one to I gather an updated address) its charity delinquency notices from the OAG office, and I see no IRS’s or RRFs filed since 2005.  Perhaps it’s an intentional lapse?

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
CAPITOL RESOURCE INSTITUTE 065160 Charity Delinquent SACRAMENTO CA Charity Registration Charity

1987 filing states purpose and initial agent, plus his address:

To Establish and Develop an educational institution for the purposes of instruction in and dissemination of educational material . . . . material relating to the fields of family life and economics.”   2005 IRS shows, and my copy of part of it to this website probably won’t – but you can access on-line too:

Primary Exempt Purpose doesn’t include a verb, and is fairly generic:  “PRINCIPLES OF FAMILY LIFE.”

This organization was definitely crafted and targeted at California.  Yet it’s not operating legally in this state, from what I can tell, at least as a nonprofit.  It IS filing federal tax returns, apparently:  this if from NCCSDATAweb.org — up through 2009.

Capitol Resource Institute

Sacramento, CA 95814

 = IRS provided data
 = User submitted data
    (EIN = 680129342)
Form Name Date Year
Form 990 2009 Download
Form 990 2008 Download
Form 990 2007 Download
Form 990 2006 Download
Form 990 2005 Download
Form 990 2004 Download
Form 990 2003 Download
Form 990 2002 Download

(the 2001 tax return requests an extension because of “turnover in accounting staff and two changes of executive director,” with a “Michael Mears” listed.  One of the Bd of Directors there is CEO of a Los Angeles industry (Michael A. Durst), but I think this 1998 fax (on-line), showing Capitol Resource personnel on the letterhead basically tells their intent:  It’s a fax to apparently someone at LDS leadership (that’s Latter Day Saints for the unitiated) seeking funding for a California Initiative to oppose gay marriage, lest the liberals in Hawaii & Washington out-spend and win:  Just read it: found off the mainsite “CaliforniaWatch.org”  


Referenced here:

Prop. 8 lawyer vetted first gay marriage initiative with Mormon leaders

January 29, 2010 | Robert Salladay

UPDATE: The Courage Campaign has filed a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission against attorney Andy Pugno over using state resources to communicate with a Mormon attorney about an anti-gay marriage initiative.


Andy Pugno, the lead attorney defending Proposition 8, once worked for state Sen. William J. “Pete” Knight, the Palmdale Republican who spearheaded California’s first successful ballot measure to outlaw gay marriage. On Feb. 26, 1998, Pugno wrote a memo to a Utah lawyer with close ties to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, regarding the initiative Pugno was crafting:

Photo: Dave Schumaker

“We urgently need you to review the proposed text and respond to two key questions before the close of business tomorrow,” Pugno wrote to Lynn D. Wardle, a law professor at Brigham Young University. “Senator Knight will be re-filing language for a ballot initiative on Monday morning – and plans are laid to definitely qualify the measure for the ballot.”

The Mormon church’s involvement and financial support in California’s gay marriage debate is well documented. But Pugno’s newly unearthed memo, written on state government letterhead, is striking evidence of how closely the Mormon church has been involved in the gay marriage debate in California for more than a decade.

At Pugno’s urging, a Mormon attorney was vetting the language ofProposition 22 and then quickly passing his information to the highest ranks of the LDS church.

California Watch obtained several memos showing the early activity of the Mormon church in the state’s anti-gay-marriage debate. The memo between Pugno and Wardle, and others between the church leadership, are below. Also included is a January 1998 memo from the Capitol Resource Institute asking for Mormon funding to support the marriage ban.

The day after Pugno sent his urgent memo in February 1998, Wardle wrote to three church elders in Salt Lake City, along with two law firms and a law professor in Iowa, alerting them of proposed changes to Proposition 22. The recipients included high-ranking members of the church, Marlin K. Jensen and David E. Sorensen, from the church’s Presidency of the Seventy.

That’s not FUNNY!  Read this, church description of “Quorums of the Seventy”! and the heirarch — of the 12, and of course the Presiding Bishopric, or, let’s just go to the top, for LDS:  ”

Jesus Christ is the head of the Church. Under His direction, General Authorities and local leaders lead and teach Church members throughout the world.

You think people who claim to be, well, of the Aaronic Priesthood  are concerned about earthly laws, or subject to them?  Think Warren Jeffs, and I believe you have the general concepts.  Or go visit a local LDS church, particularly if you’re from Berkeley and atheist and notice how the men and women behave, particularly (I’ve done this) absence of pants and major age differences between husband and wife.

Rulon Jeffs (father of Warren) and two of his many wives.  I’ve posted the text on URL under description of Warren Jeffs from 2005.

Rulon Jeffs with two of his reported wivesWarren Jeffs sentenced to life for child sex abuse

The nearly two-decade tenure of father and son has split the polygamist community on the Utah-Arizona border. After taking power in 1986, Rulon Jeffs slowly abolished the seven-member Priesthood Council that had previously governed the sect.Rulon Jeffs eventually claimed a “One Man Rule” and as a result, part of the group split away and founded their own polygamist settlement nearby.

Upon the death of his father, 49-year-old Warren Jeffs took over as prophet of the FLDS, or Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in September of 2002. Jeff’s father, Rulon T. Jeffs, had been the group’s prophet for the previous 15 years. He died at the age of 92, leaving an estimated 75 widows and 65 children to mourn him.According to former followers, the prophet is considered to be God’s mouthpiece on earth. It is believed that God speaks directly to Warren Jeffs to reveal His will. And through the prophet, God directs which male members are worthy of entry into heaven (females are invited into heaven by satisfied husbands). Jeffs is also the only person who can perform marriages, and it is through him that wives are assigned to their husbands. Pleasing the prophet can result in loyal members being rewarded with one or more wives. Wives are considered to “belong” to their husbands for eternity.
In order to reach the highest degree of glory in heaven, members of the FLDS believe that each man must have at least three wives. A significant means of prophet power is derived from his ability to punish followers by reassigning their wives, children and homes to another man. Obedience is highly valued, and it is rare for wives to resist reassignment.
(Photo to right goes with “Warren Jeffs sentenced to life for child sex abuse
So, Capitol Resource Institute (whose registered agent Sweeney of Sweeney & Greene, LLP, talks about defending churches, businesses & schools from sexual harassment and sexual abuse claims) in 1998 is soliciting money, or at least discussing it, from LDS leadership to stop gay marriage.   I realize “FLDS” (Jeffs) is not “LDS” but they are definitely too close for comfort! and sprang off the same tree…

  APPARENTLY This nonprofit doesn’t know that its license has been suspended, I find it quite active on-line.

“As your watchdog for family values here in Sacramento, CRI is committed to keeping you informed about important legislation. So, stay tuned!”

Action center has one item, predictably:

Jul 22, 2011

  1. Capitol Resource Institute

    www.capitolresource.org/ – Cached

    The mission of Capitol Resource Institute (CRI) is to educate, advocate, protect, and defend family-friendly policies in the California state legislature and at local 

    660 J St # 250
    Sacramento, CA 95814-2483
    (916) 498-1940

And their action center has a nice link to Capitol Resource Family Impact (plus logo):

CRI Family Impact

Yes, the site recommends PJI, and has a logo “What Strengthens Families, Strengthens California,” and articles such as “you live in a Battleground state” and why churches should get involved in politics, etc. I recommend reading it, although — NB — it has not filed somewhere along the line, its corporate status got suspended.

News, under the website for this non-entity, CRI, has a few more items:

Dec 16, 2009

President Obama’s Safe Schools Czar, Kevin Jennings, was the founder, and for many years, Executive Director of GLSEN. It was while he was with GLSEN that a recommended reading list for students was compiled. The recommended reading list contains very explicit material.

{{GLSEN being of course, “GLSENGay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network: Home

www.glsen.org/ – Cached

Organization for students, parents, and teachers that tries to affect positive change in schools. Offers information on what you can do and local chapters in each …”}}

Apr 30, 2009
Apr 30, 2009

It’s also running educational sessions of various sorts in California’s State Capitol:

Day at the Capitol | More Information and Registration

Several times a year, CRI’s Day at the Capitol attracts hundreds of “ordinary” citizens to spend a day at the state Capitol in Sacramento. There they are: Equipped with a better understanding of the legislative process; Familiarized with pending legislation; Provided with skills to communicate effectively with state legislators and other officials; and briefed by members of the state Legislature.

these must be free, because I see nothing on the state attorney’s site to say where they are producing revenue in California.

And these, too:

Class at the Capitol | More information

CRI offers Class at the Capitol as an exciting and unique opportunity for students to get acquainted with the legislative process. This is a one-day, hands-on program where students become mock legislators for the day.

The “Economic Research Institute” actually lists CRI.

It apparently stopped filing around 2005, got two delinquency notices. Maybe efforts are being poured into PJI for the good fight against gender expression, curtailing public school evangelism, advocating for male-dominated “Be a man” nonprofit expansionist churches with apparently substantial support (though I DNK the $$) from the Foursquare Demonination, who want to run their businesses on city property that the city would prefer be put to “secular” use.

Founding Documents:
(I cannot finish looking today, but may return). executive Director Peter J. Henderson (when Capitol Resource Institute was founded by him & 2 other men, one from Garden Grove, the other from Irvine, CA) showed an address of a lobbyist, i.e., 1029 K Street #38, Sacramento. (street address shows it in a registry of lobbyists, and at least per the site, also of a

Price Consulting
1029 K Street Suite 38
Sacramento, CA 95814-3821

See also (2007 newsletter) “William Jessup University” inset showing Public Policy Advisors include PJE & Capitol Resource Institute, affiliated with San Jose Bible College? and focusing on raising up generations of leaders to straighten out California, i.e., Public Policy leadership training.

A Little More perspective on at least one of the founders of Capitol Resource Institute: Peter L. Henderson (haven’t run across the name, don’t know him, I’m only interested in the topics here, and CRI’s support or affiliation with groups like PJI who go crying to the Supreme Court about it’s not fair to discriminate against the nonprofit, men-preaching style of churches they wish to help create a new kingdom on earth through, generally speaking. I know firsthand what some of these preaching does to women and children, particularly daughters, and how it affects (limits) their personal visions and identities of themselves in favor of the corporate vision which is, well, you know, about manly men and real men, and none of this California-style “BS.” Yet they are again, benefitting through tax-exemptions and so obtaining a form of financial help from the same government they proclaim is discriminating against them by not helping ENOUGH.

Source, another site, “Developmental Resources, LLC” which is apparently a firm that helps others raise money.

PETER HENDERSON, Ministry Consultant

Peter Henderson is a graduate of University California, San Diego and Fuller Theological SeminaryHe began his career in Southern California serving on staff of a mega-church in Santa Ana.**  His position provided the opportunity to develop church growth strategies and vision casting.  Peter’s career continued as the National Director of a computer training company, developing training programs for Fortune 500 companies.  Later, he embraced the opportunity to work in philanthropy and public policy; founding the Capitol Resource Institute of California and serving as Chief of Staff for the California Republican leader.  He was also responsible for advancing the marketing and capital growth of the Alliance Defense Fund.  In addition, Peter served for ten years on the adjunct faculty of William Jessup University.

Peter has over 30 years experience and offers expertise in ministry fundraising strategies and implementation of donor marketing and communication, emphasizing domestic donor cultivation.  Continually involved in the social changes of American society, Peter is especially passionate about understanding and implementing ways the church can affect its community with attractive lifestyles and service.

Currently, Peter is involved with managing a private foundation in Southern California, serving as an Associate Mentor for the Masters Program, and consulting non-profits and individuals.  Peter’s true passion is to help men and ministries understand their calling and mission before God, allowing them to fulfill and leverage their gifts and assets for maximum Kingdom impact.

Peter and his wife Joanie have four adult children and one grandson.***  They reside in Folsom, CA where they attend Lakeside Church and Peter leads the prayer ministry.  One of their lifelong goals is to raise up four generations that honor and serve God.

** Los Angeles is extremely diverse. Santa Ana, an slightly different read: Wikipedia // Money Magazine [2006!] snapshot compare Santa Ana to top 100 cities (or best places to live in US) gives a general picture.

***If this had come out a daughter, would the bio have read “and one granddaughter” or “and one grandchild.” Do his four adult children have a gender, and if so was it a mixture of male & female, or all one?
The Fuller Connection should be VERY disturbing (when inserted into federal policies of any sort, i.e., faith-based access to fatherhood & marriage grants) whatever one’s personal beliefs, or lack thereof, unless you’re all for republic via mobocracy into a fast-moving theocracy — whichever brand has the best PR and most money decides which brand of Theocracy. Moreover, intelligent women should be extremely concerned about this. See above. And should make sure to vote and follow the money in any churches they are supporting, i.e., at the corporate and charity registration level, for starters. You might otherwise be in for a very rude awakening shortly after marriage and/or pregnancy. Or, you may be totally ill-equipped to help other women who, through chance, fortune, or thinking that “believes in God” means “is a good person,” and married into the School of Hard Knocks, and brood-mare status, barely concealed. No, I”m not a feminazi saying this: read my blog!

Here’s an excerpt from http://letusreason.org/latrine. I had looked up Fuller Seminary:

A National Symposium on the Post-Denominational Church was convened by Dr. C. Peter Wagner at Fuller Seminary, May 21-23, 1996. Bill Hamon said that “this was a historical occasion in God’s annals of Church history. It was prophetically orchestrated by the Holy Spirit to fulfill God’s progressive purposes of bringing His church to its ultimate destiny… the consensus of the panelists was that there are still apostles and prophets in the Church, and there is an emerging Apostolic Movement that will revolutionize the 21st Century Church” (Streams, Rivers, Floods, Avalanches, cited by Jewel van der Merwe, Discernment Ministries Newsletter, http://www.discernment-ministries.com/Articles/streams.htm)

C. Peter Wagner states “I believe that the government of the church is finally coming into place and that is the, the scripture teaches in Eph. 2 that the foundation of the church is apostles and prophets” (CBN interview Jan.3, 2000).

“ The second apostolic age began in the year 2001”  “What’s important is that you’re the people of God out there, you’re representing the kingdom of God, and you know this, but nothing has happened because the government of the church has not come into place”  (C. Peter Wagner Arise Prophetic Conference Gateway Church San Jose, CA 10/10/2004) (emphasis mine)

Did the Church have no government for almost 1900 years prior to Wagner’s new apostolic prophetic movement?

Wagner explains this “The second apostolic age began in the year 2001, okay?  And in this whole first chapter in this book I argue my point, I think rather… I hope it’s convincingly, that 2001 marks, is the year that marks the second apostolic age, which means for years the government of the church had not been in place since about, you know, the first century or so.  It doesn’t mean weren’t apostles and prophets, because the government of the… the foundation of the church according to Ephesians 2:20 is apostles and prophets, Jesus being the chief cornerstone.  It doesn’t mean there weren’t apostles and prophets, it means the body of Christ hadn’t recognized them and released them for the office that they had so that they’d function as apostles and prophets in the foundation of the church.  But we now have that, I believe we’ve reached our critical mass in the year 2001”   (C. Peter Wagner, Arise Prophetic Conference, Gateway Church, San Jose, CA, 10/10/2004)

Actually, what’s “newest” about this, as compared to more traditional denominations, is the better understanding of how to organize churches around the internet, and set up a different authority structure, including accepting donations, gaining members, helping just a few people “Plant” a church, and in short Rick DeVos type enterprises.

One way to learn something about a religious group is to hear another one talking about it, but the point here is that the concept of turning “Post-Denominational” into “New Apostolic” aggrandizes it, and adds the implication of answering to a great authority than, say, local laws. Not to mention the very disturbing fact that it appears our government continues to pour millions$$ into a fatherhood movement (half marriage, half fatherhood. Church groups could grab either focus) with personalities that could actually say such things with a straight face.

Fuller Seminary and Fatherhood, at first blush (sampler):

Fatherhood Programs – Active Relationships Center
Authored by Kelly Simpson, MA, LMFT with Amanda Weatherby-Stimmel, PhD ( Fuller Theological Seminary) and Ben Stimmel, MA LMFT (Fuller Theological …

Active Relationships Center (ARC) seems to be in Texas, and is probably a nonprofit getting fatherhood grants, too. Back up and look at the headings on the website. Fatherhood. Families. Incarcerated, etc. — almost any designation but Women.


James Furrow, Ph.D. (for an exemplar of a Fuller graduate). Please review the Vita carefully and note some co-investigator federal grants, whether the partner is a Linda Wagener I wonder if a relationship to the Peter Wagener, above? of the New Apostolic Age, etc.?

This man is a Telecommunications BA from Tulsa (1983), who went to Fuller and got an M.A. in Theology with a marriage emphasis (1986) and then apparently his first work experience (listed, 1992) is as Research Director at the National Center for Fathering in Manhattan, Kansas! Then a Ph.D. in Human Development/Marriage and Family, from KSU, coincidentally also in Manhattan, Kansas. From 1995 forward he is also functioning in variously decorated positions at Fuller again, including “Co-Director of Center for Child and Adolescent Development” and Assistant Professor in, naturally, Marriage and Family Therapy, Graduate Psychology.

No man of course is an island, nor, typically, is any Child Reseach Center in any college or university, let alone seminary. Of course, it goes without saying that any woman who even thinks about attempting to function as an island, esPECIALLY as a mother, is anathema and in part responsible for the breakdown of society (ref. See Genesis 2, Eve, curse, etc.) But seriously, it lends credibility to associate and name your centers as part of an Institute. Moreover, all of this is going to take money (including probably federal grants-based). All I can say is please take a look:

Travis Research Institute

{{be sure to click on the letter from head of TRI, and learn how this 10 year old assemblage actually builds on 10 more years of “biopsychosocial” research at Fuller, which will be appropriately spiritually and biblically framed. Chances are, if you have a marital “dispute” and area assigned a counselor in CA, you and/or your child may end up in front of a Fuller-produced graduate full of biopscyhosocial interpretations of family.}}

The Thrive Center

The Thrive Center aims to further the knowledge and resources that support positive development in children and adolescence. Center research studies explore the role of personal and social resources that promote the development of character, competence, and a commitment to serve others. The Center seeks to expand an understanding of spiritual development and religion in positive youth development and the study of human thriving.

Directors: Dr. Justin Barrett

Faculty (in alphabetical order): Drs. Justin Barrett, Mari Clements, James Furrow, Pamela Ebstyne King, Lisseth Rojas-Flores, Sarah Schnitker

Research topics and projects

Child and Adolescent Development
Positive Youth Development
Spiritual Exemplars Project
Youth Violence

Related research topics and projects

Marriage and Family
Research on Parenting
Conflict Resolution in Families Project
Emotion Focused Couple Therapy: Process and Training Research

This, among other reasons, is why, should there be a resurrection, I want to have a few words with former-President George Bush, and quiz him about his 2001 Executive Order freeing up grants to “faith-based” groups, and aggressively dismantling things that the writers of the Constitution he swore (in fact, shortly before doing this) in front of the whole US to uphold and defend, had nightmares about, and memories within their lifetimes of what might happen should church again become state.

Co-director Linda Wagener states she wants to understand what makes people flourish, and also how young people respond to grief and trauma. Pasadena is probably not the best place to understand the underside of life from, but thankfully there must be research grants for travel to find some oppressed people (Los Angeles probably is too close and mundane to count?):

Wagener explored this question as she traveled last summer through Bosnia, Jordan, and Turkey, interviewing young people about their responses to the radical political, economic, and social traumas they were encountering in their cultures. “Their thoughtful responses to moral and relational issues,” says Wagener, “was a hopeful reminder that humans were created by God in ways that lead to resiliency and thriving even under desperate circumstances.”

Of course, the researchers in this institute are going to publish as well, accordingly SAGE Publications (Thousand Oaks, CA, London & New Delhi) has put out (co. 2006) their Handbook of Spiritual Development in Childhood and Adolescence. For only $139.50 (at Amazon) you can read (from a hard copy) about the “foundations for the scientific study of this topic” which is about the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard of yet, coming from any evangelistic group; perhaps they forgot what Jesus said about becoming like a little child (cf. Ph.D. studying children) if one wants to enter the kingdom of heaven, and how at age 12 he was asking learned questions of his elders and listening to their answers, too.

