Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 61
Like Tree5Likes

Thread: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

  1. #26
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    ROBERT MALPHURS

    ID Case Number: M-0351304
    Category: Criminal
    Last Name: MALPHURS
    First Name: ROBERT
    Middle Name: ALLEN
    DOB: 19520725
    City: DALLAS
    State: TX
    Charges Filed Date: 03312003
    Offense Date: 03172003
    Offense Code:
    Offense Desc: DWLS/INV
    Conviction Date:
    Source State: TX
    Source Name: Dallas TX Courts
    Court: MJ


    ROBERT MALPHURS

    ID Case Number: 6566122
    Category: Criminal
    Last Name: MALPHURS
    First Name: ROBERT
    Middle Name: ALLEN
    DOB: 19520725
    City:
    State:
    Charges Filed Date:
    Offense Date: 03/17/2003
    Offense Code: 54990012
    Offense Desc: DRIVING WHILE LIC INVALID
    Conviction Date:
    Source State: TX
    Source Name: TX Dept of Public Safety
    Court:

  2. #27
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall

    http://assets.ngin.com/attachments/document/0044/3462/USASA_Bylaws_-_2016.pdf
    Section 2.
    1) The Board of Directors may suspend, fine or terminate (or any combination thereof) the
    membership of any Organization Member of USASA if the Board of Directors determines
    that
    a) the conduct of the Organization Member is adverse to the best interests of soccer or
    USASA; or b) the Organization Member has not complied with the requirements of its membership
    in USASA. 2)

    The Board of Directors may
    act under subsection 1) a) of this section only after a hearing
    of which the Organization Member is given reasonable notice of the time and
    place by the Board of Directors and during which the Organization Member is provided a
    reasonable opportunity to present evidence in support of the Organization Member's
    position.
    US Youth By-laws say:
    ARTICLE VII 206 FEES AND DISCIPLINE 207
    208
    Section 1. Annual Fees. 209
    A. Organization Member. Each organization member shall pay to USYSA annual fees 210 recommended by the board of directors and approved by the National Council. 211
    B. Individual and Sustaining Members. The fees for individual and sustaining members 212 shall be as prescribed by the board of directors. 213

    Section 2. Suspensions and Terminations. 214
    A. Suspension. 215
    1. Failure to Pay Fees. Any member failing to pay any fees due USYSA shall be 216 provided written notice of the delinquency. If those fees are not paid within 30 days 217 after the date of the notice of delinquency, the delinquent member may be 218 suspended from membership in USYSA after a proper hearing pursuant to 219 Subsection 3B of this Article. The member shall be notified in writing of any 220 suspension and the date on which membership will be terminated if the fees remain 221 unpaid. 222
    2. Due to Litigation. 223
    (a) Any person participating in a USYSA program, or in a program of a state 224 association or a program of a member of a state association, who becomes a 225 defendant in litigation detrimental to the welfare of youth players or litigation 226 based on activities detrimental to the welfare of youth players, shall be 227 suspended from all soccer-related activities. Suspensions under this bylaw shall 228 be determined by the appropriate state association or the USYSA Board of 229 Directors.
    Matters detrimental to the welfare of youth players shall include, but 230
    September 1, 2014 Page 7


    not be limited to, crimes of moral turpitude and felonies.
    The person has a right 231 to appeal the suspension only over whether the matter which is the substance of 232 the accusation, if true, is detrimental to the welfare of youth players. 233
    (b) On completion of the litigation, the suspended person may inform the body 234 suspending the person under Subsection 2A2(a) of this Article that the litigation 235 has been completed and request that the suspension be terminated and the 236 person reinstated. The suspending body may grant the request of the person or, 237 if the decision of the litigation was adverse to the person, may continue the 238 suspension for a period specified by the suspending body, fine the person, 239 terminate all membership of that person with the suspending body and its 240 members, or any combination of those authorized penalties. 241
    B. Termination. 242
    1. The membership of a state association may be terminated by the National Council 243 for cause by a two-thirds vote of the National Council. 244
    2. If the membership of a state association is terminated either by resignation from 245 USYSA or under Subsection 2A1 or Subsection 2B1 of this Article, USYSA shall 246 immediately undertake actions to replace that organization with another 247 organization having the same USYSA jurisdiction as the organization whose 248 membership is terminated. That replacement organization may include an 249 organization established and temporarily operated by USYSA. 250
    3. The board of directors may terminate the membership of a sustaining member as 251 prescribed in Section 3A of this Article. 252

    Section 3. Suspension, Termination and Other Penalties. 253
    A. The board of directors may suspend, fine, terminate and/or impose any other penalty 254 on any member of USYSA, if the board determines that: 255
    1. the conduct of the member is adverse to the best interests of soccer or USYSA;
    or 256
    2. the member has not complied with the requirements of its membership in USYSA. 257
    B. The board of directors may act under this Article only after a hearing, reasonable 258 notice to the member of the time and place of the hearing, and providing the member 259 with a reasonable opportunity to present evidence in support of the member’s position. 260

    Section 4. Effect. A suspension or other disciplinary action imposed by USYSA in accordance 261 with these bylaws shall be recognized by all members of USYSA on notification by USYSA. 262 Suspensions and other disciplinary actions imposed by members of USYSA shall be 263 recognized by USYSA and all other USYSA members on proper notification to USYSA. 264
    265


    From: John Sutter [mailto:john.sutter@CoVerica.com]
    Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 3:32 PM
    To: 'Heather'
    Cc: jsutter@usyouthsoccer.org; 'egill@usyouthsoccer.org'; Chris Moore (cmoore@usyouthsoccer.org); 'Rob Martella'; 'Todd Roby | US Youth Soccer'; bpodewils@usyouthsoccer.org; jharrell@usyouthsoccer.org; 'squreshi@usyouthsoccer.org'
    Subject: Heather Dobrott vs. Garland Soccer Association / David Arciniega

    Dear Ms. Dobrott:

    I apologize for the delay in responding to your initial email.

    As the traditional application of the Bylaw you cited has previously been used almost exclusively in response to filed criminal actions, we are currently evaluating the civil suit against Garland Soccer Association and David Arciniega for Bylaw applicability and jurisdiction.

    As we do not have a corporate General Counsel, I ask your indulgence for the time involved in our review process.
    I expect the review to conclude in the very near future.

    Sincerely,

    John

    John Sutter
    Chairman
    US Youth Soccer
    jsutter@usyouthsoccer.org
    www.usyouthsoccer.org
    North Texas State Soccer Association (501 c 3 over Garland Soccer Association) says:
    2.2.6 Jurisdiction
    This Association shall have jurisdiction over all Member Associations’ administrators, referees, coaches, assistant coaches, managers registered players and teams affiliated with it. Each Member Association shall retain its own autonomy, but will adhere to its Bylaws and Rules and Regulations and will comply with the authority of the (North Texas State Soccer) Association. If the Association is presented sufficient evidence that a Member Association is not adhering to its Bylaws and Rules and Regulations, the Association may form a committee to investigate the allegations and make recommendations to the Executive Committee to correct the infraction(s). If gross misuse of funds, misapplication of Bylaws, or misapplication of rules and regulations is discovered, the Member Association shall be declared not in good standing and given sixty (60) days to correct the situation, or the (North Texas State Soccer) Association may take more immediate action if deemed necessary by the Executive Committee.


    Why are North Texas and their board members Larry Hall and David Arciniega not facing a thorough investigation and facing the music? Why are Garland Soccer, Denton Soccer, North Texas Premier Soccer and more being NOT being held accountable according to the by-laws?

  3. #28
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    2007
    SIERRA SEED INC
    STE 135
    11520 N CENTRAL EXPY STE 135
    DALLAS, TEXAS 752436607
    1: HILL HAVEN HEITHS
    2: LOT 4 MIDBURY DRIVE
    3:
    4: INT200600266892 DD07202006 CO-DC
    5: 7278 001 00400 1007278 001
    Deed Transfer Date: 7/21/2006
    2006 MALPHURS ROBERT A
    7706 MIDBURY DR
    DALLAS, TEXAS 752303212
    1: HILL HAVEN HEITHS
    2: LOT 4 MIDBURY DRIVE
    3:
    4: VOL98197/7435 CO-DALLAS
    5: 7278 001 004 1007278 001
    Deed Transfer Date: 10/8/1998



    Drowning in federal and state tax liens for years and this foreclosure begs the question of why someone who is in desperate financial straights is spending time working for a registered charity for decades when they need to be earning a living? NTSSA needs to better vet its volunteers and they need to set strict parameters for who is eligible to volunteer.

  4. #29
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    Who is Most Likely to Commit Fraud at Your Company?

    September 2, 2010 - AUSTIN, Texas-- A fraud suspect might not be easy to pick out of a crowd -- or from a rap sheet.

    The average fraud perpetrator has no prior fraud charges or convictions, according to new research by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE), the world's largest provider of anti-fraud training and education...

    Behavioral red flags, tenure at an organization, position and educational background are all criteria examined in the ACFE's 2010 Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud & Abuse....

    High-level perpetrators cause the greatest damage to their organizations. Frauds committed by owners/executives were more than three times as costly as frauds committed by managers, and more than nine times as costly as employee frauds. Executive-level frauds also took much longer to detect.
    Fraud offenders were likely to be found in one of six departments. More than 80 percent of the frauds in the study were committed by individuals in accounting, operations, sales, executive/upper management, customer service or purchasing....

    Most of the fraudsters in the study had never been previously charged or convicted for a fraud-related offense.....
    Fraud perpetrators often display warning signs that they are engaging in illicit activity. The most common behavioral red flags displayed by the perpetrators in our study were living beyond their means (43 percent of cases) and experiencing financial difficulties (36 percent of cases)....

    "Fraudsters exhibit behavioral warning signs of their misdeeds," said ACFE President James D. Ratley, CFE. "It's important to remember that this human element of fraud -- demonstrated in red flags such as living beyond one’s means or exhibiting control issues -- is not identified through an audit or other traditional controls.

    "This is why the staff at any organization should be trained to recognize these and other common behavioral signs that a fraud might be occurring," Ratley said. "Moreover, they should be encouraged not to ignore such red flags, even when discovered by accident, as they might be the key to detecting or deterring a fraud."....

    Contact the ACFE
    For more information, email PR@ACFE.com.
    The court docs so far made available make it obvious that the board of North Texas Premier Soccer does not know about the land and the financial issues surrounding that. Larry Hall and David ARciniega are also on the North Texas State Soccer board. God only knows what is going on there!

    Garland Soccer is run in the same shroud of secrecy. I was constantly viciously attacked because I demanded proper documentation on money missing in Garland Soccer. David Arciniega tried to push through a very public No Confidence vote against me because I went to the Garland Police and North Texas State Soccer about the issues and I dared to support a more qualified candidate that ran against him. Garland Soccer is an atmosphere of intimidation and harassment due to David Arciniega. The Garland board was barred by Arciniega from seeing bank statements, check stubs, Jevin Sports Management Software internal financial records and other documents that would have proven what happened to the missing money. David Arciniega hid everything from the board and the Quicken books pages could not be substantiated. What does a public charity have to hide?

    Thanks to David Arciniega lying to the Garland Police and stopping their investigation in 2013 another 19 charities have had late or missing payments totaling more than $400,000.00 from Jevin and numerous reports to the authorities have been made. Shockingly David Arciniega is still forcing Garland Soccer to use that vendor.

    With these obvious questions over the land and finances in NTPSA and Garland why has the North Texas State Soccer board not stepped in and taken jurisdiction and thoroughly investigated all these issues? Time for the local associations to look at their options. South Texas select has gone with US Club and North Texas groups are following suit. I have also heard wonderful things about AYSO. North Texas is hopelessly inept, mismanaged and corrupt as they continually protect possible wrongdoers and never follow their own by-laws and investigate. Folks like David Gray and I who have morals and conviction are left to fight this corruption in court because North Texas can't resolve its own issues. Beyond ridiculous!

    St. Petersburg Little League one of several nationwide missing money | Tampa Bay Times

    Management Company Gives Little Leaguers Run-Around - Athletic Business










  5. #30
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    https://www.501c3.org/avoiding-conflicts-of-interest/
    The board is responsible for the governance of the organization, while employed individuals are responsible its management and operation. As stated in our last article on board members, having an individual be responsible for both of these roles is not long-term best practice. Even board members who are not serving an additional role can present a conflict of interest to the organization. For instance, if a board member’s relative is to be hired by the organization, the related board member must recuse themselves of voting on the hiring and compensation amount for their relative (a relative in this case is the same as listed above). Additionally, a conflict of interest is created if the organization chooses to use services provided by a board member’s for-profit entity. If an organization does intend to use such services, it must provide documentation showing the for-profit entity is the best option for the organization, and services must be provided at a fair value (if not below market value).
    Insider-owned land, buildings, vehicles, or equipment that is being used by the organization present a conflict of interest. At a minimum, the insider must recuse themselves of any discussion or decision-making. Unless donated, the IRS may require proof that the transaction is in the best interest of the nonprofit, which as mentioned in the above paragraph, will require research and documentation.
    North Texas Premier Soccer's response to a BBB complaint is quite telling:
    2) The league is poorly managed.

    Ms ****** has not attended any of our Board meetings to our knowledge nor reviewed our staff so to state we are poorly managed is in error. Our General Manager recently was awarded the Regional Administrator of the year and has served the league for the past 30 years. The all volunteer board manages to register, schedule and administrate 186 teams each season, which is the second largest adult soccer league in the country, for over 40 years so I believe we are extremely well managed.
    The Best Practices for a Conflict of Interest in a Nonprofit | Chron.com
    Nepotism

    Influential board members might try to obtain jobs for spouses or children, leading to the perception that you are not staffing your organization with the most qualified professionals. This can lead to questions about pay and benefits and whether they are appropriate for a nonprofit. Set parameters for hiring board members’ relatives, which could include a ban.
    The board of directors of a nonprofit should be independent.... The Internal Revenue Service defines independent individuals as those:
    • who are not compensated by the organization as an employee or independent contractor;
    • whose compensation is not determined by individuals who are compensated by the organization;
    • who do not receive, directly or indirectly, material financial benefits from the organization except as a member of the charitable class served by the organization; and
    • who are not related to (as a spouse, sibling, parent or child), or do not reside with, any individual described above.

    A nonprofit may not lend money to, or guarantee an obligation of, a director or officer of the corporation.
    https://www.theguardian.com/voluntar...rsity-trustees
    ...We in the charity sector need to ask ourselves some difficult questions about how we recruit the people who are responsible for our organisations. If we are going to prevent further high-profile collapses of charities such as Kids Company and avoid wasting millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money, we urgently need to stamp out poor recruiting practices.






    I have the following questions for charity sector leaders:

    • Would you build a team made up of friends and family without ensuring they had the right skills and knowledge?


    • Would you forgo proper recruitment procedures and induction?


    • Would you allow someone to continue in a role with no proper assessment of their performance?


    • Would you ignore social, demographic and ethnic diversity when recruiting ?

    Most charity leaders would of course answer no, but the reality is that this sort of practice is common when charities appoint trustees. .
    How can cronyism be stopped?
    It is shocking how many trustee boards are still built in the image of their existing chair, recruited via a tap on the shoulder of friends and colleagues. Research by the Charity Commission four years ago showed that more than half of all trustees are recruited in this way and many charities overrule their own policies regarding trustee terms.
    Charities should be publicly accountable for their recruitment procedures and for declaring conflicts of interest. Charities need to adhere to the terms of service established for trustees, with no exceptions. Extended trustee terms are at odds with the basic principles of effective leadership. We need fresh input and new thinking to ensure the ongoing health of the charity sector....
    The only paid employee is Larry Hall's wife who has run this deal for thirty years. That means there are no checks and balances and that Larry Hall, Andi Hall (Andrea Hall) and Robert Malphurs (the joint owners of Premier Park and the men being arguably the two most powerful board members) have been running this charity way too long unchecked. What about that premier Park land, the loan, the questions about ownership, the financial records that are not matching up, the lack of transparency and more?

