# The ICCF - Did you know?



## membervoice (Oct 23, 2009)

I couldn't resist sharing this with the members of this forum. It is long and worth the read.

RE: ICC Foundation Issues

As many of you are aware, WABO is very concerned with the direction of our

membership organization, the International Code Council. It started with voting

irregularities at the ABM in Minneapolis and as we searched for answers, troubling

financial issues came to our attention. We brought many of these issues to the

attention of ICC, but have yet to receive adequate explanations.

During a review of ICC financial records, we noticed some transactions affecting

membership assets and the ICC Foundation that especially concerned us. As we

began to track these transactions, we discovered ICC is putting millions of dollars of

member-owned assets at risk while costing hundreds of thousands of dollars in

unnecessary rent payments, apparently to support the Foundation.

Two office buildings originally owned by ICBO were transferred to ICC during the

merger of the three legacy groups. These two buildings have a current assessed

value of over $6.31 million1. From 2003 to 2006, these buildings were reported to the

Internal Revenue Service as belonging to ICC. On the IRS reports for 2007,

ownership of the two buildings were moved from ICC to the Foundation. There is no

explanation on either report given for the transfer.

When brought to his attention, ICC’s General Counsel and Senior Advisor to the

CEO, David deCourcy stated that it had been deeded to the Foundation for tax

purposes. But since both organizations are tax exempt, we were unsure what benefit

would be realized. Later, he said the property was transferred to the Foundation by

ICBO at the time of completion of the merger and that it had been erroneously

reported on the ICC & ICC Foundation IRS filings. According to Mr. deCourcy, an

amended 2005 IRS return was filed in 2008, “To report transfer of building in 2003 to

affiliate ICC Foundation: transaction not properly recorded at time of transfer.”

However, despite numerous requests, they have not provided a copy of the amended

return so we cannot confirm his statement.

The same IRS reports for 2007 also reveal that ICC began to pay rent to the

Foundation for the offices ICC maintains in these two buildings. The Foundation has

received rent in the amount of $340,000 per year or more beginning in 2007 and

continuing to date.

That raised the question, “what is the Foundation doing with this money?” Our

research led us to conclude that they are not using it for scholarships or to promote

building safety as one would expect. Instead, it is being given to the Federal Alliance

for Safe Homes (FLASH, Inc.), a Florida organization, who is supposed to be

managing the Foundation’s programs and fund raising to further the goals of the

Foundation. FLASH, Inc. is a non-profit organization devoted to disaster safety and

property loss mitigation.

We have been unable to learn the exact amount of the contract between the

Foundation and FLASH, Inc., but based on ICC financial reports, we believe it is

approximately $30,000 per month or $360,000 per year.

What is the Foundation getting for this not inconsiderable contract? How much money has the Foundation

received through FLASH, Inc.? Through July 2009, a total of $3,000 for the year. How much has been raised in

contributions? Again, through July 2009, a total of $12,5182, much lower than the budgeted year-to-date amount

of $150,0003. Yes, there is a revamped website and a new scholarship program has been developed for

implementation next year, but nothing that couldn’t have been developed in-house for much less than $360,000

per year.

Even more disturbing is the discovery the ICC Board of Directors has also given up control of the Foundation.

The original bylaws of the Foundation specified that they could only be changed by a majority of the Foundation’s

governors and with “written consent of the (International Code) Council.” In October 2008, the Foundation bylaws

were changed so that now they “may be amended, altered or repealed and new bylaws may be adopted at any

time by the Council CEO.” In other words, the ICC CEO (Rick Weiland) has exclusive authority to change the

bylaws in any way he desires. Changes can be made to the bylaws without the consent of the ICC Board of

Directors, its membership, or the Foundation Board of Governors.

Additionally, the current bylaws state there can be two paid positions within the Foundation, the President and the

Treasurer. The ICC CEO can fix the salaries of these two positions. Conveniently, the ICC CEO is also the

President of the Foundation (Dominic Sims, ICC COO is Treasurer) and as such has the ability to set his own

salary. While there is no evidence that the Foundation president is now receiving a salary, there is nothing

preventing that from happening in the future.

There is one other thing worthy of mention. The ICC CEO, who happens to be the Foundation President with total

and unilateral control of the Foundation, also sit s on the Board of Directors of FLASH, Inc.4 According to the

FLASH press release dated September 24, 2007, “International Code Council CEO Rick Weiland today

announced the selection (of FLASH, Inc.) to operate its Foundation programs while the two organizations

evaluate a potential strategic alliance and/or merger.” We believe that the ICC CEO (having the sole authority to

change the Foundation bylaws) and also serving as President of the Foundation while holding a position on the

FLASH, Inc. Board of Directors presents the appearance of a conflict of interest and quite possibly is a conflict of

interest.

