NLA Plays Nymphomaniac to Host Communications

A day or so ago I became acquainted with the terms of a document which purports to be a management contract between NLA and Host Communications, Inc. (Host). I found it so appalling that for the last day I have been lost for words. I feel like a mosquito on an elephant - I know what I have to do, but I don't know where to start. So, I'm going to divide up my comments into several posts dealing with several subjects so that the participants and non-combatants in this forum can get their arms around this pathetic episode. Since last August, I have called people a lot of things in this forum, most of them more accurate than I ever believed at the time I did so. More recently I asked if NLA was a criminal enterprise, and even then I didn't know how close I was to the target. In this post, I'm going to address the fraud, deceit and attempts to conceal from members the precise relationship between NLA and Host.
<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI> The contract bears signature lines for three parties, NLA, NLA Certification, LLC and Host Communications, Inc. It does not bear a signature line for the Executive Director of NLA, which is required by the NLA by-laws. It is signed by the CFO of Host and by Darryl "President for Life" Norman on behalf of NLA and NLAC. It purports to be effective on January 1, 2001 and purports to have been signed by Darryl "President for Life" Norman on December 22, 2000 - a "Christmas Present" from Darryl "President for Life" Norman to Host, although it's not clear who was doing the giving in connection with his signature.
<LI> The document bears a representation and warranty that each party has the full right, power and authority to enter into the agreement, and that the individuals signing it have been duly authorized to do so. This is, plain and simply, a fraudulent representation and known by both Host and Darryl "President for Life" Norman to be fraudulent. Norman should go to jail for this. I believe, and it is my opinion, that this provisions of the contract is at least one or more predicate acts of mail fraud that give rise to claims by NLA members against NLA, Host and Norman for damages under the Rackeeter-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), and if this "contract" is treated as anyhting but the piece of toilet paper that it is, claims under RICO will be pursued against Norman, NLA, Host and ANY DIRECTOR who has participated in, or aided and abetted, these acts by Norman and Host. Everyone involved in this deal knew and knows that the NLA board never voted on this contract, that Norman was never "duly authorized" to sign it, and that it was required to be signed by the Executive Director of NLA and "countersigned" by the NLA President, yet both Darryl "President for Life" Norman and Host ignored what they well knew. If litigation arises between Host and NLA over this piece of trash, EVERYONE gets sued - no threat, a blood-promise.
<LI> How far will Host and Norman go to conceal this fraud and deceit? The contract provides that the agreement is "confidential" and only the NLA officers and directors are to know about it, as well as legal counsel, accountants and tax advisers! What about the MEMBERS???? Nada. That's who it is being kept confidential from!!!! But it gets better. The agreement requires Host to keep full and accurate books and records for NLA and keep them in Lexington, Kentucky. Do NLA members have access to these books and records as required by the law of the District of Columbia??? The better question is, does NLA even have access??? The answer is, NOPE! In order for NLA to have access to ITS OWN documents, Host must receive "written notice" from NLA's legal counsel or the NLA "executive committee." If anybody ever thought that the executive committee hasn't hi-jacked the board's powers, this is proof positive as to who is running the show. This provision is intended to make it virtually impossible for board members of NLA, or officers of NLA, including that stalwart watchdog of the corporate treasury, Cory Rozen, to have access to NLAs own records, to say nothing of the impossibility of NLA members ever prying open the safe at Host to get a fleeting glimpse of NLA's records.
<LI> When I became acquainted with this document, I thought that NLA had been raped by Host. But when I looked more closely, it became apparent that this was not a case of rape by Host, but a case of nymphomania by Darryl "President for Life" Norman. Norman is either insane, terminally stupid, dishonest, or all of the above, given his conduct in connection with this document. Limoman's suggestion that he should be given a plaque is ridiculous, and if either LCT or LimoDigest laud his accomplishments, they should be sued for fraud.
<LI> Darryl "President for Life" Norman has lied about this document to every director who has attempted to find out about it. He has hid it from view because he sold out NLA in the worst sense, and has actively attempted to conceal his mis-deeds. Norman is done, not only at NLA but in this industry. No wonder he's trying to sell-out to Carey - even he knows that he's done. The question is, what's in the Carey deal to compensate Norman for what he has done? In this situation, the old adage to "follow the money," which I have cited before, takes on a whole new meaning. Remember, "follow the money." "Follow the money." "Follow the money."
[/list]
More next post, stay tuned. It really does get better.

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

[This message was edited by JHJ on January 14, 2001 at 11:37 AM.]