    Cronyism is also alive and well in NTPSA and Garland Soccer. Robert Malphurs was the original incorporator for NTPSA 39 years ago. Larry Hall and his wife Andi have been there for about 30 years. David Arciniega has run Garland soccer for over a decade as the numbers plummeted from 4500 players to way less than 2000 under his corrupt administration. Elections in Garland have been proven to be dirty for years. Referees were brought in with proxies having already been told who they had to vote for (when only 1 vote is allowed per registered team and they should not have been voting at all.) I was publicly attacked with a No Confidence vote that David Arciniega pushed forward because I dared to speak in support of a far more qualified candidate running against him. Garland Soccer only needs to have 10% of its voting head coaches present to hold an election an once again this winter they had to call and beg people to come in so that they could hold their election. The coaches in Garland have given up as they know they have no say in their own charity. It is time for new blood in both these charities!

    This is where we must question why North Texas State Soccer doesn't investigate and doesn't properly train new board members in their very heavy and serious responsibilities. NTSSA is totally failing us!

  6. #31
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    https://trust.guidestar.org/blog/201...e-term-limits/

    4. It Allows Removal of Bad Board Members


    I saved this reason until near the end because of the possible negative connotation. Any of us who have been part of more than one board knows it is more or less inevitable a few less than adequate board members will emerge.
    How do we define less than adequate board members? Here are a few:

    • Their meeting attendance is poor
    • They are not active with any board related committees
    • They are not good ambassadors in any manner
    • They seldom volunteer or attend any NPO events
    • They do not donate at the proper level
    • They are disruptive in meetings
    Term Limits for Nonprofit Boards

    Posted by Laura Otten, Ph.D., Director on August 6th, 2009

    In response to a recent blog, I was asked the following question: What is your opinion on term limits for board members and officers? Opinions are one thing of which I have no shortage. So, be careful what you ask!...

    1. If you are doing all the work you are supposed to be doing as a hard working board member—in other words, if you are truly assuming the full array of your board member responsibilities—you get tired. And after six or nine years of service, and two or three consecutive terms of two or three year terms seems to be the norm, you should be a very tired board member in need of a vacation...

    2. Boards need new blood, energy and, perhaps most important, perspective and ideas if they want their organizations to flourish. Which means boards need new board members.

    3. What an organization needs on its board in terms of expertise, connections, demographics, and intrinsic qualities is not static...

    4. Just because a board member rotates off the board after serving one to the maximum number of terms allowed does not mean that you are throwing that board member away, saying good-bye and good riddance. Quite the contrary. Smart organizations have ways to keep those good, hard working board members engaged once their term limit is up.....

    6. Boards must avoid the pitfall of dismissing ideas with “We’ve tried that before.” Trying something 10 years before is not the same as trying it today, when neither the organization nor the environment in which it is operating should be the same. Boards populated by individuals who have that institutional memory to remember what was tried—or dismissed without trying—10, 15, 40 years ago—hold organizations back.

    7. All of what has been said above applies equally to board officers. They get tired, leaders need to be innovative, aware, calculated risk takers, etc. I’ve seen too many board presidents who have been in office for too long kill the enthusiasm of boards, hold organizations back, squash new ideas. Being a good board leader, particularly the president, requires hard work. Burn out can come quickly to a board.....
    http://www.ntxsoccer.org/assets/pdfs...Point_2011.pdf
    Duty of care requires director to be informed, including obligation to make
    reasonable inquiries…No RED FLAGS!!!
    ...... When asked why the change, the
    Executive Director informs the board that it is too
    complicated to explain, the loss will not happen
    again, and that the board should take his word for it
    that all will be well. Without further discussion the
    board unanimously accepts the Executive Director’s
    statements. Any problems?....


    What if all of the other directors
    completely disagree with you, snarl at
    you, and make you eat lunch alone?......


    Duty of Candor
    Duty to disclose to the corporation material facts relating to anything of significance to
    the corporation. Duty is affirmative

    no one has to ask
    Disclosure must be full and fair…….
    http://www.tn.gov/attorneygeneral/no...tguidebook.pdf

    Best practices to assist you in carrying
    out your responsibilities include:

    Attending board meetings and meetings of committees on which you serve. Make certain that you receive detailed information beforehand about matters that are going to be discussed and voted on at a meeting, especially the financial reports and financial statements of the nonprofit.

    Carefully reading all the material you receive, asking questions, and being active in board discussions. It is important to know how the organization is functioning and understand the specific purposes and mission of the nonprofit. Be informed about every major action that the nonprofit takes, and be proactive about reviewing materials in a timely manner.

    Using your own judgment in voting and not simply following the lead of the
    chief executive officer, chairperson of the board, or fellow board members. A responsible board member will ask about the reasons for recommending a particular action and the consequences, good and bad, such action will bring.


    Participating in strategic planning activities that assess and plan for the
    nonprofit organization’s future. Ask about the status of the nonprofit’s internal controls and about written policies and procedures that protect the nonprofit from error, fraud and embezzlement.

    Inquiring whether the nonprofit has a directors and officers liability policy and whether the nonprofit indemnifies its directors and officers from liability.

    Reviewing board or committee minutes to make certain that the meetings and votes were properly recorded. If there are errors in the minutes, ask for clarifications or changes….

    The officers and board members of a nonprofit, even when serving in a volunteer or part-time capacity, must be well-informed, hold regular board and committee meetings, maintain accurate minutes of those meetings , encourage open discussion, and pursue the nonprofit’s mission and best interests with determination. One of the responsibilities of a board member is to make certain that the nonprofit operates in a fiscally sound manner, has mechanisms in place to keep it fiscally sound, and is properly using any restricted funds it may have. If, as a board member, you do not have adequate information, you have the right to get it. Officers have the responsibility to provide it…..

    In order to carry out your responsibilities as a board member, you must be able to make informed judgments about important matters affecting the daily operation of the nonprofit organization and how it affects the community it serves. The law permits you to reasonably rely on information from the nonprofit organization’s staff, its lawyer, its accountant, outside advisors, and board committees in making those judgments. If you don’t have adequate information, request and obtain it. Officers have a duty to provide this information to the board.

    http://www.mass.gov/ago/docs/nonprof...rd-members.pdf


    You should attend board meetings and meetings of committees on which you serve.

    You should make sure that you receive detailed information beforehand about matters which are going to be voted on at a meeting.

    • You should carefully read all of the material which you receive and prepare yourself to ask questions.

    You should use your own judgment and not simply take the word of your CEO or fellow board members.

    II. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION
    In order to carry out your legal responsibilities as a board member or trustee, you must be able to make informed judgments about important matters affecting the organization. The law permits you to reasonably rely on information from the organization’s staff, lawyer, auditor, outside advisors, and board committees in making those judgments. If you do not have adequate information, you have the right to get it.
    IN SHORT:
    You should be aware of and informed about every major
    action the charity takes.
    http://www.texasbar.com/Content/Navi...Excellence.pdf

    How’s Your Culture? Developing a Climate of Inquiry
    By Marilyn Cavicchia

    At the same time they’re making sure all the relevant policies are up to date and on file, bars and other nonprofits should also take a hard look at their overall culture, said Nancy Axelrod, a consultant and principal at Washington, D.C.-based Nonprofit Leadership Services, who spoke at the ABA Bar Leadership Institute in March. Is the bar a place where elected leaders and staff are encouraged to ask questions—including the tough ones? Or is there a culture of “passivity and groupthink”?

    The results of such “passivity and groupthink” can be devastating, she added, citing a study that found that companies such as Enron and Tyco had boards that met all the benchmarks that were then standard in terms of size, codes of ethics, and financial expertise.

    Looking great on paper is not the same as doing a great job, Axelrod noted, adding that at these companies, it was possible to follow all the rules but not add much in the way of organizational intelligence (reliance on the organization’s values and mission) and contextual intelligence (awareness of what’s going on in the world, such as social changes).

    “The problem is, we don’t often tap that wisdom,” said Axelrod, recalling her own early experience on a college board. She was excited at first, but soon found herself wondering, “What material difference has my presence made at this board meeting?”

    To the list of fiduciary duties—duty of care, duty of loyalty, and duty of obedience—Axelrod would like to add what she called a “fourth D”: the duty of curiosity. In trying to be polite and achieve consensus quickly, she said, many boards don’t wholeheartedly invite or don’t allow sufficient time for questions and dissent.

    Ideally, the president will know how to run a meeting in which all the board members are engaged and participating—which is what the fiduciary duties require, and also what board members themselves often expect. The problem, said Paul Greeley, president of Ashburn, Va.-based Association Consulting Services, who also spoke at the BLI session, is that not every leader inherently has these particular skills.
    “Just because you’re outstanding in your field doesn’t mean you’ll be outstanding at running a board meeting,” he noted. This is one reason it’s essential for the president and the executive director to have a strong relationship that includes honest discussion and a shared understanding of best practices, Greeley and Axelrod said: It helps set the tone for the rest of the bar, including the board and how it will work as a group.

    Also important, they said, is to realize that getting a good grasp on proper governance practices and procedures is not a one-time task. With all the different issues that can come up, the dramatic ways the board can change from one year to the next, and the still-evolving understanding of best practices for nonprofits, board members need opportunities to revisit and refresh their knowledge throughout the year.

    “Governance is a process,” Axelrod noted. “Keep learning.”

    Want to learn more? The materials from this BLI session are at
    www.abanet.org/barserv/bli/2007/axegreeletgovernanceplenary.pdf


    Term limits are an absolute necessity. David Arciniega and his longtime cronies went after me with a No Confidence vote as he is running Garland Soccer as a dictatorship and new members with expertise and experience that come in ready to address serious issues are not welcomed. The Garland Soccer board members that come in new generally bail very soon. They have no idea what their responsibilities are and it is a hostile and exclusionary environment. David Arciniega made very damaging statements about other board members and warned us about cliques when we came on the board when he and his cronies are in fact the problem clique. The board is run by a handful of longtime David Arciniega supporters who constantly scream that there must be a "united front." United against who? An us versus everyone else mentality has evolved and fiduciary duties as defined in state law have been totally flouted. Conflict, secrecy and intimidation are the characteristics of the board David Arciniega totally dominates. What is it like in the stagnant North Texas State Premier Soccer Association?

  7. #32
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    Soccer fields or pool at Premier Park?















  8. #33
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    From July 3rd 2016 Dan Ptak owner of Jevin quoted (his source undoubtedly had to be David Arciniega of Garland Soccer and NTSSA Chairman of Coaching Education as one can surmise from this lie-filled and vicious attack on me. Folks angrily decry me posting the facts and commenting, but look at the outright lies and misinformation that David Arciniega and his supporters are spouting:

    Most of you have been approached by a person making unfounded claims and accusations against Jevin.
    Really, Ptak??? Quote any false statements of fact (you know, something that would be actionable) and refute them. Simple enough right?
    To the best of our knowledge, neither Jevin nor any Jevin employee has ever had any interaction, conversation or email exchange with that person.
    So, Dan Ptaks mad salesman, Charlie M., didn't tell Ptak that he talked to me for an hour and 13 minutes? Charlie referenced this very thread and said it was making it hard for him to sell Jevin. I suggested he get documentation on all the issues raised here. David Arciniega said and published:
    1. www.realscam.com/attachments/f12/14448d1467385645-jevin-inc-dan-ptak-online-sports-organization-management-software-david-arciniega-garland-soccer-chargebacks-executive-committee-minutes-30-june-2013.pdf
    ...The amount owed to GSA from Jevin for the missing deposits from the spring 2013 season and tournament is over $8k. Representing Jevin, Dan Ptak called Sam Perry on June 10th and reported that the slow deposits to GSA were due to Corduro, the payment processor used by Jevin. Dan said that Jevin accepted responsibility for the missing deposits and promised to provide the missing funds to GSA, even if that meant taking out a loan. Dan said he expected to have the loan by the end of June. He also said that Jevin was changing their payment processor from Corduro to Chase

    On June 28th, Dan Ptak called Sam Perry with a new proposal. Dan offered to reduce the fee charged by Jevin as a way to repay the missing deposits from the Spring 2013 season, and then to provide a reduced fee for subsequent seasons. Dan offered to reduce the fee to 5% for the fall 2013 season, then to 8% for the spring 2014 and all subsequent seasons. The same fees would apply to both the recreational player registration and tournament for that season. The savings to GSA would at least $7k for the upcoming fall 2013 season and then about $3k for each season after that.....
    David Arciniega claimed in September 2013 at the Coaches Meering:
    GSA receives it largest income from the registration fees so all income must match the data in the Jevin System daily. Jevin/online provider owed GSA $8,061 (in June 2013) which was paid in full to GSA as of August 20th. To compensate GSA for this delay, Jevin will lower its rates resulting in additional revenue for GSA. Litigation is on-going between the online provider (Corduro) and Jevin so additional information may not be divulged per the North Texas lawyers.
    3. David Arciniega claimed at the July 2013 board meeting that Jevin (hence the 501 c 3 charities its serves) was actually missing $50,000.00 because of Corduro (the payment processor.)
    Jevin Inc. / Dan Ptak / Online Sports Organization Management Software / David Arciniega / Garland Soccer / Chargebacks

    The "ongoing" litigation was never filed. So, did Dan Ptak or David Arciniega lie about that gem? And, I spoke to the president and CEO of Corduro at length. He said no litigation was filed or even threatened for that matter and that no police investigations or anything of that nature transpired. I don't believe that Corduro is the likely culprit for the $50,000.00 story that David Arciniega was blathering about.

    We are thankful and fortunate that most of our customers do not always believe what they read on the internet. Thank you to everyone who has called in asking for the real story behind the emails…and thank you for your continued loyal support while we defend ourselves.
    Folks should seek full, verifiable documentation. Garland Soccer was refused documentation by its president and Dan Ptak's buddy, David Arciniega.

    The factual details of this issue date back to 2013 when the author of the emails was defeated in a general election for an age-group director board position with Garland Soccer Association (GSA).
    2013 is when Garland went from late payments to the 8 grand referenced already. I demanded full documentation and Dan Ptak's buddy, David Arciniega refused to produce any documentation whatsoever. We saw no financial records from Jevin, check stubs, financial statements, court records, etc. I was pushed off the board in December 2014 because I was demanding that David Arciniega and his clueless flunkies follow state law concerning fiduciary duties, IRS regulations and the bylaws of Garland Soccer and our parent organizations North Texas State Soccer. There were many serious issues going on in GSA and one of them was David Arciniega forcing Garland Soccer to continue to use Jevin with all the financial issues and software issues going on. Retention of Jevin is addressed in the lawsuit.

    The author’s response was to file a lawsuit against GSA, the president of GSA and the North Texas Soccer Association (later dropped from the suit).
    Scandal / Corruption Garland Soccer Association / US Youth Soccer / North Texas State Soccer / David Arciniega That is the original petition that was filed. North Texas State Soccer Association (NTSSA) is not listed as a defendant. So, Dan Ptak has reading comprehension issues in the extreme or has been talking to his buddy, David Arciniega, the president of Garland Soccer and NTSSA's Chairman of Coaching Education (North Texas State Soccer Board Member.) NTSSA was never a party to the suit at all, so I could hardly have dropped them! NTSSA as the parent organization that has the power to take jurisdiction over GSA did receive a courtesy copy of the suit beforehand as I wanted to resolve the issues and keep kids and money safe and see Garland Soccer be able to move forward successfully.

    The lawsuit requested over $100,000 in monetary damages – yes monetary damages – because the claimant failed to win an election for a volunteer board position.
    Dan Ptak needs to talk to a competent attorney (not his clown of a friend, David Arciniega) about why a monetary demand would be made in a lawsuit. Numerous people besides Ptak are claiming I file lawsuits to make money and rumors are flying. There is not a scintilla of evidence to support that and absolutely no truth to that, but David Arciniega and or his followers are desperate to discredit me.
    Let me reiterate, the suit does NOT include Jevin and neither Jevin nor any Jevin employee has ever been deposed or subpoenaed….the issue is strictly between the author and GSA.
    That all remains to be seen.

    Since there was no real basis for a claim, the author listed nearly 100 bullet items alluding to improprieties within GSA. Those articles ranged from ‘one time, one person….’ to two items that listed Jevin.
    Those bullet items you are talking about are from the original petition filed on 3/6/2015 and are in reality the items requested as discovery that you are probably referring to. David Arciniega is still ducking discovery even though he lost the Plea to Jurisdiction and knows the lawsuit is going forward (despite him publicly telling the Garland coaches that my suit had no merit and would be thrown out in June 2015.) Wrong again, Arciniega! Motions to Compel and whatever else is needed will be filed. I can prove that David Arciniega lied in the discovery responses as I have the other end of numerous e-mails and other docs that prove it conclusively. David Arciniega also failed to turn over documents that he admitted the had that were responsive. He is trying to spend me into oblivion and endlessly drag out this suit. Very dirty tactics! I will be seeing this suit to the finish and then work to establish a safe, transparent and quality soccer program in Garland for our precious kids.