I’m not sure this is all about entering the kingdom of heaven later, rather than positioning certain affiliates to produce one (according to their building plans) on earth, but either way, producing $140 books will certainly help with the livelihood while figuring out how to produce spirituality in children.

Perhaps they should read the account of the prophet Samuel’s childhood under a corrupt priest, and simply accept that it’s not their job.

Either way — the mega-church involvement in psychology and marriage counseling is to me AS disturbing as groups like Kids’ Turn originals (or whatever law firm at 1242 Market Street was involved at the time) participating to defend the would-be high priestess of the Church of Satan. If I got the terminology wrong here, you can hear it from one of the ex-partners of the author of the Satanic Bible in a FAQsheet here, in association with others, of course taking into account who’s writing. Oddly, I agree with one of their premises — that churches should not be tax-exempt. However, I do realize that’s probably a pipe dream in this life, in which this philosophy apparently includes 9 premises, from #1. Indulgence instead of abstinence to #9, Satan has been the church’s best friend keeping it in business all these years. and #4, Love is for those who deserve it and not to be wasted on ingrates.

That said, the property at 6114 California being fought over in Hegarty v. LaVey was indeed a hellhole, and the attorney for Hegarty (it’s a palimony action), Elizabeth Benford, lists as her mailing address the current address of Kids’ Turn (still operating with suspended charity status, I wonder?) — 1242 Market Street, 2nd floor, San Francisco, CA. Also, it appears from the “FAQs above, that “satanism” pre-dated the “New Apostolic age” by a quarter century years; it claims to have started in 1966.

Wonder what the fees for that lawsuit went into. The link I just provided shows addresses, at the bottom (scrolling down), it is signed by a woman who was secretary to Mr. LaVey for 14 years, and is outraged that this outstanding structure, so central to Satanism, should somehow be forfeit.

If Pacific Justice really wants to make a dent in “the enemy” why not find a way to take on the finances of groups like this directly? Now that would take major courage. After all, that’s why it moved into the Bay Area, Sodom & Gomorrah of the West Coast, right? But instead, they are going to the Supreme Court on rights to evangelize in public schools, stopping state funding of “occult” schools (Waldorf) and teaching about gay history, or alternative lifestyles in elementary schools. Perhaps they could take on the entire concept of public schools to start with, or dissociate, rather than selecting specific issues to defend, and other issues to remain mute about, like how many women and children are dying, or children being molested at the hands of fine, upstanding, fatherhood-endorsing Christian ministers (or therapists), or about the tragic waste of millions of $$ on child support enforcement, abstinence education in the schools, and so forth?

For a more equal fight — hows about trying this as a FOR-PROFIT industry like the rest of us individuals who have been depending on wages from businesses that have to watch their profit margins and are accountable to their shareholders?

Capitol Resource Institute still is alive and kicking despite (from on-line appearances) operating right out of the state capitol, Sacramento, with a suspended corporation license and delinquent charity status. It has not apparently filed with the state of California since 2005, although I just found an IRS return stamped “2010” which I encourage readers to view and write the legislator about. They register are operating at a loss, which includes Program Service Accomplishment write-offs (i.e. expenses for a nonprofit) including $145K for what amounts to PR and lobbying, another $45K for “Conferences that Celebrate and Promote California Families” (we know what kind of families are not welcome there) and another $1,500 generic “Advocacy” plus $82K of “Other” expenses.

Karen England (the only paid member of CRI — it says $50K/year on last return) is clearly active and speaking for CRI in the STOPSB48 movement, cited July, 2011. You saw above — they have not filed their required statement of charitable trusts, and their business license has been suspended. I also showed that Peter L. Henderson (Fuller Seminary grad, formerly Santa Ana mega-church staff, a CRI institute founder) whose bio blurb also states he used to be “Chief of Staff for the California Republican Leader” (undated, person not named, should we check that reference?) if he is still involved with this CRI (no longer on the board, I see), it has received two delinquency notices from the state. It’s clear PJI and CRI are being cited hand in hand, and I don’t want to do more free PR for this group by quoting them; but this is the link showing the linkage to PJI at STOPSB48.com.

What does it say about Pacific Justice Institute to be hanging out with groups that operate with a suspended (so far as I can tell) business license and that exploit nonprofit status by failing to file?

(my equipment today is too slow to view the tax return properly, including finding out what $82,000 of “other” expenses might be, however, contributions (REVENUES from public, grants, etc.) for 2006 were $241,767, for 2007, $315,275, and for 2008, $282,463.

Imagine a single person not paying taxes on these amounts, or a small business composed of about 4 people filing FOR-profit not paying taxes on this amount, as minor as it is in the larger scope? Would they have a bank lien on by now?

Imagine 4 noncustodial fathers (or mothers) who collectively earned this much, and didn’t pay their child support . . .. Of course, they might slide if they were by doing so contributing to the Title IV-A/D/E system — but even so — social services are being cut for innocent kids, and it’s known that women disproportionately in older age are going to rely on social security. And these father-centric religious (republicans) are more concerned about history textbooks for elementary students while some of their (fuller, I mean) associates profit sell (or at least are paid, while authoring) books on the scientific study of how to produce childhood spirituality and fly overseas to study how young people report to trauma.

found at “Americansoffaith.com”:

May 21, 2010
Living Oaks Community Church 1100 Business Center Circle, Newbury Park, California.
Luncheon with Karen England, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute.

Pastors’ luncheon with the Pacific Justice Institute on May 21, 2010 from 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. with special guest Karen England, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute.

Back in 2008, RIGHTWINGWATCH.org described “Americans of Faith” (website says founded in 2004, this is how I found out where — in Virginia — guess where I’m going next on-line….. to look up nonprofit status and corporate status since typing “Americans of Faith” into the NCCSDATAWEB search (active & inactive organizations) pulled up “No Records Found”….) as follows;

Americans of Faith, which seems to be going by the name Operation Vote nowadays, was founded back in 2004 to register and mobilize 5 million Christian voters by Jay Sekulow, who just so happens to be Chair of Romney’s Faith and Values Steering Committee, as well as a member of Romney’s Advisory Committee On The Constitution And The Courts.

The Passion of the Religious Conservatives

1 May 2004

National Journal

Several prominent evangelical-movement leaders, as well as businessmen, social conservatives, and other like-minded believers, have put together ambitious voter-registration efforts that aim to get the Christian faithful to the polls on Election Day. Though nominally nonpartisan, these “ground- war” efforts are expected to benefit Republicans far more than Democrats because of such hot-button issues for conservatives as gay marriage and abortion.

One effort is being run by Americans of Faith, a Virginia-based tax-exempt group that is co-chaired by Bush fundraising “Pioneer” Edward Atsinger, who is president of Salem Communications, the nation’s largest Christian radio broadcaster; and Jay Alan Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, a nonprofit launched by Pat Robertson that champions religious causes.

“I’ve been talking about this for the last 10 years,” Sekulow said. “Evangelicals haven’t been good participants in elections. We’re talking about Christian civic participation.” Americans of Faith hopes to raise about $800,000 and will use the Internet, Christian radio, and music festivals, as well as churches and other venues, to try to reach its goal of registering 2 million new voters from the conservative Christian community in time for the November election.

Giving extra firepower to evangelicals, the group’s board includes such well-known leaders as Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council in Washington, and Frank Wright, the head of the National Religious Broadcasters.

According to a 2004 Talon News article, Americans of Faith’s Board of Directors includes, in addition to Sekulow and Perkins, the likes of Richard Land, Mike Farris, and David Barton.

While Farris has endorsed Huckabee and Barton has been sharing the stage with him in recent weeks, Land and Perkins have been conspicuously cold toward his campaign – and considering that the organization’s founder is a key backer of Huckabee’s main rival, it is odd that Huckabee would be invited to address an Americans of Faith event, especially since the longer he stays in the race, the more damage he does to Romney.

Motto at bottom of “Americans of Faith”:

“When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
but when the wicked rule, the people groan.”
-Proverbs 29:2

I think we can fairly well deduce what the meaning of “righteous in authority” means, here in general, and who they are….at least in re: certain issues. How does this meld with the righteous according to the IRS and State Attorney General for THIS group?

OK, here we go:  You KNOW where I’m going after reading about “AMERICANS of FAITH” — it’s off to Virginia we go:

Perhaps, once the 2008 elections happened, their purpose was fulfilled?

 SCC ID Business Entity Name Entity Type Entity Status
06116099 AMERICANS OF FAITH Corporation Terminated

at 1770 Kirby Road, McLean, VA = “Single Family Residence, 5 Bed, 4.50 Bath, 6613 Sq. Ft”

I finally got them through the “IRS 990-finder” and a little more detail.










Americans of Faith CA 2009 $29,259 990 16 20-0742507
Americans of Faith CA 2008 $1,781.27 990O 17 20-0742507
Americans of Faith CA 2008 $7,138.15 990 15 20-0742507

And, “aha” — the IRS (2008) shows them doing business in MY state! but with registered agent in Virginia, as above.  And next to no assets.

5235 Mission Oaks Blvd., Camarillo,CA 93012 (which appears to be either a FedEx store, or a church….or a church using a PO Box)

and address (suite 1000) of a conservative group with (at least) a link to Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assoc.

Americans for Prosperity: California

which IS registered here as a charity — and at the same Suite# as showing under AOF on the strange tax return of 20-0742507.  The AOF also list their purpose as “Voter Education.”

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY CT0136202 Charity Current WASHINGTON DC Charity Registration Charity
AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY Charity Not Registered ARLINGTON VA Charity Registration Charity
AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION 116822 Charity Current WASHINGTON DC Charity Registration Charity

— IS this “AOF” sharing the same PO Box?

(BACK to the drawing board in California):  AOF (Americans of Faith) NOT registered as a charity in California, either looking at the EIN# or by name.  OR with the Secretary of State.  Maybe it’s a 3-state outfit, like the old AFCC?

Tax Return of 2009 (above) lists these unpaid officers:

  • Colby May (see corporation registry, 6 bedroom home in Virginia)  {{ALSO works with ACLJ, see “sekulow,” next.)
  • Jay Sekulow (now I know I have the right group) and
  • Edward Atsinger, plus it’s signed by
  • “David J. Spady, Treasurer” (not listed on the form.  Go figure!)
COLBY MAY description, from “Wakefield School of Divinity Site” I note that this school started only in 1999, and has baptist origins.

Director & Senior Counsel, Washington Office
American Center for Law and Justice

Colby M. May is Senior Counsel and Director of the Washington Office of theAmerican Center for Law & Justice. With the ACLJ since 1994, he specializes in federal litigation, regulatory proceedings, communications and technology, non-profit tax issues, and First Amendment law.

Mr. May, a graduate of the George Mason University School of Law, has represented parties and amicus curiae in several landmark Supreme Court cases, including:  (see link) . . . .

Mr. May is a member of the District of Columbia Bar and Virginia State Bar, and is admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States of America, United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit; United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit; United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit; District of Columbia Court of Appeals; and the Supreme Court of Virginia.

Mr. May has provided testimony to the Congress of the United States on many occasions and on a variety of matters, such as: the “Religious Liberty and Protection Act,” “The Dot Kids Domain Name Act,” and “The Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act.”

Mr. May is an Adjunct Law Professor at Regent University, Virginia Beach, Virginia (Legislation) (Spring 2003-present).

Mr. May also serves on the board of directors of several civic and charitable organizations and currently serves as a director and Secretary of EndPoverty.org, a public charity fostering microeconomic development in emerging countries of the world, and Enough is Enough!, a pro-family organization working to make the Internet safe for children.

Jay Sekulow’s son presumably, from ACLJ can be seen under the link on ACLJ:

Sekulow is a graduate of Regent University School of Law in Virginia Beach, VA, where he served as co-founder and Editor-in-Chief of the Regent Journal of Law and Public Policy. Sekulow earned his BA in Political Science from George Washington University and went on to earn his Master of Laws degree (LL.M.) in International Human Rights from the Georgetown Law Center”

And with “Edward Ratsinger,” particularly if it’s Edward Ratsinger, III, I am officially in too deep.   See this site, and not my first time on it.  From “sourcewatch.org”

Edward G. AtsingerIII is the president and chief executive officer of Salem Communications Corporation.

According to June 1999 information posted on the Council for National Policydatabase:

“Edward G. Atsinger III-CNP Board of Governors (1996). President and C.E.O., Salem Communications Corporation; chairman, National Religious Broadcasters Music License Committee. Founded Salem Communications in 1986 with his brother- in-law Stuart W. Epperson, who is Chairman of Salem’s board. Each partner owns half the company, but Atsinger remains more involved in day-to-day business decisions. Salem Communications includes 44 stations grouped primarily in major markets across the United States. It is the largest Christian radio group and among the top ten in commercial radio groups in the nation. Salem owns stations in eight of the 10 largest radio markets in America, all but Detroit and Miami. The company’s goal is to run stations in the top 25 markets.
“Atsinger is also a member of a secretive entity called the Capital Commonwealth Group (CCG) comprised of four multi-millionaires who collaborate to maximize their influence by recruiting and funding candidates for state political office in California: Howard Ahmanson (heir to the Home Savings & Loan fortune); Rob Hurtt (president of Container Supply Company, and now a state senator); Edward Atsinger III (owner of 19 Christian radio stations); and Roland Hinz (publisher of dirt bike magazines). In 1992, as the press began to report on CCG and its links to the Radical Right, Ahmanson, Hurtt, Atsinger, and Hinz formed Allied Business PAC. During the 1992 election cycle, Allied Business PAC and members of CCG as individuals contributed more than $2 million to various candidates and ballot initiative.
Forbes. Com shows he’s not quite parallel (at least form this source) with Robert A. Montoni, of Maximus, Inc. (in California) but doing quite well.

Edward Atsinger, Chief Executive Officer and Director

Salem Communications Corporation

Camarillo ,  CA

Sector: SERVICES  /  Broadcasting – Radio

Officer since January 1986
71 Years Old
Mr. Atsinger has been Chief Executive Officer, a director of the Company and a director of each of the Company?s subsidiaries since their inception. He was President of Salem from its inception through June 2007. He has been engaged in the ownership and operation of radio stations since 1969. Mr. Atsinger has been a member of the board of directors of the National Religious Broadcasters for a number of years; he was re-elected to a three-year term on that board in February 2010. He has also been a member of the National Association of Broadcasters Radio Board since 2008. Mr. Atsinger has been a member of the board of directors of Oaks Christian School in Westlake Village, California since 1999. Mr. Atsinger is the brother-in-law of Mr. Epperson.
The tax returns I looked at are among the strangest (and least complete) of any.   Not to mention, “Americans of Faith” has a california address but isn’t registered (as charity OR business) in California, although another conservative group at the same PO Box (presumably) IS.    


SCC ID: 06116099
Business Entity Type: Corporation
Jurisdiction of Formation: VA
Date of Formation/Registration: 2/19/2004
Status: Terminated
Shares Authorized: 0


Send them a copy of the Franklin Coverup materials, and let them go look up a survivor and take an interview! Again, to quote “Jesus,” he that is faithful in that which is least . . . . This is not a multi-state outfit, but one that formed itself (it seems) right in Sacramento for lobbying purposes. Perhaps that’s the best place to avoid scrutiny, in close proximity to where lawmakers meet.


Corporation Number
Corporation Name
Disclosure Filing Date

Sampler of Executive Pay:

Name Title Compensation Shares Options Bankruptcy Fraud
ATSINGER, EDWARD G. III DIRECTOR $ 2,175,588.00 3,952,730.00 606,365.00 NO NO
DAVENPORT, DAVID DIRECTOR $ 64,318.00 1,500.00 9,500.00 NO NO
EPPERSON, STUART W. DIRECTOR $ 1,502,538.00 3,892,176.00 397,230.00 NO NO
HALVORSON, ERIC H. DIRECTOR $ 68,818.00 3,500.00 12,000.00 NO NO
HINZ, ROLAND S. DIRECTOR $ 68,818.00 69,027.00 14,400.00 NO NO
PRESSLER, JUDGE PAUL DIRECTOR $ 62,318.00 1,000.00 9,500.00 NO NO
RIDDLE, RICHARD A. DIRECTOR $ 68,318.00 54,667.00 14,400.00 NO NO
WEINBERG, DENNIS M. DIRECTOR $ 49,338.00 16,640.00 1,000.00 NO NO
ADAIR, ROBERT C. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 463,793.00 400.00 15,250.00 NO NO
ANDERSON, GREG EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 366,132.00 0.00 17,250.00 NO NO
DAVIS, JOE D. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 786,962.00 3,500.00 103,725.00 NO NO
EVANS, DAVID A R EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 1,344,461.00 5,800.00 304,284.00 NO NO
MASYR, EVAN D. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 459,383.00 0.00 60,670.00 NO NO

SO?  Pay someone to do your damn charity registration with “AMERICANS of FAITH,” in your home state, or “AMERICANS for PROSPERITY” or whatever its name is helping promote OTHER organizations (Capitol Resource) which don’t file THEIR charity registrations, either.  I guess if a group of people are helping re-write laws, they shouldn’t have to be subject to them as well …..

OK, now:

On Judge Paul Pressler, who is about to (or did) have a “School of Law” in Louisiana named after him, and is frighteningly Southern Baptist:  ANd yes, he was a Judge.  See his Forbes.com  He must be 81 years old by now….

THIS LINK details takeover of the SBC (Southern Baptist Convention), as planned with a meeting at least in New Orleans in 1967, with this Judge Pressler and a seminary student.  It is truly hair-raising and shows what happens when fundamentalists get an idea on the brain, and succeed in pushing it through.  THIS (YES) relates to women:

Chronology of the SBC Takeover

Here are some key events in the fundamentalist takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention. They have been compiled from a variety of sources and edited by myself. Feel free to let me know of other items that you think should be included.

1967 — Seminary Doctoral student Paige Patterson and Judge Paul Pressler met at Cafe du Monde in New Orleans and discussed a long term strategy for fundamentalist domination of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC).

1974 — Baptist Faith and Message Fellowship identified inerrancy as the issue to be used in their struggle against moderates in the SBC.

1979 — Patterson, Pressler and others ran a “get out the vote” campaign in 15 states prior to the Convention, urging a defeat of the moderates in the SBC. Voters were bussed to the convention in mass numbers but left after the vote for president. Fundamentalist pastor Adrian Rogers was elected president.

1980 — Judge Pressler publicly announced  the strategy of the fundamentalist takeover, which was to elect the SBC president a sufficient number of times to gain a fundamentalist majority on the boards and agencies of the Convention. This was to be accomplished through the president’s power to make appointments. Fundamentalists successfully elected all presidents of the SBC from 1979 to the present.

1985 — SBC formed a Peace Committee to investigate the growing conflict and make recommendations for conflict resolution. Dominated by fundamentalists the committee failed to approach reconciliation. Cecil Sherman resigned from the committee in 1985, followed by Winfred Moore in 1986 because he did not feel he could participate in a “police committee.”

1986 — Home Mission Board (HMB) trustees became controlled by fundamentalists.

Trustees barred women from receiving pastoral assistance in mission churches supported by HMB.  Seminary presidents attempted peace in the “Glorietta statement” but to no avail.

1987 — Peace Committee report was adopted, recoommending that hiring practices of boards and agencies reflect “the most commonly held beliefs” in the denomination. Moderates charged that creedalism became official SBC policy through this action. Southeastern Board of Trustees became controlled by fundamentalists. They took the faculty out of the process for hiring new instructors, and placed this power solely in the hands of the president, who used the Peace Committee document as a doctrinal guide for hiringPresident of Southeastern Seminary, Randall Lolley, resigned in protest.

HMB voted to forbid missionary appointment to persons who speak in tongues and divorced persons, unless the divorce fell within strict guidelines.

