I don't think anyone needs to question WHY Cathy is taking in ferrets and
not adopting them out.  So long as she is able to properly care for and
love the animals in her charge, we should keep our noses out of it and
focus only on the part that effects us, that being her nonprofit status.
 
Yes, we should.  You are missing the point.  The focus is why she is
receiving 501c3 status when they have essentially become her personal
ferrets since she refuses to adopt out..  yes refuses.  It is our
business if anyone person, organization etc qualifies and receives
tax exempt status that in itself is reason enough.  This is a VALID
discussion, debate, arguement (depending on who you are talking to) and
it needs to be discussed.
 
Now, as to that, anyone can correct me if I'm wrong, but her organization
has nonprofit status, not she herself, and it is income that the
organization makes in the form of donations, etc., which are not taxable,
not her own earnings from jobs, etc
 
Tax exempt donations are not the only benefit to 501c3 status.  But even
so, if I receive 20 tax exempt for caring for my ferrets..  whoa that
saves me a bundle.  They in turn may also receive stamps, paper to mail
out letters etc.  They recieve many tax advantages in the same way
churches, charitable organizations etc do.
 
Melissa Hooper wrote:Leanne wrote in a post about ZFS' 501c3 status:
>No one is saying you don't provide proper care, housing, play, etc., but
>in reality they are saying they should not foot the bill for the care of
>your personal animals
 
May I point out that the people to whom you are referring are NOT footing
the bills for the ferrets at the sanctuary, nor are they being asked to.
Cathy filed for (and received) 501c3 status in order to provide tax
receipts for those who VOLUNTARILY, of their own free will, decided to
donate items or money to help with the babies them
 
See below
 
Melissa wrote:
>and perhaps everyone (who has been doing so) can now stop harping on the
>whole 501c3 part...tax payers are NOT paying anything towards the upkeep
>of the ferrets at ZFS, unless they willingly and freely donate money or
>items individually.
 
Melissa when one becomes 501c3 tax status there are actually many doors
opened.  Not only the availability to not pay taxes on the donations
received (which I don't think anyone has a problem with here) But that
door opens them up to Federal grants, monies etc. to run the shelter,
santuary.  Including breaks on everything you use in one.  You say the
tax payers are not footing the bill but they are.  If you accept
donations tax free (mind you we all pay tax on our personal kids)
somewhere the tax payers are footing the bill or do you just not see that
clearly?
 
Once again, I have no problem with Zoo, Cathy or what she does but if she
refuses to adopt out (and she has REFUSED) they have become personal kids
in one way or another.  She is not providing a service to the community
by what she does, yes, she take in kids that need rescue, So do I.  I
have rescued, yes rescued three of my kids from horrible situations.  But
they sick or not are my personal kids and I foot the bill what do you not
understand?  This is an argument or debate gone wrong.  The whole thing
still boils down to a shelter who accepts and qualifies for 501c3 status,
which I indeed have no problem with as long as the shelter, refuge,
sanctuary provides a service to the community.  If her taking in sick,
older (and they are not all sick or older )kids and providing them with
medical care (just as we all do with ours that we may rescue or adopt)
and not adopting them out is concidered more or as a community service
than taking in those same kids that need medical care, providing
surgeries, shelter but again adopting them out when available than I'm
lost.  Heck Im providing the same service... Where is my tax exemption?
 
Sorry but you are entirely missing the point here.  I do NOT argue that
she is 501c3 status..  hell all shelters should receive monetary help
of some kind if they indeed are providing a community service which the
majority are..  but she needs again to re-examine her reasoning.  She
is providing at this point, no more service to the community that I am..
but she is (I didn't say she asked for them) receiving tax exempt
donations to care for personal ferrets at this point since she does and
WILL NOT adopt out.  The fact remains, that although personally I would
rather see the ferrets in her care out of stores, people homes that are
abusive, not taking care of them etc than in the county animal jail, or
humane society we would all prefer to see those kids placed in loving
forever homes.  You can not predict people and the way they are and how
they care for their animals.  You can however, provided the service to
the community and animals as you intended to provide in the first place.
The 501c3 status is just a benifit of such and does not and should not
be taken for granted.  I myself have donated over 125.00 just this month
to shelters (3 different ones for three different reasons) and they do
provide a service for which I do not feel at or question at all what it
goes for.  Yes, sending donations to Zoo would go to the animals I
understand that .... but who's animals?  Who is reaping the benefits
here and at who's expense?  Enough said for me.
 
Leanne B
[Posted in FML issue 4043]