The Chauffeured Transportation Certification Program (CTCP), which in many ways has been at the root of the division of the NLA membership and which still threatens to bring down NLA, lives on in the document which purports to be a contract between Host, NLA and NLAC. Just to refresh your memory, I direct your attention to last October when the Certification Committee met in Chicago to make certain decision about the CTCP. At that meeting the CTCP program essentially died, at least as a certification program and in the form that it has theretofore existed. After that meeting, Ron Sorci was supposed to summarize the talking points and NLA was supposed to distribute such talking points to the entire NLA membership for input, and THEN a decision made about what to do with this ill-conceived program. Ron prepared and circulated the talking points to the committee, and then nothing happened. No distribution to the members, no input. What happens next? The CTCP becomes a "seminar" at the LCT show in Las Vegas as if nothing ever happened (I hear this "seminar" is going to be disrupted in Las Vegas and Linda Bouland run out of the room). What else happened? NLA then shows two staffers on its web site as running the CTCP which is, in fact, not running, but which has died - what do they do? Why is this happening???? We finally get to the root of it - FOLLOW THE MONEY! The document purporting to be a contract provides that Host will administer the CTCP and will designate a Certification Manager and Certification Clerk to do so, and that NLA will pay Host $6,000 per month at the end of January, 2001 and each month thereafter for six months while NLA and Host negotiate an agreement to continue this furtive copulation. WARNING - Whoever at NLA approves, signs, delivers, or participates, directly or indirectly, in stealing $6,000 from the NLA treasury this month, or any month thereafter, and gives it to Host, is going to be held individually and personally responsible for those funds - no threat, a blood promise. This document ignores the will of the membership, and possibly the will of the board of directors, and flys in the face of everything that has happened in connection with the CTCP!!! Host gets $72,000 per year to provide two flacks to administer this so-called program, which is moribund as we speak!!!!! And who now thinks NLA shouldn't be self-managed? Questions for Darryl "Nymphomaniac for Life" Norman - How much has NLA taken in the past six months in certification revenue? Has NLA been paying $6,000 per month to Host since last July to "administer" this piece-of-crap program? What is the total loss on this program? How do you justify your signature on a document to give away $6,000 per month to Host?
It gets better still, but I have to go visit la bella bambino this afternoon, so I'll have more to say this evening. Stay tuned folks.

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

OK, I lied. I'm not back, I just need to mention one more item before going out. In the section of the putative contract between NLA, NLAC and Host, there is a standard section which provides for "notice" to be sent to the parties. Typically, this also includes the attorneys for the parties. It is, of course, not surprising that Host identifies their CEO as the person to get such notices, Sam Dunn at Host to get a copy, and Host's attorneys in Lexington to get a copy. And for NLA, Darryl "Nymphomaniac for Life" Norman is designated to get notices. What is curious is that NLA's present and long-time law firm in Washington, D.C., Keller and Heckman, isn't mentioned. Instead, the law firm to get a copy of any notices is Howe and Hutton in Chicago!!! OK, now, where did this law firm come from? Why not the regular and usual attorneys? Why Chicago? Were they involved in negotiation of this contract? How did NLA come to retain this firm? Does this firm represent American Limousine or George Jacobs? Whose hand was really behind this putative contract? It's been said for a long time that Jacobs is the puppeteer behind Darryl "Nymphomania for Life" Norman - is this the evidence? Maybe there's a simple explanation - but, then again, maybe there's not. We intend to find out!

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

Dear Jim: I am shocked at what I am reading! Why would the NLA be paying Host money for a dead certification program? I was at the same meeting in Chicago that killed the program! Is this how they spend our money! I need to call the president and get some answers. If this is true then we have a much bigger problem than I thought! I will call Host on Monday to get an answer as well. I am afraid to read this site! Every time I come on there are more new items that I never knew before. The members need to see the details!

Scott -
I am amused by your comment that you are going to call the president to get some answers!!! I assume you mean President Clinton. Surely you don't expect to get answers from Darryl "President for Life" Norman, do you? Norman is the one who has been blowing smoke up the a**es of the board of directors for three months.

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

Dear Jim:The president is responsible to answer any questions from any member and I will do my best to get the information to our members.

Alright, now I want to talk about the economics of the putative contract between NLA and Host Communications. There are a lot of qualifications, so I'm going to do an overview first so that it's easier to understand.