1988 — HMB used the Peace Committee report to enforce creedalism in hiring practices. SBC meeting in San Antonio passed a resolution elevating strong pastoral authority and denigrating the priesthood of all believers by a vote of 10,950 to 9,050. Richard Land, a fundamentalist leader, became President of the Christian Life Commission. Foreign Mission Board (FMB) fired moderate missionary Michael Willett after a fundamentalist missionary reported on Willett’s opinions.  (WOW!)

1989 — Fundamentalist leaders gave the Christian Life Commission greater responsibility for dealing with church and state issues in order to circumvent working with the more moderate Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs. . . .

1993 — President of Southern Seminary, Roy Honeycutt, resigned due to a hostile fundamentalist board of trustees. Al Mohler, a leading fundamentalist, became President of Southern Seminary. SBC voted to cease giving funds to the Baptist Joint Committee for Public Affairs because it would not cooperate with the fundamentalist agenda to restore publicly-led prayer in schools, government vouchers to attend religious schools and other right wing political and religious goals. Fundamentalists attempted to refuse seating for messengers from the church where President Clinton had his church membership. SBC affirmed a report critical of membership in Freemasons. Gary Leazer was fired from the HMB for explaining the meaning of that vote to Masons at a Masonic meeting.

1994 — SBC Executive Committee leaders commanded SBC Seminaries to cease hosting booths at CBF meetings. Moderate Professor Molly Marshall was forced to resign from Southern Seminary. A hostile board of fundamentalist trustees at Southwestern Seminary fired President Russell Dilday and changed the locks on his office. SBC meeting in Orlando voted to refuse CBF funds designated for missionaries and other SBC agencies. SBC Executive Committee requested that State Conventions cut all ties to CBF.

1995 — Diana Garland was fired as Dean of Carver School of Social work by seminary president A1 Mohler. FMB President Jerry Rankin sent a letter to 40,000 pastors and Women’s Missionary Union (WMU) Directors urging them to pray that the National WMU would cease cooperating with the CBF.

John Jackson, chairman of the Board of Trustees for the FMB, compared the WMU’s cooperation with the CBF with the acts of an adulterous woman.

2001 – South Main of Houston severed ties with the SBC. Two professors at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary refused to sign the new Baptist Faith and Message and lost their jobs. 

Former President Jimmy Carter urged estranged moderates to forget the conservative-led Southern Baptist Convention and form new partnerships to advance traditional Baptist views. 

Registrations numbered 5,100 at the annual CBF Convention in Atlanta, a new record. Fundamentalists in Texas held their convention at the same time as the BGCT annual convention which was peaceful and without controversy (only about 50 votes in favor of the new Baptist Faith and Message out of the thousands that attended).

2002 – Texas Baptists established a rescue fund for disenfranchised SBC missionaries.


On this site (easier to follow), Pressler (think “Americans of Faith,” the unregistered, tax-evading? outfit sponsoring the also non-charity-registering Capital Resource Institute & the apparently more California-compliant (but equally obnoxious towards women) Pacific Justice institute. The connection of Pressler with this “ALEC” group, if NPR reported it right, is very disturbing.

Either way, here’s Pressler being interviewed and boasting (?) about how he took over the Southern Baptists.   As a domestic violence survivor, long-term, religious-based, I do want to say that where we miss it stopping abuse is failing to realize the capacity for strategic long-term planning of takeover.  Easier to see in hindsight, hard to stop once it’s started.    A normal, and/or honest, person would be incredulous that this type of mentality exists.  Trust me, it does.  Moderates are often slow to “get” zealots.

(note, the partner “Paige” was a man.  I was wondering, given the context).


A Review of the Firestorm Chat With Judge Paul Pressler


Unbelievable attitude.  This is a Texas Appellate Judge at the time….


In early 1987, an interview with Paul Pressler was conducted by Gary North on an independent religious radio program called “Firestorm Chats.”* Underneath a facade of religious rhetoric Pressler revealed exactly how he and a small group of men had organized a movement to place themselves in control of the Southern Baptist Convention. Or as Pressler’s sympathetic interviewer candidly put it, how they carried out a “strategy” for the “capture” and “takeover” of the Southern Baptist Convention. *Dominion Tapes, P.O. Box 8204, Fort Worth, Texas 76124


Editor’s Note: The following is a summary of the details of the key elements of the takeover strategy described by Pressler in this interview. For a copy of the tape contact the TBC office.


1. Pressler says that he spotted a weakness in the SBC structure which makes such a takeover possible. Convention rules allow one person — the SBC president — to appoint the critical SBC committees, thus he could pack the SBC structure with a single faction.


2. Pressler tells how he and Paige Patterson set out to accomplish exactly that: to elect presidents to load SBC positions with persons sympathetic to their views. As Pressler put it, “Paige and I make a good team because he is the theologian and I am more the legal analyst of how the system works.”


3. He revealed how he and a few others began in the 1970s to build a political organization within the SBC to carry out the plan. “About 1978 we really came up with knowing how it could be done,” he said.


4. By controlling the elections for a number of years (as Pressler put it, having “a series of presidents who know what is coming off ”), eventually the entire SBC would be controlled. Paul Pressler then revealed his extensive efforts to get his voters to go to the convention and to vote with him.


5. Gary North: “How did you get them (your voters) out?”


Pressler: “I started speaking and Paige started speaking…to people all over the country.”

North: “How many churches did you speak… say in ’78, how many churches did you have to speak at…?”

Pressler: “I can remember one trip I took which was fairly typical. I was gone from Houston six days and during that six days I spoke at least six or seven times a day… last year (1985) between January and June I spoke over 200 times in 16 states…the largest group I spoke to where it was an evening meeting, that they came only to hear Adrian Rogers and me speak…”

In response to the question of how he earned a living while traveling across the country to build the voting power, Pressler explained that, as an appellate judge, he is required to be in his office only one day a week, for “the oral arguments which my panel heard on Thursday afternoon. So my rule would be to leave Thursday night, get home the following Wednesday night, and… if I was as current as any other judge in the Texas appellate system, nobody had any gripe coming.”


OK, Here, in a blog? about Council for National Policy, if one scrolls down to the bottom, one sees a section on “ALEC” which includes Pressler.   ALEC stands for:  American Legislative Exchange Council, established (it says) in 1973 by Paul Weyrich.

Besides being obnoxiously long (I literally spent all day on this post, just about) — I would like to remind us that this is not the first time I’ve brought up the connection between world-domination-group Unification Church, a related “Heritage Foundation” and the ultra-right pressures of the fatherhood movement.  I say this because it feels like a cult because it IS a cult.  And by “cult” think Scientology, Moonies, you name it.  Money laundering is central and, just a little reminder, the topic here overall is tax-evasion, for which “Sun Myung” went to jail in the US in 1982.  Not that it appears to have slowed him down much.

I think this site has some good info for those able to digest it:

American Legislative Exchange Council, (ALEC): Established in 1973 by Paul Weyrich  of the Free Congress Foundation’s Coalition for Constitutional Liberties, among others, ALEC’s purpose is to reach out to state office holders. In the words of ALEC’s former executive director, Sam Brunelli:

“ALEC’s goal is to ensure that these state legislators are so well informed, so well armed, that they can set the terms of the public policy debate, that they can change the agenda, that they can lead. This is the infrastructure that will reclaim the states for our movement.” 52  

ALEC has the financial support of more than 200 corporations including Coors now Castle Rock Foundation, Scaife’s Family and Allegheny Foundation, Amway, IBM, Ford, Philip Morris, Exxon, Texaco and Shell Oil. William Bennett, [CNP’s] Jack Kemp, [CNP’s] John H. Sununu, and George Bush have all addressed ALEC sessions in recent years. 53 Footnotes 37-53

Judge Paul Pressler  – CNP President Executive Committee 1988-90, member 1984, 1996, 1998;  justice, Texas Court of Appeals, retired; former member, Texas Legislature; practiced law for 12 years at Vinson and Elkins; appointed District Judge, 1970; appointed Justice, Texas Court of Appeals, 1978; active in conservative movement in the Southern Baptist Convention; board member, KHCB (Christian radio); member, Texas Philosophical Society; Southern Baptist Convention, Boys Country, Salvation Army; Phillips Exeter Academy; graduate, Princeton University

this is too heavy for the rest of this post.  Follow-up note:  “Council for National Policy” and origins of the Heritage Foundation:  Look up “Paul Weyrich” in Wikipedia . . . . .

In 1971 Joe Coors along with Jack Wilson and Paul Weyrich founded Analysis and Research Inc., to establish a political research entity. Joe Coors donated the first-year Heritage budget of $250,000 for 1973 from the coffers of the Coors Corporation and for the next two years gave $200,000. He then pledged $15,000 per month. Coors and Weyrich set up the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress to carry out political activities and the Heritage Foundation as a tax exempt educational research entity. The Coors company provided Heritage Foundation with $20,000 per month during the foundation’s first year. Weyrich was Heritage president until February 28, 1974. Weyrich had ties to Josef Strauss of Bavaria Germany who was active in a political party that coalesced with repentant Nazi’s after World War II.

Strauss came to the United States in the early 1970’s.  Weyrich and Strauss’ aide by the name of Armin K. Haas planned Strauss’ schedule. Joe Coors helped Haas make political contacts in Congress. 33  

Paul Weyrich united with the Coors family which funded the start-up of the Heritage Foundation in the early 1970s. In 1974, with money from the Coors family, Weyrich also started the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress, which later became the Free Congress Foundation. Since the beginning, the Heritage Foundation and the Free Congress Foundation have been led and/or received oversight by Weyrich, and their boards of directors are interlinked.

The Free Congress Foundation, The Heritage Foundation and the Conservative Caucus actively supported the Contras.  In 1985, Heritage Foundation, “donated” $100,000 to the Institute for North-South Issues, a conduit to the Contras, connected to Oliver North

Put that together with the CNP:

(THIS “Last Gasp” of the post actually was written near the top and — as I do – got pushed downward while I did look-ups and posted them in the middle.  ORIGINALLY, I thought this would be about two groups and a San Leandro Earthquake — timely and perhaps humorous.  However I have ended the study more convinced than ever that the tax system (profit/non-profit) is a major source of current woes, and that we should NOT be complacent about tax-dodging shape-shifting non-profits in these fields.  Who knows how much money is being laundered?  NONE? Then what’s the need for the multiple incorporations at one address by multi-millionaires?

Overall, superstition is alive and well in the united states (see literature on the fatherlessness crisis and scapegoating of single-mother households for poverty rather than things such as, for example, a work/school relationship which requires dumb-down school to occupy most of children’s growing time while their parents go pay taxes at various jobs and the think tanks figure out new ways to bankrupt the postponed hope of social security for old age and others figure out how to get the federal cut, at least, on the interest for collected but undistributed child support nationwide, amounts unknown, and for-profit companies have $30 million to spare in settlement suits regarding fraud for false claims. (see last post).

Rick Joyner prophesying over California:

Joyner: America Is Under Judgment and God Is Going to Destroy California

March 22, 2011 | Filed under: Joyner, Rick,Propheteering,Right Wing Watch | Posted by: Right Wing Watch

Last week, Rick Joyner was warning that the earthquake in Japan was a sign that demonic Nazism was going to engulf the United States.

Joyner has since produced two 30-minute “special bulletin” video updates to warn everyone that the US has fallen under God’s judgment because the nation has become so depraved and allowed “evil, wicked” atheists to remove God from the public square.  As such, it is now inevitable that a massive earthquake is going to destroy California and Joyner is urging everyone “to get out of that area”:

(yeah, and well.  I’m still looking for some evidence that ‘Americans with Faith” actually filed a nonprofit somewhere, presumably in Virginia, and if not, I’ll cite the earthquake in Virginia, which FYI was larger, as evidence that somebody ought to start getting their nonprofit corporate acts together near our nation’s capitol AND the west coast capital of California!)

OOPS, make that “Americans OF Faith.”

Citizens React To Earthquake Online

Writer Mat Honan sized the 3.6-magnitude quake felt throughout San Francisco Bay Area with this twitter update: “That is exactly what we get with regard to making fun of the East Coast today.” The actual news swarm covering the rare quake in Virginia, coupled with the other quake reports had many speculating about end of the world scenarios. “I certainly pray this entire earthquake-thing hitting Massachusetts, Colorado, and every other place does not become The actual Day After Tomorrow,” wrote a Twitter member using the name of DJ Knight Sweetie.

Seriously, I can relate this to the current topic of nonprofits vs. profits in the Family arena. It’s a bit of a stretch, but chances for this kind of irony don’t pop up often.

Also, my on-line access today doesn’t include anything that can upload a pdf file, so I’ll just take this opportunity to speak again about the very irritating Pacific Justice Institute’s choice of favorite causes.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

August 26, 2011 at 2:28 am

The amazing Suspended, Dissolved, Terminated, Forfeited, Delinquent, perchance Active-Status (re)Incarnations Family Court Stakeholders (Phew!)

with one comment

Well, I’m breathless keeping up with them.  Someone very, very tech-savvy should design a 3D chart.

The X-axis could be years, the Y axis perhaps States of incorporation.  A 3rd dimension could be either $$, or Board of Directors Personnel in common Profit/Nonprofit or perhaps %/# of public law & court-related employees among incorporating personnel.

Actually no matter how I look at it, the human mind can’t keep up with such level of detail, and I don’t see any databases that are, although there are plenty of databases that track almost every other level of detail, including books signed out from local public libraries by users.

My cursor / fingers are so trained they can get on auto-pilot, or otherwise just about effortlessly over to the state (usually my state’s) “Business Corporations” search page, and then the “Registry of Charitable Trusts” search page – in approximately 5 seconds or less, without bookmarks.  The computer is trained to go there also.

Business Entities (BE)

To spice it up a bit, I took a little detour to the link underneath “Business Search” — and to “Disclosures.”  (California Secretary of State link)

No, this isn’t the judges’ statements about their financial holdings (Form 700s in my state — what about in yours?) — but Public Traded Stock corporations doing business in (my state).   This is another angle of the child support enforcement (and other) businesses we tend to overlook.

There are shareholders – not just employees — invested, literally, in the success (profit) of for-profit organizations whose business is to put liens on your assets and garnish your wages if you’re a delinquent in support payments person.  Or, sometimes, when you aren’t.  Or sometimes, as it comes to certain groups, when you don’t even have a minor child by the name they are putting into the system.  Or paid already (and so forth).

So, before posting Maximus’s disclosures (speaking of which) my Secretary of State site very helpfully posts the relevant business codes for anyone – meaning any foreign (out of state) corporation doing business “intra” (within) the state.  These are for the protection of the stockholders, and us.

For example:

2105. (a) A foreign corporation shall not transact intrastate business without having first obtained from the Secretary of State a certificate of qualification. To obtain that certificate it shall file, on a form prescribed by the Secretary of State, a statement and designation signed by a corporate officer stating:
(1) Its name and the state or place of its incorporation or organization.
(2) The address of its principal executive office.
(3) The address of its principal office within this state, if any.
(4) The name of an agent upon whom process directed to the corporation may be served within this state. The designation shall comply with the provisions of subdivision (b) of Section 1502.
(5) (A) Its irrevocable consent to service of process directed to it upon the agent designated and to service of process on the Secretary of State if the agent so designated or the agent’s successor is no longer authorized to act or cannot be found at the address given.
(B) Consent under this paragraph extends to service of process directed to the foreign corporation’s agent in California for a search warrant issued pursuant to Section 1524.2 of the Penal Code, or for any other validly issued and properly served search warrant, for records or documents that are in the possession of the foreign corporation and are located inside or outside of this state. This subparagraph shall apply to a foreign corporation that is a party or a nonparty to the matter for which the search warrant is sought. For purposes of this subparagraph, “properly served” means delivered by hand, or in a manner reasonably allowing for proof of delivery if delivered by United States mail, overnight delivery service, or facsimile to a person or entity listed in Section 2110 of the Corporations Code.
(6) {{[(a)??}} If it is a corporation which will be subject to the Insurance Code as an insurer, it shall so state that fact. (b) Annexed to that statement and designation shall be a certificate by an authorized public official of the state or place of incorporation of the corporation to the effect that the corporation is an existing corporation in good standing in that state or place or, in the case of an association, an officers’ certificate stating that it is a validly organized and existing business association under the laws of a specified foreign jurisdiction. (c) Before it may be designated by any foreign corporation as its agent for service of process, any corporate agent must comply with Section 1505.

This is going to become VERY interesting when it comes to nonprofits with the word “COURT” anywhere in their name.  The ethereal re-incarnations and multi-state addresses are really hard to keep up with.

But, thankfully, MAXIMUS was forthcoming and disclosed, twice, in California (remind me to check EVERY state):

Corporation Number
Corporation Name
Disclosure Filing Date

Sorry to give it that ugly format, but the more picturesque versions (which drag an image) tend to not show in different browers.  So you get the warhorse version, with live links (I hope).

I then went right back to the “Business Search” (as in yesterday’s post) and typed in “C1618100” (easier than the whole name), remembering to check “Entity#” and got this:

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process

Well perhaps THAT’s why we can’t keep up with all these stakeholders in the mediation (etc) and businesses of law — they have a faster than light incorporating service. . . . . .


MADISON,  WI  53717-2915

Also at that address:


Maximus (see narrow bar, above) has been doing in business in california since before welfare reform, and was in fact involved in it.  I think that a contract with Los Angeles was one of the earliest one’s in the company’s history in this business.

Benefit from our Child Support Expertise

MAXIMUS professionals manage 40 percent of the privatized child support caseload in the United States and Canada today. All our services are supported through a team of CSE experts, which includes former state and local IV-D directors and others with significant child support legal, policy and operations experience. Our more than 660 CSE specialists have a shared passion and dedication for helping children and families obtain the resources they need.

As the local IV-D directors also (through fatherhood grants, etc.) have some say in child CUSTODY matters, this can get fairly interesting . . . ..

Child Welfare

MAXIMUS is committed to improving the welfare of the nation’s most vulnerable children by providing SSI Advocacy Services for children in foster care and providing Title IV-E, TANF, and Adoption Assistance Eligibility services for our government partners.

We partner with government clients and tailor our services to meet child welfare program goals. We are passionate about advocating for vulnerable populations, and our team brings a unique blend of knowledge, skills, and experience, which is unmatched by any other firm.

And partnerships with various regional nonprofit child support directors associations (see my recent posts for who is paying for that . . . . . )

Extending our reach through our valued partners (Affiliated Associations)

As a corporate member of several civic associations across the nation, MAXIMUS is dedicated to the business areas and communities in which we operate.

Child Support

Eastern Regional Interstate Child Support Association   (ERICSA)
National Child Support Enforcement Association   (NCSEA)
Western Interstate Child Support Enforcement Council  (WICSEC) (active in California also, although our state one is “CSDA”)

About that 1988 incorporation date in California:

From wikipedia (just a reminder), Maximus started in 1975, in a garage in McLean Virginia:


MAXIMUS was founded by David Mastran, a Vietnam veteran and former government worker, in 1975 and was first incorporated as a privately held company in 1975. Mastran founded the company from his garage in McLean, Virginia.[10]The company eventually went public on June 13, 1997.

So, it incorporated in California probably in order to do this:

Employment services

MAXIMUS began providing welfare-to-work services in 1988 with Los Angeles County’s decision to award the first welfare-to-work privatization contract in the nation. Today[when?]MAXIMUS operates TANF programs in Los Angeles County; Alaska; San Diego; Orange County, California; Wisconsin; Maricopa County, Arizona; Nashville, Tennessee; and Cleveland, Ohio.

The company also runs One Stop Employment Centers, Veterans Employment Programs, and WIA Summer Youth Programs.[14]\

Public obviously meaning it trades its stock, “MMS,” openly, and not just restricted to shareholders.  Right now, that’s worth about . . . .

Last Price $37.69  Day Change (up) 0.89|2.42 %  that’s literally 8/23/2011 1:19pm, thank you “Quote.morningstar.com/stock/s.aspx?t=MMS

(. . No, I don’t know stocks either, just looking)

However, in 2007, it apparently was doing better, until it had to pay that $30 million in settling a whistleblower lawsuit from one of its own employees.  This is a whistleblower law blog:

Maximus, Inc. pays $30.5 Million to settle False Claims Act Case

“Helping the Government serve the People” is the tagline of Virginia based Maximus, Inc., latest corporate citizen entangled in a Medicaid fraud scam.

