2025-07-14T07:24:25-07:00 2023-12-31 464263748 S & S TAX SERVICES 1443 ROCK SPRING RD SUITE 98 BEL AIR MD 21014 990 2023-01-01 820647764 NATIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION INC NATI 3176982143 8710 BASH STREET INDIANAPOLIS IN 46250 EDDIE HUTCHISON PRESIDENT 3176982143 2024-06-21 true true Stephen J Melnyk P00413662 4108385511 2024-06-23 2023 2025-03-06 01:10:19Z X PUBLIC DISCLOSURE COPY EDDIE HUTCHISON 8710 BASH STREET INDINAPOLIS IN 46250 5304237 false X WWW.NATIONALPOLICE.ORG X 2017 IN THE NATIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION IS A 501(C)(3)NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION FOUNDED TO EDUCATE SUPPORTERS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ON HOW TO HELP POLICE DEPARTMENTS ACCOMPLISH THEIR GOALS. 3 3 0 3 0 0 6044122 5304217 0 20 0 0 6044122 5304237 0 0 0 240194 247419 2039962 5906238 5521508 6146432 5768927 -102310 -464690 692175 362882 205094 340491 487081 22391 THE NATIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION IS A 501(C)(3)NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION FOUNDED TO EDUCATE SUPPORTERS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ON HOW TO HELP POLICE DEPARTMENTS ACCOMPLISH THEIR GOALS. false false 8794542 0 5239708 SEE SCHEDULE O FOR NARRATIVE. 8794542 true false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false true false false false false false false true false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false false true 0 0 true 0 false false false false false false false false false false X 3 3 false false false false false false false true false false false true true true true true true false false false AL AZ CA CT FL GA HI IL KS KY MA MD MI MN MS NH NJ NM NY NC OR PA RI SC TN UT VA WV WI AR IN X X ED HUTCHISON 3176982143 8710 BASH ST INDIANAPOLIS IN 46250 ED HUTCHISON PRESIDENT & TREASURER 60.00 X X 96500 0 0 BRAD SHAW SECRETARY 5.00 X X 39000 0 0 DEREK PETERSON MEMBER 10.00 X X 65000 0 0 200500 0 0 false false false DIRECT RESPONSE CONSULTING SERVICES 7918 JONES BRANCH DRIVE MCLEAN VA 22102 CONSULTING 494167 PRINT MAIL GROUP 4333DAVENPORT RD FREDERICKSBURG VA 22408 PRINT MAIL 2663086 AMERRICAN CAGING INC 4850 WRIGHT STREET STAFFORD TX 77477 CAGING & CASHIERING 202527 US POSTMASTERS 5342 NW 25TH STREET TOPEKA KS 66618 POSTAGE 290700 WASHINGTON LISTS INC 7700 LEESBURG PIKE FALLS CHURH VA 22043 LISTINGS 507621 5 5304217 5304217 20 0 20 5304237 0 0 20 99871 0 99871 0 48437 0 48437 0 247419 247419 3184 0 3184 0 BANK CHARGES 21363 0 21363 0 CAGING & CASHIERING 202527 0 202527 0 CONSULTANTS 202434 157449 44985 0 GIFTS 126369 46682 6329 73358 4817323 1976718 1121420 1719185 5768927 2180849 1548116 2039962 X 4577168 1311941 1229324 2035903 692175 362882 692175 362882 205094 340491 205094 340491 X 487081 22391 487081 22391 692175 362882 -464690 6613693 -6613693 X false true X true false X 0 3147874 6333370 9569984 6044122 5304237 30399587 0 0 3147874 6333370 9569984 6044122 5304237 30399587 0 30399587 0 0 0 30399587 1.00000 1.00000 X 0 0 0 11917930 6613393 6613393 5304537 5304537 12382620 6613693 6613693 5768927 5768927 true DCRS CONSULTING SERVICES CONSULTING, MAIL ORDER FUNDRAISING false 5239708 513936 4725772 5239708 513936 4725772 AL AK AR CA CO CT FL GA IL IN KS KY MD MA MI MO MO MS NV NC ND NJ NY OH OK OR PA RI SC TN TX UT VA WA WI Line 2b col(v) PROVIDES EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM SERVICE CONSULTING AND DIRECT MAIL ORDER FUNDRAISING SERVICES Pt VI, Line 8b THE ORGANIZATION CURRENTLY DOES NOT HAVE ANY COMMITTEES. THE ENTIRE BOARD SELECTS THE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR AND REVIEWS THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. Pt VI, Line 11b THE FORM 990 IS PREPARED BY AN OUTSIDE ACCOUNTING FIRM, REVIEWED BY THE PRESIDENT, THEN SENT TO THE ENTIRE BOARD FOR REVIEW, BEFORE FILING WITH THE IRS. Pt VI, Line 12c EACH