franklin_m

Sorry. Working on two hours sleep. That blue wedge is depreciation. I've updated the chart in the post above to be percentages to two decimal places. It was rounding to whole percentages before.

init4fun

No need to apologize , I was just asking in case there was something I was missing there . Truly good job on the chart preparation , it makes it really easy to see where the money gets spent . I'd have figured salaries would be the biggest part of it but to see the magazine is the single largest expense is surprising to me . I'd have truly guessed if asked before I saw you chart that salaries would be first , insurance second , and then maybe the magazine at like third or maybe even fourth place . I guess I can see where a lot of folks would like it eliminated but to be truthful I kinda like reading it , and if it's as unprofitable as it appears maybe they could scale a bit of it back some if need be rather than outright killing it . Charge a bit more for the ads , a few less glossy pages maybe , and tame it's costs just a bit ?

franklin_m

What I found interesting is just how much of the pie goes to supporting the organizational structure. $100K on travel and $300K on conferences was a bit of a surprise. Especially when compared to just how little was distributed in grants ($32K), which I'm pretty sure is the scholarship program. With all the press that came out on it, I'd have expected the number to be higher.

Also, the 990's show that AMA is spending about $50K a year in lobbying efforts. Since it's not called out, I suspect it's part of that "all other expenses."

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

"Preacher , Heed thy own sermons" comes to mind. While that person's post is inappropriate, you're just making matters worse by responding to it. You know it's been reported and will be deleted. Just place the person on ignore as Ken has suggested multiple times (among other suggestions). Might wanna check with Mike as to how easy things have been for him since using the ignore function. Why is it that you can't?

But ya, this is a toy forum, but some people here are so incredibly thin skinned and take everything so personal. For instance, just the other day a fellow said he was going to look back at my posting history to collect posts that he didn't like, and then try to report these to the AMA, because he recently figured out I was a Leader Member (3 years now). I mean, think about the pathology involved in that. To scan 6000 posts, capture them without context, then turn them in to what, the principle? The headmistress? Think about the time and effort and again, pathology involved in that kind of hate. Franklin has bristled at the McCarthy comparison, and wonders where something like that would come from? Is it a stretch?

But as you said, this is a Toy Plane forum. Think that one through. I know that person will find a million ways to justify spending that much time and energy and effort (to what end other than personal), but stop and think about that one.

Now I have to go and dig up those names I promised Franklin, then off to enjoy the broiling 100 degree weather.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

So are grants the only money the AMA gives back to it's members?

flyinwalenda

My Feedback: (5)

There is a digital version of the magazine. If as it seems the printed version is a huge boat anchor then cut it loose. There are better areas to spend that money.
So many have touted all of the assistance the AMA gives to so many chartered clubs. What part of the 0.33% is it? One would think they could help more clubs in need than what is spent on office supplies.

init4fun

It is interesting to note folk's priorities with spending money and I am not shy to list mine ;

First and foremost , I do believe in paying the employees a decent salary , maybe even a notch or two above decent because it's their day to day dedication to doing their jobs that is the glue that holds the AMA together (that , combined with our dues money , that is) . Take good care of the troops and the troops will return that good will in the dedication they bring to their jobs each day .

Second , if the lobbying is what produced the "400 foot letter" then I'm all too happy to spend a bit on schmoozing up the political system . It's sad that it has to be that way , that lobbying should even be needed for something that is just and fair , like giving us our own discretion of what is a safe altitude for any given situation , but that's our present day world it seems , spend $$$ lobbying or become roadkill on the political highway .

Third , scholarships , I believe in them 100% and any and all possible help should be given to aviation minded youth to advance their love of flying things . If the magazine were cut in half , with that half of the money going to scholarships it wouldn't cross me in the least .

Now , I'm not yet quite sure and am really undecided on the charity of flying site grants and other monies given to clubs . While I believe 100% in scholarships I'm not quite there yet with money to clubs because if all that money was diverted to scholarships and the clubs left to pay for their improvements themselves , it would shift the financial load off of the entire AMA and onto the club itself , which are the folks who are going to be enjoying 100% of the effort their money has put in . A lot of folks say the same exact thing about the national flying site , why should folks who will never use something pay for it ? Well to me , the national flying site is the one and only field I would spend AMA money on because we should have at least one site centrally located to showcase exactly what we are all about to the public . Same goes for the museum , somebody's gotta keep the history of our hobby alive and it might as well be us (the AMA) . When we pay money to some clubs and not others how could that possibly be fair to the clubs that don't get anything ? And what if all the clubs decided they wanted to establish a museum of their own , would we need to pay for those too ? I'm sure my undecidedness on the money for clubs thing will be used to label me "mean" , but like I said , I'm really "on the fence" about that one issue ....

franklin_m

It's the only one called out in the IRS990. As I recall from the minutes they gave about the same amount in flying site grants - $30K give or take a little. So that would be also about 0.3%. Even if they gave every club one of those $100 recognition awards (which they didn't), that would add up to half what they gave in grants ... 0.017% or so.

init4fun

A great point indeed ! Since that's the way the world seems to be going , an all electronic MA with no hard copy likely will happen in time . Our time ? Who knows , but it's said that paper based communications day's are numbered and it's just a matter of how far into the future hard copy magazines continue ....

franklin_m

The lobbying thing is a tough one. On one hand, they need to do it, but as a 501c3, there's a limit to how much they can do. It's a calculation on the 990 form. In fact, I was reading on the lobbying aspect of the 501c3 law the other day, and it's my opinion that the recent email your Congressman effort was probably close to a violation. Straight from the IRS website:

"In general, no organization may qualify for section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying). A 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.

