My recent concerns and opinions regarding STR advocacy group Oregon Coast Hosts:

Oregon Coast Hosts legal petition to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) against Tillamook County was dismissed on Feb. 9, 2024. In a nutshell, LUBA said this is not a land use issue, and dismissed its claim. The fight was against County Ordinance 84 ( 2017 ) & Ordinance 84-2.

Fast forward over 2 weeks ago since this substantial legal decision and neither OCH’s website nor its public FB page  discloses anything about this significant legal loss. Yet, the nonprofit’s website continues to fundraise with the clearly stated goal of financing legal action that, at least in the short term, appears to have already been settled. ( Still current but outdated info on the website:  “The Notice of Intent to Appeal was filed on Aug 8, 2023 and in 2024 we are still awaiting a decision on jurisdiction from the Land Use Board of Appeals.” ).  

So, the BIG question is: why hasn’t this nonprofit publicly acknowledged the fact that it lost this important legal decision at significant cost, and why does it continue to fundraise without stating how those funds are to be used going forward?

It has been reported that past legal bills may have exceeded original estimates by $75-$100k. Will new fundraising be used to pay past debts?

As a former OCH board member who helped build OCH’s website and who has donated hundreds of hours and $$$, I sent an email to Nicole Twigg, current board member and treasurer of OCH, asking for some clarity, and current numbers regarding the following:

OCH current account balance( deposited and undeposited received funds ):

OCH Total legal fees to date :

OCH Total paid legal fees to date:

OCH Total legal fees still owed to date:

The response I received was less than forthcoming from a group that one would hope would support the principals of openness and transparency. In fact, they refused to share ANY of this information with me.

I was told this on Feb 21st, 2024 by OCH Treasurer Nicole Twigg:

 “The board hosted a meeting a few days ago with high stakes donors, and petitioners….we do not need to share fundraising/expense figures in writing....as far as the official numbers, I am not sure I am able or required to share that beyond the board; although as mentioned we did discuss this at the most previous meeting” 

So what they are saying is this: if you are donating to OCH, they won't share with you exactly how your $$$ will be spent, how much they have spent or owe on past legal fees, and how much they currently have in the bank to pay for any legal challenges going forward, unless you belong to a "high stakes" donor group, or are one of the petitioners in the lawsuit. 

If you donated less than a predetermined amount, you’re out of luck. And for those donors of more limited financial means….sorry, you will have to wait until OCH ( a 501c4 nonprofit ) files their 990 tax form for 2023. This is both irrationally selective, and economically discriminatory.

The question is, what are they trying to hide?

 This is hardly the definition of “transparency”. You have to wonder why they refuse to share this information with all current or potential donors, or other interested parties? Are they trying to fundraise without clear intent on how future funds are to be used or allocated? And as I stated earlier, will future funds be used to pay off past debt’s? 

To quote from the National Council of Nonprofits:

“As tax-exempt public charities, charitable nonprofits embrace the values of accountability and transparency as a matter of ethical leadership, as well as legal compliance.”

“Leaders of charitable nonprofits know that financial transparency will help preserve the important trust community members and donors place in a nonprofit.” 

“Earning trust through financial transparency and accountability goes beyond what the law requires…..”

“Transparency inspires confidence. Beyond what the law requires, nonprofits can demonstrate their commitment to ethical practices by being transparent regarding financial information and fundraising practices.”

And from Araize, one of the largest fundraising management companies:

"Nonprofits are required to publicly disclose current tax forms and financial information. But, nonprofit accountability goes beyond disclosing tax requirements. In recent years, ethical transparency is also a requirement."

"....when it comes to donating, donors want to know how their money is going to be spent."

Apparently, OCH President Hillary Gibson and her board doesn’t want to share with all donors how much OCH has spent or what it still owes. 

Early on, Gibson pushed to hire not one but two separate legal firms (Tonkon Torp LLP & Heather Brann ) for a single legal challenge to an ordinance that Tillamook Co. Commissioners hadn’t even voted on and was still being revised. The cost: approx. 69K in donations. I voiced my concerns about needing to hire 2 separate law firms early on....but they we're ignored. 

During this same time frame Gibson also failed to engage free offered help from two seasoned public relations professionals. Instead, she chose to hire a PR agency, spending more than 10K of donor funds. 

The apparent truth is: OCH is fundraising without any stated clear intent. Again, will donations be used to pay off previous debt? Fundraising without stating how those funds would be used hardly meets the definition of “transparency”!

Unfortunately, it seems to me that Oregon Coast Hosts has little interest in sharing these values or being open and honest about current and future spending, despite being completely dependent on donations from others.

Pete & Linda Stone

Nedonna Beach, Oregon.

psphoto@comcast.net