    The first Jevin item claimed that the GSA president was an employee of Jevin – this is a false statement…the GSA president has never been an employee of Jevin and has never been paid by Jevin.
    Dan Ptak best read the suit in its entirety.

    The second item alleges that Jevin did not pay GSA all of the money due to GSA – this is also grossly untrue.
    The facts have been posted publicly for quite some time in this very thread. Jevin Inc. / Dan Ptak / Online Sports Organization Management Software / David Arciniega / Garland Soccer / Chargebacks The money being recovered through a discount is hardly a secret. The issue is there is no documentation to back up all of the claims by David Arciniega such as Corduro being responsible for the money issues, Jevin being unable to get a loan for 8 grand, a total of $50,000.00 being missing from several charities and Jevin having been in ongoing litigation with Corduro due to all this.

    So why is this person emailing all of Jevin’s customers making these false statements and what does she hope to gain from this? No one really knows and there is no rational explanation. At a minimum, it appears to be a desperate cry for attention.
    I was on the board of a charity out money and no documentation was ever provided to substantiate any of the issues surrounding that. I was told by GSA President, David Arciniega, that fellow sports charities were out 50 grand due to Corduro. I am not going to sit back quietly and let charities lose money when they are struggling to serve our precious children and knowing that many of these families really sacrifice to see that their kids can participate. And, again quote and refute said false statements and provide all of the documentation related to the financial issues for the past decade with Jevin. What is the secret?

    The only other theory is that since her original suit with GSA was dismissed by one court, maybe this is a misguided attempt to try and find something in her suit with GSA that might hold up in the new court filing.
    My suit against GSA has never been dismissed. Again, I have to assume that Dan Ptak has been talking to his buddy David Arciniega. I did file amended petitions (a quite common practice, I might add.) If there had been a suit dismissed, there would be a complete case file online and an original petition, answer by the defendants, a motion to dismiss and an order from the judge at a minimum would be in that record. Never happened. The records in Dallas county are all online and one can click on the links here and see documents for more recent cases for free! There are 4 results for my name, Dobrott, Heather. This case, Tim Darnell of Advantage Conferences suing me, me suing Tim Darnell and then an issue with some work on our home.

    Other than that, no logical person can begin to understand why attempting to discredit a company and its owner would provide any benefit to her. But, as many of you have already pointed out, if you do your research on this person, you will find that she has a very long history of filing suits against nearly everyone for nearly every reason. This appears to be yet another one of those imprudent undertakings.
    In addition to those 4 cases I helped an elderly rep to sue Advantage Conferences / Tim Darnell and to cut out the attorney fees I assumed her claims and represented myself in district court to finish that case. I was sued in Ohio by Don Allen Holbrook along with half of the planet (other journalist, newspapers and all the taxpayers in Texas that dared to comment in the failed billion dollar Earthquest theme park that will cost the Texas taxpayers 24 million for bupkis.) All these suits except the home repair issue are related to my volunteer work on Realscam.com to protect taxpayers and consumers.

    Why hasn’t Jevin responded sooner? We have been diligently exploring all of the various options that are available to Jevin. I am not allowed to get into specific details but we were waiting for a certain event to occur. We have now initiated efforts on all fronts. If you happen to receive any further communication regarding Jevin, please forward that to me so I can dispatch that information to the proper people.
    Please forward this to Ptak with all due haste and include the hundreds of postings made since discussing the 19 leagues that have had late or missing payments from Jevin just in 2016 that totaled over $400,000.00. The tens of thousands in chargebacks have frozen all of Jevin's accounts according to Dan Ptak himself.

    What can you do? Until the legal system has time to work, I ask that you continue to contact us with any questions you have about any of the wild and exaggerated claims. I might also suggest that you ask to be removed from the mailing list so that you no longer have to deal with the emails from this person.
    Are you, Dan Ptak, saying that you are filing suit against me? File quick! I want discovery yesterday on all these issues. I will get financial records and well... pretty much everything other than your used toilet paper. Are you suggesting David Arciniega lied? If so, then you will naturally be called as a witness in my suit against him and Garland Soccer and be sinking your buddy in court big time. If you are saying David Arciniega was correct about you claiming to be unable to get a loan, being out $50,000.00 due to Corduro, you being in ongoing litigation against Corduro (a lie as obviously there was never an ongoing lawsuit in 2013,) and that going to Chase for payment processing would solve all these payment issues, then you are again winning my lawsuit for me as it is obvious David Arciniega should not have forced Garland to retain Jevin. I am the top dog either way.

    Some of you have probably received an email in the past day or two (June 2016) referencing a news story from Utah. The actual facts of that situation are that Jevin mistakenly setup a bank transfer account that resulted in Jevin sending the funds for one organization to a sister organization’s bank account (same bank – different account number). While it was clearly a mistake on Jevin’s part, Jevin did everything possible to rectify the situation immediately once it was discovered. Jevin even offered to pay for uniforms via a Jevin credit card. The offers for immediate resolution were declined and the organization turned to the media (not the police) making claims that the funds were stolen. I have spoken with their local police department and since the organization did not contact the police until two days after they reached out to the media, the police are still investigating and, contrary to what you have been told, no charges have been filed. The sister organization has since transferred the funds and Jevin has transferred the remaining balance so the organization is paid in full. In fact, the organization now owes Jevin over $7,000.
    4 media outlets covered the story:
    Wasatch football league unsure about season after money disappears | KUTV

    Youth football league says company collected about $45,000 in fees but won’t give them the money | fox13now.com

    Sky View Youth Football league accuses software firm of misplacing $45K | The Herald Journal | news.hjnews.com

    Sky View Youth Football's missing registration fees under police investigation - CacheValleyDaily.com : Local News

    Of course, this explains why that group has been fighting valiantly to get paid since the beginning of May, right, Ptak? And, this explains the 11 other groups reporting payment issues in May and June 2016 alone, rightio? Some of those have reported being paid as is shown below, but they fought hard to chase you down, Ptak.

    I spoke to 2 of the reporters directly and talked to the other media outlets news tip people. All of them now have a copy of this letter. After several days of leaving messages, I caught a representative from the Sky View Football program in the story that made time to update me on this fiasco. They claimed that Ptak never informed them he had paid, nor did he bother to contact the media outlets and inform them so that they could update their stories on this fiasco. They had all been chasing Dan Ptak down.

    The football group had filed a formal report with the police and it was in fact being investigated. After they filed they heard nothing from Dan Ptak and certainly never heard anything about any "offers for immediate resolution" as Ptak is bragging about from what I was told. They also instructed all of their parents to use the police report number to initiate chargebacks from what I understand. They had to spend money on legal fees as well. So, they spent two months in hell thanks entirely to Jevin. Now, it will get comical for Jevin as the company will have to accurately document the money involved in the chargebacks and probably pay more in fees to fix that huge mess. And, the football league received no notification of over-payment yet either. They noticed the payment of money owed entirely by accident and of course immediately closed that account and opened a new one as they are changing software providers.

    Reported Losses Due to Jevin in 2016:

    19 groups with late or missing payments totaling over $400,000.00 and numerous reports to the authroities!

    I have requested updates, so I will continue to correct this as they come in.

    St. Petersburg Little League one of several nationwide missing money | Tampa Bay Times

    Management Company Gives Little Leaguers Run-Around - Athletic Business

    St. Pete Little League struggling to get by, owed $35,000 | WFLA.com


    I want to thank you again for you continued loyalty and support and ask that you do not hesitate to contact me with any questions.

    Regards,

    Dan Ptak
    President, Jevin Inc.
    www.jevin.net
    972-396-0078
    Funny, those who weren't getting their money on time went through hell trying to get a response. Dan Ptak being clueless enough to parrot what I am sure he was fed by David Arciniega says it all!!! What kind of nonsense is going on in the North Texas Premier Soccer Association and what is their board saying about that suit? I will never be silenced as I know how dirty it is behind the scenes and public charities can only be kept on the right track when there is transparency and good constructive criticism!

  9. #34
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    David Arciniega and Garland Soccer have lost every round in court for two years now. The judge obviously sees that Garland Soccer and NTSSA (North Texas State Soccer Association) are totally unwilling and unable to follow their own by-laws and provide due process, much less follow state law and resolve very serious issues that are of public concern. The real question is why NTSSA is ineffective, unresponsive and corrupt. Why is NTSSA not stepping into these lawsuits and getting the issues addressed and resolved?

    PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO ABATE Page 1
    CAUSE NO. DC-15-02572 HEATHER DOBROTT, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF § Plaintiff, § § v. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS § GARLAND SOCCER ASSOCIATION, § INC. and DAVID ARCINIEGA, § § Defendants. § 95th
    JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO ABATE
    TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COMES NOW, Plaintiff, Heather Dobrott, and files Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Abate. In support of this Response, Plaintiff would show the Court as follows:
    OVERVIEW
    Defendants claim that this case should be abated to require Plaintiff to exhaust her internal “remedies” with Defendant Garland Soccer Association (“GSA”) including appeals, if necessary, to North Texas State Soccer Association (“NTSSA”). Defendants’ Motion to Abate should be denied for the following reasons: 1.
    Lack of Meaningful Access:
    At all pertinent times, Plaintiff has lacked meaningful access to the internal remedies Defendants seek to have Plaintiff exhaust. GSA and NTSSA have failed and refused, despite Plaintiff’s repeated efforts before filing this lawsuit, to hear and make a decision on Plaintiff’s complaints at issue in this lawsuit. In short, GSA and NTSSA have already failed and refused to address Plaintiff’s complaints via the internal remedy process. Therefore, Plaintiff’s lack of meaningful access to the internal remedies of GSA and NTSSA is an exception to any requirement that Plaintiff must exhaust her internal remedies with GSA and NTSSA.
    2.
    Lack of Feasibility:
    At all pertinent times, it has not been feasible for Plaintiff to avail herself of the internal remedies set out in the GSA Bylaws. GSA does not have and has not had an Appeals & Disciplinary Committee (“A&D”) as required by their own Bylaws and Rules. Pursuant to the GSA Bylaws and Rules, the GSA A&D Committee is required to hear Plaintiff’s complaints at issue in this lawsuit. Since no A&D Committee exists at GSA, it is impossible and not feasible for Plaintiff to exhaust her internal remedies with GSA. 3.
    Waiver:
    Defendants have waived any right to abatement by not timely bringing the abatement issue before this Court for a ruling. In the alternative and in the event this Court is of the opinion that this case should be abated, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court to specify and order the procedures and deadlines for the internal remedy process in accordance with due process and the governing corporate documents of GSA and NTSSA. Without an Order specifying the procedures and deadlines for GSA and NTSSA to afford Plaintiff her internal remedies, Plaintiff believes that GSA and NTSSA will ignore Plaintiff’s complaints, refuse to hear Plaintiff’s complaints, and fail to provide Plaintiff with due process to address her complaints as GSA and NTSSA have already repeatedly done. Plaintiff also respectfully requests that Defendant GSA specify all “internal remedies” which it contends that Plaintiff must exhaust, including any appeals, for each of her complaints set out in Section 4 (a)-(g) of the Facts below.
    FACTS
    1. Plaintiff is a former U6 Girls Director of GSA. She is also a former team manager of a GSA team, former coach of a GSA special needs player, and the parent of a former GSA player. 2. GSA was formed to create and maintain a soccer program for the residents of Garland, Texas. GSA is a non-profit corporation. 3. Pursuant to the Bylaws and Rules of GSA and NTSSA, (a) GSA is a member of NTSSA; (b) GSA is required to comply with the Bylaws and Rules of NTSSA; (c) GSA is under the jurisdiction of NTSSA, including matters regarding GSA’s misuse of funds and
    misapplication of applicable Bylaws and Rules; and (d) all administrators, team managers, team members, and participants in GSA are under the jurisdiction of NTSSA. 4. Plaintiff complied with her fiduciary duties to GSA by reporting, complaining about, and questioning the following incidents, misconduct, and ethical violations which were contrary to GSA Bylaws and Rules, contrary to public policy, and which adversely affected GSA and its property (i.e., GSA registration monies) and the safety of GSA’s players who are minors: (a) GSA misused GSA funds when Arciniega continued to retain Jevin, GSA’s software provider for GSA scheduling and registration. Jevin handles all the registration monies of GSA. GSA continued to retain Jevin despite the fact that over $8,000.00 of GSA’s registration money was missing while said funds were under Jevin’s control.
    (Prior to filing this lawsuit, Plaintiff complained about Jevin to both GSA and NTSSA and received no hearing, findings or decision regarding her complaint. See Exhibit “D” attached hereto.)
    (b) GSA’s retained a GSA Director whose husband is a Level 2 sex offender and convicted felon who had access, through his wife the GSA Director, to rosters and other records of GSA players who are minors. GSA, through David Arciniega, did not comply with the applicable Whistleblower Policy. Instead, GSA and Arciniega disclosed to the convicted felon and Level 2 sex offender and his wife, the GSA Director, that Dobrott had disclosed the husband’s public criminal record to GSA and NTSSA.

    (Prior to filing this lawsuit, Plaintiff complained about this child safety issue to both GSA and NTSSA and received no hearing, findings, or decision regarding her complaint. See Exhibit “E” attached hereto.)
    (c) GSA kept its Board Meetings secret and did not publish its Board Member Reports to the members of GSA contrary to applicable GSA Bylaws and Rules.
    (Prior to filing this lawsuit, Plaintiff complained about these issues to GSA and received no hearing, findings, or decision on these issues as required for Plaintiff to appeal to NTSSA. See Exhibit “F” attached hereto.)
    (d) In 2014, GSA Director, Angela Bowen-Hearn, missed seven of the previous twelve Board Meetings contrary to GSA Bylaws and Rules. Rather than handle the complaint confidentially under the GSA Whistleblower Policy, Arciniega informed Angela Bowen-Hearn that Dobrott had reported Ms. Bowen-Hearn for missing Board meetings.
    (Prior to filing this lawsuit, Plaintiff complained about these issues to GSA and received no hearing, findings, or decision on these issues as required for Plaintiff to appeal to NTSSA. See Exhibit “G” attached hereto.)


    FILED
    DALLAS COUNTY
    8/25/2016 10:25:52 AM
    FELICIA PITRE
    DISTRICT CLERK
    Last edited by Soapboxmom; 01-01-2017 at 05:19 PM.

  10. #35
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    (e) GSA misused proxies which resulted in irregularities and illegalities in GSA elections for 2012, 2013, and 2014.
    (Prior to filing this lawsuit, Plaintiff complained about this issue to GSA and received no hearing, findings, or decision on this issue as required for Plaintiff to appeal to NTSSA. See Exhibit “H” attached hereto.)
    (f) Arciniega filed a meritless, arbitrary, and capricious A&D Charge against Dobrott which was heard by the GSA Board and not the A&D Committee as the GSA Bylaws and Rules require for “instructing in the placement of a new coach, along with his sons, to an existing team without following proper procedures.” There were no findings issued by GSA on this A & D Charge.
    (Prior to filing this lawsuit, Plaintiff complained about these issues to NTSSA and received no hearing, findings, or decision on these issues. See Exhibit “I” attached hereto.)
    (g) Arciniega was the complainant on a “No Confidence Petition” against Dobrott which was meritless, arbitrary and capricious and which was filed against Dobrott in retaliation for Dobrott supporting the candidate running against Arciniega in the 2013 spring GSA election.
    (Prior to filing this lawsuit, Plaintiff complained about these issues to GSA and received no hearing, findings, or decision on these issues. See Exhibit “J” attached hereto.)
    5. Article VI, Section 2.1 of the GSA Bylaws in effect at all pertinent times require that GSA have an Appeals and Disciplinary (“A&D”) Committee composed of the Vice President as Chairman and four (4) Association Coaches in good standing. See Exhibit “A” attached hereto.