There are a number of revenue streams involved in this contract, so pay attention:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI> NLA agrees to pay Host a management fee beginning January 1, 2001 of $385,000 for the year 2001, followed by a fee of $404,000 for the year 2002.
<LI> NLA agrees to pay Host an "incentive" fee over and above the management fee. The incentive fee is 20% of 110% of gross revenue above year 2000 (for 2001) and 20% of 110% of gross revenue above year 2001 (for year 2002). Now listen up - gross revenue is defined as all revenues of any kind, including mnembership fees, EXCEPT the following sources: (1) net profits from publications (see below for a discussion); (2) Corporate Profit Sponsorship Program revenues (see below for a discussion); (3) revenue generated from the LCT Show; (4) proceeds from the sale of the right to hold or produce any NLA conference; and (5) revenues collected and designated for the Harold Berkman Memorial Fund.
<LI> NLA agrees to pay Host 20% of all revenues generated from the sale of advertising in any and all NLA publications (existing, or in the future).
<LI> NLA agrees to divide equally (50/50) with Host the net profits from publication projects originated by Host on behalf of NLA. Net profit means the profit after deducting all expenses of producing the publication, excluding the 20% commission provided for above.
<LI> NLA agrees to pay Host a 30% commission for any NLA sponsorship programs initiated by Host, and 15% on existing sponsorship programs. In exchange NLA gives Host the right to license NLA's name, logos and/or trademarks.
<LI> NLA agrees to pay, over and above the management fee, Host's actual out-of-pocket expenses for travel, office materials and supplies, postage, long distance telephone charges, photography, printing, models, displays, special effects, audio/visual engravings and casual labor, third-party computer programming services and all other out-of-pocket expenses that Host incurs in managing NLA.
[/list]
This covers the economics, but there are other things of value that Host gets under this putative contract, as follows:
<UL TYPE=SQUARE>
<LI> NLA gives Host a worldwide Sponsorship License to use NLA's name, the letters "NLA," NLA's logo and all other trademarks and tradenames. Host gets the right to sublicense this intellectual property, and to sell advertising on the NLA web site. Depending on whether the sponsorhip existed before or after the putative contract, Host gets either 15% or 30% of sponsorship revenue, as noted above. There are no performance requirements imposed on Host.
<LI> NLA grants a publishing license to Host to publish, now get this, the piece-of-crap bi-monthly newsletter that NLA calls the LimoScene that should disappear, the NLA Technical Journal, which is the expensive piece-of-crap publication that you just got, or soon will get, from NLA that is nothing more than manufacturers touting their wares in the guise of a magazine, and for which they are required to advertise to put an article in the "journal," and the NLA Membership Directory.
[/list]
Does anybody have any thoughts on why NLA can't self-manage itself and retain all of these rights and all of the revenue streams that Darryl "Nymphomaniac for Life" Norman has diverted to Host????

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

There's been a lot of discussion in this forum about Host's intention to cause NLA to terminate its arrangement with LCT for the annual trade show in Las Vegas because Host wants to conduct an NLA and non-LCT trade show. Is that idle speculation, or gossip? Likely not. The putative contract between NLA and Host provides an economic structure for that to happen, and it is provided for in several places as a contingency. Added in at the very end of the contract, where it is totally out of place, is a provision that if NLA decides to hold an annual convention after February, 2001 (what is an annual convention, by the way), NLA must provide Host with 120 days notice prior to the convention and Host shall have an exclusive right of first refusal to manage the NLA annual convention for a "reasonable" fee to be agreed upon between Host and NLA. Aside from being some of the most amateur language I've ever seen in a contract, what this language should tell everyone is that NLA is going to terminate the deal with LCT and contract with Host to conduct an annual convention. Did the board decide to terminate the deal with LCT? Did someone say that Sara McLean holds a "seat" on the NLA board in "honor of" Ty Bobit? What a strange idea of "honor" someone has.

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

Jim,

You have mentioned that the Host Contract was "private" - how did you get a hold of it?

