kylejack Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Yeah, I looked her up earlier. Her arrests are for prostitution and agg assault. Pretty old, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbates2 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Once a prostitute... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 It is clear you have not done sufficient background research into what tax-exempt non-profits can and cannot do when putting on events. There is no such thing as a "non-profit party." There are only non-profit organizations. Non-profit organizations can put on events to make a profit. It is what they can and cannot do with that profit that is the distinction.Non-profits are organizations that apply with the IRS and Texas Comptroller for tax exempt status because they agree that their members/directors (or anyone) will not have an ownership interest in the entity that will entitle them to a distribution of the entity's net income like a shareholder in a for-profit business. For the IRS, non-profits have to fit within one of the six different kinds of organizations that can be a non profit (501©1-6). You can't form a tax exempt entity to allow you to drink beer and go to strip clubs with your friends on weekends. Non-profits can hold events to raise funds for themselves or contribute to others. Non-profits can use the funds raised to pay for expenses incurred in putting on the events, to pay the expenses of the organization, or for whatever purpose the non-profit was organized for....I am no specialist in the area and could be wrong. But, I have looked at these issues before and consulted with some people who are specialists. That is way more than the author did and is my problem with the story.There are over 25 types of non-profits under the Internal Revenue code, not 6.You can certainly form a non-profit to drink beer with your friends and go to strip clubs. That falls under 501c7 Social Clubs. The dues you pay are not deductible, but the club can own property, hold events (limited in income), etc.and the income from related purpose activities is exempt from tax.There are limits on how much non-exempt purpose income can be earned wihtout losing the non-profit status. Income from non-exempt purpose sources is subject to taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2T2 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Once a prostitute..."Once a prostitute... " not necessarily always one.I question how well the information and sources for this article were checked out before publicly damning someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsplay Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Please tell me this is a different individual than in the story: http://www.hcdistric...lic/Search.aspxchoose the "criminal" tabfor defendant, enter "harris, jacqueline p"search, then click on the link under "style"a new window will open, then click on the "Criminal History" tabNot a bit shocked. She needs to lower herself from that imaginary pedestal she thinks she is sitting upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsplay Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 "Once a prostitute... " not necessarily always one.I question how well the information and sources for this article were checked out before publicly damning someone.Which article? MC..I'd have to say once a pro, always a pro. Just my opinion, which .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2T2 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Which article? MC..I'd have to say once a pro, always a pro. Just my opinion, which ....The Houston Press article referenced in Post #1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T2T2 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Which article? MC..I'd have to say once a pro, always a pro. Just my opinion, which ....Once a prostitute...At one point in her life, Dr. Maya Angelou worked as a prostitute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackieHarris Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 It was never about me having a bad night. I first figured that it was all screwed up because Mitch was just an idiot. Oh well. It wasn't til some of the 19th street business owners came in to the BBR that night after the event that I found out how pissed off everyone else was and that's when my friends from 19th told me about the non profit scheme. It's about Mitch turning a great event into a con game. The event was put on by the 19th street businesses to help the small businesses that make up most of the Heights. I have participanted every year since it started. It was run by Karen Mann and it was always a good event with no problems. Til Mitch got his greedy hands on it last year. People paid from $100-$1500 and that money was to go for services that in the end were never delivered. Everyone spent a lot of money getting ready for what is usually the best night of the year. It was a very bad year for everyone so we looked forward to what should have been a great night. Instead no one had any business except 6th Street(Pink Street) because that was the only street promoted and I suspect it was because that was where Mitch was selling alcohol in the name of the phony non profit. He did not spend the money on what it was suppose to go for, shuttles,advertizing, printing, etc. and he took money from businesses that he new he could not possibly include. They were to far a way. But most of all it's about the non profit scheme. This is the real story. When he refused to show anybody the financials I contacted the proper authorities that handle non profit frauds. There are investigations going on at this time. Out of 97 business that participated last year only 39 joined this year. That is 58 pissed off business owners. Out of the 39 that did participate I know many of the 39 hate Mitch and know he is a con artist but joined anyway because it is a great event. The other participants this year are all new to the Heights. The rest of us will come back to it when we get rid of Mitch. For the puplic this is still a great party. It was hard for John Lomax to really get the whole story out there because so many of the businesses that were involved last year and are pissed off at Mitch are afraid of the type of harassment that Mitch always engages in towards his critics. I am not. I hate scamers especially ones who mis-use charties. As for my bar since you all seem so interested, here's the story. I moved into the Heights 32 years ago way before any yuppies got here or even many artists. I moved into a great warehouse that was next door to a closed cantina. My neighbor at the time told me that it would never open again because there had been to many murders there. Good I thought. I was a young artist living by myself and working at one of Houston's many topless bars. Back then the north Heights was 100% barrio. More than a little dangerous. To my surprise the cantina open up a month later. I was constantly opening my door in the morning to drunks passed out on my door step, people doing drugs and having sex in my yard, extremly drunk drivers, blocking my driveway, parking in my driveway, shooting guns off almost every night in front of my warehouse, etc. You see back then HPD would rarely come into my hood except for emergencies. So