MEMBER OF THE BOARD AND/OR OFFICER ANNUALLY COMPLETES A CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT, DISCLOSING ANY POTENTIAL CONFLICTS. SHOULD A CONFLICT ARISE,AN INTERESTED PERSON MAY MAKE A PRESENTATION AT THE GOVERNING BOARD MEEING, BUT, AFTER THE PRESENTATION, HE/SHE LEAVES THE MEETING DURING THE DISCUSSION OF, AND VOTE ON, THE TRANSACTION OR ARRANGEMENT INVOLVING THE POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE GOVERNING BOARD, IF APPROPIATE, APPOINTS A DISINTERESTED PERSON OR COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION OR ARRANGEMENT. AFTER EXCERCISING DUE DILIGENCE, THE GOVERNING BOARD DETERMINES WHETHER THE ORGANIZATION CAN OBTAIN WITH REASONABLE EFFORTS A MORE ADVANTAGEOUS TRANSACTION OR ARRANGEMENT FROM A PERSON OR ENTITY THAT WOULD NOT GIVE RISE TO A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. IF A MORE ADVANTAGEOUS TRANSACTION OR ARRANGEMENT IS NOT REASONABLY POSSIBLE UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES NOT PRODUCING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THE GOVERNING BOARD DETERMINES BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE DISINTERESTED DIRECTORS WHETHER THE TRANSACTION OR ARRANGEMENT IS IN THE ORGANIZATIONS BEST INTEREST, FOR ITS OWN BENEFIT, AND WHTHER IT IS FAIR AND REASONABLE. IN CONFORMITY WITH THE ABOVE DETERMINATION, IT MAKES ITS DECISION AS TO WHETHER TO ENTER INTO A TRANSACTION OR ARRANGEMENT. Pt VI, Line 15a THE ORGANIZATIONS DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS WERE PERFORMED BY THE BOARD Pt VI, Line 19 THE ORGANIZATION MAKES IT GOVERNING DOCUMENTS, CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY, AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC PER REQUEST. Other 2022 Advocacy Accomplishment Highlights 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Amicus Brief In a friend-of-the-court brief filed in March 2022 with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, the National Police Association (NPA) argued that the Fourth Circuit should overturn the denial of summary judgment to an officer who had arrested protestors on the grounds of the Maryland State Capitol building after those protestors violated Maryland state law in the course of conducting their protest. In June 2023, the Fourth Circuit sided with the officer and reversed the lower court, granting judgment for the officer and dismissing the lawsuit against him. Sgt. Brian T. Pope with the Maryland Capitol Police was called to direct a group to move their protest off a sidewalk near the Maryland State Capitol building and onto an adjoining grassy area called Lawyers Mall. When Sgt. Pope later returned the group had grown, but had not relocated. Sgt. Pope again ordered the protestors onto the Mall. When the protestors refused, Sgt. Pope advised them they were subject to arrest. When they still did not move, Sgt. Pope began to arrest the groups leader as others filmed. The protesters operate under the name Patriot Picket, maintaining a YouTube channel, Facebook page, and website. They wear shirts that say We Will Not Comply and hold signs that say More Patriots Than You Have Handcuffs. They describe their methodology as media-savvy activism. In this case, they made a video of their protest and of the sergeant advising them to stop blocking the sidewalk. The leader of the protest is on video stating he would be arrested on purpose. Breaking a law to create content for a YouTube channel is generally considered civil disobedience. Practitioners of civil disobedience usually portray their arrest as an exhibition of moral superiority and a demonstration that they believe so strongly in their cause they are willing to break the law and suffer the consequences. In this case, however, the protest leadership not only didnt take ownership of the arrest they manufactured but sued the arresting officer for doing his job. A