Legislation includes action by Congress, any state legislature, any local council, or similar governing body, with respect to acts, bills, resolutions, or similar items (such as legislative confirmation of appointive office), or by the public in referendum, ballot initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure. It does not include actions by executive, judicial, or administrative bodies.

An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.

Organizations may, however, involve themselves in issues of public policy without the activity being considered as lobbying. For example, organizations may conduct educational meetings, prepare and distribute educational materials, or otherwise consider public policy issues in an educational manner without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status. [emphasis added]"

- https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/lobbying


In reading that, my question was : Did the coordinated effort out of AMA to contact our legislators when the FAA bill was coming up for a vote constitute "urg[ing] the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation?"

franklin_m

When I think about the balance between money spent on the Muncie site vs. money spent at club fields around the country, I consider this question: Where are the potential members? Clustered around Muncie or clustered around club fields? Since the MRs can fly anywhere, unless they're racers, no real reason to fly at a club field. For FW, helo, etc., nicer facilities closer to where members (or potential members) live might induce more membership.

Just thinking out loud.

flyinwalenda

My Feedback: (5)

Yes, if they are going to cherry-pick what clubs get assistance;as seems to be the case, then I agree to stop doing and promoting it.

franklin_m

I could support a base level grant to clubs based on paying AMA members in the club, then a pot of money for above and beyond improvements based on applications. For the latter, I think it should be a factor to consider how many AMA members live within a certain distance, whether club members or not, as way to look at potential impact of the improvements.

cj_rumley

They claim to have spent more than a million $$$ on getting such legislation as the Special Rule for Model Aircraft in place. Find that in the 990 filing.

franklin_m

I found 990's that contain AMA lobbying data going back to 1999. Since 1999, AMA has told the IRS they've spent a total of $285,463.




So, they've told us they've spent over $1,000,000 on lobbying, but have told the IRS they've spent only $285,463.

init4fun

Hi CJ , yes I agree that it would be nice to know what the actual figures are , is it $285K or a million

cj_rumley

Thank you, Franklin, that took some considerable work. It is telling re openness in keeping the membership informed....or is it IRS that's in the dark

franklin_m

My hope is that it's bluster.

If it turns out the info to the IRS is incorrect, then the AMA is playing with fire. While nosing around on the IRS website, they said that honest errors are one thing. A pattern though would indicate deliberate, and loss of 501c3 status .... PLUS back taxes penalties, fines, etc.

franklin_m

I was able to find the 990's (see above). So we know what the AMA told the IRS, and we know what the AMA told us. Both cannot be right. My bet is on the IRS filings.

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

1% on Travel...outrageous.

2.7% on Conferences,....horrible.
26.5% on salaries....almost criminal. Who would have thought salaries of staff would make up a big chunk of dues.

Guess they should all work for free so more clubs could get handouts, and of course E5's and below some discounts on membership dues. Would everything be o/k then? I suspect not. But....

the insurance figure of just under 14% is curious. Sure doesn't seem like the whole AMA dues thing is for insurance does it? Doesn't Mike feel that this is all just a big "scam" (his exact words). I can't help but wonder, again, if only 13.8% of our dues goes to this huge insurance scam why oh why hasn't someone put together an alternative to this "scam" and start making some money !!!! What is the hold up?

I think I know........

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

seems to be the case based on your personal experience, or just a WAG? Have you or your club ever asked for assistance, if so what was it for and what was the outcome? Do you know how many clubs don't even know that program exists and never avail themselves of it? Probably the same amount of clubs that had no idea Model Aviation Day was this weekend. More failure at the club leadership level it would seem, because the AMA certainly advertised it via e-mail blasts, online postings, and of course in that mag that so many use to line their bird cages with. And then they complain about poor communication, yup! So some folks know about club assistance, but can't figure out how to fill out the form which takes about 5 minutes, then complain they can't get help. Wonder why? Do you know how the program works? Are you a big believer in public assistance, or do you think there is a case to be made for getting "some" help?

So how is it again the AMA cherry picks which clubs get assistance, can't wait to hear this.....

franklin_m

The travel expense was more about it being more than triple what they give in scholarships, and similarly conferences are ten times as much.

The number one expense is the magazine. If it were up to me, I'd put a fork in it.

franklin_m

First, if people saw value in what was being sent, I doubt they'd be using it "to line their bird cages with."

How about instead of blaming the rank and file, they should ask "Why" people don't pay attention to what's being sent.

aircraftbuilder67

My Feedback: (6)

Mr. Porcia83,

I don't know you and you don't know me, so I mean you no disrespect. I just don't understand why you (in this case) become so defensive when someone points out something or questions the AMA. As I read through this thread and others like it, I do not see that any accusations were made about wrong doing or ill intent. In this case, there has been an observation of inconsistent filings of financial information.

Can no one inquire into the activities of the organization without an over defensive response? Again, I mean no disrespect, but if indeed, you are a leader member, wouldn't you want to know yourself so that it can be corrected and you can represent that to the membership? And why wouldn't the organization want to be transparent about what goes on? I don't think the data shows any aggregious transgressions of funds. If folks don't like how the money is being spent and distributed, well, that's why they have the elections.

Again, sir, I mean nothing personal, but it gets disappointing to see these threads devolve into name calling, one upsmanship rants.

if you care to know, I am an AMA member. If there is something else more personal at work here, then, please accept my apology for butting in.

Respectfully,

Craig

rcmiket

Wow nice work.

Mike