I got sick of it and one day when somebody from the bar parked in my driveway I went over there with my machete and told the whole bar that if who ever owns the car didn't move it ASAP their tires were going to be rubber bands. After that I had a lot fewer problems with parking. After living next to the bar for 17 years the last 8 of which were really wild, my neighbors and I had enough. I looked up the property and was surprised to see my landlord was the deed holder of record. His name was Jesse Cougot and I knew he had sold it 20 years ago. I had bought my warehouse from him several years earlier and Jesse had died a few years earlier. I knew the current owner and I realized that for some reason he never registered his deed. The other people you mentioned in connection with Reina's Bar were just fronting for him. He also had never paid any taxes and owed a lot. He owned many, many bars on the north side, some of them very big and very notorious all of them cantinas. Everyone in the northside knew what he was thats how I found out and I was best friends with a former accountant of his, that helped. The fight went on for three years in court and then he agreed to take half of what the bar was worth( he could never produce the deed) and give up all claims to the bar. The neighborhood was very thankful. Of course John Lomax's use of the machete story is just a metaphor and for shock effect.By the way,Walter Shannon is my husband and El Machete Inc. is my company. Wildchild and Strangelove are our real estate companies that own the two commercial properties. Since we own most of the block and it is our homestead the bank requires seperate entities own the frontage so we can't homestead it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJxvi Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 dude, seriously, walmart and historic district just got bumped for most entertaining thread. Topic Followed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TGM Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 Better go easy on the "butter" http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/18670 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marksmu Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 There is some serious mud slinging going on in this thread...I'm inclined to just default to agreeing with whoever s3mh is arguing with, but since I really have zero opinion on what seems to be a cat fight, I will sit back and just watch the train wreck in slow motion.Im not really sure what all the hoopla is about anyways....only about 10 people even read the houston press....slightly more than the 8 who read the chronicle... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth Busters Fan Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 However, this "strike" also states that there were 3 board members that were suggested to Lomax to interview and that only 1 was contacted and the other 2 sought to contact him but he did not contact them in return. In the story, the only mention I see of these 3 board members is, " By that time, Cohen says, some of his supporters were gone from the board". Why is the one that was contacted not referenced in the article and why were the other two not even interviewed? I want to know what those 3 board members have to say. I'm not sure I understand what you think is going to come of these board memebers. It appears to me when looking at it that its is a futher indictment of Cohen and not a path to exhonerate him.Board members have a fudicary repsonsibility to protect the organization and not the CEO of the organization. All the board members which are now gone, were recommended by Cohen to sit on the board. Dont forget this fact. Although Cohen's timeline is wrong, none of his 'supporters' left prior to him abruptly withdrawing his bid. But, the fact that he says his supporters were gone from the board in my opinion seems to be an admission that he did not recommend those board memeber with the best of intentions. In hindsight maybe, he placed them there to protect his interest and maybe have them help him mask his activity. This seems to show a little forethough, or maybe pre-mediation on Cohens part that he felt he had to have supporters on a board. It is something i never thoughto of before, but maybe something that should be considered. Maybe he thought he could get his way regardless of its legality? Should not board members support the laws and charter of the non-profit.It is my personal feeling when i see a pix on facebook of one board member sitting in Mitchs lap at a bar and others comment underneath, Oh look its the Overload, Maybe its time for them to go becasue its obvious they are not there for the non-profits best interest, which is what board members are compelled to do.This is all in my own opinion.Anyway, these people were ask to leave or voted out because of their lack of committment to the non-profit best interest goals. Two left because they could not meet the time commitments, two were asked to leave, and subsequently voted out. Nothing more nothing less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsplay Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I'm not sure I understand what you think is going to come of these board memebers. It appears to me when looking at it that its is a futher indictment of Cohen and not a path to exhonerate him.Board members have a fudicary repsonsibility to protect the organization and not the CEO of the organization. All the board members which are now gone, were recommended by Cohen to sit on the board. Dont forget this fact. Although Cohen's timeline is wrong, none of his 'supporters' left prior to him abruptly withdrawing his bid. But, the fact that he says his supporters were gone from the board in my opinion seems to be an admission that he did not recommend those board memeber with the best of intentions. In hindsight maybe, he placed them there to protect his interest and maybe have them help him mask his activity. This seems to show a little forethough, or maybe pre-mediation on Cohens part that he felt he had to have supporters on a board. It is something i never thoughto of before, but maybe something that should be considered. Maybe he thought he could get his way regardless of its legality? Should not board members support the laws and charter of the non-profit.It is my personal feeling when i see a pix on facebook of one board member sitting in Mitchs lap at a bar and others comment underneath, Oh look its the Overload, Maybe its time for them to go becasue its obvious they are not there for the non-profits best interest, which is what board members are compelled to do.This is all in my own opinion.Anyway, these people were ask to leave or voted out because of their lack of committment to the non-profit best interest goals. Two left because they could not meet the time commitments, two were asked to leave, and subsequently voted out. Nothing more nothing less.It's probably best said if you post nothing at all. Your path of incredulous remarks is astounding. You come up with lunacy, mind numbing attacks that you think MC had a master grand plan. Who knew there were so many preposterous ways of thinking and then trying to pen them to others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.