Unfortunately, this company needs a new tagline. The DOJ announced today that Maximus has agreed to pay $30.5 Million to settle qui tam lawsuit. The company admitted to their part in submitting fraudulent Medicaid claims for children who may not have received foster care services. Last September, at the end of their fiscal year the company reported earning $700 million in revenueand predicted a rosy forecast for 2007. Today the Maximus stock closed at $42.05, only down a slight 5% from earlier trading.  I wonder, how they will project next year’s forecast, in wake of this scandal.  It is a scandal, because the good name of this organization has been tarnished due to a few “greedy” and “unscrupulous” workers.

Thanks to the brave whistleblower, Benjamin Turner, a former division manager at Maximus, the acts and deeds of the corporate wrongdoers, did not go unpunished. In recognition for his efforts, Mr. Turner will receive $4.93 million as a result of filing a qui tam or whistleblower lawsuit under the provisions of the False Claims Act. There are times when a whistleblower gets compensated for his brave actions. And there are times when the whistleblower gets nothing, even after going to the Supreme Court, as in the case of Rockwell v. United States, as mentioned here previously on the Whistleblower Law Blog.

I’m just putting that in for reference, before posting this Disclosure from my state.  I was talking about what it takes (financially, salaries) to run the SF Superior court a post or so ago.  Well, here are some of the profits — including in both salary and “options” (that’s stock options, which have higher leverage and potential profits than plain stocks) for the executive directors.

California Secretary of State site shows:

Corporation Number
Corporation Name
Disclosure Filing Date

The first filing showed one set of Executive Directors:

Corporation Number: C1618100
Document Number: 0990969
Disclosure Filing Date: 07/17/2006
Bankruptcy: NO
Legal Proceedings: Material pending legal proceeding(s) – YES
Legally liable in any material legal proceeding(s) – NO
Prepared most recent auditor’s report: ERNST & YOUNG
Employed by the corporation as of the date of the statement: ERNST & YOUNG
Name Title Compensation Shares Options Bankruptcy Fraud
BELIVEAU, RUSSELL A. DIRECTOR $ 37,500.00 0.00 16,823.00 NO NO
HALEY, JOHN J. DIRECTOR $ 45,000.00 0.00 16,823.00 NO NO
LEDERER, PAUL R. DIRECTOR $ 55,500.00 0.00 1,823.00 NO NO
POND, PETER B. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 12,570.00 NO NO
RUDDY, RAYMOND B. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 8,519.00 NO NO
SEYMANN, MARILYN R. DIRECTOR $ 56,500.00 0.00 16,823.00 NO NO
THOMPSON, JAMES R. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 4,954.00 NO NO
WEBB, WELLINGTON E. DIRECTOR $ 43,500.00 0.00 2,141.00 NO NO
FRANCIS, DAVID R. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 425,120.00 2,413.00 80,000.00 NO NO
MONTONI, RICHARD A. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 565,000.00 6,500.00 15,000.00 NO NO
WALKER, DAVID N. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 218,500.00 0.00 280.00 NO NO
Name: NONE

and the next filing, a bit earlier, a different set, with the exception of Mr. Montoni is still there, showing the increase in salary in just a few years.

Corporation Number: C1618100
Document Number: 0655844
Disclosure Filing Date: 03/05/2004
Bankruptcy: NO
Legal Proceedings: Federal security law violations – NO
Prepared most recent auditor’s report: ERNST & YOUNG
Date of last report: 12/16/2003
Name Title Compensation Shares Options Bankruptcy Fraud
BELIVEAU, RUSSELL A. DIRECTOR $ 101,612.00 0.00 15,000.00 NO NO
DAVENPORT, LYNN P. DIRECTOR $ 426,000.00 0.00 5,000.00 NO NO
HALEY, JOHN J. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 3,899.00 NO NO
LEDERER, PAUL R. DIRECTOR $ 30,000.00 0.00 5,656.00 NO NO
MASTRAN, DAVID V. DIRECTOR $ 395,155.00 0.00 0.00 NO NO
POND, PETER B. DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 9,083.00 NO NO
SEYMANN, MARILYN R. DIRECTOR $ 30,000.00 0.00 2,068.00 NO NO
THOMPSON, JAMES R. JR DIRECTOR $ 0.00 0.00 3,475.00 NO NO
BOYER, JOHN F. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 350,000.00 0.00 0.00 NO NO
GRISSEN, THOMAS A. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 414,500.00 0.00 5,000.00 NO NO
JOHNSON, DAVID M. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 511,523.00 0.00 100,000.00 NO NO
MONTONI, RICHARD A. EXECUTIVE OFFICER $ 374,333.00 0.00 15,000.00 NO NO
Name: NONE

I may have posted this before, but a brief bio of Mr. Montani is here from people.forbes.com

Richard A. Montoni

Chief Executive Officer, President and Director

Maximus, Inc.

Reston ,  VA

Sector: SERVICES  /  Business Services

Officer since March 2002
59 Years Old
Richard A. Montoni has served as Chief Executive Officer, President and a director of MAXIMUS since 2006. Previously, Mr. Montoni served as our Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer from 2002 to 2006. Mr. Montoni served as Chief Financial Officer for Towers Perrin, a global professional services firm, during April 2006 before rejoining MAXIMUS and his appointment as Chief Executive Officer and President. Before his employment with MAXIMUS, he served as Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President for Managed Storage International, Inc. in Broomfield, Colorado from 2000 to 2001. From 1996 to 2000, he was Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President for CIBER, Inc., a NYSE-listed company in Englewood, Colorado where he also served as a director until 2002. Before joining CIBER, he was an audit partner with KPMG, LLP, where he worked for nearly 20 years. Mr. Montoni holds a Masters Degree in Accounting from Northeastern University and a Bachelor of Science degree in Economics from Boston University.
(notice, steadily increasing, and the stock awards also.)
Salary $700,000.00
Bonus $0.00
Restricted stock awards $1,800,000.00
All other compensation $58,409.00
Option awards $ $0.00
Non-equity incentive plan compensation $700,000.00
Change in pension value and nonqualified deferred compensation earnings $0.00
Total Compensation $3,258,409.00
Just for a point of reference.

Faster than thought:  AFCC, in Illinois, Los Angeles, and Colorado (simultaneously):

NOW IT’S A LITTLE LATE IN THE DAY, BUT JUST FOR REFERENCE:  At the end of the last post, I was re-posting some comments about what (the heck) is going on at 111 Hill Street in Los Angeles, and what has been — regarding the history of the AFCC.
If someone would like some proof or what is said at “Beware AFCC” (google it) and that Jessica Pearson, of Center for Policy Research, has organizational connections to the AFCC, which itself has direct connections of SOME sort, to the Los Angeles County Courthouse (at least the one at 111 Hill Street), I’ll give you this one:
Entity Number: C1091990
Date Filed: 10/01/1981
Jurisdiction: ILLINOIS
Entity Address: 1720 EMERSON ST
Entity City, State, Zip: DENVER CO 80218
Agent for Service of Process: MARGARET LITTLE
Agent Address: 111 N HILL ST
Agent City, State, Zip: LOS ANGELES CA 90012
Margaret Little (Ph.D.) in 2006 shows up on a Judicial Council Task force report (about abuses in probate conservatorships!) as this title:

Dr. Margaret Little

Family Law and Probate Administrator Superior Court of California,

County of Los Angeles

Topic of the report (which I just linked to), dated 9/18/2007 about how the courts responded to  not internal controls, or complaints from litigants, but an expository (series?) from the Los Angeles Times!  May there be a similar one on these topics in my lifetime!  . . .   Notice how “lack of resources” (rather than, say, corruption and inappropriate alliances between probate judges and public guardians) is cited as a cause of the troubles.  I hope that by quoting this you don’t lose sight of the tri-state corporate identity of (AFCC), above, or its significance:

Final Report of the Probate Conservatorship Task Force (Action Required)

Issue Statement

The administration and management of probate conservatorship cases in the state of California was recently placed under scrutiny through a series of Los Angeles Times articles that raised concerns that some conservatees were being subjected to abusive practices. Of particular concern were the inappropriate granting of temporary conservatorships on ex parte petitions, lack of proper oversight of accountings, abusive practices of private professional conservators including improper billings, lack of sufficient notice to conservatees and their families, and inadequate protections of the rights of conservatees. Although there are courts and counties with exemplary programs, many others do not appear to be able to provide the services and oversight necessary to ensure that conservatees are protected and receive proper care and treatment. This inability is often due to a lack of resources and, in some cases, gaps in existing statutes, rules, and guidelines.

Recognizing these challenges, in January 2006 the Chief Justice established the Probate Conservatorship Task Force and charged it with conducting a top-to- bottom review of the probate conservatorship system in California

Dr. Margaret Little is involved in Family and Probate Courts, and was the registered agent (if anyone had started a lawsuit, she’d have received the paperwork) for ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS with ILLINOIS jurisdiction and DENVER place of business, probably while back then also on the public payroll for the County of Los Angeles.   Makes you think, huh?  Since then (2010) she was a member of the “Elkins Family Law Task Force” as Senior Administrator (in the same area), and was cited by a 2001-licensed Child Forensic Psychologist (Marlene Valter, Psy.D.) as having conducted the following training (it’s a “vita,” I searched for “Margaret Little”).  Note the following seminar listed, same year and who sponsored it!:

2003 Domestic Violence Training for Child Custody Evaluators and Mediators; Los Angeles, CA; January 23; Coordinator: Margaret Little, Ph.D.; Sponsored by Los Angeles County Family Court Services. (4 hours)

2003 Managing Parent-child Reunification in Alienation and Abduction Cases. Burbank, CA; September 25; presenters: various; Sponsored by Judicial Council of California Administrative Office of the Courts. (3 hours)

If we look at this Pepperdine-trained person, it’s clear a lot of her work life has been in the los Angeles County System, not to mention around AFCC, heavily so:


2008 AFCC-CA Annual Conference: Abduction, Risk, and Response; Ethical and

Effective Coaching of One Parent During a Child Custody Evaluation; Domestic Violence;


PAGE 2Private Life, Public Parenting-Is a Parent’s Sexual Behavior Relevant?; The Impact of Celebrity

on the lives of Children; Therapeutic Interventions. Santa Monica, CA; Sponsored by AFCC and Los Angeles County Superior Court. (12 hours)

2008 Domestic Violence Training for Child Custody Evaluators; Santa Monica, CA; In collaboration with AFCC/CA Chapter. (4 hours)

2007 Annual Update for Custody Evaluators: The Steve Frankel Group, June 19. Online Presenter: Philip Stahl, Ph.D., ABPP. (8 hours)

(Philip Stahl is straight PAS-promoter, and quite AFCC, currently in Arizona…)
As far back also as 1991, here is an article by Margaret A. Little, funded in part (it says) by a grant from the “California Judicial Council” (too bad the TAGGS.hhs.gov database doesn’t go  back that far), published in the “FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS REVIEW.”  Other than giving a background history of Hofstra University in NY which helps publish this with AFCC, I don’t know how much more plainly I could point to who is running the family court services basically around the country..
The Impact of the Custody Plan on a Family:   A Five-Year Follow-up
(for what Trish Wilson has to say on this, in 2002 (the 11-year followup?) see HERE at “The Liz Library” it appears to be commenting on the same article, in re: joint custody.)
1991 – 5 = 1986 – 5  = when the above-listed California “foreign” corporation, predecessor of AFCC, had to surrender its business license.  I imagine these people know exactly what they are doing corporately in moving fro in-state to out of state.  I can’t say the same for every young proselyte that graduates into the system, whether through Fuller Theological Seminary,** in the area, or Pepperdine, also in the general area (Malibu) or wherever
(** this mini-section added 8/25, and I am posting some material on Fuller today as well.  Both are Christian-oriented groups who have really pushed into the business realm surrounding the courts, through graduate psychology, marital studies, and as to Pepperdine University School of Law’s emphasis on Dispute Resolution, churning out professionals at a high rate that my research keeps running into as I chase down nonprofits, delinquent and active both).
Think of the ramifications if AFCC is indeed the shape-shifting, tax-evading, court-controlling group it certainly appears to be!


So when Marv Bryer, raving almost, states “incredulous” things (like, over a decade ago) like this (quoted from Liz Richards NAFCJ site this time) . . . .

In 1981 – I presume their bank account was still open and they created a new identity called the Association of Family Conciliation Courts. This time – Margaret Little – FAMILY COURT SERVICES for LOS ANGELES, and a Colorado individual named Jessica Pearson orchestrated yet another version of the LOS ANGELES COUNTY COURTHOUSE SCHEME. Pearson borrowed the EIN of the WISCONSIN AFCC and claimed her office was in Colorado as an ILLINOIS corporation. The LOS ANGELES COUNTY COURTHOUSE became PEARSON’S and Dr MARGARET LITTLE’S California – FOREIGN – CORPORATION.

. . . He’s not nuts.  I just showed you.

Also, looks like they had to give it up.
NB:  i showed you the Los Angeles County Judges’ Association last post.  Wasn’t it still out of 111 Hill?
Jurisdiction, Illinois (OK . . . . . )
  1. Endnotes – The Future of Children –

    futureofchildren.org › Home › Publications › Journals – Cached

    by JR Johnston – 1994 – Related articles
    May 17, 2011 –  is presently under research in a multisite national study (J. Pearson, Center for Policy Research, 1720 Emerson St., DenverCO 90218). 

  2. Colorado Model Office Project EVALUATION OF COLORADO’S DRIVER’S 


    Center for Policy Research 1720 Emerson Street DenverColorado 80218 303/837- 1555. Quotes from this study indicate clearly that so called “Deadbeat Dads” 

  3. Evidence in child abuse and neglect cases – Google Books Result

    books.google.com/books?isbn=0471167525John E. B. Myers – 1997 – Family & Relationships – 600 pages
    Center for Policy Research, 1720 Emerson StreetDenverCO 80218. Phone: (303) 837-1555) [hereinafter Tjaden & Anhalt]. 332 Tjaden & Anhalt at 1. 
  4. 2309 Emerson StDenverCO 80205 Directions, Location and Map 

    http://www.mapquest.com/maps?…2309%20Emerson%20St…DenverC – Cached

    Our interactive map lets you view, print, or send to your phone directions to and from 2309 Emerson StDenverCO 80205, and view the location as a 



    by J PEARSON – 1992 – Cited by 2 – Related articles
    Center for Policy Research1720 Emerson StreetDenverColorado 80218, USA. The research reported in this article was developed under grants from Hunt 

  6. Child Support Improvement Project: Paternity Establishment; Final 

    by J Pearson – 1995
    Sponsoring Agency: Colorado Dept of Social Services United States. Sale: Ctr for Policy Research 1720 Emerson Street DenverCO 80218. United States 

Of course it’s now moved — and shows up at 1570 Emerson Street:
Center For Policy Research
1570 Emerson Street  (google maps view)
Denver, CO  80218
Phone: 303-837-1555
Fax: 303-837-1557
And legally registered as a trade name and nonprofit at http://www.SOS.state.CO.us:
Found 2 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 1.
# Name Address Type Count
80218-1450, US
Trade name Registrant 1
2 PEARSON, JESSICA S. 1570 EMERSON, DENVER, CO 80218, US Registered Agent 1
Also in Denver, NCADV Main Headquarters (the other office listed being in Washington, D.C.) which apparently just moved here, no kidding, on April 1, 2011:
NCADV’s Main Office (as of April 1, 2011)
One Broadway, Suite B210
Denver, CO 80203

1899 Wynkoop Street # 300

Denver, CO 80202-1092 map

(personnel in common, and often publishes under HHS grants with CPR).
Also (note address):


1899 Wynkoop #300
Denver, CO 80202
(800) 234-5147
Company Website: www.chpplusproviders.com

In fact, trade names for PSI, I should probably just list here — there are plenty for this 1984-incorporated organization, several of which relate to this blog:
Found 12 matching record(s).  Viewing page 1 of 2.
# ID Number Document Number Name Status Form Effective Date Comment
1 19951078593  19951078593 COLORADO CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES Effective DPC 06/16/1995 12:00 AM
2 19961012292  19961012292 PRIVATIZATION PARTNERSHIPS, INC. Effective DPC 01/29/1996 12:00 AM
3 19961012293  19961012293 PSIBER TECHNOLOGIES INC. Effective DPC 01/29/1996 12:00 AM
4 20001166186  20001166186 CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES OF COLORADO Effective DPC 08/25/2000 12:00 AM
5 20001209751  20001209751 TELLER COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT Effective DPC 10/27/2000 12:00 AM
6 20001209752  20001209752 EL PASO COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT UNIT Effective DPC 10/27/2000 12:00 AM
7 20011022445  20011022445 PSI INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND JUSTICE CENTER Effective DPC 01/31/2001 12:00 AM
8 20011022446  20011022446 PSI HEALTH Effective DPC 01/31/2001 12:00 AM
9 20021117260  20021117260 CHILD HEALTH ADVOCATES Effective DPC 05/03/2002 12:00 AM
10 20021159702  20021159702 PSI ARISTA Effective DPC 06/12/2002 12:00 AM
and the last two, Parent Opportunity Programs, you “know” are going to show up fatherhood-hhs-sponsored:
Found 12 matching record(s).  Viewing page 2 of 2.
# ID NumberClick here to sort in ascending order. Document Number Name Status Form Effective Date Comment
11 20021223054  20021223054 BOULDER COUNTY PARENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM (POP) Effective DPC 08/13/2002 12:00 AM
12 20021223055  20021223055 EL PASO COUNTY PARENT OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM (POP) Effective DPC 08/13/2002 12:00 AM
From fatherhood.hhs.gov, the descriptions:


Noncustodial Parent Programs

  • Boulder County Parent Opportunity Program (POP) Policy Studies Inc. has operated a Welfare-To-Work (WtW) program for non-custodial parents (NCP) in Boulder County since 2002. The program helps NCPs who are unemployed, underemployed, or having trouble meeting their child support obligations. The POP helps these parents overcome barriers to employment by linking them with services in the community or through allowable WtW funds. The program has been instrumental in helping clients increase their wages, child support payments, and visitation with their children. Primary Contact: John Mahaney, .
  • El Paso County Parent Opportunity Program (POP) This program is in its seventh year of operation. During the first three years, it operated under a federal grant to develop an innovative approach to create a strong community effort serving noncustodial parents who lacked the means to support their children. The POP now operates as a partnership between the El Paso County Department of Social Services, Policy Studies Inc. (PSI), the Center on Fathering and Goodwill Industries. These partners work in coordination with other community agencies to provide services including employment and training, mediation, parent education, child support assistance and community referrals to unemployed and under-employed non-custodial parents and their families. Recently, POP has partnered with the Pikes Peak Workforce Center to help them serve noncustodial parents eligible for WtW services. An evaluation of the first three years of the program is available upon request. Primary contact:Chad Eddinger, Project lead, El Paso Department of Human Services .
Guess who was probably paying (now that I’m on that web page, which comes generally speaking under HHS == tax distribution agent of the U.S. Government) for these:

Faith-Based and Community Organization Activities

  • On October 1st and 2nd, 2004, The Colorado Collaborative for FatherHood and Families, and the Fatherhood Coalition of Metro Denver co-sponsored a kick-off training conference called Journey to Manhood, attended by nearly 30 local fatherhood providers and fathers interested in training. Presenters included James Rodriguez of the Arizona Fatherhood Collaborative and ACF staff. This was the opening session of a one-year certificate program in Fatherhood to be offered by Red Rocks Community College.
  • Also on October 1st, 2004, the Fatherhood Steering Committee of the Colorado Department of Human Services, with support from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, held a Stakeholders Forum. Many excellent presentations were offered by local fatherhood experts on how to make organizations more father-friendly, and how to address barriers that keep fathers from full participation in child welfare organizations.
  • The 14th Annual Expanding the Visions Conference was held on March 20, 2004. This event, sponsored by the Denver African-American Leadership Conference, was attended by approximately 1,000 boys and their dads. Several hundred packets of ACF-related information were distributed to attendees. This information focused on how to be a great dad and strategies for avoiding divorce.
  • Colorado Springs, Colorado: Approximately 200 dads and daughters participate annually in the Father-Daughter Purity Ball. The centerpiece of this evening of formal dinner and dancing is always the reading of a pledge by the dads to model purity and integrity for their daughters and to do all they can to protect their purity.
  • In Douglas County, Colorado, Extension Agent Rich Batten has established a monthly e-mail letter for those interested in fatherhood advocacy and committed to increasing the probability of every child being intimately connected to an involved, responsible and loving father or father figure.
  • The Denver Indian Family Resource Center has begun a Young Men’s Sweat Lodge project, which includes fathers and male mentors. Seven sweats have been held so far.