    The GSA Rules provide many specific duties of the A& D Committee as set out in Exhibit “B” attached hereto. The A & D committee of GSA has not heard any of Plaintiff’s complaints in this lawsuit which are set out in section 4 (a)-(g) above. 6. The NTSSA appellate procedures are set out in Section 3.11.9 of the NTSSA Rules, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “C.”
    ARGUMENT
    1.
    Defendants’ Motion to Abate should be denied for the reason that Plaintiff lacked meaningful access to the internal remedies of GSA and NTSSA because GSA and NTSSA have failed and refused to hear and make a decision on Plaintiff’s complaints despite Plaintiff’s repeated requests prior to filing this suit.
    A claimant is not required to exhaust internal remedies where there is a lack of meaningful access to the internal remedies procedures. Smith v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of
    Wisconsin
    , 959 F.2d 655, 659 (7
    th
    Cir. 1992). Here, Plaintiff made repeated efforts to avail herself of GSA and NTSSA’s review of each of her complaints at issue in this case with no success. Before Plaintiff filed this lawsuit, both GSA and NTSSA ignored Plaintiff’s complaints, refused to hold a hearing or grant Plaintiff due process regarding her complaints, and refused to make any findings on Plaintiff’s complaints. Specifically, Plaintiff made complaints to both GSA and NTSSA on the various issues before this Court, and both GSA and NTSSA refused to act as shown on Exhibits D – J attached hereto. Because Plaintiff had no meaningful access to the internal remedies process of GSA and NTSSA, Defendants’ Motion to Abate should be denied. 2.
    Defendants’ Motion to Abate should be denied because GSA at all pertinent times did not have an A&D Committee hear Plaintiff’s complaints as required by GSA’s own Bylaws and Rules.
    Futility is a recognized exception to the requirement that a claimant must exhaust administrative remedies.

    Ogletree v. Glen Rose Ind. School Dist.
    , 314 S.W. 3d 450, 454 (Tex. App. – Waco 2010 pet. denied);
    see also, Smith v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield United of Wis.,
    959 F.2d 655, 659 (7
    th
    Cir. 1992);
    Dawson Farms, LLC v. Farm Serv. Agency,
    504 F.3d 592, 606 (5
    th
    Cir. 2007);
    Gardner v. School Bd. Caddo Parish,
    958 F.2d 108, 111-12 (5
    th
    Cir. 1992). GSA’s internal remedies process is described in Exhibits “A” and “B” attached hereto. This process expressly requires that the GSA A&D Committee hear Plaintiff’s complaints. GSA does not have and did not have an A&D Committee to hear Plaintiff’s complaints as required by GSA’s own Bylaws and Rules. Therefore, it is not feasible for GSA to provide Plaintiff with the internal remedies guaranteed by its own Bylaws and Rules. Further, Courts have held that a private association, such as GSA, must afford its members due process.
    Masonic Grands Chapter of Order of Eastern Star v. Sweatt,
    329 S.W.2d
    334, 337 (Tex. Civ. App. – Fort Worth 1959, writ refused, n.r.e.);
    Hatley v. AM. Quarter Horse Ass’n,
    552 F.2d 646, 655 (5
    th
    Cir. 1977). The essential elements of due process are notice and an opportunity to be heard and to defend in an orderly proceeding adapted to the nature of the case.
    Sweatt
    at 337. Here, GSA’s own Rules and Bylaws set out the due process to which Plaintiff is entitled. Because GSA cannot follow this process since it has no A&D Committee, it is not feasible for Plaintiff to exhaust her internal remedies. Therefore, Defendants’ Motion to Abate should be denied. 3.
    Defendants’ Motion to Abate should be denied because Defendants have not timely brought the abatement issue before this Court for a ruling on abatement and, therefore, have waived abatement.
    Defendants have waived any right to abatement by not timely bringing the abatement issue before this Court for a ruling. Specifically, this case was filed on March 6, 2015, over seventeen months ago, and is set for trial on October 31, 2016. Defendants have conducted discovery on the merits of this case and have obtained a ruling from this Court on a Motion to Dismiss. By their dilatory conduct, Defendants have waived any right to abatement in this case. If Defendants were really concerned about abating this case for Plaintiff to exhaust her internal remedies, Defendants would have brought this issue to the Court for a ruling long before now. Defendants’ request for abatement is simply a delay tactic by Defendants and should be denied.

    4.
    In the event that this Court is of the opinion that abatement should be granted, this Court should order procedures and deadlines for the internal remedy process in compliance with due process and the corporate documents of GSA and NTSSA.
    GSA and NTSSA have already repeatedly ignored, refused to hear, and failed to provide Plaintiff with due process to address her complaints as shown in Exhibits D – J attached hereto. However, in the event this Court is of the opinion that this case should be abated for Plaintiff to exhaust her internal remedies, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court to order as follows:.....

  11. #36
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    Please find following excerpts Exhibit D:

    From: David Crawford [mailto:projsocc@yahoo.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 9:45 PM
    To: 'David Messersmith'; 'Heather'; 'David Crawford'; 'Chris Kotschi'
    Cc: 'Billy Babcock'
    Subject: RE: Garland Soccer Association Financial Accountability

    Heather,
    I have reviewed your information and will discuss this with a couple of our Board members to determine how we want to address your request.
    David Crawford
    NTSSA VP-Development

    From: David Messersmith [mailto:david@ntxsoccer.org]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 3:25 PM
    To: 'Heather'; David Crawford; Chris Kotschi
    Cc: Billy Babcock
    Subject: RE: Garland Soccer Association Financial Accountability

    Heather,
    We are in receipt of your email complaint. I do not know if David Crawford is in town right now. When he is available he will determine what action, if any, that North Texas Soccer will pursue. Neither Chris Kotschi or myself are in a position to make that determination. We will hold the information until we hear from Mr. Crawford. Thanks for your work on this and it will be addressed soon.
    David M

    From: Heather [mailto:garlandsoccerrocks@gmail.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 5:29 PM
    To: David Crawford; David Messersmith; Chris Kotschi
    Cc: jsutter@usyouthsoccer.org
    Subject: Garland Soccer Association Financial Accountability

    Dear North Texas board members and office staff,

    I am respectfully requesting that North Texas exercise jurisdiction over the Garland Soccer Association and conduct a thorough investigation into the missing funds. It is also imperative that the phony charges filed against me and the U12 director and the no-confidence vote (brought against me for seeking proper documentation related to the missing funds and taking the appropriate action by reporting these missing funds to the proper authorities) be evaluated in relation to their validity and adherence to proper protocol and procedure as prescribed in our by-laws.

    2.2.6 Jurisdiction
    This Association shall have jurisdiction over all Member Associations’ administrators, referees,
    coaches, assistant coaches, managers registered players and teams affiliated with it. Each Member
    Association shall retain its own autonomy, but will adhere to its Bylaws and Rules and Regulations
    and will comply with the authority of the Association. If the Association is presented sufficient
    evidence that a Member Association is not adhering to its Bylaws and Rules and Regulations, the
    Association may form a committee to investigate the allegations and make recommendations to the
    Executive Committee to correct the infraction(s). If gross misuse of funds, misapplication of
    Bylaws, or misapplication of rules and regulations is discovered, the Member Association shall be
    declared not in good standing and given sixty (60) days to correct the situation, or the Association
    may take more immediate action if deemed necessary by the Executive Committee.

    Please see the accompanying documents attached. Note the executive committee completely and unnecessarily bypassed the board. They agreed to a discount on future withholdings by Jevin to repay over $8,000.00 of missing payments from the spring 2013 soccer season. Jevin, already had a history of late payments and issues. The payment processor Corduro was the convenient scapegoat for this missing money without a shred of documentation to substantiate that they were in any way responsible. The story that Jevin couldn’t get a loan to pay GSA the money owed is beyond laughable. That suggests that Jevin has serious financial concerns as they cannot qualify for a small business loan among many other possibilities.

    Another director pointed out the obvious at our monthly meeting in July 2013. This whole financial issue is fraud plain and simple. The first step (which I in fact took) should have been to go to authorities as it cost nothing and was personally recommended to me by my licensed attorney and a forensic fraud investigator. When I took that proper step of going to our local police, I was attacked by the board and David Arciniega told the police and the board that any talk of these missing payments was “unfounded.” What we have been writing and saying about Corduro, for months without any verifiable documentation amounts to libel and slander. And, reduced fees do not address the critical issue of who was responsible for the late and missing payments to begin with and why anyone might wish to cover up that problem.

    The second page of the attachment shows Jevin’s glowing testimonial about Corduro. They claim they are getting funds the next day from Corduro. Next, I have included my August board report. I documented in writing the information we had been given by David Arciniega. In July when I asked for more information about the missing payments from Jevin, David Arciniega went on about $50,000.00 in losses he claimed Jevin suffered due to Corduro. I was horrified to think other non-profits and businesses might have been harmed and continue to face losses due to Corduro and that GSA was taking no action. I questioned why Jevin didn’t go to the authorities and why they were filing a court case in lieu of a free investigation by the police. I also questioned how Jevin could fund a court case if they couldn’t pay GSA the 8 grand owed or even qualify for a loan. I am very concerned that we are continuing to do business with Jevin when we have no verifiable documentation about any of this.

    The November General Coaches Meeting minutes follow. Following is the quote of what David Arciniega said at the September meeting:

    “GSA receives it largest income from the registration fees so all income must match the data in the Jevin System daily. Jevin/online provider owed GSA $8,061 (in June 2013) which was paid in full to GSA as of August 20th. To compensate GSA for this delay, Jevin will lower its rates resulting in additional revenue for GSA. Litigation is on-going between the online provider and Jevin so additional information may not be divulged per the North Texas lawyers.”

    Why is this misinformation being sent out to our coaches? Board members have asked for proper documentation for months and none has been forthcoming. The president and executive committee members must be aware at this juncture that the court case is pure fiction. I need the contact information for the North Texas lawyers to be forwarded to me immediately, so that any records they have related to this financial fraud can be accessed by the GSA board members seeking clarification on this matter. The GSA board must make decisions based on verifiable fact and not rumor, innuendo and hearsay.

    I checked with Collin County (where Jevin is located), Dallas County and Tarrant County (where Corduro is based) and confirmed there was never any action filed. Knowing that, I went to Corduro to get their side of the story as should have been done by the leadership of GSA in the beginning. The CEO and president of Corduro, Robert Ziegler, generously offered to speak with me and respond to my request for information in writing. Said correspondence is attached. Mr. Ziegler indicated that Jevin and Corduro had parted ways amicably a year ago. He stated that Corduro does not owe Jevin any money, much less the $50,000.00 claimed by David Arciniega. Jevin never threatened or filed any litigation against them. And, no investigations by law enforcement were conducted to his knowledge. So, GSA, David Arciniega and NTSSA by association have been libeling and slandering Corduro and frankly we are fortunate that Mr. Ziegler is not pursuing any litigation against us at this time in light of the wild tales that have been told regarding his company.

    The actions of the GSA president and executive committee defy logic. We are a charitable organization and everything we do should be well documented and completely transparent. We are to be the good stewards of the funds of the families of Garland that come to us. I have been asking for open meetings and proper documentation, all of which constitutes normal procedure and ordinary care for a board member that is executing their legal obligations and duties. Our president is still advising people they are not welcome at board meetings and operating this public charity under a veil of secrecy.

    To allow continual harassment and retaliation against board members that are making ordinary and necessary request for proper documentation related to financial and other matters is reprehensible and must be addressed. The phony charges and No Confidence vote filed against me are nothing but a dirty tactic employed by our president and vice president to scare off board members who ask questions and demand that business be conducted openly and above board.

    I have no intention of tolerating any more nonsense and will get my attorney and the media involved if I am subjected to any further abuse and retaliatory measures. That is precisely why I have come to North Texas for help. The GSA board is no longer able to fulfill its mission with the secrecy, lies, and misinformation being spread. This board and office cannot function when members and employees fear reprisal and retaliation by the leadership when they are simply trying in good faith to carry out their jobs. We have a board where members are afraid to stand up and do the right things as the leadership has made it clear what will happen to those who ask too many questions or don’t follow the wishes of the president.

    Again, I respectfully request a full investigation into the financial dealings within GSA and the obvious attempts at bullying and harassing board members who are working hard to serve our member families. We board members come from various professions and backgrounds and a scandal involving financial fraud would seriously harm our personal reputations and even our livelihoods in some cases. This issue effects the good standing of GSA and North Texas and needs to be addressed immediately. I look forward to your response by the 23rd please.

    Thanks,

    Heather Dobrott
    U6 Girls Director for the Garland Soccer Association

    From: David Crawford [mailto:projsocc@yahoo.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 9:45 PM
    To: 'David Messersmith'; 'Heather'; 'David Crawford'; 'Chris Kotschi'
    Cc: 'Billy Babcock'
    Subject: RE: Garland Soccer Association Financial Accountability

    Heather,
    I have reviewed your information and will discuss this with a couple of our Board members to determine how we want to address your request.
    David Crawford
    NTSSA VP-Development

    From: David Messersmith [mailto:david@ntxsoccer.org]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 3:25 PM
    To: 'Heather'; David Crawford; Chris Kotschi
    Cc: Billy Babcock
    Subject: RE: Garland Soccer Association Financial Accountability

    Heather,
    We are in receipt of your email complaint. I do not know if David Crawford is in town right now. When he is available he will determine what action, if any, that North Texas Soccer will pursue. Neither Chris Kotschi or myself are in a position to make that determination. We will hold the information until we hear from Mr. Crawford. Thanks for your work on this and it will be addressed soon.
    David M

    From: Heather [mailto:garlandsoccerrocks@gmail.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 5:29 PM
    To: David Crawford; David Messersmith; Chris Kotschi
    Cc: jsutter@usyouthsoccer.org
    Subject: Garland Soccer Association Financial Accountability

    Dear North Texas board members and office staff,

    I am respectfully requesting that North Texas exercise jurisdiction over the Garland Soccer Association and conduct a thorough investigation into the missing funds. It is also imperative that the phony charges filed against me and the U12 director and the no-confidence vote (brought against me for seeking proper documentation related to the missing funds and taking the appropriate action by reporting these missing funds to the proper authorities) be evaluated in relation to their validity and adherence to proper protocol and procedure as prescribed in our by-laws.

    2.2.6 Jurisdiction
    This Association shall have jurisdiction over all Member Associations’ administrators, referees,
    coaches, assistant coaches, managers registered players and teams affiliated with it. Each Member
    Association shall retain its own autonomy, but will adhere to its Bylaws and Rules and Regulations
    and will comply with the authority of the Association. If the Association is presented sufficient
    evidence that a Member Association is not adhering to its Bylaws and Rules and Regulations, the
    Association may form a committee to investigate the allegations and make recommendations to the
    Executive Committee to correct the infraction(s). If gross misuse of funds, misapplication of
    Bylaws, or misapplication of rules and regulations is discovered, the Member Association shall be
    declared not in good standing and given sixty (60) days to correct the situation, or the Association
    may take more immediate action if deemed necessary by the Executive Committee.

    Please see the accompanying documents attached. Note the executive committee completely and unnecessarily bypassed the board. They agreed to a discount on future withholdings by Jevin to repay over $8,000.00 of missing payments from the spring 2013 soccer season. Jevin, already had a history of late payments and issues. The payment processor Corduro was the convenient scapegoat for this missing money without a shred of documentation to substantiate that they were in any way responsible. The story that Jevin couldn’t get a loan to pay GSA the money owed is beyond laughable. That suggests that Jevin has serious financial concerns as they cannot qualify for a small business loan among many other possibilities.

    Another director pointed out the obvious at our monthly meeting in July 2013. This whole financial issue is fraud plain and simple. The first step (which I in fact took) should have been to go to authorities as it cost nothing and was personally recommended to me by my licensed attorney and a forensic fraud investigator. When I took that proper step of going to our local police, I was attacked by the board and David Arciniega told the police and the board that any talk of these missing payments was “unfounded.” What we have been writing and saying about Corduro, for months without any verifiable documentation amounts to libel and slander. And, reduced fees do not address the critical issue of who was responsible for the late and missing payments to begin with and why anyone might wish to cover up that problem.

    The second page of the attachment shows Jevin’s glowing testimonial about Corduro. They claim they are getting funds the next day from Corduro. Next, I have included my August board report. I documented in writing the information we had been given by David Arciniega. In July when I asked for more information about the missing payments from Jevin, David Arciniega went on about $50,000.00 in losses he claimed Jevin suffered due to Corduro. I was horrified to think other non-profits and businesses might have been harmed and continue to face losses due to Corduro and that GSA was taking no action. I questioned why Jevin didn’t go to the authorities and why they were filing a court case in lieu of a free investigation by the police. I also questioned how Jevin could fund a court case if they couldn’t pay GSA the 8 grand owed or even qualify for a loan. I am very concerned that we are continuing to do business with Jevin when we have no verifiable documentation about any of this.

