<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	>

<channel>
	<title>sports teams &#8211; CalWatchdog.com</title>
	<atom:link href="https://calwatchdog.com/tag/sports-teams/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://calwatchdog.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2015 14:11:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">43098748</site>	<item>
		<title>Pro sports nonprofits seek special exemption from state raffle rules</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2015/07/20/pro-sports-nonprofits-seek-special-exemption-state-raffle-rules/</link>
					<comments>https://calwatchdog.com/2015/07/20/pro-sports-nonprofits-seek-special-exemption-state-raffle-rules/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2015 14:00:19 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Breaking News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corruption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[professional sports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonprofits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonprofit exemptions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sports teams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[raffles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gambling]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://calwatchdog.com/?p=81769</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Professional sports franchises have a track record of securing special exemptions from environmental regulations, landing sweetheart bond financing deals and collecting direct government subsidies for stadiums. Now, the nonprofit arms of]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Professional sports franchises have a track record of securing special exemptions from environmental regulations, landing sweetheart bond financing deals and collecting direct government subsidies for stadiums.</p>
<p>Now, the nonprofit arms of these billion-dollar businesses are looking to gain a special exemption from the state&#8217;s rules on charitable fundraising.</p>
<p>A proposal speeding through the legislature would grant nonprofit organizations affiliated with professional sports franchises a special exemption from the state&#8217;s laws on charitable raffles.</p>
<p><img decoding="async" class="alignright wp-image-81782 size-medium" src="http://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Isadore-Hall-171x220.jpg" alt="Isadore Hall" width="171" height="220" srcset="https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Isadore-Hall-171x220.jpg 171w, https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Isadore-Hall-797x1024.jpg 797w, https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Isadore-Hall.jpg 800w" sizes="(max-width: 171px) 100vw, 171px" />Senate Bill 549, authored by state Sen. Isadore Hall, D-South Bay, would exempt nonprofits affiliated with sports franchises from Proposition 17, a 2000 ballot measure that allowed private nonprofit groups to conduct raffles. That voter-approved initiative requires 90 percent of a raffle&#8217;s proceeds to be spent on charitable purposes.</p>
<p>SB594 would allow sports-affiliated nonprofits to run a 50-50 raffle, where half of the proceeds can go to a gambler. According to <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/15-16/bill/sen/sb_0501-0550/sb_549_bill_20150623_amended_asm_v96.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the bill&#8217;s text</a>, the only eligible organizations are those connected to &#8220;a team from the Major League Baseball, National Hockey League, National Basketball Association, National Football League, Women’s National Basketball Association, or Major League Soccer, or a private, nonprofit organization established by the Professional Golfers’ Association of America, Ladies Professional Golf Association, or National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing.&#8221;</p>
<h3>Sports charity donates to California Legislative Black Caucus</h3>
<p>Proponents of the special perk for sports franchises say that it encourages more philanthropic giving.</p>
<p>&#8220;Results of 50-50 charitable raffles in over 29 states have been tremendous,&#8221; Senator Hall, the bill&#8217;s author, recently <a href="http://calchannel.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=7&amp;clip_id=3067" target="_blank" rel="noopener">testified before</a> the Assembly Governmental Organization Committee. &#8220;This measure will supplement great charitable work done by professional sports franchises throughout the state.&#8221;</p>
<p><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" class=" wp-image-81785 size-full aligncenter" src="http://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/LA-Dodgers-Foundation.png" alt="LA Dodgers Foundation" width="700" height="514" srcset="https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/LA-Dodgers-Foundation.png 700w, https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/LA-Dodgers-Foundation-300x220.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" /></p>
<p>That charitable work includes a nonprofit organization managed by state lawmakers.</p>