For a REAL eye-opener, go to the SOS Colorado business search page, click on “Advanced Search” and then type in “Fatherhood”!

Sorry, this post was less about the title’s Suspended, etc. — but bet it was informative.  Namely, the appearance of detachment and belonging to separate entities (when one awards and compliments the other) dissipates when the connections between associations are traced at the corporate level.
Since then, AFCC has straighted up and incorporated in a California Chapter.  At least the “incorporated in California Chapter” part I can vouch for:
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
Entity Number: C1587819
Date Filed: 05/15/1987
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 1336 N MOORPARK RD #185
Entity City, State, Zip: THOUSAND OAKS CA 91360
Agent for Service of Process: LULU L WONG
Agent Address: 1303 JEFFERSON ST STE 710B
Agent City, State, Zip: NAPA CA 94559
NAPA is wine country, just north of San Francisco.  Remember Karen Anderson’s grants money was used to host an art & wine seminar up there? (see johnnypumphandle’s account, I DNR exact details…..).
Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
Too bad I wasn’t checking here in 2010 and earlier; looks like they got their 2011 warning letter too!  if it doesn’t show here, go to the site and read it, bottom document under “first delinquency notice.”     Cute!

It got slapped up on the site crooked.  Looks like someone was in a hurry!
Just a reminder:  They are addressing an organization comprised of judges and attorneys, etc.  Isn’t that sweet, reminding them of the law?
You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.Registrant Information
Type: Public Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 1587819
Registration Number: 068671
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/15/2012
Registration Status: Current Date This Status: 2/7/2011
Date of Last Renewal: 3/3/2011
Address Information
Address Line 1: 1336 N MOORPARK RD #185 Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: THOUSAND OAKS CA 91360
Annual Renewal Information
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-04
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-04
Total Assets: $23,332.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $59,598.00
RRF Received: 01-FEB-11
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-05
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-05
Total Assets: $28,259.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $62,923.00
RRF Received: 10-FEB-09
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-06
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-06
Total Assets: $25,101.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $66,748.00
RRF Received: 10-FEB-09
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-07
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-07
Total Assets: $31,241.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $106,426.00
RRF Received: 16-MAY-08
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-08
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-08
Total Assets: $76,048.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $135,317.00
RRF Received: 13-MAY-09
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-09
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-09
Total Assets: $73,765.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $120,592.00
RRF Received: 26-FEB-10
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Fiscal Begin: 01-JAN-10
Fiscal End: 31-DEC-10
Total Assets: $80,200.00
Gross Annual Revenue: $103,725.00
RRF Received: 11-FEB-11
Returned Date:
990 Attached: Y
Status: Accepted
Related Documents
00003B29 Founding Documents
00003B2A RRF-1 2009
00003B2B IRS Form 990 2009
00003B2C RRF-1 2008
00003B2D IRS Form 990 2008
00003B2E RRF-1 2007
00003B2F IRS Form 990 2007
00003B30 RRF-1 2006
00003B31 IRS Form 990 2006
00003B32 RRF-1 2005
00003B33 IRS Form 990 2005
15310 1st Delinquency Notice
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information
IRS Return Data
Founding documents, 1987 (AFCC began apparently in Los Angeles somewhere around 1962?) are full of love and appreciation for children and conciliation, etc.
Notice the inclusion of “BEHAVIORAL SCIENTISTS.”   Got to get them in there.
Notice (below) the span of the state (in fact, west coast) represented in directors, starting with a LA County Judge at 111 Hill Street, San Diego, Santa Barbara, and up north, our beloved San Francisco:


Legislating the Profession of Mediation into existence?

with one comment


After last, interesting post, in which I found innumberable mediation companies that had failed, had their licenses suspended, were delinquent, and/or raised a LOT of money but simply forgot to tell the Registrar of Charitable Trusts in California that they even existed . . .. It comes out why:

Another great idea out of Los Angeles. Go figure!


After another day at the databases (= why my last post was so fat…. I mean, long), I finally went to the national nonprofit database and simply typed in (something like) “MEDIATION.”  Of course this is going to bring up some non-family-law situations as well (landlord/tenant, civil, etc.).


But get this: (I got it from NCCSDATAWEB site, simply searched “Mediation” and “State of California.”


Now that’s a first — about $7K in the hole:

2010  931177540 California Academy of Mediation Professionals CA 1996 03 143,529 -6,680 990

CHARITy status (hardly surprising, with this track record).

rganization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF MEDIATION PROFESSIONALS 108150 Charity Delinquent ENCINO CA Charity Registration Charity


Details from above show ZERO documents filed, almost.  Notice year filed.  In 15 years, not one tax return filed correctly? Or not one acknowledgment to the state of california that it was operating as a nonprofit?  At what point do we get to drop the word ‘PROFESSIONALS” ???


The basic sense of the word “profession” has to do with SAYING something, i.e., profession of faith.

I’m learning (see previous examples) to look at:   State Level: Corporate, Charity, Public Website, Street address, and Personal, and when I get around to it:  national registration.   Maybe I should incorporate — for profit (too much paperwork registering and if I mess up, getting nasty letters from the Attorney General Charitable Trusts registry) — and hire someone to do this database look up.  I could then form a membership organization to Un-PROMOTE the practice of mediation throughout the land given that the people promoting it can’t comply with filing regulations, for the most part.


You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.Registrant Information
Type: Public Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 1948545
Registration Number: 108150
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: 6/30/2001 Renewal Due Date: 11/12/2002
Registration Status: Delinquent Date This Status:
Date of Last Renewal:
Address Information
Address Line 1: 16501 VENTURA BLVD STE 606 Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: ENCINO CA 91436
Annual Renewal Information
Related Documents
00309CC9 Founding Documents
00309CCE RRF-1 2001
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information
IRS Return Data

It says (in RRF form) that if an organization grosses more than $100,000, it has to fork over $25 to the registry of charitable trusts.  Vacaville Public Education Foundation (last post) allegedly raised over $1 million without reporting, and I believe it’s in trouble now.  Maybe the people on these Boards are spreading themselves too thin, so they (or someone in the organization) forgets to do a simple thing like this — send in an RRF and $25!

This time, this group did:

LIKE MANY  OTHERS the interest in such groups seems to correspond with the TANF welfare reform, which frees up some funding to, in part, promote mediation for noncustodial parental increased hours, and social science demonstration projects as promoted by the HHS.  However, there’s more causes behind it as well.

Anyhow, this is a one-person organization to start with, at least one person incorporated it and signed:


That’s nice to narrow down the location some.  It will take place in Los Angeles:

And Jeffrey Kirvis originally incorporated.

SOMEHOW, DESPITE Almost NONE OF ITS RRF FORMS SHOWING UP ON THE CHARITY REGISTRATION SITE (years:  1996 – 2011) and definitely no IRS on there, this organization is still business license “ACTIVE.”  Nor is there any record of scolding letters, such as for the couple (one of whom died) for a much smaller outfit (Myron Blumberg of Mammoth Lakes?). . . ..       Even Kids’ Turn (San Diego?) got a few of those, despite how well-connected they are!

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process


Entity Number: C1948545
Date Filed: 08/31/1995
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 16501 VENTURA BLVD STE 606
Entity City, State, Zip: ENCINO CA 91436
Agent for Service of Process: MARIAM ZADEH
Agent Address: 16501 VENTURA BLVD STE 606
Agent City, State, Zip: ENCINO CA 91436


Here is another organization at the same address, with an outstanding website, including moving background and icon:

First Mediation Corporation was formed in 1990 and serves as the administrator of cases for Jeffrey Krivis andMariam Zadeh, as well as a resource for clients and colleagues in the ADR field. The firm is also involved in training, consultation and advice to the legal community and is active in designing protocols for resolving disputes using both the internet and videoconferencing, particularly where companies are faced with difficult geographic challenges. We have conducted cases online and are continuing with efforts to expand the internet as a resource for online communication.


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process


Entity Number: C1488161
Date Filed: 10/04/1990
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 16501 VENTURA BLVD STE 606
Entity City, State, Zip: ENCINO CA 91436
Agent for Service of Process: JEFFREY L KRIVIS
Agent Address: 16501 VENTURA BLVD STE 606
Agent City, State, Zip: ENCINO CA 91436



Jeffrey Krivis


Jeffrey Krivis began his mediation practice in 1989, when lawyer-mediators in Southern California were rare, and litigators had to look outside the state for experienced practitioners. Now, over 20 years later and having resolved thousands of disputes — including entertainment, mass tort, employment, business, complex insurance, catastrophic injury and class action matters — Krivis is recognized not only as a pioneer in the field, but also as one of the most respected neutrals in the state.
(notice, family law is not in there particularly…)

An adjunct professor at the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution at Pepperdine University School of Law since 1994, Krivis teaches negotiation and mediation skills to lawyers and judges. His experiences as both a working mediator and academic prompted him to write two books: “Improvisational Negotiation: A Mediator’s Stories of Conflict About Love, Money and Anger – and the Strategies that Resolved Them” and “How To Make Money As A Mediator And Create Value For Everyone (Wiley/Jossey-Bass 2006). Improvisational Negotiation received the2006 Outstanding Book Award from the CPR Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution.

Krivis is a past president of both the International Academy of Mediators and the Southern California Mediation Association. The Los Angeles Daily Journal legal newspaper named him many times as one of the “top neutrals in the state,” and he continues to appear since its inception on the “Super Lawyer” list published by Los Angeles magazine and Law & Politics Media. In 2010 he was awarded “Lawyer of the Year” for Alternative Dispute Resolution by the “Best Lawyers in America.” The Hollywood Reporter recognized him as one of the “Power Mediators” in the entertainment industry. In 2011 he was recognized by the International Academy of Mediator’s with the President’s Award for leadership and vision. Krivis received the highest rating (AV) from Martindale-Hubbell.

In 2007, Krivis expanded his practice to the scenic and relaxing environment of Monterey, California, and regularly handles matters in San Francisco.

Mariam Zadeh

Mariam Zadeh was an active trial lawyer in New York City until September 11, 2001, at which time her life was dramatically changed. She moved to Los Angeles, obtained her L.L.M. in Alternative Dispute Resolution from the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution at Pepperdine University, and became a partner with Jeffrey Krivis. Since joining First Mediation, Mariam has successfully mediated employment, class actions, commercial, premises & professional liability, catastrophic injury, mass torts, complex insurance, ERISA and other tort actions.

This STRAUS institute name & Pepperdine keeps popping up.  INcluding in the suspended, delinquent, etc. officers of corporations who one might think should keep this stuff current. . . .

Very interesting article re:  the Institutionalization of Mediation — and the acceptance of the human practice of deception.  This is one of the more honest statements about it I’ve seen.  However, in the family law venue, a party which protests when this gets to the fraud or lying part is likely to get labeled “high-conflict” by the AFCC personnel on the scene, and punished.  That type of punishing / labelling etc. can become like, “taking candy from a baby” when children’s lives are at stake and someone else is controlling their safety.  Or your own.

The Truth About Deception In Mediation


Now that the court system has institutionalized the use of mediation in virtually all civil proceedings, trial lawyers are paying closer attention to their negotiation skills. While those skills involve less structured behavior than presenting a case to a jury, they nonetheless involve one common strategy that even the most skilled practitioners refuse to acknowledge: deception.

Society Tolerates Limited Uses of Deception

Deception can best be described as the raw material which drives negotiation of litigated cases. It allows barriers to be overcome and concessions to occur. It can mean anything from mild exaggeration to lying and outright fraud. The spectrum of possibilities appears below:

White Lies
Partial Disclosure
Silence as to Other Party’s Mistake
False Excuses

Deception is part of the human condition and it would be a mistake to dismiss it as improper, particularly when resolving litigated disputes. The exception of course would be outright fraud, which is by necessity illegal and unethical in all contexts. While candor and honesty are preferred when parties are concerned about ongoing relationships, it is unrealistic to expect litigators to be candid when the goal is to get as much as they can for their client.

(under “Articles” at First Mediation Corporation site).


ANYHOW, per NCCSDATAWEB — the California Academy of Mediation Professionals IS making more than $100K per year, and as such should be filing.  Perhaps the RRF-s from the office of charitable trusts are backlogged about 20 years worth?  Or from however many years it began making over $100K:



Organization Details
EIN: 931177540
Name: California Academy of Mediation Professionals — Google
Location:  16501 Ventura Blvd Ste 606
Encino, CA 91436
 Report Address Change
County: Los Angeles County
Ruling Date: 1996   (Approximate year when founded)
IRS Type: 501(c)(3) – Public charity: Religious, educational, charitable, scientific, and literary organizations…
Legal basis for public charity or private foundation status (FNDNCD): 15 – Organization with a substantial portion of support from a governmental unit or the general public
NTEE:  I51 – Dispute Resolution & Mediation
Most recently completed fiscal year (TAXPER) 06/2010
Total Revenue $143,529
Total Assets: $-6,680


By the way, it looks like IRS forms have been filed, just not the RRF-s to register as a charity,  SO it didn’t show up in California’s site, although it’s a California corporation…

Form Name Date Year
Form 990 2010 Download
Form 990 2009 Download
Form 990 2008 Download
Form 990 2007 Download
Form 990 2006 Download
Form 990 2005 Download
Form 990 2004 Download
Form 990 2003 Download
Form 990 2002 Download

A sample 990 here (from “2002” link above) shows that unlike many other organizations, it is not living off grants – but actually producing “program service revenue”:


(in otherwords, the line 1a above is blank.  )

AND spending it (see bottom of the graphic here):


One FT employee was paid $51K, making me think this is administrative:

She is listed as Program Director, receiving this amount, Jeff (the only other listed director on this particular return) receives nothing for his work.  In short, Cynthia runs the program, which generates around $300K income, tax-exempt.

STAFF at FIRST MEDIATION (note topic change, I just wanted to point this out):



Sylvia Chen

Sylvia Chen received her bachelor degree from California State University, Northridge in 2005 with a degree in biology.   During her senior year of high school, she was a volunteer for First Mediation and California Academy of Mediation Professionals. Sylvia has worked for both companies since 1999 and over time grew into her position of Office Manager, in addition to handling all the firm’s case and billing administration.  

Aside from her interests in law and government, Sylvia has also donated countless hours to New Horizons, Inc. helping mentally disabled students.

The FOR-PROFIT corporation here, has a person also from Pepperdine:  look at the background:  I’m bringing this up as I’m looking at the same-office combination of NONprofit and FORprofit in the same line of work, basically.  Look at the overlap:
Heather Reed
Heather Reed is a seasoned pioneer in the ADR field. She serves as an independent agent to mediators, Jeffrey Krivis and Mariam Zadeh with First Mediation Corporation. She manages all the marketing, case convening, and client relations for their mediation practices and the organization.
Heather obtained her Masters Degree in Dispute Resolution from Pepperdine Law School/Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution in 1996. Prior to that, she received her Bachelor degree as a double major in Political Science and Sociology, graduating Phi Beta Kappa in 1992 from University of California, Santa Barbara.

She began her ADR career assisting Randy Lowry and Peter Robinson, the Directors of the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution at Pepperdine Law School, in researching and developing ADR educational degrees. She joined JAMS/Endispute in 1994 convening and managing cases in the Los Angeles market. In 1997, she researched and recruited mediator and arbitrator talent in the Tri-County Region and opened and managed the Santa Barbara office for Judicate West for ten years.


Judicate West hearing

(Too bad AFCC doesn’t believe that “Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens!” motto, instead of their “Kids Count on Us!”)


About Judicate West

We are one of California’s leading providers of private dispute resolution services, with a distinguished roster of more than 100 proven neutrals. Our select panel includes retired state and federal court judges and knowledgeable attorney mediators and arbitrators from a broad cross-section of practice areas.  Our service area encompasses all of California, covers the nation and extends internationally.

Judicate West was founded in 1993 when local management acquired the West Coast assets of Judicate, Inc., the National Private Court System.  Since then, we have grown in both size and reputation, driven by the principal of delivering “results beyond dispute” for our clients. Experienced case managers and administrators serve our clients and support our panelists to promote results and to ensure neutrality. Durable solutions achieved efficiently, effectively and creatively will convince you that Judicate West is the first and last option in your search for skilled dispute resolution professionals.

More, to the point, about JAMS:

JAMS/Endispute in 1994

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
ENDISPUTE possibly got outclassed.
JAMS/Endispute has a lot of press also, though:

OXNARD, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–April 2, 1999–JAMS/ENDISPUTE, the pre-eminent dispute resolution firm, has announced that the company will open a new office in the city of Oxnard to provide Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Services to the Ventura/Santa Barbara/San Luis Obispo region. . . .

JAMS/ENDISPUTE has more than 28 offices nationwide and resolves approximately 15,000 cases annually. The company is exclusively served by more than 360 neutrals, including former judges, experienced attorneys and other professional mediators and arbitrators.

With more than 20 years of experience, JAMS/ENDISPUTE offers mediation, arbitration, private jury trials and other programs focused on particular areas of law and special dispute-resolution needs, such as employment-related disputes

JAMS are the “big guns” in mediation promotion:

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
C2502125 03/13/2003 ACTIVE JAMS, INC. JULIE SAGER
There are plenty of “JAMS” corporation (including the fruit spread kind), but this one above is the home office, as is the fund-raising Foundation to go with it, right below here (same address).

Entity Number: C2350930
Date Filed: 07/16/2001
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 1920 MAIN ST #300
Entity City, State, Zip: IRVINE CA 92614
Agent for Service of Process: JULIE SAGER
Agent Address: 1920 MAIN ST #300
Agent City, State, Zip: IRVINE CA 92614

C3339433 12/09/2010 (??) ACTIVE JAMS GLOBAL JAYMIN PATEL
1 2 3 4 5
For comparison:

ntity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
1 2 3 4 5

JAMS Arbitration and Mediation Services logoJAMS Arbitration and Mediation Services tag line

JAMS Foundation Logo


About the Foundation

Funding Opportunities

  • Foundation Grants: The Foundation may provide financial support of up to $50,000 for ADR-related initiatives with national scope or impact that are related to one or more of the Foundation’s current areas of interest, subject to available funding.
  • Opportunity Grants: The Foundation may provide grants of up to $10,000 for local or regional ADR-related projects that present unique opportunities or innovative approaches to providing dispute resolution education, training, or services.
  • Weinstein International Fellowships: The Foundation will provide funding of up to $25,000 each for qualified individuals from outside the U.S. to come to the U.S. to learn more about dispute resolution services, programs and practices in order to expand the use of ADR in their home countries.
  • Major Dispute Resolution Initiatives: The Foundation will, on occasion, initiate and fund major projects in selected areas of dispute resolution education, training, or services.
  • Special ADR Needs: The Foundation will consider financial support and volunteer resources for ADR-related assistance in extraordinary situations such as those experienced in New York following the attacks of September 11, 2001 and in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina.

The Mission of the JAMS Foundation

JAMS, the nation’s premier provider of private dispute resolution services, established the non-profit JAMS Foundation to offer financial assistance for conflict resolution initiatives with national or international impact and to share its dispute resolution experience and expertise for the benefit of the public interest. Funded entirely by contributions from JAMS, JAMS neutrals, and employee associates, the Foundation’s mission is to encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), support education at all levels about collaborative processes for resolving differences, promote innovation in conflict resolution, and advance the settlement of conflict worldwide.