    The November General Coaches Meeting minutes follow. Following is the quote of what David Arciniega said at the September meeting:

    “GSA receives it largest income from the registration fees so all income must match the data in the Jevin System daily. Jevin/online provider owed GSA $8,061 (in June 2013) which was paid in full to GSA as of August 20th. To compensate GSA for this delay, Jevin will lower its rates resulting in additional revenue for GSA. Litigation is on-going between the online provider and Jevin so additional information may not be divulged per the North Texas lawyers.”

    Why is this misinformation being sent out to our coaches? Board members have asked for proper documentation for months and none has been forthcoming. The president and executive committee members must be aware at this juncture that the court case is pure fiction. I need the contact information for the North Texas lawyers to be forwarded to me immediately, so that any records they have related to this financial fraud can be accessed by the GSA board members seeking clarification on this matter. The GSA board must make decisions based on verifiable fact and not rumor, innuendo and hearsay.

    I checked with Collin County (where Jevin is located), Dallas County and Tarrant County (where Corduro is based) and confirmed there was never any action filed. Knowing that, I went to Corduro to get their side of the story as should have been done by the leadership of GSA in the beginning. The CEO and president of Corduro, Robert Ziegler, generously offered to speak with me and respond to my request for information in writing. Said correspondence is attached. Mr. Ziegler indicated that Jevin and Corduro had parted ways amicably a year ago. He stated that Corduro does not owe Jevin any money, much less the $50,000.00 claimed by David Arciniega. Jevin never threatened or filed any litigation against them. And, no investigations by law enforcement were conducted to his knowledge. So, GSA, David Arciniega and NTSSA by association have been libeling and slandering Corduro and frankly we are fortunate that Mr. Ziegler is not pursuing any litigation against us at this time in light of the wild tales that have been told regarding his company.

    The actions of the GSA president and executive committee defy logic. We are a charitable organization and everything we do should be well documented and completely transparent. We are to be the good stewards of the funds of the families of Garland that come to us. I have been asking for open meetings and proper documentation, all of which constitutes normal procedure and ordinary care for a board member that is executing their legal obligations and duties. Our president is still advising people they are not welcome at board meetings and operating this public charity under a veil of secrecy.

    To allow continual harassment and retaliation against board members that are making ordinary and necessary request for proper documentation related to financial and other matters is reprehensible and must be addressed. The phony charges and No Confidence vote filed against me are nothing but a dirty tactic employed by our president and vice president to scare off board members who ask questions and demand that business be conducted openly and above board.

    I have no intention of tolerating any more nonsense and will get my attorney and the media involved if I am subjected to any further abuse and retaliatory measures. That is precisely why I have come to North Texas for help. The GSA board is no longer able to fulfill its mission with the secrecy, lies, and misinformation being spread. This board and office cannot function when members and employees fear reprisal and retaliation by the leadership when they are simply trying in good faith to carry out their jobs. We have a board where members are afraid to stand up and do the right things as the leadership has made it clear what will happen to those who ask too many questions or don’t follow the wishes of the president.

    Again, I respectfully request a full investigation into the financial dealings within GSA and the obvious attempts at bullying and harassing board members who are working hard to serve our member families. We board members come from various professions and backgrounds and a scandal involving financial fraud would seriously harm our personal reputations and even our livelihoods in some cases. This issue effects the good standing of GSA and North Texas and needs to be addressed immediately. I look forward to your response by the 23rd please.

    Thanks,

    Heather Dobrott
    U6 Girls Director for the Garland Soccer Association
    972 496-3649


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From: Chris Kotschi [mailto:Chris@NTXSOCCER.ORG]
    Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 5:41 PM
    To: 'Heather'
    Cc: David Crawford; Chris Kotschi
    Subject: RE: Garland Soccer Association Financial Accountability
    Importance: High

    Heather,
    I have received your complaint and have read through it as well as give it some serious consideration. I wanted to follow back up with you to let you know I have not forgotten it. I also wanted to clarify a few areas.

    I have tried to distance myself from the subject and contemplate both sides’ arguments without talking with either party or consulting anyone else. The matters you raise are rather serious and also a bit conflicting. On one hand you allege there are missing funds which is a serious allegation while at the same time requesting an overturn of a decision obviously made against you 6 months ago. While it may seem these issues coincide, they are two separate matters.

    Your letters mention both 8k and 50k as amounts in question. If I understood completely the 50k had nothing to do with GSA. In the attached correspondence there was acknowledgement of payments having not been received until a payment plan had been arranged and accepted. Is it your assertion these funds were never recovered and payments have not been made? Or is your argument the Board overstepped its authority in accepting an alternative payment arrangement? The allegation of missing funds is a serious matter. In the correspondence you attached, I do not see any clear substantiation of your claim. Do you have other material which should be considered, or have I misunderstood your intent?

    Any such claim, investigation, or hearing on this matter would not run the same course as the decision to remove you from office, so I’m trying to determine whether you wish to move forward. To my knowledge, that decision was not appealed, so I feel as though I may have missed something. Please clarify these items for me as well as your intent so I can determine the most suitable course for your complaint.

    David Crawford
    NTSSA VP-Development
    North Texas should be demanding documentation from David Arciniega. They refuse to follow their by-laws and investigate and that is why the lawsuits abound.

    North Texas State Soccer Association (501 c 3 over Garland Soccer Association) says:
    2.2.6 Jurisdiction
    This Association shall have jurisdiction over all Member Associations’ administrators, referees, coaches, assistant coaches, managers registered players and teams affiliated with it. Each Member Association shall retain its own autonomy, but will adhere to its Bylaws and Rules and Regulations and will comply with the authority of the (North Texas State Soccer) Association. If the Association is presented sufficient evidence that a Member Association is not adhering to its Bylaws and Rules and Regulations, the Association may form a committee to investigate the allegations and make recommendations to the Executive Committee to correct the infraction(s). If gross misuse of funds, misapplication of Bylaws, or misapplication of rules and regulations is discovered, the Member Association shall be declared not in good standing and given sixty (60) days to correct the situation, or the (North Texas State Soccer) Association may take more immediate action if deemed necessary by the Executive Committee.
    North Texas is a total fail!

  12. #37
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    Exhibit G excerpts:
    On Dec 9, 2014 3:18 PM, "Heather Dobrott" wrote:
    Dear Madam Vice President,

    I am requesting an investigation into the use of proxies and formal charges for anyone who has abused the use of proxies in the last 3 years. For an example, I talked to a referee who will confirm that Gayle and Cliff Brandt gave him a proxy for the May 2012 election and that he was told he had to vote for Kim Verity to “help out.” Elections being rigged is a serious matter and needs to be thoroughly investigated. I trust that you are aware of the whistleblower policy and those that have violated it in the past.

    Thanks,

    Heather Dobrott


    The Appeals and Disciplinary Committee is responsible for the investigating, hearing and
    disposing of, in an equitable manner, all matters that are contrary to the By-Laws and Rules of
    the Association. All players, coaches, assistant coaches, team managers, parents, spectators,
    administrators, and others who are registered in GSAI and/or participate in soccer activities
    within the jurisdiction of Garland Soccer Association, Incorporated shall abide by the By-Laws
    and Rules of Garland Soccer Association, Inc., and will be subject to the decisions made by the
    GSAI A&D Committee.
    http://assets.ngin.com/attachments/d...olicy_2012.pdf
    From: Heather Dobrott
    Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 6:52 PM
    To: cquinones@ntxsoccer.org
    Cc: jcampbell@ntxsoccer.org; 'Billy Babcock'
    Subject: Garland Soccer Association Director Charged

    Dear NTSSA,
    I would like to request that formal charges be filed against David Arciniega, President of the Garland Soccer Association, and Kimberley Verity, VP and Chairman of the A & D Committee based on the following:


    1. I was brought up on charges as shown on pages 1-3 of the attachment. Clearly as this letter was sent registered mail by the A & D chairman it is an A & D hearing. This hearing was not heard in front of the A & D committee as specified in the GSA By-laws. I was brought before my fellow board members. Please see page 4 of the attachment which was given to all of the panel at the A&D hearing.
    2. The League Rules clearly state that “upon receipt of written notification, the A&D Committee shall conduct a confidential investigation by questioning any person with first hand knowledge of the facts. The investigation must include an interview with the accused unless it can be determined that no further action, including the preferring of the charge(s) is necessary or warranted.” Kim Verity’s committee did not interview me, Rachel Beltran, the coach who took the U12 boys team or his wife that handled the paperwork to get the player in question registered.
    3. It clearly states in the League Rules that one brought up on charges “will be subject to the decisions made by the GSAI A & D committee.” David Arciniega’s complaint against me was not heard by that committee, but rather the board of directors as a whole. So, any decisions made I should not be subject to as proper protocol and procedures were not followed.
    4. According to the NTSSA Appeals and Discipline manual “it is a requirement for the A & D Chairman to have enough knowledge of the situation at hand in order to select a fair and unbiased panel.” A hearing among fellow board members in what has become a hostile environment does not meet this requirement. The issue referenced in the charges against me has been discussed at board meetings and in e-mails. Please see pages 69, 70, 105 of the attachment. No one on that panel could possibly be unbiased.
    5. The NTSSA manual states “in matters where the A & D Chairman is unsure what the rights of the complainant or the accused are as to whether this should or should not justify a hearing, the NTSSA A&D Chairman may be consulted.” Did Kim Verity seek out counsel and advice on this situation from the NTSSA A&D Chairman?
    6. The NTSSA manual guarantees in the “Rights of the Parties” that the letter to the accused shall show the range of possible consequences should the charges be found true. My letter does not give the range of possible punishments as it should. Please see pages 1-3 of the attachment.
    7. The NTSSA Appeals and Disciplinary manual also admonishes that A & D Hearings should not be held at the same time as board meetings. That according to NTSSA and local Garland rules takes away the option of an appeal with the local board. I was brought before my fellow board members for the first hearing on this matter.
    8. The NTSSA manual further states that “no member (of the committee) should be involved in the circumstances being heard: nor in any way, closely associated with any of the involved parties. If necessary, alternate members should be available should such an involvement or affiliation exist.” Again the complaint was heard before the board where certain members are close and there is also tremendous hostility, and no alternative panelists were available.
    9. The specific charges they are completely bogus. I am accused of being involved in the instructing of placement of a new coach with his son in violation of our team formation rules. Our Frequently Asked Questions clearly state that if one would like to coach their child’s team that the child will be placed on their team with them. Please see page 24 of the attachment. We have an obligation to honor what is on the front page of our www.garlandsoccer.com website.
    10. The Frequently Asked Questions also state that a “player’s information is given to a committee that assigns players.” I have no control or involvement in player placement whatsoever. I do not know who is on the player pool committee or how to contact them. Please see page 23 of the attachment. How can I face charges for something I cannot possibly do?
    11. The antiquated Team Formation Rules, that have not been updated in over 5 years, state that “the formation of teams and solicitation of coaches and new players is the responsibility of GSAI Officers and Directors.” Please see page 25 of the attachment. If that is the case why was I brought up on charges when a new coach and his son came into GSA?
    12. The antiquated rules further state that “players will be assigned (rostered) to teams, at the age group director discretion, by one of these two methods:

    Use of a coordinating committee.
    Random draw by neighborhood schools by the coaches.” Again that is not the case. We have a player pool committee and the age group directors have no involvement in this whatsoever.
    These Team Formation Rules go on to discuss Directors placing players when we in fact have no involvement in that whatsoever. Please see page 26.

    1. The rule in the specific charges against me states, “in order for any person to request their child be transferred to a returning team they are coaching, they must have been the head coach of record for the previous two outdoor playing seasons, or asked to be the head coach of the returning team by a majority vote of the GSAI Board of Directors.” Since these rules are antiquated and do not at all reflect what we are doing I don’t see how they can be used as a means to bring me up on charges. Again, our Frequently Asked Questions clearly state that a child will be placed on the team their parent is coaching. Please see page 24 of the attachment.
    2. Please note the e-mail on page 34. The registrar contacts the age group director (Rachel Beltran) and asks her to find Dan Medina a team that his son could be placed on. There were not near enough players to form a new team. As my son is too ill to continue playing I was desperately searching for a coach to take over my team, the Pumas. The Pumas team was the only spot available in the U12 boys division.
    3. Please note the e-mail on page 54. I am asking for Trevor Medina’s uniform size as I saw in Jevin that he was placed on the team, but his name was not on the official roster yet. He was showing up in the uniform section and medical releases etc. He had landed there due to the player pool. Rachel Beltran and I were not involved in his placement in any way. He appeared on the official roster after his release from Richardson arrived in the GSA office.
    4. Please note from the e-mails that the board was having heated discussions concerning Joe Garcia having his daughter assigned to his team. The Dan Medina situation was brought up at two board meetings despite Kim Verity’s claim to the contrary. At the February 4th meeting I came in very excited that I had a coach to take over my team as my son was too ill to play. On February 20th when Joe Garcia’s daughter was discussed, Rachel Beltran mentioned Dan Medina and I spoke up about it as well before we voted. I believe this is why these charges were filed against me. I carefully considered what is on the GSA website and I voted and acted in the best interest of our coaches.
    5. Joe Garcia sent our two e-mails to the entire board before the charges were filed stating that Dan Medina had had his son placed on his existing team. Joe Garcia also forwarded the e-mail from Dan Medina to the entire board as noted on page 69. So, the board was already well aware of the conflict going on and was tainted. They could not step into the board hearing Kim Verity scheduled as an unbiased and fair panel to hear this issue.
    6. Please note the numerous e-mails where I request documentation concerning the team formation practices. David Arciniega sent a report to NTSSA in February about this exact rule and issue and I have not been given access to it. I was not given access to anything or a single piece of paper in response to my reasonable requests. Why is GSA hiding information from its directors? Please see pages 110-123 of the attachment.
    7. The board is having serious conflict over having open meetings as the e-mails show. Please see pages 50-54 in the attachment.
    8. The materials in question related to this filing have not been updated in five years even though we have radically changed the team formation practices using the Jevin software and an independent player pool committee for the last 4 years. NTSSA needs to address this lack of proper documentation. Please see page 119 of the attachment.
    9. It appears the Garland Soccer Board of Directors voted on Coach Dan Medina and his son after we were asked to leave the board meeting. How could there be any vote on those individuals when they were not given any kind of notification that their placement on the U12 boys Pumas team was in question? That is totally unethical.



    I respectfully request that NTSSA pursue charges against David Arciniega and Kimberley Verity. I believe a thorough review of the A&D hearings held by GSA is also in order in light of this situation. GSA offers no orientation or training to its new directors and its website and materials are not updated to reflect current practices. That needs to be addressed as well.

    Sincerely,
    Heather Dobrott
    U6 Girls Director
    From: Rachel Beltran
    Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 11:04 PM
    To: Heather Dobrott
    Subject: Re: NTSSA Hearing!

    What are you kidding me-OMG-I hope they take in consideration of Kali too-we will better be prepared-I get Barcelona Coach and Kix Coach-I will also get Amy form Texas Black Gold too bear wittness on unfair GSA is about-Need also to get the GSA board chastsed too for not looking themselves on how GSA bylaws, league rules, and web sitecontridicted each other. If tried to point it out-get bully or false charges against us-an mental angish!!!!
    Will Call you tomorrow
    YEAH!!!!!!!!!

    Rachel A Beltran
    Soccer Coach of:
    U19 Girls Panthers, U16 Girls Strypers and U14 Boys Cobras
    GSA

    From: Heather Dobrott
    To: 'Rachel'
    Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 10:18 PM
    Subject: NTSSA Hearing!

    Dear Rachel,

    Chris Kotschi called me from her office at 6:45. She thinks they will be scheduling a hearing for our cases as she has looked at the paperwork. She had not seen Kaeli’s appeal, but will ask for that and look at it tomorrow. She seemed quite surprised that we were not allowed to see David’s report to NTSSA about Kaeli and our team formation practices.


    Thanks,

    Heather
    The court docs don't explain that GSA must issue a decision letter on that A & D hearing as it is mandatory and puts Garland NOT in good standing as David Arciniega refused to issue it. Chris Kotschi was scheduling a hearing, but mysteriously it never happened.

    The GSA Vice President never pursued the dirty election issue and NTSSA ignores any complaints, grievances of appeals that it doesn't suit their fancy to take. Apparently, David Arciniega stops everything from going forward. NTSSA is totally dirty and corrupt!