http://www.limos.com/limoforumgraphics/bbtitle_small.gif

Why is NLA in the clutches of Host? How do we stay that way? Here's the answer. Let's start with the NLA by-laws. Those by-laws provide for an Executive Director who is to be selected and appointed by the NLA board of directors and is to be paid by NLA. Right now we don't have one. Here's what the putative contract provides about an Executive Director, and you tell me if it sounds like the NLA board is selecting an Executive Director and if NLA is paying the executive Director. The contract provides that the incompetent Linda Bouland is required to be the Assistant Executive Director for the next two years - this is the person who doesn't return member phone calls and is conducting the seminar that is going to "sell" the certification program in Las Vegas. Bouland is a loose cannon who is beholden solely to Host. In the putative contract, NLA agrees that it will select an Executive Director with whom Host is mutually agreeable (knowing full well that the NLA board doesn't have an ounce of independence in its body). In other words, NLA cannot select the Executive Director of its own choosing, it must have Host's agreement. The agreement also purports to bind NLA to select the vice-presient of Host's management group to be NLA's Executive Director in another place in the putative contract. With this contract, Host has NLA in a death grip that it can never escape from. And what if NLA wants to retain a different management contract at the end of the two-year term of this agreement? Is it free to do so? NOPE! Host gets a right of first refusal to manage NLA and NLA agrees to negotiate in good faith with Host to keep it as the management company. Isn't this wonderful?

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

It emerged on my fax machine suddenly and without warning!!!!! I guess a client wants me to review it?

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

Jim: Why would the NLA give up so much to any management company? This does not make any sense! The NLA should retain the rights to these revenues or am I crazy? I am shocked at this deal!I will call the president in the morning to see what I can get as an answer to my question! This is disturbing news.

When our lawsuit is filed against NLA (and it is growing ever larger in scope and against more people, such a rogue NLA directors), one of the claims will be to set aside the election of George Jacobs, or, alternatively, the election that is going on right now (for other reasons as well as those stated here). The reason? Well, remember in December when Jacobs was elected to fill the seat of Robert Bellagamba who resigned? Bellagamba was from the East, and his proposed replacement, Don Kensey, was also from the East. According to the majority of the directors, that didn't matter. George Jacobs was from the Central region, and that didn't matter either. And, of course, that is the correct interpretation of the by-laws because they do not provide for regional voting. No sooner do these geniuses elect Jacobs, but they turn around and conduct an annual election by regions. One or the other is unlawful and is going to be upset. And until that happens, if Jacobs' vote makes a difference in any matter, that matter also will be set aside by the court. And if the new board is not legally elected, anything else it does will be set aside. And Darryl "Nymphomaniac for Life" Norman wants to contract out the management of NLA to Host, the gang that can't shoot straight and bends every rule to do what it wants the NLA board to do.

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

The board meeting on Tuesday should not be the day to vote on the Host contract. I will be pushing the motion to defer this decision to the Las Vegas board meeting.

Just for the record, if a vote is held on Tuesday in which I think is a mistake, I will be voting against the contact. It is terrible that this contact in its entirety was not brought before the board. We all need to review the so call other proposals that were rejected by the "Executive Commitee". I also think, we need to put out new RFP's for analysis.

Right now "The Gang of Four" as we are known to our critics on the board are:
Ron Soci
JohnSinibaldi
Carolyn Nelson
David Seelinger
We are committed against the present Host Contract.

We need five more votes to block this contract from taking effect at this time.

John Sokol
George Jacobs
Kay Haskins
Gary Tonkin
Barbara Pastelak
Cheryl Berkman
Alan Melton
Marion McCormack
Carl Geiger

The Board members listed above are good people. We need your help to lobby them to defer this vote.

The other members: Darryl Norman, Michelle Rossi, and Cory Rosen are also good people too, unfornuatly they are wrong about this contract. I hope they can see that defering the vote to Las Vegas, and reviewing this contract in more detail would benefit the NLA.

We don't need lawsuits from members to settle this matter.

John Sinibaldi
NLA Board Member

In re-reading my post on the economics of the Host-NLA putative contract, I note that I did not express accurately the incentive fee. The fee is 20% of the revenues in excess of 110% of the base years 2000 and 2001. I knew what I was saying but did not say it accurately. Sorry about that.

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured
Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

If you're an NLA member, you received a fax blast that apparently somebody created a new NLA committee called the Management Oversight Committee which is going to be composed of three NLA board members and three regular members who are going to analayze and monitor management performance and make recommendations to the Board of Directors regarding the management contract, as needed. What a hoot and a load or crap this is. Read the fax blast memo to say what it really means: the board of directors, which has almost daily contact with Host Communications and its management performance, can't figure out if Host is doing a good job or not (we also can't find our ass with both hands) and we don't have the balls to get rid of Host, so we want a committee to blame. The more things change the more they stay the same. Does anybody really have time for these jokers? Has anybody heard from any of these directors since the election? It was all a lot of eyewash to make it look like there was going to be change but only to benefit the people who wanted to get elected to the NLA Board - why they would want to get elected is still a mystery. Meanwhile, the new board just keeps on having illegal meetings and doing the same thing the old board did - new faces, same script. When you fools get tired of this game, say so and we'll activate a new association with by-laws so specific and iron-clad that this will never happen again

