There is a Connection

I just could not figure out how a vet tech ended up on the pseudo-sanctuary's board of directors as its corresponding secretary. I could not imagine the sanctuary's directors wanting anyone with animal knowledge around the facility. It just did not make sense to me, especially since the vet tech works for a vet clinic that used to do business with the so-called sanctuary. If she was actively involved with the WAO, like she claims, then the vet technician must have known what was going on at this place? What in the world would compel this person to serve on the board and hold her tongue when it came to animal care? Simple...money.

It took some research, but I finally discovered a connection--a connection that was promptly elevated to the OAG. You see, the board member is married to the sanctuary's independent animal hauler contractor! The hauler apparently does not work for any other business, but is self-employed, contracting out his services to the sanctuary on a monthly basis to haul mainly dogs and cats throughout the United States. From what I understand the so-called sanctuary started a little side business of hauling dogs and cats from a shelter  in Mississippi to other shelters primarily on the east coast.


The sanctuary hired the independent driver to haul the animals (as far back as 2005 I learned), and after submitting his invoice, is paid by the sanctuary. This side business has nothing to do with the sanctuary's mission -- it is strictly a side job, with the sanctuary animals paying for his services. The independent contractor also hauls the sanctuary's latest acquisitions to its property from various states, which fortunately, is not too often.

Why is any of this significant? Well, there are no independent contractors listed on the 2006 and 2007 990 (the hauling business has been going on since 2005).  Interesting enough, contractor services are listed on the 2005 990, but no where else after that year. Also, the female board member never identified herself as being married to the highest paid independent contractor on the 2005/2006/2007 990. Talk about a conflict of interest! Shouldn't the public know that her board decisions may be influenced by the work her husband performs for the sanctuary? How in the world did the so-called sanctuary ever balance its books, when a large sum of money is paid to the independent contractor each month? Did the directors roll his "salary" into the employee salary category, hence why the amount rose two consecutive years since 2005, despite several employees quiting their employment with the sanctuary?


Did the board director join her husband on some of the trips, enjoying a little vacation away from work?  Was she reimbursed for travel, meals, and lodging as well as her husband?


Is the "contract" driver even operating legally throughout the US?  Doesn't he require a special license or something?  And how can he be a 'contract worker,' when he uses the "sanctuary's" Humane Train (as reported in various on-line articles), operates on a schedule/plan prepared by the "directors" and is reimbursed for a stolen GPS device by the animals?  No, no, no!  He is NOT a contract worker--he is an employee!!  So a question for the IRS is this...at the end of 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, did this 'employee' receive a W-2 or a 1098? 

I believe this "love" connection has a hint of fraud about it --don't you?