    5.Member Associations will provide equitable and prompt hearing and appeal procedures to guarantee the rights of individuals to participate and compete and insure due process to the
    accused. In all hearings conducted, the parties shall be accorded:


    • a.Notice of all specific charges or alleged violations in writing and possible consequences if the charges are found to be true;



    • b.Reasonable time between receipt of the notice of charges and the hearing within which

    to prepare a defense;


    • c.The right to have the hearing conducted at a time and place so as to make it practicable

    for the person charged to attend;


    • d.A hearing before a disinterested and impartial body of fact finders;
    • e.The right to be assisted in the preparation of one’s case at the hearing;
    • f.The right to call witnesses and present oral and written evidence and argument; Notice


    of all specific charges or alleged violations in writing


    • g.The right to confront witnesses, including the right to be provided the identity of

    witnesses in advance of the hearing if requested;


    • h.The right to have a record made of the hearing if requested in advance, with all costs

    to be paid by the requester;
    i.
    A written decision, with the reasons for the decision, based solely on the evidence of
    record issued in a timely fashion and including appeal rights and procedures.
    j.

    Notice of any substantive and material action of the hearing panel in the course of the
    proceedings.


    • k.Equality concerning communications and no ex parte communication is permitted

    between a party and any person involved in making a decision or procedural
    determination except to provide explanations involving procedures to be followed.

    Honor all orders of suspension of persons issued by this Association or

    one of its Member Associations.

    6.Member Associations will, at all times, recognize the authority, rules, rulings, constitution and

    bylaws of the Association, which comply with the authority of the United States Soccer
    Federation, and its National Associations of which North Texas State Soccer Association is a
    member.
    7.Failure to comply with one or more of the Subsections 1–6 Section 2.1.3, will result in the

    Executive Committee determining the Member Association is not in good standing. Failure to
    be in good standing is further defined as meaning players and teams registered through the
    Member Association will not be allowed to participate in any tournament/event sponsored or
    sanctioned by NTSSA, nor will they be certified to play outside of the NTSSA in any games,
    tournaments or other competitions for which they might have been otherwise eligible. The
    Member Association may not vote on any matter at any meeting of the Association while it is
    not in good standing.

    8.A Member Association failing to meet any requirements of good standing for a period of sixty

    (60) days shall have its territory declared open and shall not be entitled to vote or to any

    protection, services or competitions of this Association.

  13. #38
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    My winning motion can be read in its entirety here:
    https://www.scribd.com/document/3222...otion-to-Abate

    Excerpts from Exhibit J follow. Please take note that the real reason for these lawsuits is that North Texas State Soccer Association (NTSSA) is not following its own by-laws and stepping in to help. It appears that David Arciniega and Larry Hall are untouchable because NTSSA is corrupt and actually protects them no matter how many by-laws and state laws concerning fiduciary duties they violate or how secretive and dishonest they are. North Texas State Soccer is not doing its job. The voting members can leave and go with US Club or AYSO or they could vote to dissolve the corporation and force Us Youth and USASA in to reorganize the disaster that is NTSSA.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: David Arciniega [mailto:darciniega@verizon.net]
    Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 11:15 AM
    To: 'David Arciniega'
    Cc: Angela Bowen-Hearn (U8 Boys Director); Crystal Martin (U6 Boys Director); Darcy Quintana (Publicity and Awards); Don Shell (Major League Director); Don Starkey (Facilities Director); Heather Dobrott (U6 Girls Director); Kathleen Robinson (Special Events); Kim Verity (Vice President); Piney Burch-Walser (U10 Director); Rachel Beltran (U12 Director); Robert Mayfield (Referee Director); Sam Perry (GSA Treasurer); Terry Walser (U8 Girls Director)
    Subject: Agenda for Tonight's meeting

    Board Members,

    I sent an email out last night to all our coaches informing them that the 'vote of no confidence' would not be addressed tonight.

    I would like to ask everyone to refrain from discussing this topic or anything related to this topic with anyone, especially, our members. The information discussed in the Board Room and/or provided in the petition should not be disclosed to anyone.


    Regards,

    David A. Arciniega
    Reading the earlier e-mails below prove that David Arciniega was required by the by-laws, but failed to mail out the No Confidence Petition. All of a sudden the contents of the petition are a secret. If it had to be public all along, why is Arciniega so desperate to keep it secret, especially from the charity (Garland Soccer's) members. The board represents and works for the members! And, another lecture on keeping his dirty board meetings secret as well.

    From: David Crawford [mailto:projsocc@yahoo.com]
    Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 6:04 PM
    To: 'Heather Dobrott'
    Cc: david@ntxsoccer.org; 'Billy Babcock'
    Subject: RE: Executive Committee Minutes

    Heather,

    As best I can I will try to answer questions about process without weighing on this matter neither toward one side or the other. I need to remain neutral since I may be involved in any potential appeal. In so doing, my answers may seem a bit curt which is not the intent.

    So long as they hit the timeline established in the GSA Bylaws, the process appears in accordance with proper parliamentary procedures (referenced by Robert’s Rules of Order, Ask.com, and/or the Center for Non-Profit management). If there is any variation to the timelines, I would suspect the complaint would be re-dated and started over.

    The complaint does not mention any theft or fraud unless I missed it, so I would caution you to only bring the subjects to light you feel are necessary for your defense. If a matter is potentially under pending litigation you have a fiduciary responsibility to keep the specifics of that information confidential.

    I was not involved in the hearing or matter on David Arciniega, so I cannot attest to any difference you may be experiencing.

    Please let me know how I may best be of service.

    David Crawford
    NTSSA VP-Development

    From: Heather Dobrott [mailto:hdobrott@gmail.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 9:52 PM
    To: 'David Crawford'
    Cc: david@ntxsoccer.org
    Subject: Executive Committee Minutes

    Dear Mr. Crawford,

    I will need to provide my coaches with copies of the Executive Committee Minutes and / or the March and August board reports that outline the possible felony theft or fraud as another board member described it of over $8,000.00. I am up on a no confidence vote at the general coaches meeting on Tuesday September 3rd and this is necessary for my defense. We had discussed open meetings and what information was confidential and I thought you would be able to help me with this.

    Would you perhaps also have access to documentation showing the normal procedure and protocol for a Vote of No Confidence. When President David Arciniega was brought up on said type of vote in May 2013, the petition against him was presented to the board with all the allegations already refuted in great detail by Kim Verity (VP) and possible Arciniega himself). Is there some reason I was not allowed the follow that same procedure and have my defense prepared for the board ahead of time? When we voted on Arciniega’s No Confidence vote petition we voted in various colored pens?

    Thank you for your kind help.

    Sincerely,

    Heather Dobrott
    U6 Girls Director
    972 496-3649
    Crawford admits he read the No Confidence Petition. I was attacked for going to NTSSA (including him for help), going to the Garland Police about missing money (that was to address the possible felony theft) and supporting a far more qualified candidate for president. Dan Medina chose to run and I spoke in support of him because I had worked as his manager and knew he was the best choice for the office of president for Garland Soccer. It is totally unethical to harass and attack members for how they vote. That is why they can't get coaches to come to the meetings and vote. They fear retaliation and harassment and as the elections have been dirty for years they don't feel their vote counts.

    Here is a portion of a grievance from 2013 that directly quotes the No Confidence Petition. I am still waiting for the A & D decision letter:
    1. Heather has participated in several malicious attempts to remove our President from office – examples include, but are not limited to: solicited a new member to GSA to run for President, files complaint with NTSSA and continues to provide NTSSA with information in an effort to reveal dysfunction within the organization that are erroneous and not warranted.


    From: Heather [mailto:garlandsoccerrocks@gmail.com]
    Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 3:06 PM
    To: president@garlandsoccer.com; 'Heather Dobrott'
    Cc: vicepresident@garlandsoccer.com; treasurer@garlandsoccer.com; fields@garlandsoccer.com; events@garlandsoccer.com; publicity@garlandsoccer.com; referee@garlandsoccer.com; u6boys@garlandsoccer.com; u6girls@garlandsoccer.com; u8boys@garlandsoccer.com; u8girls@garlandsoccer.com; u10director@garlandsoccer.com; u12director@garlandsoccer.com; majorleague@garlandsoccer.com; jcampbell@ntxsoccer.org; dcrawford@ntxsoccer.org; bbabcock@ntxsoccer.org; david@ntxsoccer.org; jsutter@usyouthsoccer.org; jcosgrove@usyouthsoccer.org
    Subject: RE: Vote of No Confidence

    NTSSA By-laws
    2.4.3
    Removal
    Any member of the Executive Committee shall be required to resign following a vote of no
    confidence in his ability to remain in office. Any three (3) Associations, simultaneously, through
    their delegates may petition for such a vote. The petition must be submitted in writing to the
    Executive Committee that, in turn, will review the petition and forward copies of same to all Member Associations within fourteen (14) days of receipt of such petition. The vote of no confidence must be passed by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of all Member Associations after all
    Member Associations have been given fourteen (14) days written notice of such pending petition.
    The Executive Committee may call for a vote of no confidence on another member of the
    Committee whose actions have been resolved to be grossly negligent, or whose actions constitute
    severe improprieties or other serious irregularities provided that a two -thirds (2/3) majority of all
    Executive Committee members so vote. If an officer receives this vote of No Confidence, he is
    automatically suspended from the board until the next membership meeting. The matter must be
    submitted in writing to the membership and the member associations must then concur with a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the vote for the removal to be effective.

    GSA by-laws
    ARTICLE III - Directors and Officers, Election, Term of Office, Removal and Executive Committee
    2.3 Any member of the Board of Directors may be removed from office by a vote of no confidence
    in his ability to remain in office and perform the duties thereof.
    2.4 Any three (3) Team Representatives may petition for a vote of no confidence provided that the
    petition shall be in writing and must be submitted to the Board of Directors. The Board of
    Directors shall review the petition and submit a copy thereof to all members within fourteen
    (14) days of receipt of same.

    2.5 The vote of no confidence must carry by a three-fourths (3/4) majority of all members present
    and voting. The vote shall not be taken sooner than fourteen (14) nor more than twenty-one
    (21) days after written notice has been given member teams.

    27 November 2012

    NTSSA by-laws virtually mirror those of GSA.

    Sincerely,

    Heather Dobrott

    -----Original Message-----
    From: president@garlandsoccer.com [mailto:president@garlandsoccer.com]
    Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 9:35 PM
    To: Heather Dobrott
    Cc: president@garlandsoccer.com; vicepresident@garlandsoccer.com; treasurer@garlandsoccer.com; fields@garlandsoccer.com; events@garlandsoccer.com; publicity@garlandsoccer.com; referee@garlandsoccer.com; u6boys@garlandsoccer.com; u6girls@garlandsoccer.com; u8boys@garlandsoccer.com; u8girls@garlandsoccer.com; u10director@garlandsoccer.com; u12director@garlandsoccer.com; majorleague@garlandsoccer.com; jcampbell@ntxsoccer.org; dcrawford@ntxsoccer.org; bbabcock@ntxsoccer.org; david@ntxsoccer.org; jsutter@usyouthsoccer.org; jcosgrove@usyouthsoccer.org
    Subject: Re: Vote of No Confidence

    Heather,

    The process/procedure provided to you and to Kim Verity was first sent to NTSSA for their review. The petition itself was not sent to members so that no one would come to the meeting with a biased opinion. Handing it out at the coaches meeting and allowing both parties to speak would allow our members to hear both sides at the same time.
    I will contact NTSSA for guidance and respond back to you and to Kim on the manner in which this will be handled.

    Regards,

    David A. Arciniega


    > Dear Fellow Board Members,
    >
    >
    > I must respectfully demand that the vote of No Confidence be
    > immediately dismissed.
    >
    >
    > Technicalities:
    >
    > 1. The original petition / letter attached above must be sent to the
    > members within 14 days of receipt. The board received it and voted on
    > it on August 5th 2013. The member coaches had to receive it by
    > August 19th.
    >
    > 2. The petition / letter cannot be given to the coaches at the meeting
    > when the vote is scheduled to take place as Mr. Arciniega was planning
    > to do as our by-laws clearly state that is not the proper protocol and
    > procedure.
    >
    > 3. The vote has to be taken within 14 to 21 days of receipt of the
    > notice which includes the written petition / letter. The coaches
    > never got the petition, so a vote cannot be taken.
    >
    >
    > ARTICLE III - Directors and Officers, Election, Term of Office,
    > Removal and Executive Committee
    >
    >
    > 27 November 2012
    >
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: president@garlandsoccer.com [mailto:president@garlandsoccer.com]
    > Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 9:04 AM
    > To: u6girls@garlandsoccer.com; vicepresident@garlandsoccer.com
    > Cc: president@garlandsoccer.com
    > Subject: Meeting Procedure
    >
    >
    > Heather and Kim,
    >
    >
    > The procedure for the upcoming meeting is shown below. Please
    > provide a copy of any items that will be handed out during the meeting
    > to the GSA Office no later than Tuesday at noon. Please limit any
    > items to be handed out to only those items supporting/disputing the
    > allegations referenced in the petition submitted to the GSA Board.
    > Also, make sure that phone numbers, names of kids and any other type
    > of sensitive information is not included in any of the items being handed out.
    >
    > Most importantly, given the pending litigation between Jevin and
    > Corduro, GSA is being advised not to mention Corduro or any other
    > banking institution during this meeting.
    >

    >
    > Meeting Procedure:
    >
    >
    > 1) The vote of 'no confidence' will be last on the agenda.
    >
    > 2) Prior to the vote of 'no confidence', all non-members will be asked to
    > leave the room. Only those with a voting ballot, which will be handed out
    > during the registration process, will be allowed to remain in the room.
    >
    > 3) Hard copies of the petition will be handed out to all members who

    > remain.
    >
    > 4) Hard copies of supporting information can be handed out at the same
    > time. This will fall under each of your responsibilites.
    >
    > 5) As the chairman of the meeting, I will introduce the petition and ask
    > the members that submitted and signed the petition to address the details
    > of the petition. A maximum of 10 minutes will be allocated.
    >
    > 6) The GSA Board member who is named on the petition for a vote of 'no
    > confidence' will be given the same amount of time (10 minutes maximum) to
    > present his/her defense. Character witnesses for the defense will be
    > limited to three and are allowed to speak within this 10 minute time
    > period.
    >
    > 7) I will open the floor to questions by the members regarding the items
    > on the petition. Questions will be addressed to the defendant or the people
    > who submitted the petition. A maximum of 20 minutes will be allocated for
    > this portion of the meeting.
    >
    > 8) My only role during this meeting will be to keep the decorum.
    >
    > 9) The Elections Committee will be responsible for counting the votes.
    >
    > 10) During the vote count, a member from each side may be present to
    > witness the vote count but must remain silent.
    >
    > 11) If the vote of 'no confidence' passes, the GSA Board member will be
    > asked to step down immediately. If it fails, then the meeting will
    > adjourn
    > and we will move forward as an association.
    >
    >
    > Please reply to this email as confirmation that you have received the
    > published procedure.
    >
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    >
    > David A. Arciniega
    >
    >
    > Sincerely,
    >
    >
    > Heather Dobrott
    >
    > U6 Girls Director
    Note Arciniega who was the Vice President of Garland Soccer and then president for a decade is not following the simple written procedure in the by-laws. He had to mail out the No Confidence Petition in the mail. While his cronies on the board were voting in favor of that petition to public attack me for supporting a far more qualified candidate for president, going to the police about missing money and going to NTSSA and US Youth for help as specified in the by-laws, David Arciniega had pulled me into the office. He got threatening with me and demanded that I resign and said he wouldn't pursue the No Confidence vote if I did. He probably thought I would be bullied off of the board and he wouldn't have to send out that lie-filled trash. I stood my ground and filed formal complaints with NTSSA about this blatant harassment that violates state law as a fiduciary must vote their conscience and do what is right for the charity and not be bullied by a dishonest leader.

    Please note I was again chastised to keep the ongoing litigation (2013) between the Jevin Software scammers and Corduro secret. David Arciniega lied to all the coaches about that litigation going on and said the North Texas lawyers wanted it all kept hush hush. Why would we keep fictitious litigation secret and why does NTSSA tolerate their dishonest Chairman of Coaching Education telling his association outright, ridiculous lies like that and tangling them up in it? No litigation was ever filed and as the media in 2016 published, Jevin owes tens of thousands of dollars to charities. Why in the heck is David Arciniega forcing Garland Soccer to continue to use them?