(see link for the scope — practically all areas of endeavor, JAMS wants us to mediate.  No conflict.  Should go tell that to the Libyan Rebels in Tripoli that President Obama just commended; they FOUGHT, and a Tyrant is just about deposed.  However the rest of us must not fight, but mediate.

Obama:  Gadaffi’s regime is at an end

“Tonight, the momentum against the Gaddafi regime has reached a tipping point. Tripoli is slipping from the grasp of a tyrant,” Obama said in a statement issued as he took a vacation on the resort of Martha’s Vineyard.

“Moamer Gaddafi and his regime need to recognize that their rule has come to an end,” the presidnet said. “The people of Libya are showing that the universal pursuit of dignity and freedom is far stronger than the iron fist of a dictator.”

They showed by fighting back.

(By Agence France-Presse
Monday, August 22nd, 2011 — 8:11 am, posted in “TheRawStory”)


AFCC, of course

Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (Madison, WI) – Stakeholder Meeting on ADR in Civil and Family Courts

In collaboration with Resolution Systems Institute and Marquette Law School, $10,000 to help support a meeting of national leaders in civil and family court dispute resolution, exploring current challenges faced by court-ADR professionals and developing new approaches for addressing them. www.afccnet.org

Pepperdine University School of Law (Malibu, CA) – ADR Teaching Symposium

$10,000 to help fund a two-day international symposium for law professors and ADR instructors, reviewing current best practices for teaching a variety of ADR courses – including specialized courses on negotiation, mediation, and arbitration – and seeking to bridge the divide between the ADR classroom and professional practice.www.law.pepperdine.edu



“JAMS” also has JUDGES — lots of them !:

JAMS FEDERAL JUDGES  (that’s a 5 page, color list of judges)

JAMS is proud to have many of the most respected retired United States federal judges on its panel. These former and retired federal judges are exclusively associated with JAMS for the professional practice of Alternative Dispute Resolution. They are all experts or experienced in federal law issues, such as securities, intellectual property and employment, and in some cases have expertise or experience in such fields as bankruptcy, admiralty and environmental law.



And these comprise the $118K of ‘OTHER” earnings, including 3 computers, and $91K on trainings:

and the 3 computers, plus depreciation:

THERE was revenue generation, definitely:



SOME of which was government fees or contracts, the other, straight mediation — under this nonprofit’s name:

(“Fees and contracts from government agencies” — $153,066.  In other words, a little over half was from government, and just under half “mediation services” — but not taxable).



Nice website for the nonprofit, too (name:  “campmediation.org” — cute…)

Established in 1995, CAMP receives funding from the Los Angeles County Dispute Resolution Program Act. The County’s program offers the broadest spectrum of dispute resolution services focusing on court referred cases such as landlord/tenant, personal injury, and limited jurisdiction-small claims.

CAMP was founded by Jeffrey Krivis as a means of providing accessible mediation services to his students and the community at large.  Mr. Krivis currently serves as an advisor and resource to CAMP.

NOTICE it does NOT do family law, meaning it is not interfering with AFCC territory.

Services are provided to parties in any civil case filed in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Services are not provided under this program to family, probate, traffic, criminal, appellate, mental health, unlawful detainer/eviction or juvenile court cases.

The services include: mediation, conciliation, facilitation, and is provided through private non-profit and public entities. Any fees charged are based on a sliding scale and no fees are charged for the indigent.

But still I have to ask — what’s with the not filing with the RRF, given that it’s a charity?


Now, I didn’t know about that act.  However, here’s a statement that XYZ organizations are under contract to provide services.  Please note that it is under the “Department of Consumer Affairs,” not the justice department.  It is under “business and professions code.” Nevertheless, we are seeing the same behavior — failure to file as a charity when one is a charity (as I understand this…..)


Welcome to the California Department of Consumer Affairs

California Dispute Resolution Programs Act – Statutes

The Dispute Resolution Programs Act of 1986 (Stats 1986, ch. 1313, SB 2064-Garamendi and Stats 1987, ch. 28, SB 123-Garamendi) provides for the local establishment and funding of informal dispute resolution programs. The goal of the Act is the creation of a state-wide system of locally-funded programs which will provide dispute resolution services (primarily conciliation and mediation) to county residents. These services assist in resolving problems informally and function as alternatives to more formal court proceedings.

Counties which choose to offer these services to their residents are authorized to allocate up to up to $8 from filing fees in superior, municipal, and justice court actions to generate new revenues for these local programs.

The Act provides the framework for the statewide system. In addition, it specified that a limited-term Dispute Resolution Advisory Council adopt temporary guidelines and propose regulations which would supplement the provisions of the Act. The Council completed its responsibilities and terminated, as required, on January 1, 1989. Its proposed regulations were subsequently approved by the California Office of Administrative Law, effective October 1, 1989. The Regulations supersede the “Temporary Funding and Operating Guidelines” which were adopted by the Council in 1988.

The state oversight agency designated by the Act is the California Department of Consumer Affairs. The department’s responsibilities include reviewing and modifying the rules and regulations, providing technical assistance to counties and programs, monitoring local government and program compliance with the Act and the Regulations, and evaluating the services of the programs and their impact on the state justice system.

The Act’s statutory provisions (codified at California Business and Professions Code ” 465-471.5), and its Regulations (contained at California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Chapter 36) now operate in tandem to govern the implementation activities by counties and the services provided by local dispute resolution programs.

Inquiries about the Act and its implementation should be directed to:

Dispute Resolution Office
Department of Consumer Affairs
1625 North Market Blvd., Suite S 309
Sacramento, CA 95834
(916) 574-8220


NOW, this part of the act is very interesting – towards the end it refers to the time that the STATE (not counties, presumably?) shall take charge of the funding of the TRIAL COURTS, there is a hope to have more ADR going on.

Article 1. Legislative Purpose

465. Legislative finding and declaration

The Legislature hereby finds and declares all of the following:

  1. (a) The resolution of many disputes can be unnecessarily costly, time-consuming, and complex when achieved through formal court proceedings where the parties are adversaries and are subjected to formalized procedures.
  2. (b) To achieve more effective and efficient dispute resolution in a complex society, greater use of alternatives to the courts, such as mediation, conciliation, and arbitration should be encouraged. Community dispute resolution programs and increased use of other alternatives to the formal judicial system may offer less threatening and more flexible forums for persons of all ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic backgrounds. These alternatives, among other things, can assist in the resolution of disputes between neighbors, some domestic disputes, consumer-merchant disputes, and other kinds of disputes in which the parties have continuing relationships. A noncoercive dispute resolution forum in the community may also provide a valuable prevention and early intervention problem-solving resource to the community.
  3. (c) Local resources, including volunteers reflective of the diversity of the community and available public buildings should be utilized to achieve more accessible, cost-effective resolutions of disputes. Additional financial resources are needed to expand, stabilize, and improve existing programs and entities which sponsor alternative dispute resolution.
  4. (d) Courts, prosecuting authorities, law enforcement agencies, and administrative agencies should encourage greater use of alternative dispute resolution techniques whenever the administration of justice will be improved.
  5. (e) Counties should consider increasing the use of alternative dispute resolution in their operations as plans for court reform are developed and implemented.
  6. (f) The Judicial Council should consider, in redrafting or updating any of the official pleading forms used in the trial courts of this state, the inclusion of information on options for alternative dispute resolution.

465.5. Legislative intent

It is the intent of the Legislature to permit counties to accomplish all of the following:

  1. (a) Encouragement and support of the development and use of alternative dispute resolution techniques.
  2. (b) Encouragement and support of community participation in the development, administration, and oversight of local programs designed to facilitate the informal resolution of disputes among members of the community.
  3. (c) Development of structures for dispute resolution that may serve as models for resolution programs in other communities.
  4. (d) Education of communities with regard to the availability and benefits of alternative dispute resolution techniques.
  5. (e) Encouragement of courts, prosecuting authorities, public defenders, law enforcement agencies, and administrative agencies to work in cooperation with, and to make referrals to, dispute resolution programs.

At the time that the state assumes the responsibility for the funding of California trial courts, consideration shall be given to the Dispute Resolution Advisory Council’s evaluation of the effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution programs and the feasibility of the operation of a statewide program of grants, with the intention of funding alternative dispute resolution programs on a statewide basis.


It seems to me that the net effect of this is to enable public employees and very successful attorneys, retired judges, etc.  — to incorporate, form nonprofits, GET GRANTS TO PROMOTE THIS, sometimes fail to file, and market themselves.  LIke, everywhere.





The following organizations provide mediation services under contract with the Los Angeles County Department of Community & Senior Services. Services are provided to parties in any civil case filed in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Services are not provided under this program to family, probate, traffic, criminal, appellate, mental health, unlawful detainer/eviction or juvenile court cases.


Interesting that an ADR services organization is operating out of that 111 Hill STreet office in Los Angeles that Marv Bryer was so upset about in the 1990s

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Our panelists offer all forms of alternative dispute resolution and are available throughout the country. ADR Services, Inc. has offices in Downtown Los 

111 N Hill St # 107B
Los Angeles, CA 90012-3115
(213) 974-5425






THere is a paid professional in the SF Superior Court, whose business is to promote ADR.  Now, this court system (SF) is under imminent threat, per Katherine Feinstein, to close down 25 courtrooms and lay off 200 employees!  (press release)





JUNE 16, 2011:   “JUSTICE WILL BE DISMANTLED!  (restore funding, please!)

“I urge lawmakers to restore trial court funding to ensure that Californians have access to justice,” Judge Feinstein said. “We are not an emergency room that can turn away patients because we are at capacity. People want an orderly resolution to their disputes. If they can’t achieve that outcome, then we will see more disorderly resolutions. Unlike executive branch agencies, we cannot control how much work comes in. We are constitutionally unable to do that.”

Given the apparent vulnerability of California’s trial courts – as witnessed in the past 48 hours – the Court is planning to close 25 courtrooms, including Civil, Criminal, Probate, Juvenile and Family Law departments. These closures will mean that all members of our community seeking access to justice or resolution of disputes will face significant delays in getting their day in court.

“Justice as we know it today in San Francisco will be dismantled,” Judge Feinstein said.





SAN FRANCISCO — San Francisco Superior Court Executive Officer T. Michael Yuen today assured the Judicial Council that 92 percent of the issues identified in an audit of Court operations in 2005-2008 have been addressed since the comprehensive report was completed in May 2010.

Yuen, who was appointed by the San Francisco Superior Court Bench to serve as CEO 10 months ago, thanked the Administrative Office of the Courts’ Internal Audit Services team for its thorough review of Court administration, cash controls, court revenue and expenditure and general operations. The Judicial Council voted to accept the audit during today’s meeting.


Great timing on that press release, and “Har, Har, Har….”   Remember the Civil Grand Jury convened on child support issues, as reported on their website?  I found a report that classified Kids Turn funds ($45K or so) as “Violence Prevention,” and a whole LOT of other shenanigans, including outright simply breaking their own standards in picking single-source vendors (versus competitive), and more.

LOOKING UP 111 HILL STREET (where some ADR activity most certainly occurs) Los Angeles reminds me again of JOHNNYPUMPHANDLE site:


Non-Profit Organizations

brdmeet2.gif (4758 bytes)

Many non-governmental organizations exist to reap profit from the Family Law system. Most are identified as Non-Profit and are exempt from taxation. You may have contacted some of these organizations for help, only to discover that help is not available – particularly if you are seeking justice.

Many organizations have been established by professionals in the Family Law system for conspiracy and protection of these professionals. Thus we have many Bar Associations, whose members are lawyers and judges; Psychological Associations for classifying family members syndromes, so that none will be overlooked; and other associations established merely to act as a conduit for family member’s money collected in the process.

The Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association is a good example of one of the latter Non-Profit organizations whose stated purpose is “promotion of judicial profession pursuant to section 501(c)(6)”. (see form 3500 – Exemption application). The Association boasts a budget of over $100,000 – none of which will be received from members dues – and most of which will be funded by “Professional Education programs for the legal community”. Unlike most professional organizations, this organization was granted(?) the use of County premises, complete with facilities for it’s office space and management of it’s business within the County Court facilities at 111 North Hill Street.


Now that we’ve (at least I have) been looking at some nonprofit tax returns and articles of incorporation as nonprofits, let’s look at this one fro 1997, for public benefit purpose:  “PROMOTION OF THE JUDICIAL PROFESSION:”  Please note that the registered agent is a law firm in NORTHERN California, SF to be specific:



Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process


Entity Number: C2062529
Date Filed: 12/10/1997
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 111 N. HILL ST RM 546
Entity City, State, Zip: LOS ANGELES CA 90012
Agent for Service of Process: FREDERICK R BENNETT
Agent Address: 111 N HILL ST RM 546
Agent City, State, Zip: LOS ANGELES CA 90012

It shows up around the web as a nonprofit:


Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association

111 N Hill St Ste 204 Los Angeles, CA 90012
EIN: 954663773
Contact: Robert W Parkin

Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association
Employer Identification Number (EIN) 954663773
Name of Organization Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association
In Care of Name Robert W Parkin
Address 111 N Hill St Ste 204, Los Angeles, CA 90012-3115
Subsection Board of Trade
Ruling Date 01/1998
Foundation All organizations except 501(c)(3)
Exempt Organization Status Unconditional Exemption
Tax Period 12/2008
Assets $100,000 to $499,999
Income $25,000 to $99,999
Filing Requirement 990 (all other) or 990EZ return
Asset Amount $102,801
Amount of Income $72,192
Form 990 Revenue Amount $33,516

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION EX550137 Charity Exempt – Active LOS ANGELES CA Charity Registration Charity


(ALTHOUGH when I keyed in the FEIN# it wasn’t found under charities, and when I keyed in the Business Entity# (sec. of state) it didn’t come up either).

Either it’s not earning much, or they just forgot to file, ALSO:  (notice different room# in the Hill Street address).

Below is the detailed data for the registrant you selected.
You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.
Registrant Information
Type: Mutual Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 2062529
Registration Number: EX550137
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/15/1991
Registration Status: Exempt – Active Date This Status:
Date of Last Renewal:
Address Information
Address Line 1: 111 N HILL ST RM 204 Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: LOS ANGELES CA 90012
Annual Renewal Information Related Documents
No Related Documents
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information
IRS Return Data


WELL, from their 2009 return, they keep a modest profile for such high-profile personnel (judges!)

Their only income about $50K in membership dues, which seems to go to mainly entertainment.


And — this displays sideways but shows how to have a net income LOSS on MUSIC, DINNER & SPORTING EVENTS, and charge someone $1,000 tax preparation to do so.  in fact (judging by the first of the series of 990s here) this seems to be the process:  Hold Events, Pay someone to run them, and write off about $12 to $16K in the process keeping a low profile




Look for yourself

Something must have been working right, because for years, the judges got extra county-paid benefits, as Richard Fine showed.

INTERESTING HISTORY OF THIS BUILDING – and its intersection with what possibly later became AFCC:



1958 The Los Angeles County courthouse at 111 Hill Street was dedicated.


The Conference of Conciliation Courts (CCC) established a bank account at Security First National Bank (which later became Security Pacific Bank)

Evidence: CCC 1968 Financial Statement. A balance from 5th Annual Conference is described. This indicates the account probably began 6 years before in 1962.


Conference of Conciliation Courts, a private organization, was formed. The address of record was 111 N Hill Street, Room 241, which is the LA County public courthouse.





Evidence: Publication of first CA Conciliation Courts Quarterly

1965 Tried to get Family Law bill passed.

1965 The CCC has other states involved

• Arizona California was dropped from their publication name.

1967 CCC became a national organization.

Treasurers in Missouri and Michigan Still no incorporation documents filed; still no Secretary of State, FTB or IRS registration • President Lauren Henderson from Phoenix,AZ • VP Hugh Page from San Luis Obispo, CA • Treasurer William Shields (where from?) CCC expanded to include • Alameda County • San Luis Obispo County

1968 CCC became international.

Still no formal incorporation status, despite being an international group with a money flow. Treasurer: from San Luis Obispo In the seminar business, began giving Family Law Symposiums in Los Angeles Combined with Bar Association (marriage between attorneys and court) Have a legislative committee CCC expanded to include • San Luis Obispo • Phoenix,AZ • Chicago, ILL • Detroit, MICH • Missouri • AUSTRALIA Evidence: CC Quarterly

Money began flowing in from everywhere, despite no incorporation status, no registration with FTB o

• Income of $2716.64. Into this unincorporated entity, which did not pay taxes, flowed dollars from membership dues and conference registration fees. • Expenses of $208.64. Out flowed dollars for stamps, a rubber stamp, check imprinting, Holiday Inn meeting rooms, a refund to Conner Cole for conference registration, Hills Stationery Ledger Papers, and a mysterious entry: reimbursement to the County of San Luis Obispo for stationery. NOTE: the treasurer is from San Luis Obispo Evidence: CCC Financial Report (through May 21, 1968)

After May 21, 1968, the CCC, an unincorporated entity paying no taxes, anticipated they would have:

• Income of $700 from Registration, and $300 from County of S.L.O NOTE: the treasurer is from San Luis Obispo • Expenses of $2433.64 for banquet, luncheon, breakfast and cocktail party • Expenses to Drs. Stembr, Suares, Steller, Muhrich,Transcription costs, flowers, music and Expenses to President Meyer Elkin for publications. Evidence: CCC Anticipated Income and Expense Report (after May 21, 1968)


The national CCC finally filed to incorporate as a domestic nonprofit CA corporation with Secretary of State. Michael Aaronson, attorney from San Carlos, filed these papers.



Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process


Entity Number: C0576876
Date Filed: 07/30/1969
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 3100 S CENTRAL AVENUE
Entity City, State, Zip: CHICAGO IL 60650
Agent for Service of Process: *
Agent Address: *
Agent City, State, Zip: *

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
CONFERENCE OF CONCILIATION COURTS Charity Not Registered CHICAGO IL Charity Registration Charity

You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.Registrant Information
Type: Public Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 0576876
Registration Number:
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: Renewal Due Date:
Registration Status: Not Registered Date This Status:
Date of Last Renewal:
Address Information
Address Line 1: 3100 S CENTRAL AVENUE Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: CHICAGO IL 60650
Annual Renewal Information
Related Documents
No Related Documents
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information
IRS Return Data



Well, there’s a Collaborative Law Institute there…. (Smile):  The address is a Virtual Business Office, too (one can rent meeting rooms, etc.)  This one’s been around since 2002….

Entity Type File Number Corporation/LLC Name

And that International COllaborative I was looking for was indeed registered in Arizona:

Reg. Number: 01050362
EIN: 943323285
Address: 11811 N TAUM BLVD


and I guess they are doing OK financially, too:


Reg. Number: 01050362
EIN: 943323285
Reg. Date: 03/02/2007
Address: 11811 N TAUM BLVD
SUITE 1000
County: No county listed



Fiscal Year

$510,746.00 $1,084,406.00 03/31/2010
$419,913.00 $980,444.00 12/31/2007
$280,941.00 $836,342.00 12/31/2006
$176,298.00 $524,026.00 12/31/2005


YEP I will have to do a segment on Collaborative Lawyering, and how Hofstra University (AFCC home away from home, helps publish family court review, etc) is preparing already to deal with the domestic violence liability in situations where judges might not even be involved!  And how COllaborative/Cooperative law played out in Florida, as promoted by a group of AFCC personnel including a judge, an attorney and a professional educator (you always need one of those to keep promoting the concepts…..)

and they have one listing under the booming field of “co-parenting” (which was involuntarily dissolved…. after apparently 5 years from incorporation).  Get with it, Illinois!  You’re far behind, say, texas in this field!  (Then again, Illinois has Jeffrey Leving, etc. . . .. . .)