<p>According to its most recent tax return, the Los Angeles Dodgers Foundation has contributed $15,000 to the <a href="http://blackcaucus.legislature.ca.gov/members" target="_blank" rel="noopener">California Legislative Black Caucus</a>. The current vice-chair of the Black Caucus is none other than Senator Isadore Hall, III &#8212; the author of SB 549.</p>
<p>Last session, Asm. Reginald Byron Jones-Sawyer Sr., the chair of the California Legislative Black Caucus, authored a <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/asm/ab_1651-1700/ab_1691_cfa_20140513_123503_asm_comm.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">nearly identical bill, AB 1691</a>. Jones-Sawyer&#8217;s bill faced strong opposition from the state&#8217;s tribal groups, which saw it as encroaching on their turf.</p>
<p>&#8220;When you go from a 90-10 split to a 50-50 split, you&#8217;re moving away from charity to something more like a lottery,&#8221; David Quintana, a lobbyist for the California Tribal Business Alliance <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-sports-raffle-bill-20140425-story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told the Los Angeles Times last year</a>. &#8220;This is a huge change.&#8221;</p>
<h3>Questionable spending by sports charities</h3>
<p>In addition to benefiting nonprofits managed by state lawmakers, CalWatchdog.com&#8217;s review of California-based sports franchises found that their charitable entities frequently spend money on questionable activities that often benefit the underlying pro sports business.</p>
<p>According to the group&#8217;s tax return, the San Diego Chargers Charities spent nearly $40,000 to run its &#8220;Junior Charger Girls&#8221; program. The group&#8217;s noble charitable function: to teach girls aged seven to fifteen &#8220;the performance routine from the official Charger Girls Dance Team.&#8221; The nonprofit also spent $5,891 on football tickets.</p>
<p>In some cases, the sports nonprofits lose money on lavish fundraising events. The Los Angeles Lakers Youth Foundation spent $100,000 to a rent a golf course for a fundraiser that lost money, according to the nonprofit&#8217;s most recent tax return.</p>
<p>The Oakland Athletics Community Fund spent thousands of dollars on promotional-type events and fundraisers, including $65,525 for a golf tournament, $53,611 for a &#8220;bowling bash&#8221; and $9,654 for player appearances, according to the organization&#8217;s most <a href="http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2013/942/826/2013-942826655-0a598550-F.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recent tax return</a>. That doesn&#8217;t include the $98,774 spent on &#8220;grants&#8221; to the Athletics Investment Group, LLC, the company that owns and operates the Oakland Athletics. The grants were for tickets to A&#8217;s home games, yet the organization did not acknowledge a relationship between the two entities in its tax filings.</p>
<h3>Senate Bill 549: Sweetheart deal for sports nonprofits</h3>
<p><a href="http://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Basketball-sports.jpg"><img decoding="async" class="alignright size-medium wp-image-81794" src="http://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Basketball-sports-300x210.jpg" alt="Basketball sports" width="300" height="210" srcset="https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Basketball-sports-300x210.jpg 300w, https://calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Basketball-sports.jpg 500w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" /></a>A statewide coalition of charitable organizations says the legislation provides a special perk to a small group of nonprofits.</p>
<p>&#8220;SB 549 lets professional sports teams and their foundations play by different rules than the rest of us,&#8221; CalNonprofits, a statewide advocacy group that represents more than 10,000 nonprofit organizations, wrote in opposition to the bill. &#8220;All other nonprofits – school bands, symphonies, humane societies, rotary clubs and food banks, and all the rest of us – would be limited to the current 90/10 rules, whether they prefer it or not. And that’s not fair.&#8221;</p>
<p>Because the bill amends a voter-approved initiative, it requires a two-thirds vote of both houses &#8212; giving Republican lawmakers rare power to influence public policy. The Republican Caucus&#8217; analysis of the bill has raised concerns about the bill, especially its proposal to add a new $5,000 fee.</p>
<p>&#8220;There is a fee contained within this bill,&#8221; a Republican staff analysis of the bill warns lawmakers. &#8220;The bill requires eligible sports franchises, manufacturers and/or distributors of raffle related products and/or services to pay a $5,000 annual fee, in addition to a $100 fee for every individual raffle conducted at an eligible location to the DOJ in order to cover the administrative and enforcement provisions of the bill.&#8221;</p>
<p>Not a single lawmaker &#8212; Republican or Democrat &#8212; has voted against the bill.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://calwatchdog.com/2015/07/20/pro-sports-nonprofits-seek-special-exemption-state-raffle-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">81769</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/


Served from: calwatchdog.com @ 2026-04-19 20:58:41 by W3 Total Cache
-->