It is feasible that if the Foundation is merged with FLASH, Inc., $6.3 million of ICC member assets will disappear,

becoming the property/assets of FLASH, Inc. and there may be nothing the ICC membership can do to stop it.

Also, should a merger between the Foundation and FLASH, Inc. actually occur, ICC could end up paying rent to

FLASH, Inc. for property ICC used to own.

There very well may be a logical and ethical reason for these actions, but we have been unable to obtain

reasonable and complete answers from ICC’s representative. In these troubling times ICC cannot afford to give

away over 20% of the organization’s assets, hundreds of thousands of dollars to another organization for little in

return on the investment.

Our goal for bringing these issues to your attention is in the interest of preserving the ICC and honoring the

mission and values that make this organization unique. Our objective is to further promote transparency within the

organization and we encourage all members to do the same. We urge you to ask your ICC Board representative

and candidates vying for a board position at the ABM for an explanation and how they plan to address these

concerns.

1 King County, WA & Los Angeles County, CA Assessors’ offices2 ICC Financial reports July 20093 In August ICC revised the budgeted revenue. The budgeted contribution income for July, 2009 (year-to-date) was $150,000. The budgeted amount for

August (year-to-date) is reduced to $12,818.

4 FLASH, Inc. 2007 IRS Form 990


----------



## mjesse (Oct 23, 2009)

Re: The ICCF - Did you know?

Disturbing ?


----------



## AegisFPE (Oct 23, 2009)

Re: The ICCF - Did you know?

Better add that to JP's list.


----------



## High Desert (Oct 23, 2009)

Re: The ICCF - Did you know?

This letter was actually sent to all the ICC Chapters. I'm sure it will ruffle a lot of feathers.


----------



## TJacobs (Oct 23, 2009)

Re: The ICCF - Did you know?

Wow, it is worse than I thought.

OK, who stands to gain if ICC goes belly up?  Follow the money...

Was this the brainchild of James Lee Witt?


----------



## RJJ (Oct 23, 2009)

Re: The ICCF - Did you know?

Yes! I have been aware of the issues for some time. Remember that a list of issues may paint a poor picture of problems. Not always what we assume. However, I do believe we need some explanation. I had signed on with the first letter regarding these issues as stated above and was on line with a phone conference with about 50 to 60 code officials across the country to discuss these and other issues. WABO has done a fine job and has raised some major points.

That being said; we will need answers in Baltimore and those that can't be in Baltimore please log on for the Fire Side Chat. By doing so you will be able to hear Mr. Zubia address the issues or at least the questions from the floor.


----------



## Mule (Oct 23, 2009)

Re: The ICCF - Did you know?

I hope we will be able to log on!


----------



## jpranch (Oct 24, 2009)

Re: The ICCF - Did you know?

Full financial disclosure is on the list of issues that I submitted to the icc yesterday. I'm not sure what to expect?

Pause.... Long pause.......................................................................................................

While I do agree with those that would like to fix the problems with the icc and I hope so I'll know more in 2 weeks. If by the spring of 2010 the icc dose not pull their heads out of the dark I WILL petition the Wyoming Conference of Building Officials to resign their association with the icc. If that happens there will not be any chapter in this state. I would then move on to petion the Office of the State Fire Marshal to do the same. The State Fire Marshals Office is very active and connected with WCBO. The icc will most likely not miss us at all? This being the least populated state in the lower 48. But I do not see another choice. The past president of WCBO will be with me in Baltimore. You can bet this will be a topic of discussion between us and I can tell you that he feels the same as many do here and the same as members of the old BB. It is with sadness that I post this.


----------



## Little_Guy (Oct 26, 2009)

Re: The ICCF - Did you know?

It is truly a sorry affair to see ICC loosing its valued members by being slowly turned into a "for profit business". They say that they are member driven, but when you call ICC they ask you what business you represent not what jurisdiction do you represent. They are not an organization of members anymore but a business that is using the non-profit status to get attention and promote their idea of a code organization. :cry:

We need to hold them accountable and as the letter above indicates, moneys that we have paid to build ICC and the three code bodies before ICC, need to stay with us as a member driven organization, they need to be held accountable. :twisted:


----------