Entity Type File Number Corporation/LLC Name

AND, here we are:


Search Criteria: CONCILIATION

Entity Type File Number Corporation/LLC Name




 Status ACTIVE
 Incorporation Date (Domestic) 07/31/1975  State ILLINOIS
 Agent Name SUSAN SNOW  Agent Change Date 06/21/2010
 Agent Street Address 12112 S 75TH AVE PO BOX 23  President Name & Address
 Agent City PALOS HEIGHTS  Secretary Name & Address
 Agent Zip 60463  Duration Date PERPETUAL
 Annual Report Filing Date 07/06/2011  For Year 2011

The corporation doesn’t HAVE to profit — everyone associated with it will, and often at taxpayers and parents’ expense, too!

There is an Illinois Charitable Registry also, after one has read the disclaimer, which reads in part:

 The Illinois Attorney General does maintain a record of every charitable organization ever registered with this Office pursuant to the Charitable Trust Act (760 ILCS 55/1 et seq.) and the Solicitation For Charity Act (225 ILCS 460/1 et seq.), including past and current charitable registration statements and annual financial reports.



• Filed seven years after establishing the original bank account at SPNB. • The address of this corporation was Room 241, Courthouse, 111 N. Hill Street, Los Angeles 90012, which is the LA County public courthouse address. • Stated on the form filed with Secretary of State that CCC is not incorporated, is now being incorporated, and is not an outgrowth of another unincorporated predecessor (despite the fact that they have maintained a bank account for seven years under that name) • Stated on the form filed with Secretary of State that that they have not applied for an exemption with the federal government, nor filed federal tax returns (despite money flowing in and out of their account). • Defines the specific purpose: “To improve marriage counseling procedures so as to provide greater assistance to parties having marital difficulties. To attempt to improve the professional and ethical standards of professional family counseling so as to help preserve family relationships.” • Defines major activities: Conduct meetings and seminars with the various judges, handling domestic, relations and with marriage counselors and court commissioners for the purpose of disseminating knowledge and information that will be direct benefit to marriage counselors and thus benefit the families which are counseled by them. • Sources of income: dues and contributions • Purpose use of funds:“Cost of meeting halls and speakers, costs of reference books, telephone and clerical and stenographic services.” Evidence: documents filed with Secretary of State

Now found at the 3100 South Central Avenue, “Chicago” 60650:


(Address is in cicero, not Chicago (I’ve noticed this sometimes on business address filings — what seems like a “wrong” address),  Basic google search.

Seguin Services, Inc. 3100 S. Central Avenue
Cicero, IL  60650

Seems right up the alley, relatively speaking, with their focus on children:

Seguin Services Adoption and care for severely disabled children, licensed by Illinois DCYS




NOTHING EVER ON FILE WITH IRS FTB contacted them because they had left off part of their articles:

Judge Victor J Baum of Michigan Edward Staniec of Michigan Franklin Bailey of Los Angeles Mailing Address: James E. Frick, 3100 S Central Ave, Chicago, Ill 60650 (Cook County) Corporation # CO376876 Evidence: Secretary of State Status Inquiry


James E. Frick is a common name, and these are some interesting search results, though:


James E. Frick, Inc. (the Company) is a consulting company specializing in reducing costs for client companies. Their core product, unemployment compensation cost control, is complimented with unemployment tax planning services, multistate tax audits and related services, software consulting solutions, and other employer business services. The Company’s customers range in size from the very large (serving approximately one-third of the Fortune 500 Companies) to small employers with less than 200 employees. The customer base is dispersed throughout the United States and includes a broad cross section of industries.

The Company is 100% owned by The Frick Company Employee Stock Ownership Plan (the ESOP).



The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could vary from the estimates that were used.”


Whether or not this is James E. Frick, this is an interesting case:  EQUIFAX (of GEORGIA) acquired TALX  and Frick (then of Missouri). Some of the industry overlaps with what would affect the child support industry for sure — employment and human resource issues.


In the Matter of

TALX CORPORATION, a corporation.  

Docket No. C-4228

Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”), having reason to believe that respondent TALX Corporation (“TALX), now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Equifax, Inc. (“Equifax”), has violated and is violating Section 7 of the Clayton Act, and that TALX has violated and is violating Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows:

I. Nature of the Case

1. This complaint concerns the acquisitions consummated by TALX of James E. Frick Inc., Unemployment Compensation Business Services Division of Gates, McDonald & Company, Johnson & Associates, L.L.C., substantially all of the assets of the Unemployment Compensation Management (“UCM”) and small employment verification businesses of Sheakley-Uniservice, Inc., UI Advantage, Jon-Jay Associates, Inc., and the unemployment tax management business of Employers Unity, Inc. This series of acquisitions occurred between March 2002 and December 2005.

VIII. Anticompetitive Effects

22. The acquisitions by TALX of James E. Frick, Inc. and the UCM business of Gates McDonald & Company eliminated direct and actual competition between Frick and Gates

-4­McDonald for the provision of outsourced UCM services. The acquisitions by TALX of Johnson Associates, LLC, the UCM assets of Sheakley-Uniservice, Inc., UI Advantage, Inc, Jon-Jay Associates, Inc., and Employers Unity, Inc., eliminated direct and actual competition between TALX and each of the enumerated acquired firms or businesses in the provision of outsourced UCM services.

23. The acquisitions by TALX of the employment verification businesses of James E. Frick, Inc., Sheakley-Uniservice, Inc, Jon-Jay Associates, Inc., and Employers Unity, Inc., eliminated direct and actual competition in the provision of employer verification services.

24. The acquisitions by TALX of its competitors have enhanced its ability to increase prices unilaterally and enhanced its ability to decrease the quality of services provided in each of the relevant lines of commerce.

IX. Violations Charged

25. The Acquisitions described in Paragraphs 5 through 10 constitute a violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 45, and Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 18.


(Sorry to get off on the James E. Frick tangent, there).



WELL, AGAIN, when the concept of ADR promotion at public expense to nonprofits (such as we’ve seen last few posts), including one whose address seems to be 111 Hill Street, and here is the 1999 Insight Magazine Link detailing the concerns:   Some financial records were subpoenaed, and ALL KINDS of checks were going into that fund.

THIS SEGMENT is (in)Famous among many parents facing a custody battle (male or female), and I’ve also posted part of it in my Shady Shaky Foundations of Family Law page — a “READ ME FIRST” page for this blog.


Now, almost 3 years later, and a LOT of eyestrain later, and with a bit better understanding of how businesses, charities, etc. have to actually register — and of course of the grants systems (some of them) around the courts — I find it fascinating that as the courts are going broke (budget) and we DON”T HAVE AN ACCOUNTING for so many public funds, we DO KNOW that lots of organizations are often out of compliance with the tax codes themselves (CAVEAT:  I’ve been looking at these public sites, not originals of the 990s, and there is a possibility that registrations exist that the Attorney General’s office simply didn’t get up on-line) – – –

it seems to me that with wonderful foresight, a.k.a. “COLLABORATIVE LAW” — certain professionals have been preparing for a VERY long time to take the OUT-flux of parents that actually need some business done — in the form of private judging among friends:  “keep it all in the family” if the courthouses do indeed get shut down.  I suggest that parents do a general boycott and accept that no matter HOW bad your ex was, they can’t generally speaking be this large-scale systemic corrupt (unless you are married to one of these) as to think it’s OK to continually form nonprofits, and then watch people whose lives your work ahs helped waste, be pushed back towards welfare, when there isn’t going to be any!  Thanks in part to the taxes your groups didn’t pay, for some “public benefit” or, as case may have it, a “mutual benefit.”

There was one (collaborative) group whose only purpose was to collect dues for the international one.  I believe that was in San Bernadino, CA (but could be wrong)





Update 4/11/99

Published in Washington, D.C.. . . . Vol. 15, No. 16 — May 3, 1999 . . . .

Insight Magazine

Is Justice for Sale in L.A.?

By Kelly Patricia O’Meara

An alleged slush fund for the L.A. Superior Court Judges Association is at the heart of a scandal involving possible income-tax evasion and gifts that may affect judges’ rulings.

Child-custody cases always are heart-wrenching, but a three-month probe by Insight has unearthed an added twist for parents with cases before the Superior Court in Los Angeles. Emotionally distraught litigants are questioning whether a cozy financial connection between judges, attorneys and some court-appointed professionals in the City of Angels is affecting the outcome of their cases. Friends of the court are concerned that, at the very least, there is a strong appearance of impropriety.
. . . . Private bank accounts that benefit judges are at the heart of this brewing scandal — one that state and local agencies resolutely have failed to investigate, adding further suspicion. Bank accounts funded in part by fees from local lawyers and others involved in the family-court system are troubling litigants. Many feel it is impossible to know whether they’re facing a judge who has benefited financially from an attorney appearing before the court.
. . . . Former presiding judge Robert Parkin tells Insight that an account critics dub a slush fund is nothing more than “coffee-and-flowers” cash for the Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association, or LASCJA.

. . . . Dozens of checks, obtained by Insight, deposited in the LASCJA account were made out to several other institutions, including the Judges Miscellaneous Expense Fund, the Judges Trust Fund, the Family Court Services Special Fund and the Family Court Services. These organizations are not registered with the IRS or the California State Franchise Tax Board, and if the Bank of America has accounts for any of them, the checks were not deposited in those accounts.
. . . . Not only were attorneys who argue cases before the family court making payments to the judges’ fund, but so were the court monitors — appointed by the judges and paid a professional fee of as much as $240 a day as observers during child visitations. These monitors qualify for their jobs by paying to take a training and certification course from the judges, with the check going to the fund, whereupon they are placed on the exclusive list the judges use when assigning monitors.
. . . . The Los Angeles County Bar Association’s contributions to the fund were payments to the judges run through a joint partnership with the court on MCLE classes. They split the proceeds from legal and professional seminars.
. . . . So, in addition to the ethical issues involved in how the bank account has been maintained, its funding also raises numerous legal issues, according to attorney Richard I. Fine, a taxpayers’ advocate. “If a private group [the LASCJA] is using a public building and everything associated with that private group is being paid for with taxpayers’ dollars, then it is clearly fraudulent,” Fine contends. He adds that “unless the public entity has passed an ordinance specifically allowing the private group to exist and specifically stating that the public will bear the costs — separate phones, leasing office space, furniture, computers, etc. — then it should be paid for by the private organization.”
. . . . According to Fine, “If the judges have provided false information on official financial statements submitted to government agencies or financial institutions [the Bank of America account], then they have defrauded the Internal Revenue Service and the county and the people of Los Angeles by receiving tax-free status under fraudulent means. … This would be the same as if a person lied on their tax return. It is incredulous to me that something like this could have happened and the IRS, state attorney general, county district attorney and auditor have not acted over all these years.”


HEre’s Bryer’s Tort Claim of 1998, and a rant.  The images on the links clicked to are almost illegible, but one does show 1969 as the date Conference of Conciliation Courts received (State) tax exemption — if you peer at it closely.   What I’m noticing how is a DIFFERENT EIN# for this judges’ fund than he mentions:

What do you think?


Filed Sep 11, 1998
September 10 1998


ACCUSED: Tyler McCauley – Assistant Auditor – County of Los Angeles
Frederick Bennett – County Counsel of Los Angeles  (….and associated with this nonprofit I showed, LASCJ)
Amy L. K. Shek – County Counsel of Los Angeles
Henry Stewart – County Sheriff of Los Angeles
Clarence Markham – County Sheriff of Los Angeles

Now – Ongoing

DAMAGES: Amount to be assessed by trial by jury

DESCRIPTION: The ACCUSED are part of an underground of white collar criminals who are involved in the theft of CITY, COUNTY, STATE, and FEDERAL money. The scheme started before their time as an organization known as the CONFERENCE OF CONCILIATION COURTS. That organization changed its identity and assumed the name ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS. Using various identity changes, the organization was listed in the LOS ANGELES SUPERVISORS DIRECTORY in 1993 as JUDGES TRUST FUND ACCOUNTING.

The crime ring is an underground Mafia that posed as the COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – by using the FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 95-6000927. In recent dramatic announcements, the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE has informed me that the EIN or FEIN number assigned to the latest version of the organization – the – LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES ASSOCIATION – is an EIN that was not assigned to the organization. It Is a COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES EIN!


Here’s how it looks now that 95600027 — I searched the Charity Registration:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF’S CITY OF INDUSTRY POSSE NO. 14 029033 Charity Delinquent GUASTI CA Charity Registration Charity

Below is the detailed data for the registrant you selected.
You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.
Registrant Information
Type: Mutual Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 0476230
Registration Number: 029033
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/11/2004
Registration Status: Delinquent Date This Status:
Date of Last Renewal:
Address Information
Address Line 1: 150 N HUDSON ST Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: GUASTI CA 91743
Annual Renewal Information
Related Documents
00000155 Delinquency Letter
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information
IRS Return Data


For COMPARISON, the Secretary of State (which lists the city correctly, and another address of the registered agent)y

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process

Entity Number: C0476230
Date Filed: 08/17/1964
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 150 N HUDSON ST
Entity City, State, Zip: CITY OF INDUSTRY CA 91743
Agent for Service of Process: DOUGLAS KNUDSON
Agent Address: 21217 WASHINGTON ST #44 * * *
Agent City, State, Zip: WALNUT CA 91789

Mobile Homes For Sale, For Rent, Mobile Home Insurance, Loans, and Financing



(* * *which is a manufactured or mobile home community in L.A. County…)



Currently this looks like an Animal Control Office in “City of Industry”

Los Angeles County Animal Control &/or Sheriff’s Dept.

Los Angeles County Sheriff

150 N Hudson Ave
City Of Industry, CA zip code

Phone Map it

150 North Hudson Ave, City of Industry, CA 90242-400

ALSO, as with the Conference of Conciliation Courts registration, they piped in the wrong city — as here.  Guasti, CA has a different zip code.  150 N. Hudson is in City of Industry.  Deliberate?

In reviewing this Marv Byer piece, I see his is again specifically talking about abuse of TRAINING payments to become child custody monitors — people would write the check out to one (fictitious) entity, but it could get deposited elsewhere

RE:  95-6000927  (database NCCS search produced results = no IRS filings either?

JUST to Further confuse the innocent, or engage the obsessively curious: I searched (googled) that #, and here’s an 11 page document about plan A, B, or C “deferred compensation” with blank form dating to 2005 (and from the US Treasury) which has this as part of a form.  Anyone who deciphers it welcome to submit a comment; it may relate:



The deferred compensation issues is a hot topic, and was the subject of front-line news recently, when top Alameda County Officials got a particularly sweet deal, including the district attorney, Nancy O’Malley, Supervisor Nate Miley, and Sheriff

I’ll provide the links








Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

August 22, 2011 at 8:32 pm

Planning Professional Niches, Rehearsing Terminology Changes, Profiting from Trainings, — How does AFCC DO this?

with one comment

And dropping nonprofit / for-profit legitimacy along the way. . . . .

(NOTE: I am using a different input computer, so DNK how this will display. For now, this means no difference in font sizes as I can normally do in wordpress). It’s missing half the formatting buttons, not to mention a scroll bar. I suspect it may come up without paragraph breaks either, but we shall see…. Mastering html input to compensate for this is not on the agenda…)

GEORGIA, PENNSYLVANIA, (TEXAS), ILLINOIS — it’s all in an AFCC practitioner’s lifestyle:

Which will include collaborating to figure out which terminologies to use around the family law business — incorporating (where absolutely necessary only), maintaining corporate and nonprofit status (apparently optional, when it comes to doing business — case in point, has any one stopped the parenting education profession at 1242 Market Street 2nd floor, SF yet?, Because its business license in my book –and on the California Secretary of State site — still reads “Suspended.”) Like some of the courthouses in the area, that were closed because of the budget crunch. Perhaps if fewer parents were left alone to work, versus constantly fight for their basic rights, only to be assigned some federal-grants-incentive-program participation — there might be more income tax to spread around, and we’d also (on the sly) buy a few things that produced local sales taxes for the city, too, like clothing, etc.

ANYHOW, this 2001 brochure (among many other things) shows how Parenting Coordination was being planned, promoted, and explicated at least 10 years ago, in AFCC circles. The term “Collaborative Law” was also being presented (see page 1). . .. Which is now all over the internet….

Please note #1 (topic) assessing and addressing ALLEGATIONS of sexual abuse.

  • Collaborative Family Law
  • High-Conflict Families (the family is labeled, not individuals.  No reference to what the conflict might be about, for example — sexual abuse or allegations of it?)

and an all-time favorite AFCC topic, alienation.

  • The Alienated Child within an Alienated Family System”

finally, the words “domestic violence” are allowed in — in this context:

  • “Domestic Violence, High-Conflict Families, and the Courts.”

These are the groups talking about how mothers coach their kids into reporting abuse — well, here is an AFCC coaching session in how to (re)frame the topics.

Notice the involvement of the NY Office of Court Administration (probably had some AFCC member highly placed in it then, and for sure by now), and the business development plan here:

A “Judicial Leadership Institute” to DEVELOP and IMPLEMENT court & community-based programs.   Help “build model courts” introduce “therapeutic justice” and of course ADR, “family services” and learn about how divorce affects kids from the good guys.  (Gee, domestic relations Judges probably had no idea about that).

The next year’s conference, Aloha!, will be in Hawaii

with the combo of presenters from:  Judges, professional educators, psychiatrists most likely, and a JD or two.  Unsurprisingly, the same type of topics will be covered.

Robert Emery, Ph.D. — directs a University of Virginia School of Law “Center for Children, Families, and the Law.”  This probably complements the one at University of Baltimore School of Law, (CCFC) and a portion of the  California Judicial Council’s “AOC”/CFCC portion of government.  Similar terms in the courts, and the schools of law, promoted and pushed by activist judges, mediators, and attorneys — not demanded by the public…

It’s no accident that AFCC has been so active in schools of law in consultation with existing judges and courts — and to spread the idea of Centers for Families & Children + therapeutic jurisprudence, problem-solving courts, Unified Family Courts, and in general soaking up the purpose of the criminal law system to within the family law system (where it’s denatured, defanged, reframed, and the responsibility for it spread to both parents, whether or not both parents have committed domestic violence or other crimes).     However that’s another topic, how it happened.

About Robert E. Emery, Ph.D. – Divorce Mediation Expert

Robert Emery, Ph.D. is Professor of Psychology and Director of the Center for Children, Families, and the Law at the University of Virginia. He also is an associate faculty member in the Institute of Law, Psychiatry, and Public Policy, and was Director of Clinical Training from 1993-2002. He received his B.A. from Brown University in 1974 and his Ph.D. from the State University of New York at Stony Brook in 1982.  He has served or is serving on the editorial board of eleven professional journals, and he has been a member of the Social Sciences and Population grant review study section of the National Institutes of Health (NIH, part of HHS) . . .

Dr. Emery’s research focuses on family relationships and children’s mental health, including parental conflict, divorce, child custody, family violence,

(not “domestic violence,” the whole family (grammatically at least) is responsible.  NOtice that’s the last topic, even though it’s a hot topic and often precipitates: conflict, divorce, and custody battles.

The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts presented the “Distinguished Researcher” and “Myer Elkin Address” awards to Dr. Emery in 2002.

…Dr. Emery has lectured extensively on his research across the United States and in numerous countries throughout the world. In addition to his research, teaching, and administrative responsibilities, Dr. Emery continues to engage in a limited practice as a clinical psychologist and divorce mediator. He also is the father of five children.**

**how many women are involved in this?  Is there a wife or mother somewhere in the picture?  Surely there must be – look at the schedule; who else would raise them?  Perhaps being such a successful person, his “about me” page might want to give some female a little credit?

Here’s a Robert E. Emery testimonial for a Richard Warshak Book, Divorce Poison, along side some Richard Gardner, etc.  Standard fare in the field; in fact the group Kids First of pennsylvania markets it as I’ve noted before:

“Divorce can be ugly, and in the ugliest divorces, one parent destroys children’s relationships with their mother or father.Divorce Poison offers clear, practical, and even-handed advice on this incredibly difficult problem. The first step? Look inward. Protect your children by finding an antidote for your own poison and by swallowing a little more from your ex.”