    St. Petersburg Little League one of several nationwide missing money | Tampa Bay Times

    Management Company Gives Little Leaguers Run-Around - Athletic Business

    St. Pete Little League struggling to get by, owed $35,000 | WFLA.com


    Afterall that, that liar Arciniega just kept going after me:

    -----Original Message-----
    From: president@garlandsoccer.com [mailto:president@garlandsoccer.com]
    Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:33 PM
    To: u6girls@garlandsoccer.com
    Subject: Update on Petition

    Heather,

    Kim Verity has informed me that she will be updating/amending the petition for 'Vote of No Confidence'. She plans on resubmitting it to the GSA Board and/or filing an ethics charge.
    The process will start all over once she submits this to the GSA Board which means that a special member meeting will be held at a later time with a copy of the petition provided to every member ahead of time.
    Please respond to this email to confirm that you have received it.

    Regards,

    David A. Arciniega
    Clearly, the problem in soccer is that North Texas does not self-police at all and David Arciniega is allowed to continue his harassment and intimidation unchecked. North Texas does not investigate by-law violations, financial issues and other serious matters.

  14. #39
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    Page 38 of 38
    http://www.ntxsoccer.org/UserFiles/File/NTSSAAandDManual.pdf

    3.
    Member Associations and their committees are urged to refuse to hear any appeal when any person is

    threatening a lawsuit. You should pass the appeal to the next higher forum which would hear it. This is a sport
    to which we are giving freely of our time, and none of us needs to take the trouble and expense to appear in court.
    North Texas State Soccer (NTSSA) promises to help local associations that are threatened with suit. I sent a courtesy copy of my suit to NTSSA for just that reason. We could have worked everything out according to the by-laws and never had to step into court. NTSSA apparently treats all problems presented to them as a joke. Now, that North Texas Premier Soccer and Garland Soccer are tangled up in litigation they are still doing nothing. NTSSA should be stepping in and taking jurisdiction and seeing that these issues are resolved fairly according to the by-laws. How much more bad publicity do they want?

    www.realscam.com/attachments/f14/17249d1482945409-ntpsa-north-texas-premier-soccer-association-lawsuit-larry-hall-robert-malphurs-plaintiffs-third-amended-original-petition-heather-dobrott-vs.-david-arciniega-garland-soc.pdf

    Garland Soccer Coach Arrested for Child Indecency | CW33 NewsFix

  15. #40
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields



    If Robert Malphurs is the treasurer, then why is Larry Hall saying he keeps the books. And, how can a legitimate charity have 0 independent directors?

    https://charitychannel.com/the-indep...s-are-at-risk/

    Moodys weighs in:

    Key elements of our criteria include:


    We rarely, if ever, deem former executives or founders to be independent

    We believe that board interlocks, consulting contracts and financial relations with executives are significant
    hurdles to independence, as are certain types of related party transactions that include professional service
    arrangements

    Shareholder, familial or charitable connections can hinder independence, but it is difficult to define one-
    size-fits-all criteria for such issues

    Occasionally, outsized director pay, long tenures or weak director-recruitment processes can undermine the
    full board's independence
    NY spells it out:
    An “independent” director is defined under the Act as a director who:


    1. is not, and has not in the last three years been, an employee of the organization or any of its affiliates;
    2. has not received more than $10,000 in direct compensation from the organization or any of its affiliates in any of the last three fiscal years (other than reimbursement for expenses reasonably incurred as a director or reasonable compensation for services as a director);
    3. does not have a substantial financial interest in any entity that has made payments to or received payments from the organization (or an affiliate of the organization) in exchange for property or services with value exceeding the lesser of either $25,000 or 2% of the organization’s annual gross revenue during the last three fiscal years; and
    4. does not have a relative who is described under any of the first three parts of the definition. 3


    This one is a doozy. President Larry Hall doesn't mention he is married to the only employee (of over 30 years mind you.) The Halls control the office and the books and the treasurer has such a questionable background.

    Again, North Texas is not training its associations board members, directors and officers about their fiduciary duties. There is little to no accountability or oversight. North Texas is completely failing in its mission and there needs to be drastic changes made immediately or the local associations should leave. Most indoor soccer groups long since left NTSSA. Why pay them for this horrible customer service, and lack of guidance and leadership?

  16. #41
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    Motion for Continuance(fraud)wexhibits.pdf
    On September 6, 2016, this Court granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Add the Individual Defendants, Larry Hall and Robert Malphurs. Plaintiffs have asserted claims for breach of fiduciary duty against Larry Hall and Robert Malphurs for their role in the gross mismanagement, and likely misallocation, of hundreds of thousands of dollars, which were donated by the Plaintiff David Gray and thousands of other member soccer players throughout Dallas and surrounding counties. Documents that were only recently produced contain evidence that raises serious questions about were the money that was donated by the players has gone......

    The October 27th Discovery, when coupled with the September
    28th Discovery and the May 5th Discovery, provides clear evidence, often referred to colloquially as the “smoking gun,” of fraud and misallocation of hundreds of thousands of dollars that were donated in trust to the NTPSA for the construction and maintenance of the league-owned soccer facility.......

    Plaintiffs seek this continuance and extension of certain deadlines: (1) to conduct additional discovery of the financials of the NTPSA; (2) to amend their pleadings to include a cause of action against the Individual Defendants for fraud; (3) to add additional directors and officers of the NTPSA; and (4) to designate Carroll Rogers, who is a CPA, and is/has been a Director and/or Officer of multiple nonprofit organizations. Below is a detailed description of newly discovered information, and an explanation of why it is evidence that suggests that the Individual Defendants defrauded the members of the NTPSA and misallocated funds that should have otherwise been expended on Premier Park, the defective soccer facility that gave rise to this lawsuit. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs seek this motion for continuance and extension of deadlines so that justice may be done......

    T
    he September 28th and October 27th Discovery contained financial information that was submitted by Larry Hall to the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) through the governing body of the NTPSA, for inclusion in the Exempt Organization Group Return of the North Texas State Soccer Association (“NTSSA”). This information differs from the original bookkeeping reports in several important respects . The internal financial records reflect significant amounts of NTPSA money, typically $190,000 per year, flowing to Premier Park, Inc. (“PPI”), but the NTPSA did not disclose these disbursements to either its governing body, through which it claims tax-exempt status, or the IRS. Additionally, the Group Return submissions demonstrate that the NTPSA did not report all the revenue that was recorded in the internal financial documents, or that would be expected by the number of members multiplied by the player fees.

    7. The September 28th Discovery contained the NTSSA Group Tax Return Affiliate Form 990 Reporting Package for Fiscal Year 9/1/12 8/31/13. Attached hereto as Exhibit A. The May 5th Discovery also contained an internal bookkeeping system report NTPSA Profit & Loss September 2012 through August 2013. Attached hereto as Exhibit B. A comparison of these reports, one internal and one published, for the exact same time period, demonstrates that the NTPSA reported approximately $100,000 less income to the IRS than they recorded on their books. Additionally, the disbursement of $192,657.54 of “Premier Park Support” is absent. These discrepancies cause the loss of $47,497.62 recorded in the internal books, to become a profit of $47,873.39 on the tax filing....

    8. The October 27th Discovery also contained the NTSSA Group Tax Return Affiliate Form 990 Reporting Package for Fiscal Year 9/1/11
    8/31/12. Attached hereto as Exhibit C. This document also included a questionnaire from the tax preparer of the NTSSA to the affiliate to confirm the affiliate’s eligibility to participate in the exempt organization group return. Larry Hall’s answers to nearly all of those questions are
    false. Some of the most notable are:

    Q. If (Larry Hall) serve(s) as an officer, director, trustee, key employee, or member of an entity doing business with the association, list name
    and nature of relationship.
    A. NO

    Q
    . If (Larry Hall) ha(s) a direct or indirect business relationship with the association, list name and nature of relationship.
    A. NO

    Q
    . Did the organization invest in, contribute assets to, or participate in a joint venture or other similar arrangement with a taxable entity during the year?
    A. NO


    9.
    It is undisputed that Larry Hall is President of PPI, a Texas for-profit corporation, and that the NTPSA is contributing substantial assets to PPI. Mr. Hall admitted in his deposition that he incorporated PPI without the guidance of the NTPSA Board of Directors. Larry Hall, through his counsel, has repeatedly stated that PPI is a wholly owned subsidiary of the NTPSA, but the Articles of Incorporation of PPI reflect no
    parent company, and give no authority to NTPSA. See PPI Articles of Incorporation, attached hereto as Exhibit D. Additionally, the October 27th Discovery included minutes of the annual general assembly meetings between 2008 and 2015, when NTPSA director and officer elections were held, and the NTPSA has never elected the directors and officers of PPI. In fact, the name “Premier Park, Inc.” never even appears. See NTPSA Meetings, attached hereto as Exhibit E.

    10.
    Also included in the October 27 Discovery were documents titled Spring 2012 League Dates & Information, and Fall 2012 League Dates & Information. Attached hereto as Exhibit F. These documents show that the seasonal player fee was $75 for both Spring and Fall seasons, and that registration (and therefore receipt of all player fees) took place on January 21-22, 2012 and July 28-29, 2012, respectively. In the NTSSA Group Return Package questionnaire (Exhibit C), Larry Hall also states that the organization had 4,900 members, from whom, at $75 per season, the NTPSA should have received approximately $735,000 in registration fees during the fiscal year. Membership of close to five thousand is consistent with registration fees paid to the governing body by the NTPSA, which are and have been $22 per year (not per season)
    per player since 2010, per the NTSSA. Exhibit C shows $102,741 in registration fees, which, at $22 per player, is 4670 players, which lowers
    program revenue expectations for the time period from $735,000 to $700,000.

    11.
    However, Exhibit C shows that they only reported income of $368,513.01 to the IRS. Furthermore, in the May 5th Discovery, Plaintiff received NTPSA Profit & Loss January through December 2012, a report from their bookkeeping system. Attached hereto as Exhibit G.
    While the time period covered by this report is for the calendar year, not the fiscal year, it easily includes both the Spring 2012 and Fall 2012 team registration periods, when fees come in. It follows that the league income in both reports should be substantially similar, but Exhibit G
    shows that the NTPSA recorded $524,906.04 in league income. This is approximately $175,000 less than would be expected based on
    membership of 4670 players, yet $156,000 more than they reported to the IRS. This is a discrepancy of over $330,000 between revenue expectations based on membership, and reported income, in 2012 alone, the year before Plaintiff was injured. And again, most other expenses are similar in the two reports, but $187,497.35 in “Premier Park Support” shown on the NTPSA books, is mysteriously missing in the Group Return submission. These documents make it clear that the NTPSA has systematically modified it’s tax filing to conceal the existence of
    PPI. 2.Larry Hall conveyed the soccer complex property to PPI on September 25, 2007, for $10. See General Warranty Deed, attached hereto as Exhibit H. The NTPSA board minutes and resolutions pertaining to this transaction have been subject to request under Rule 196 since April 2016, and were also requested in the subpoena duces tecum served upon Mr. Hall on October 19, 2016, but these documents have never been produced. Apart from their cash on hand at any time, the land and the buildings upon it are the only assets on the association’s balance sheet. The conveyance of the property was a fundamental action per Sec. 22.164 (a)(8) of the Texas Business Organizations Code, requiring a vote of two-thirds of the voting members, who are the team captains, for approval. But Plaintiff has spoken with many team captains, and none of them were aware of the conveyance. Moreover, Horst Poethke, the NTPSA Secretary from 2005 to 2010, was not aware of the conveyance, always believing the NTPSA owned Premier Park....

    13.
    Defendant’s have not complied with the Court’s order of September 6, 2016 with respect to PPI. And again, even in NTPSA’s most recent Group Return submissions, Premier Park, Inc. does not exist. Therefore, Plaintiffs still have no financial information about PPI, with the exception of those same bookkeeping system reports from the May 5th Discovery previously discussed. Plaintiffs are still awaiting the production of valid financial disclosures from corporate defendant Premier Park, Inc.

    14
    . Plaintiff has retained an expert witness to perform a preliminary analysis of the information discussed above, and to testify as to his analysis of the defendants’ financial disclosures. See Export Report prepared by Carroll Rogers, attached hereto as Exhibit I.Mr. Rogers analysis supports conclusions that Larry Hall and Robert Malphurs are in an illegal self-dealing business relationship with the NTPSA, that the NTPSA does not own PPI or Premier Park, and that Larry Hall has concealed the existence of PPI from it’s governing body and the Internal Revenue Service.

    CONCLUSION
    WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs, David and Marlitt Gray, ask the Court to GRANT this their Motion for Continuance
    and Motion to Extend Certain Deadlines, and that it continue the trial setting of this case 120 days from the date of the order granting
    the same, and that the discovery deadline, the deadline to amend pleadings, the deadline to add additional parties, and the deadline to designate expert witnesses all be extended 90 days, and for such further relief, at law or equity, general or special, to which Plaintiffs may show themselves justly entitled.
    Respectfully submitted,
    ____________________________________
    EDWARD GRAY
    4038 Lemmon Avenue
    Dallas, Texas 75219
    Edward Gray
    State Bar No. 08316200

    ATTORNEY
    FOR PLAINTIFF

    North Texas State Soccer has jurisdiction and should be investigating these financial issues per their own by-laws!

  17. #42
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    ROBERT A. MALPHURS & ASSOCIATES, L.L.C.
    Texas Taxpayer Number 30119326392
    Mailing Address 11520 N CENTRAL EXPY STE 135 DALLAS, TX 75243-6607
    Right to Transact Business in Texas FRANCHISE TAX INVOLUNTARILY ENDEDRequest tax clearance to reinstate entity
    State of Formation TX
    Effective SOS Registration Date 01/30/1997
    Texas SOS File Number 0702352122
    Registered Agent Name W SCOTT BERRY
    Registered Office Street Address 717 N. HARWOOD ST. STE. 1500 DALLAS, TX 75201

    Embezzling DeHay & Elliston Partner Hands Over Bar Card

    By Jeremy Heallen
    Law360, Houston (August 25, 2014, 6:56 PM EDT) -- A former DeHay & Elliston LLP managing partner who was slapped with a $1.25 million judgment last year for allegedly embezzling funds through a firm credit card has voluntarily given up his law license in lieu of disciplinary action.

    The Texas Supreme Court accepted W. Scott Berry’s resignation on Aug. 20, bringing to an end a disciplinary investigation the Commission for Lawyer Discipline launched in April 2013, one week after Berry entered into an agreed judgment with his former firm over the theft.

    In addition to stealing from the firm, Berry misappropriated more than $30,000 from DeHay & Elliston’s client trust account, according to the commission.

    “The court … concludes that acceptance of the resignation of W. Scott Berry is in the best interest of the public and the profession,” the high court said in a three-page order canceling Berry’s law license.

    Berry filed a motion to resign from the Texas bar on Aug. 5. The commission said in a response filed the same day that it was unopposed to the request, noting that Berry had engaged in “conduct involving dishonesty, fraud or misappropriation” in violation of Rules 1.14(a), 8.04(a)(3) and 8.04(a)(8) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.

    On April 22, 2013, Dallas County Judge Mark Greenberg entered an agreed judgment against Berry just days after DeHay & Elliston sued him for theft, common-law fraud, fraud by nondisclosure, and false pretenses, among other things. Berry stipulated in the order that he acted alone.

    Berry worked for DeHay & Elliston until Jan. 1, 2013, as a nonequity partner and independent contractor, and had served as the firm's managing partner during part of his tenure, according to the firm's lawsuit.

    Berry had access to the firm's American Express credit card account because of his managing partner position, and he allegedly charged or instructed his administrative assistant to charge more than $750,000 in nonfirm expenses to DeHay & Elliston's AmEx account over several years, the firm said.

    The charges were unauthorized, and other firm partners were unaware of Berry's alleged behavior, according to the petition.

    When Berry received the firm's AmEx statements, he allegedly designated his personal charges as “firm expenses” before giving the statements to DeHay & Elliston's accounting department. Berry allegedly instructed his assistant and the firm’s comptroller to keep mum about his activities, the suit said.

    The attorney's alleged fraud transcended his misuse of the firm's credit card, according to firm. Berry also instructed his assistant to add several nonemployees to the firm's benefits plan, causing the firm to unwittingly pay additional health insurance premiums.