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

JHJ,
I have followed your posts regarding the NLA for quite some time. I have to admit that I keep wondering why I renew my membership to an organization that does not appear to give me any tangible benifits. I guess that I hope that my money goes towards improving our industry. I have not (at least as far as I know) received any work from other NLA members because of my membership. My question to you is this: As critical as you are of the NLA, and given all of your ideas for improvement, have you ever run for NLA office? I have complaints regarding the NLA, but since I don't have time to be a part of the solution, I figure why complain. Looking forward to your response

We all renew our NLA membership for pretty much the same reason - in an industry populated by sleazballs we want some way to distinguish ourselves and to suggest to the public that we are different and, perhaps, adhere to at least some code of ethics. And it seems that that is enough for most members because out of the putative 1600 or so, only about 225-250 vote in elections, and fewer play an active role in the association.
As for me, there are a number of reasons I have not and would not run for any NLA office. First, the by-laws prohibit it. Second, I have already been accused of muckraking NLA to advance some personal agenda, and if I even considered running for an office it would destroy any credibility or indpendence that I do have (look at Scott Solombrino who claimed to be a raving critic of NLA in December and January to get elected to the board, and who now has nothing to say - does he have credibility with the membership anymore?). Third, my principal career is that of being a lawyer, so I don't need being an officeholder at NLA to pump up my ego, nor do I have a lot of economic interest in what NLA does or doesn't do - I just think what they do is criminal (I mean that in the non-legal sense) and completely irresponsible and reprehensible. Fourth, my crap tolerance is not high enough to even attend a board meeting, let alone be a director and participate in one. NLA board membership is the biggest waste of time I have ever seen in my 58 years of life and 32 years of practicing law. Finally, no one has ever said that if you want to criticize you have to run for office - if that were true it could be applied to newspaper publishers, editors, reporters and every Tom, Dick and Harry sitting around a bar carping about elected officials. The only people who try to foist that load of manure on anyone, i.e., if you don't like it, run for office (the corollary is, if you don't like it, get out) are NLA directors, who think they are immune from criticism because they are "unpaid volunteers." The fact is that they are NOT unpaid volunteers - they get plenty of direct and indirect economic benefits from the NLA board membership, otherwise why would they run again and again and lie to get elected. Look at this last election as a very good example. All the "reformers" have never been heard from since - they're too busy feathering their nests. Some day enough people are going to wake up and realize that the only viable approach to creating a vigorous national trade association will be to start from scratch - the NLA nest is too fouled. Any other questions?

James H. Joseph
Pegasus Chauffeured Motor Cars
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
jhj@pegasus-pittsburgh.com

[This message was edited by JHJ on April 20, 2001 at 08:37 AM.

[This message was edited by JHJ on April 20, 2001 at 08:38 AM.]

Hey Robert good to hear from you again.

Don't renew if you are unhappy. We didn't. We joined for the same reason JHJ did, however, we now perceive that "benefit" as being neglible. Our next version of Limos also reduces (if not eliminates) the NLA recognition as well.

http://www.limos.com/limoforumgraphics/bbtitle_small.gif

Jim:

I just got my renewal notice from the NLA and really hate to send them another $200. I am interested in joining another association if you think we have enough disgruntled members to start another association. Let me know what you think.

Wade Randolph

$200? Don't you have to pay by fleet size? Isn't it more like $1,500 for you Wade?

http://www.limos.com/limoforumgraphics/bbtitle_small.gif

Michael:
I got a bill from the NLA for $200 for my membership not $1500. I have under 10 cars and it used to be up to 10 cars for the minimum. They did not send me a fleet size price schedule so I don't really know if the prices have gone up or not.

Wade Randolph

Just got my glossy paper NLA LIMOSCENE, started to read it and just started laughing. I can't believe that the inmates running the NLA asylum reelected Curt Andrews to the board as a trade member director. This is the same guy that stood in a conference room in Orlando during an NLA road show and made statements and promises about medical insurance packages that were going to be made available to NLA members (all lies and
bulls**t). The same guy that ran around the country on NLA road shows having a grand old time at members expense. Can someone tell me what Capacity Coverage Company is and what it has to do with limousines (this is who Andrews is listed under).

Well here we go again. Old regime, new regime,
old board members, new board members - the crap is still piled high and it still smells as bad. It is a sad commentary that the current NLA board could not have found someone better to represent the trade members. But then again, they know were one sure vote is from Mr. Andrews and they know exactly where he stands.