–Robert E. Emery, Ph.D.,
Director of the Center for Children, Families and the Law,
University of Virginia,
and author of Renegotiating Family Relationships

Other AFCC 2002 (HAWAII) keynote presenter (hardly a surprise) for 2002 was going to be Joan Kelly, Ph.D. Interesting logo at “Mediate.com” — 3 units inextricably bound together, when the process of separation is supposed to include, like, SEPARATION.  Who is the 3rd unit — the court professionals that are going to glue together divorcing parents?  Or does this represent the 3-fold AFCC grouping:  Judge/Attorney/Psychiatrist or Psychologist?

Mediate.com - Complete information about mediation and mediators

Joan Kelly is a Psychologist — not an attorney!  Notice the “parenting coordination” emphasis and two decorations from AFCC.

Joan B. Kelly, Ph.D. is a clinical psychologist and former Executive Director of the Northern California Mediation Center in Corte Madera, CA. Dr. Kelly received her Ph.D. from Yale University and her research, writing, practice and teaching over 38 years has focused on children’s adjustment to divorce, custody and access issues, using child development research to develop parenting plans, divorce mediation, and Parenting Coordination. She has published more than 85 articles and chapters, and a classic book, Surviving the Breakup: How Children and Parents Cope with Divorce. Joan is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association, received the Stanley Cohen Distinguished Research and the Meyer Elkin Awards from AFCC, was a member of the AFCC Task Force on Parenting Coordination, and has been appointed to an APA Task Force on Parenting Coordination.

Notice the full complement of Joan Kelly products for sale on the link.  Being in the sales and conferencing business is apparently good business; see “mediate.COM”

While I’m at it, I typed in “Mediation” under the registry of charitable trusts (No name of dba came up for the Northern California Mediation Center” showed up under organization name or dba — so I gather it’s a for-profit outfit, perhaps.  However, these MEdiations Centers no longer are, whatever they may wish:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
MEDIATION CENTER Charity Not Registered SANTA BARBARA CA Charity Registration Charity
MEDIATION CENTER OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY 091306 Charity Delinquent STOCKTON CA Charity Registration Charity
MEDIATION CENTER OF THE NORTH VALLEY 082863 Charity Revoked CHICO CA Charity Registration Charity
MEDIATION RESOLUTION SERVICES, INC. 106201 Charity Delinquent OAKLAND CA Charity Registration Charity
MEDIATION SERVICES OF SOLANO COUNTY, INC. 078299 Charity Delinquent VACAVILLE CA Charity Registration Charity
Corporations search on the 4th one, here brought up 4 more:
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
All I typed in was the word “MEDIATION”!
The address on Ms. Gaspar’s organization is an Oakland PO Box, she also shows up owning a nice home in the area, which was apparently sold to another? marriage therapist, who turned it around quickly (within a year).  As it’s not my business to put people’s home addresses up here (when the corporation listing doesn’t) let’s leave it at that.   ANother person by same name had a bank win a judgment against her in Idaho.
Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
(I searched the street address.  This one doesn’t seem to focus so much on family law situations, but note):
The Mediation Center of San Joaquin County is a not-for-profit organization funded by the county (under the Dispute Resolution Programs Act), income from training services, case development fees, and donations. Services are provided by trained neutrals
And indicates they work with “Superior Court of San Joaquin County” DRPA funding/advisor line/courtroom mediations.
Funny, Rosalie Gates is listed as registered agent, but new Board Member as of 2008:

Please welcome new board member Rosalie Gates, E. A. Rosalie has experience working with nonprofits and overseeing the accounting and financials. We welcome her and her expertise to our Center.

AND hopefully they will resolve their “delinquent” status!


This one actually functioned for quite a while.  statement from 2008 IRS form:


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process


( Chico, CA, stil listed on the state site of “Consumer Agencies” under Butte County – search address)(NOT family law related)

However, he is an ADR professional with a solid resume here, and although his primary field isn’t family law, it would seem he might keep the corporate registration current:

U.S. District Court, California 1990 U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 1983 State Bar of California, 1981 U.S. District Court, Southern District, 1974

Pepperdine University School of Law / Straus Institute For Dispute Resolution 2010
Hastings College of Law,University of California, J.D. 1973
University of Santa Barbara 1968

Mr. Shepherd has tried over 50 civil jury trials including trials in the United States District Court for the Eastern District (Sacramento), Los Angeles County, Santa Barbara County, Butte County, Tehama County, Shasta County, Glenn County, Sutter County, Yuba County and Mendocino County Superior Courts. Mr. Shepherd is a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates. He is admitted to practice before all courts of the State of California, the Central and Southern District Federal Courts for California, the Ninth Appellate Federal Court and the United States Supreme Court.

…Upstanding Citizen

From 1988 to 2000, Mr. Shepherd served on the Board of Directors for the Chico Area Park and Recreation District, twice serving as Chair of the Board and also is Past President of the Board of Directors of the Mediation Center For The North Valley, a non-profit corporation involved {briefly??!}}in alternative dispute resolution. In 1995 Mr. Shepherd was nominated for “Citizen of the Year” by the Chico Chamber of Commerce.

Guess just too busy with all the other professional responsibilities and courts…..

(LOOK at all these mediation centers — just imagine how many websites link to groups with suspended business licenses!  North Valley is on this one.  Moreover, with all this mediation going on, shouldn’t the world be less violent by now?)

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process

Address of that MEDIATION CENTER appears to be public facilities of some sort.

Mr. Debevec (courtesy “Mediate.com” as above…..)

Carl J. Debevec

Carl J. DebevecCarl J. Debevec is an attorney practicing general civil law in northern California. His practice includes business, trusts and estate planning, real property, elder law issues and mediation. He is a graduate of the Ohio State University college of law, a former Air Force judge advocate, and holds a post-graduate certificate in conflict resolution from California State University at Sonoma.As an active mediator and trainer, he has chaired the ADR committee for the Solano county Bar Association for 7 years, and was recently named attorney of the year for his work in that program. He has extensive experience in court-referred and community-based mediation and conflict resolution processes, and organized the county bar Dispute Resolution Service, a community-based mediation programstaffed by dozens of dedicated volunteer mediators.

And an upstanding community member: (in fact, it turns out he was a board of directors of this foundation that gave him the glowing recommendation:

Vacaville Public Education FoundationBuilding Community Through Education

Posted on March 16, 2010 by VPEF


Carl has resided and practiced law in Vacaville since 1979. A native of Cleveland Ohio, he is a retired AF reserve judge advocate. He previously served as president of the Vacaville Museum, treasurer of the Solano County Bar Association and worked on the board of the Solano Land Trust. As a co-founder of the Solano Conflict Resolution Center, he is a professional mediator. His support of the Vacaville education community springs from his family: his wife of 40 years, Barbara, is a literacy coach for the VUSD, and his daughters Jenny and Elie are successful alumni of the Vacaville school system.

Speaking of THIS California Public Benefit Corporation, which purpose was to raise money for the school district and preserve some of the educational programs:


Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
VACAVILLE PUBLIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION 4258-2007 Raffle Expired VACAVILLE CA Raffle Registration Raffle
VACAVILLE PUBLIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION 4258-2005 Raffle Expired VACAVILLE CA Raffle Registration Raffle
VACAVILLE PUBLIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION CT0164604 Charity Delinquent VACAVILLE CA Charity Registration Charity


(of which, incidentally, the IRS shows Carl Debevec is a board member, so it might make sense for the public compliments).

The top two entries are RAFFLES.  Fundraising by raffle-organizations are required to file forms, as well as certifications by the officer of the charity for which they are fundraising that it actually got those funds.  SO this is legitimate.  however, there is no paperwork at all under either of those raffles.

There were some difficulties filing.  I think Mr. Debevec was busy mediating, or he’d have advised them of the regulations about filing, being an attorney himself:

This one — the IRS form shows its purpose is to raise money for the school district to preserve educational programs.  Its main source of REVENUE is a $220K grant — from the school district.  Notice the $6,000 appreciation dinner, $7,000 “accounts receivable”, $12K advertising and promo, and $120 for Corporate FIling fees, if these were ever turned in….not to mention the grants not received yet.

The address of this foundation (sic) is a local sports club:

Direct Contributions – Send checks or money orders to:

Vacaville Public Education Foundation
c/o Millennium SportsClub
3442 Browns Valley Rd., Suite
400Vacaville, CA 95688

The site states:  “The Vacaville Public Education Foundation was formed in 2003 by a determined group of parents, community leaders, elected officials, senior citizens, and businessmen and women. They came together to address the crisis in public education funding that grips California every year and is most severe when the sales taxes and capital gains taxes fall.”  and “In their tenure, they have raised and allocated over $1.8 million for the children of our schools. The money has been used for specific programs in the following general areas: academics, athletics, music, library, health and safety, counseling and the GATE program. They have received over a thousand testimonials from parents, teachers and students about how these grants have made a direct, positive impact on students of the Vacaville Unified School District.

AMONG the board of directors, (according to the site) is someone who should’ve been on top of this charity & raffle registration process, one would think!

Constance Pedron – Corporate Secretary

Board of Directors - Constance Pedron


Constance Pedron has been a resident of Vacaville since 2001. As Vice President, Dir of Human Resources and Chief Technical Officer of Salutary SportsClubs, Inc. (Millennium SportsClub) and is the corporate Administrator for the Millennium Child Development Center.

Constance consults with businesses in Solano and Sacramento Counties in the areas of Human Resource Management and Accounting Management. She has taught employment law at UC Davis Extension providing a solid foundation in current federal, state, and local regulations, emphasizing compliance and maintaining management control. In addition, she is a certified mediator for the Solano County Bar Association, Dispute Resolution Service.

With no children of her own, the community of Vacaville is her family. “The efforts we give today to empower our children in Vacaville will reward us as a community exponentially in the future.”

This “Millennium Child Development Center” (part of a chain) was recently taking over by another international group, per ITS site:

International Child Resource Insitute

child care

ICRI operates and/or oversees six child care and early childhood development centers in the San Francisco Bay Area. Each center incorporates unique curricula and learning environments, and employs talented and dedicated staff. Our goal is to develop a range of outstanding early childhood centers that are models in their communities, and provide study and learning exchange opportunities for educators from around the world. . . . Millennium Child Development Center – ICRI was recently invited to take over the operation of this center in Vacaville, California and create a model early childhood facility at the site. 

(this board & staff a seriously packed with high-profile people, incl. one with SF Government Ties:

Beyene Negewo

Beyene is the former Ethiopian Ambassador to the United Kingdom and Ireland. He is also a retired Senior Policy Advisor for the City and County of San Francisco, and served as a Senior Advisor to the World Bank on economic development in Papua New Guinea. Beyene holds a Doctorate in Public Policy from Stanford as well as additional degrees in the fields of political science, educational planning and international development. Beyene has more than 25 years of professional experience tackling complex social and policy problems throughout North America, Africa, Europe, and Asia.

(WONDER IF ANY HHS grants behind that one …..)

No relationship, presumably? (searched “millennium Children’s”)

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
MILLENNIUM CHILDREN’S FUND 115820 Charity Delinquent BEVERLY HILLS CA Charity Registration Charity

Results of search for ” MILLENNIUM CHILDREN’S ” returned 3 entity records

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process

However, the INSTITUTE is operational in California

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process


Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type


And it IS filing its charity reports and apparently IRS’s.  Mr. Jaffee is paid $140K, and the goal is “starting children’s programs around the world” with a view to preventing abuse.  Revenuves ca $4.8 million (2009), Program expenses, over $4 million, assets well over $1 million.  Program Purpose and Accomplishments are the same:

Mr. Jaffee got his child development training from Sweden:

Ken Jaffe, President & Executive Director

Ken is the founder and leader of ICRI. He started the organization in 1981 to improve the lives of children and families throughout the world, through technical assistance and consultation, resource dissemination, and the establishment of model projects.

Ken received his child development training at the University of Uppsala in Sweden and his Master’s Degree from the University of California, Berkeley, where he conducted comparative research in international child care and development practices. He earned a Juris Doctor degree from John F. Kennedy University, where he studied juvenile justice and children’s rights. Ken is the author of numerous articles on international early childhood education, child advocacy, program management and work and family policy issues.

Ken served as Chair and member of the California Governor’s Advisory Committee on Child Development for nine years. He has worked extensively on family child care issues and was a founding member of the International Family Child Care Association and the World Forum on Early Care and Education. Ken was the Vice-Chair of a statewide commission to formulate a strategic plan for child care development in California.

Ken has assisted in the improvement or establishment of more than 300 child care, child health and child abuse prevention programs worldwide. He has been a consultant to the Children’s Defense Fund in Washington, D.C., and has advised the governments of Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, China, Sweden and Ecuador on child and family issues. In addition, Ken has presented over 300 keynotes and seminars to policy makers, executives, and non-profit professionals worldwide.

Sweden, unlike the U.S., is a constitutional monarchy; it revised its constitution last round, this “state.gov” site says, in 1975.

Sweden has an extensive child-care system that guarantees a place for all young children ages two through six in a public day-care facility. From ages seven to 16, children participate in compulsory education. After completing the ninth grade, 90% attend upper secondary school for either academic or technical education.

Swedes benefit from an extensive social welfare system, which provides childcare and maternity and paternity leave, a ceiling on health care costs, old-age pensions, and sick leave, among other benefits. Parents are entitled to a total of 480 days’ paid leave at 80% of a government-determined salary cap between birth and the child’s eighth birthday. The parents may split those days however they wish, but 60 of the days are reserved specifically for the father. The parents may also take an additional 5 months of unpaid leave.

For curiosity, I typed in “Dispute Resolution.”  After all, Dispute Resolution is such a huge field, and there’s even a county employee (Superior COurt) to promote and coordinate “Alternate Dispute Resolution” to  . . . everyone.  The position has 5 steps, and the highest salary level is $86,000 (below, Classification 444 in SF).

SEARCH ON “DISPUTE RESOLUTION” under California Charities:

I found ONE by this title under charities — the Blumbergs of Mammoth Lake, CA.  Filed in 1990, name change in 1994, and finally in 2011 (this past May) the OAG caught up with them:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER OF CALIFORNIA 063535 Charity Delinquent MAMMOTH LAKES CA Charity Registration Charity

Possibly there is a pattern going on here?

You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.Registrant Information
Type: Public Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 1295640
Registration Number: 063535
Record Type: Charity Registration Type: Charity Registration
Issue Date: 12/31/1990 Renewal Due Date: 5/11/2004
Registration Status: Delinquent Date This Status:
Date of Last Renewal:
Address Information
Address Line 1: P.O. BOX 2535 Phone:
Address Line 2:
Address Line 3:
Address Line 4: MAMMOTH LAKES CA 93546
Annual Renewal Information
Related Documents
0001BA6D Founding Documents
12961879 1st Delinquency Notice
Prerequisite Information
No Prerequisite Information
IRS Return Data

with them and said, “you’re delinquent!”  It appears they NEVER filed a tax return (at least, none up here) as charities are required to.

Kamala Harris’ office is appropriately indignant and threatening (although the amount hardly seems to match the millions  per state held in undistributed child support collections nationwide).  Maybe the founders of this group had nothing to blackmail anyone with, for example, knowledge of what someone else was doing illegal also.  Although I can hardly condone starting a charity and then simply failing to dissolve it on purpose if one has no plans to file tax returns:

and page 2 warning:

I googled “Myron Blumberg” and the city he was in, and found out that as of 2008, he’d passed away, and had had Parkinsons, had been a brilliant attorney.  This still doesn’t explain what happened between 1990 and 2008 that didn’t involve charitable registrations (or from whatever year this became a requirement for California charities).  Perhaps the organization never earned income?  How does this figure with “brilliant attorney?” as described below.


Memories of Myron Blumberg

This morning Jordan and I learned that our dear friend, Myron Blumberg, passed away.

When Myron’s daughter, Deborah, called, I said, “You called to tell me something sad. Didn’t you?”
“Yes,” she said, “My father passed away.”

The news of Myron’s passing was very sad, but not surprising. He had suffered with Parkinson’s disease for many years.

Jordan and I met Myron, a brilliant attorney and WWII veteran, and his wife Shirley, a talented poet and gardener, in 1981, soon after we moved to Mammoth Lakes, California.

So, about some of those MEDIATION GROUPS, above


The third one down (North Valley) was in Chico, and IRS forms show it started out with a bang (revenues $200K), then within 3 years was down to $76K.  The public benefit it provided reminds me of the account of the Los Angeles County Judge’s Slush Fund — mediation training was a factor mentioned.  This appears to be small fry, though, compared to others.

FIRST Form 990 filed – REVENUES: (if this is unclear, go to original site).

the public gave them $135, government grants $24K, and business from Government $16K for fees and contracts.  I guess there was a government connection somewhere here, eh?  The government gives and the government revokes your nonprofit status a few years later.  I know people that could live, with a family, on $16K, let alone$24K….

Somehow they managed to spend nearly everything, which again is what nonprofits supposedly DO, right?

1st year of form 990 filed:

2nd year of form 990 filed:

a statement (of which this is just a sample) shows that at least two of the directors were doing Superior Court Mediation:

3 board of directors got $24K salary — although who got how much, omitted.  I guess (despite 3 different addresses) they cooperatively figured out or mediated who got how much, or whether it was a 3-way even split:

Revenues included a City & a County Grant.  Earned revenues included court-referrals, and training fees.

THE MEDIATION CENTER — SANTA BARBARA (not registered yet.  No documents there yet.  Street address searched showed:

J. Paul Gignac, Esq.
1231 State Street, Suite 206 Santa Barbara, California 9310
as attorney for where to file documents in a class action suit for shareholders, regarding a real estate merger.  He shows up under American Arbitration Association (“http://adr.org&#8221;) listing.   


Incorporation?  1997

Taxes filed?  Zero.

Street address not possible to check it says:

(sigh….)  Secretary of State search on “MEdiation” comes up with 189 search results.  I guess, if one took out all the “suspended” Delinquent” and “revoked” one might come up with a number PROBABLY larger than the few listed above as charities.  Of those, how many are stating that they are charities in public, but functioning as non-tax return filing private corporations in reality.  Does anyone care?   I would hope so.  Clearly Mediation is a HUGE field to get into (thanks to decades of promotion by certain parties):

Results of search for ” MEDIATION ” returned 189 entity records.

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


(I should point out that probably several of these are small claims, not all in the family law field…..)


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10



Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Must be professional burnout, working with flawed parents and highconflict families, among other things:


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19


But this main one is still going, Dr. Joan Kelly’s outfit:


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process


Entity Number: C1049143
Date Filed: 07/10/1981
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 175 NORTH REDWOOD DRIVE, SUITE 295
Entity City, State, Zip: SAN RAFAEL CA 94903
Agent for Service of Process: NANCY J. FOSTER
Agent Address: 175 NORTH REDWOOD DRIVE, SUITE 295
Agent City, State, Zip: SAN RAFAEL CA 94903

Events: Collaborative Council of the Redwood Empire: collaborative 

Joan B.Kelly, PhD : NCMC:175 North Redwood driveSuite 295, San Rafael; September 19 2011: Civility Matters III (SCBA); September 19 2011: Dept 14 

divorce legal advice healdsburg cloverdale

The Collaborative Council of the Redwood Empire (CCRE) is a group of professionals interested in avoiding court battles and power struggles to resolve conflicts. Our group consists of family, probate and civil attorneys, mental health professionals, financial planners and others professionals.
non-traditional nontraditional divorce
Although we are primarily located in Sonoma and Napa Counties our members include professionals from throughout the San Francisco Bay Area.

I find it just “astounding” that among the Board of Directors is also a Kids Turn founder, Jennifer Jackson:

Charity began ? (here we go again — charity site, incorporation site):

Secretary of State site FIRST:


Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process



Entity Number: C2654097
Date Filed: 05/07/2004
Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA
Entity Address: 111 LIBERTY ST
Entity City, State, Zip: PETALUMA CA 94952
Agent for Service of Process: RANDELL J CHEEK
Agent Address: 111 LIBERTY ST
Agent City, State, Zip: PETALUMA CA 94952



Perhaps this is why.


Below is the detailed data for the registrant you selected.
You may CLOSE this window to return to the Search Results and choose another registrant.
Registrant Information
Type: Mutual Benefit Corporate or Organization Number: 2654097