    When DeHay & Elliston's partners discovered Berry's fraudulent activity and confronted him, Berry allegedly confessed, according to the suit.

    The Commission for Lawyer Discipline was represented by Dirrell S. Jones.

    Berry represented himself.

    The case is In the Matter of W. Scott Berry, Misc. Docket No. 14-9162, in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas.

    --Additional reporting by Jess Davis. Editing by Edrienne Su. Related Articles



    RESIGNATIONS
    On Aug. 20, 2014, the Supreme Court of Texas accepted the resignation in lieu of discipline of W. Scott Berry [#02244300], 58, of Dallas. At the time of respondent’s resignation, there was a case pending against Berry, who was a partner at DeHay & Elliston. In early 2011, without the knowledge or authorization of any partner of the firm, Berry transferred in excess of $30,000 from the firm’s client trust account to himself and/or non-firm- related entities. Berry failed to hold funds belonging in whole or in part to clients that were in Berry’s possession separate from Berry’s own property. He engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation by misappropriating client funds, misusing a firm credit card for personal expenses, and enrolling non-firm employees in the health insurance benefits program paid for by the firm for its employees.

    On April 30, 2013, notice and a copy of the complaint were sent to Berry by certified mail, return receipt requested, and were delivered on May 5, 2013. Respondent was directed to provide a written response to the allegations of the State Bar of Texas within 30 days of receipt of the letter. Respondent failed to timely furnish to the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel a response or other information as required by the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure. Respondent did not in good faith timely assert a privilege or other legal ground for failure to do so.
    Berry violated Rules 1.14(a), 8.04(a)(3), and 8.04(a)(8).
    Last edited by Soapboxmom; 01-02-2017 at 08:00 PM.

  18. #43
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    Gregory Gonzalez

    2 months ago
    A necessary evil of the NTPSA owned, men's soccer fields of Dallas, Texas. The area of town is not the greatest, it's usually s bit of a drive for most players, and the league desperately needs money to level the fields. On the other hand, they are all regulation size fields and can host night games. Much appreciated and needed fields, just not the most desirable of fields.


    Safety issues must be addressed pronto!

  19. #44
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Scandal / Corruption Garland Soccer Association / US Youth Soccer / North Texas State Soccer / David Arciniega

    Living Through a Lawsuit
    U S Youth Soccer Risk Management Committee


    (Information abstracted from U.S. Olympic Committee guidelines.)

    HELP! I'VE JUST BEEN SUED!
    What to do?

    • Call your insurance company or agent immediately.
    • Photocopy the summons/ complaint/petition along with any other pertinent documents.
    • Mail the original of summons/ complaint/petition and other documents to your insurance company via certified mail, return receipt requested or by fax; send a copy to your insurance agent and your attorney, if you have one. Also, make and keep copies for your file.
    • Request that your insurance company appoint an attorney to represent you.
    • Note the response due date (on the summons/complaint/petition) on your calendar.


    What NOT to do!

    • DO NOT discuss the case with anyone other than your insurance carrier or your attorney.
    • DO NOT have any contact with the plaintiff/complainant.


    HI! I'M YOUR ATTORNEY.
    You should receive either a letter from your insurance carrier telling you the name and address of the attorney assigned to your case, or a call from the attorney telling you he/she has been assigned to defend you.

    If you don't hear from your insurance representative or from an attorney appointed by the company within five (5) days prior to the response due date, call your insurance representative and consult with your own attorney about filing an answer/response within the specified time period. This will prevent a default judgment from being entered.

    I HAVE TO DO WHAT!!?

    • Your defense attorney will eventually call you and ask for any details you have about the incident giving rise to the complaint.
    • Please take the time necessary to provide the information. He/she is only trying to help you.
    • Make sure any employees, coaches, volunteers, players or others involved in the incident which is the basis of the suit are available to be interviewed.


    WHAT IS DISCOVERY?

    • Discovery is the method by which each party to the lawsuit discovers the other party(ies) positions and their basis.
    • Discovery includes interrogatories, which are written questions, many of which only you can answer. The plaintiff can file written interrogatories and your attorney will advise you which questions must be answered. Don't be afraid to ask your attorney if you don't understand what is being asked, or if a request for information or documentation is unclear.
    • Discovery can also include a request to produce documents which are pertinent to the incident.
    • This process can be very time consuming, but unless your attorney says that you don't need to answer a question or provide documents which are requested, it must be done, and done within a prescribed period of time. Your only consolation is that the plaintiff must do this also.
    • If you fail to provide the answers or documentation, a court can fine you and possibly not allow your attorney to use all of the defenses he/she feels necessary. This can jeopardize your insurance coverage.
    • Finally, the last type of discovery is a deposition. This is an oral examination, under oath, by the other party's attorney of persons that he/she feels may have pertinent information about the case. You, your coaches, volunteers, or employees may be asked by the plaintiff to give a deposition.
    • Your attorney will spend whatever time is necessary to prepare each person to be deposed.
    • A deposition is time consuming and inconvenient; however, it is not optional.
    • Your attorney will be present during the deposition to help guide you through the process. Follow his/her advice.


    WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
    The case could be settled without a trial, possibly with mediation. Please remember that the decision to settle may be solely up to the discretion of your insurance carrier. Be sure you understand these terms, up front.

    If the case isn't settled, it will go to trial. Your attorney may ask to have a representative from your association at the defense table during trial. The presence of a person with your attorney at the defense table lends a human quality to your case. The plaintiff will be there in person. It's possible that his/her attorney will refer to the defendant as a company or a corporation, hoping that the jury will find it easier to render a verdict for his/her "poor client", by taking money from "this large, cold and impersonal corporation."

    Your attorney knows that attending a trial will take up a lot of your valuable time, but may determine it is necessary. The results in your local paper are not going to say that the plaintiff won a large verdict from your insurance carrier; the results will say they won a large verdict from your club or association. Please do your best to help.

    I PAY INSURANCE PREMIUMS, SO... WHY ALL THE WORK?
    The bottom line is that the litigation process takes a tremendous amount of cooperation and time from the persons involved. You have paid the insurance premiums to obtain professional help to guide you through the legal maze, if necessary. The burden, however, cannot be borne solely by your insurance company or by your attorney. They need your help and cooperation in order to provide you with a proper defense.

    WHAT IF THE PLAINTIFF DID NOT FOLLOW USYSA APPEAL PROCEDURES?
    The U S Youth Soccer Official Administrative Rulebook, Rule 4020, Section 7 (Penalties) states:
    No National State Association, official, club, league, team, coach, referee, or player or their representative, may invoke the aid of the Courts of any State or of the United States without first exhausting all available remedies within the appropriate soccer organizations as set forth in section 5(c) of this rule.

    For violation of this rule, the offending party shall be subject to the sanctions of suspension and fines, and shall be liable to the USYSA and State Associations for all expenses incurred by the USYSA and its officers, and state associations and their officers, as appropriate, in defending each court action, including but not limited to the following:

    1. court costs.
    2. attorneys fees.
    3. reasonable compensation for time spent by USYSA and State Association Officers and employees in responding to and defending against allegations in the action, including responses to discovery and court appearance.
    4. travel expenses.
    5. expenses for holding special National Youth Council meetings necessitated by court action.
    The clueless followers of Arciniega should actually read the lawsuit, all of my postings and this from US Youth Soccer. David Arciniega should have never spent a dime of the charity's money on the North Texas clown of an attorney when he had a free insurance one. He should never have lied about the discovery that exists (as I can prove what exists with e-mails and other documents) and failed to produce what he did agree existed. I always attend depositions and publish and comment on them. And, the insurance is in charge, so Arciniega better get himself straight on that. David Arciniega is North Texas State Soccer's worst nightmare!

  20. #45
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    https://www.facebook.com/Save-the-NT...08810/?fref=ts


    PhotosSee All




    Stumble or swim depending on the weather!


    Posts

  21. #46
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    Save the NTPSA

    15 hrs ·

    After raising and borrowing nearly Two Million dollars from and on behalf of NTPSA Members for the development of Premier Park, Larry Hall paid only Ten Thousand dollars to his crony contractor, Kanish Ali, to grade the fields. Some of the fields have humps running across them that are 12 inches tall, yet they have never made any repairs. For years, NTPSA members have believed that they owned the Premier Park Soccer Complex, but in 2007, Larry Hall quietly, and without Board approval, sold Premier Park, for only Ten dollars, to a clandestine private corporation owned by himself, his wife Andi, and NTPSA treasurer Robert Malphurs. Now, they are quietly renting it back to the NTPSA for 7 times more than the normal rate for city fields. NTPSA financial records indicate that Larry Hall is embezzling large amounts of money right off the top, and only reporting as little as half of the league's income to North Texas Soccer and the IRS.

  22. #47
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    On November 1, 2008, Missouri Youth Soccer Association borrowed $285,000 from the US Youth Soccer Association to pay off a debt originating from a lawsuit that we lost. The loan was to be repaid on November 1, 2019. I am pleased to state that loan was paid off in December of 2014 – almost 5 years early.
    Why is North Texas State Soccer (NTSSA) not stepping in and handling the litigation in Garland Soccer and North Texas Premier Soccer?

  23. #48
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    https://usys-assets.ae-admin.com/ass...cerComplex.pdf
    Even if We Can Finance it, How Do We Actually Pay for it?
    • Increased member dues

    • Perhaps a special dues
    assessment
    • Increased user fees
    • Watch for the balance between
    field rental revenue and field
    maintenance costs
    The Planning Phase
    •How large is our property?
    •How many soccer fields do we want?
    •What amenities should we have?
    What is the budget. Have a general idea
    before you get involved with engineers and
    contractors (don’t forget contingency).

    •What constraints do we face?
    • Legal
    • Environmental
    • Financial
    Hire a Top-Notch Engineering Design Firm
    • Prepare an RFP
    Ensure it’s as detailed as possible.
    Consider hiring someone to prepare a master plan.

    Solicit bids.
    Narrow the field.
    Interview the finalists.
    Conduct a thorough background investigation.
    Make sure you are comfortable with the firm.
    Negotiate the contract.

    The Planning Process
    • Give the engineer as much information as
    possible in the initial meetings.
    • Ensure the engineer knows your critical issues.
    • Set a time table.
    • Have progress meetings at regular intervals.
    • Make sure everyone signs off on the final plans.
    Planning Process

    Prepare for the permitting phase of the
    process

    Make sure of the filing deadlines.
    Determine who will take the lead.
    Determine the “hot button” issues.
    Disclose as much as you can.
    Be prepared to make some concessions but
    ensure you can live with, and up to, these
    concessions.
    Selecting a Contractor
    The engineering firm will prepare the bid
    specifications.
    •You can either put to bid selectively or in
    general, but have some idea who the top
    contractors are. The engineering firm should
    be helpful here.

    •Establish a deadline.
    Have a meeting to which all interested
    bidders are invited and can ask questions.

    Selecting the Contractor
    Narrow the field.
    Interview the prospective contractors.
    Go out and view their work.
    Talk to their references.
    Perhaps provide an opportunity for a final round of
    bidding.

    Select a contractor.
    Timeliness
    -Track record with respect to completion of projects.
    Quality
    – Does the contactor make an already well-designed
    project better?
    Cost
    -original proposal and final project costs – are they below the
    engineer’s estimate, below competitors, and below your budget?

    Managing Change
    -How does the contractor handle minor modifications?
    How do they negotiate fair and reasonable costs if
    significant changes are required?
    Staying on the job. Do they stay until they finish
    , or leave mid job to begin another job
    Selecting the Contractor
    Who will be on site daily?
    Negotiate the contract
    Retainage
    Watch out for reduction when 90-95% completion
    Penalty clause if not done on specific date
    Grass fields - grow- in period
    Ask for a schedule of values once the contract is
    signed.
    Manage the Project
    Decide who will be Clerk of the Works. It
    is important for the owner to have a
    presence on site during the project.
    Have regular meetings with the
    contractor and the engineer – have an
    agenda for each meeting, and keep notes.
    Watch out for change orders – these can
    be budget busters
    Now That It’s Built, What Do We Do?
    • Can we find a competent & affordable
    contractor?
    .Will the contractor take same interest
    in the property that you have?
    • Will there be consistency of staff?
    Can the contractor handle the irrigation
    maintenance? If not, who will do this?

    Field Equipment
    •Goals - How many ? What sizes?
    •Corner Flags
    • Storm shelters
    •Benches, Bleachers
    •Water Stations
    •Tents
    •Trash Cans
    •Golf carts & utility vehicle
    •Public Address system
    What about everything else?
    •A map of the complex, with directions
    •Rules for the complex
    •Who is going to stripe the fields?
    How do we handle trash?
    •How do we handle parking?
    •How do we handle cleaning of restrooms?
    •Concession stand & vending machines
    •Who will handle general maintenance?
    •Are we being environmentally friendly?
    ……
    •How do we control use so we don’t
    over-use natural grass fields?
    Planning for Emergencies
    •Medical personnel – do we provide or not?
    •Should we have a defibrillator?
    We need a plan for severe weather –
    lightning. How do we clear the fields?

    •Coordination with local police – when must
    we have paid police details?
    •Who gets contacted in the event of an
    emergency or crisis situation?
    Who is Responsible for Safety?
    Remember –you are managing a public park
    How do we ensure that goals are properly secured?
    What about tents?
    Is someone inspecting fields for holes, depressions, etc.?
    Do we have other facilities, such as playgrounds?
    If so, who is inspecting?
    What do we do about a lost child?
    What About Security?
    How do we keep the property secure?
    How do we keep vehicles from damaging our grass fields?
    If we have synthetic fields, how do we keep vehicles off these fields?
    Properly posting the property
    What about having vehicles towed?•
    Be careful of erecting gates that could injure a
    trespasser.
    Securing Sponsorships
    Place value on your assets
    Look for easy targets
    Prepare professional presentation ( you only get one chance to make a first
    impression).
    Very little grant money is available.
    Generally, you will be competing for
    marketing dollars.
    Once you secure the agreement, give more than what is expected, particularly if this does not cost anything.
    Contacting me
    John Burrill
    jburrill@mayouthsoccer.org
    Did North Texas Premier Soccer have a budget set before buying the Premier Park property?
    Did they have a realistic budget set before they began construction of the fields?
    Did the member teams vote to make those horrendous expenditures?
    Where are the documents showing what should have been outlined by the engineers that should have designed the park? Where were the procedures for and the bids themselves from what should have been a public and open bidding process for the contractors wanting to build the fields?
    What firm or individual was responsible for the engineering work?
    What qualifications did Kanish Ali have? Where are all the previous soccer complexes he worked on (as is graded, implemented the drainage for and put in the grass for etc.?)
    My research shows that Kanish Ali has done nothing but roofing and is a longtime member of the soccer association.
    Was this contractor competent to handle a job like this or just a buddy of Larry Hall?
    Will North Texas Premier Soccer and/or the current Plaintiff sue Kanish Ali if his work on the fields is shown to be defective and not up to standard?
    Does NTPSA have bids on the costs to get the fields to meet safety standards and who is the new engineer in charge of that?
    Who will the new contractor be that will be repairing these dangerous fields?
    See the links below and it is obvious it should have costs tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to properly construct those fields.

    http://archive.lib.msu.edu/tic/stnew.../2002mar12.pdf

    http://www.fieldturf.com/media/W1siZ...g-handbook.pdf

    Plaintiff claims:
    After raising and borrowing nearly Two Million dollars from and on behalf of NTPSA Members for the development of Premier Park, Larry Hall paid only Ten Thousand dollars to his crony contractor, Kanish Ali, to grade the fields. Some of the fields have humps running across them that are 12 inches tall, yet they have never made any repairs.

  24. #49
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    Jeremy Burdett
    Yesterday at 9:41pm
    Good luck with this. I played NTPSA for years. When premier park opened, it was never good. I ended up with a meniscus tear, sadly not sure if it was caused by playing there or made worse playing there.

  25. #50
    Soapboxmom's Avatar
    Soapboxmom is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    7,964
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: NTPSA North Texas Premier Soccer Association Lawsuit / Larry Hall / Robert Malphurs / Premier Park Soccer Fields

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...zYn_4LRRno2sNw US Youth Soccer and Pullen Insurance which are the parent organization and insurer for NTPSA respectively issued recommendations that Larry Hall and NTPSA should have been well aware of.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed on this website are solely those of their respective authors.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42