by As I noted in Part 1, Judge Cohen specified six items of relief in his interim decision. Part 1 cover items one through three and this post will cover the final three. When the trial ended and this decision was rendered, the two items out of the six that got the majority of the attention were numbers four and six.
Jumping right in, item four took direct aim at the NRA’s Audit Committee. Judge Cohen said,
Changing the Audit Committee so that it would not include people, at least not – at the very least not – as chair or co-chair, that served on the committee during the violations found in this action. Despite the changes in some members, there is an argument that there needs to be a sharp break with the past – sharper break with the past – than is reflected in the most recent committee appointments. Similar decisions could be made with respect to other committees, as well.
I believe Judge Cohen took note of NRA President Bob Barr’s assignments to the Audit, Finance, Ethics, Legal Affairs, and Bylaws & Resolutions Committee released on July 10th. He, like many of us, was none too happy to see so many of the Cabal in leadership positions. Chief among those was former NRA President Charles Cotton who was appointed chair of Audit and Ethics, vice chair of Bylaws & Resolutions, and a member of the rest. He had specifically called out Cotton along with Barr for their spin on the jury’s verdict calling it “simply false”.
Barr did take note of Judge Cohen’s “concerns” and replaced Cotton as chair of the Audit Committee with Curtis Jenkins. This was on August 1st. From what I understand, Jenkins and Barr go way back together in Georgia politics. Notice that there is no mention of Cotton being removed entirely from the Audit Committee.
Note that item four did not restrict itself to only the Audit Committee. While that was the only specifically mentioned, Judge Cohen said similar decisions could relate to other committees. David Coy who headed the Finance Committee during the period of the violations is still the chair of that committee. During the jury trial, Assistant Attorney General Monica Connell mentioned 14 board members who had been strong backers of Wayne LaPierre. Thanks to Defense Exhibit 4-2-001, we have those names. Of those 14 board members, eight are on these important committees. Of the remaining six, three have joined with the reformers, two are no longer on the board, and only Tom King was not named to one of these important committees. To think that Judge Cohen is ignorant of that would be wishful thinking by Bob Barr and the rest of the Cabal. I would not be surprised if the final decision is even stronger with regard to those who let the corruption and grifting to flourish under their noses.
Moving on, item five deals with the term of office of the Chief Compliance Officer. Currently, it is a 1-year term just like the EVP, Secretary, and CFO. Judge Cohen suggest that the term of office be extended to a 3-year term at least initially. I think he is rightly concerned that a board controlled by the Cabal could decide to replace the Chief Compliance Officer if he or she didn’t go along with their whims. Judge Cohen would like to make it so that the CCO could only be replaced during that period by the entire board for “good cause”. Some examples of what constitutes good cause would be fraud, theft, drug or chronic alcohol abuse, sexual harassment, or a felony conviction. I believe a bylaw change would be required to put this into effect.
The sixth and final item is a suggestion that there be a bylaw referendum to reduce the size of the board or “to reorganize it to create a smaller, more focused group to oversee the key operations and finances of the organization.” He goes on to suggest what I have been in favor of for a long time. That is, something akin to what many colleges or universities have with a board of trustees and a board of visitors. The trustees or directors deal with the core financial and managerial aspects of the organization while the board of visitors or advisors concentrate on things like fund-raising, building support for the organization, and advisory functions. He goes on to say that a board the size of the NRA’s is just “not a manageable to make decisions on micro issues and, also, to provide close oversight.” He is correct on that and it one of the major reasons Wayne and his fellow grifters got away with it for so long. There is one thing that should not happen when it comes to the reduction in size of the board. That is just to make the existing Executive Committee the new, reduced in size, Board of Directors.
Judge Cohen concludes that these are the types of remedies that he has considered. However, since so much of the bench trial was focused on a special monitor, he wants the parties to discuss it, negotiate, and perhaps to come up with additional remedies beyond those he has suggested for his consent order. He says that ultimately it will be his decision but he would like more precise guidance on what he has suggested.
Attorneys for the Attorney General’s Office and the NRA will meet tomorrow for a face-to-face meeting to hammer out an agreement based upon the judge’s six items as well as any additional items that might be proposed by each side. If they can’t hammer out an agreement on the six items, then they will each work on separate proposals which they will present to Judge Cohen for his consideration. Given the reasonableness of Judge Cohen’s six items especially for the NRA, I would hope that they can come up with a joint agreement tomorrow so that this case can come to a conclusion. The sticking points might be the opening up the 2025-2027 board elections, who else is to be removed from a committee, and the mechanics of reducing the size of the board.
I will be looking out for any news released after that meeting and will report on it when I get reliable information.