job made necessary by the protesters creation of YouTube content. Sgt. Pope with Jeffrey and Kevin Hulbert. Image from YouTube. When the lower court failed to adhere to the law and denied the sergeants qualified immunity against frivolous lawsuits the National Police Association entered the case. It was imperative this bad decision not become the law of the land in the Fourth Circuit due to affirmation by the appellate court. The protestors suit alleged violations of the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment rights. The NPAs amicus brief urged the Fourth Circuit to examine a more fundamental question: whether the protestors were acting lawfully at all, as unlawful acts tend not to incur First Amendment protection. In June 2023, the Fourth Circuit issued its opinion which reversed the District Courts order and granted qualified immunity to the officer. The Fourth Circuit closed its opinion with a lengthy explanation of the context of the dispute-a dispute which had at its center the questions of lawfulness and danger posed by protesters who engage in bad-faith acts for the purpose of filming the polices response, which the NPAs brief addressed. The NPA welcomes the Fourth Circuits ruling as a needed acknowledgment of the dangers that law enforcement face when interacting with protestors and social media content creators, especially near government buildings. This is the fourth case where protesters have claimed a right to break the law under the umbrella of the First Amendment that the NPA has entered on the side of police officers. The National Police Association was represented by Robert S. Lafferrandre of Pierce Couch Hendrickson Baysinger & Green, L.L.P., of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The case is Hulbert v. Pope, No. 21-1608, before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Lawsuit filed in support of father of slain officer against his HOA which ordered him to remove his Thin Blue Line flag In December 2022 the National Police Association filed suit against an Ohio HOA for threatening a homeowner for flying a Thin Blue Line flag. Thomas DiSarios son, Kirkersville, OH Police Chief Steven Eric DiSario, was ambushed and killed in the line of duty in May 2017. Since then, Mr. DiSario had flown a Thin Blue Line flag at his Pataskala, OH home in honor of his son. On or about the five-year anniversary of Chief DiSarios death, Mr. DiSario was made aware that an individual complained to Cumberland Crossing Home Owners Association via their property management company, Omni Community Association Managers (the HOA) regarding Mr. DiSarios flying of the Thin Blue Line flag. Mr. DiSario subsequently received a notification from the HOA advising that: The political sign in the form of a flag must be removed from your property. The flag on your pole is not a United States Flag. It is a political statement. Please remove the flag from your property. Mr. DiSario was threatened with being fined and sued for noncompliance. Last month, under threat of lawsuit by the HOA, Mr. DiSario took the flag down. The National Police Association (NPA) was already in court in Ohio defending a homeowners right to fly his Thin Blue Line flag against threats from his HOA. The NPA reached out to Mr. DiSarios HOA and asked them to hold any actions until after the first suit was resolved. Mr. DiSarios HOA refused, so this suit was filed. According to James Bopp Jr. of The Bopp Law Firm of Terre Haute, Indiana, counsel for Plaintiffs, HOA covenants that prohibit the display of the Thin Blue Line flag are in violation of the First Amendment and the threats by the HOA to enforce their prohibition in court are without merit. The case is 2:22-cv-04319-ALM-CMV National Police Association, Inc. et al v. Omni Community Association Managers, LLC et al, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Eastern Division. SCOTUS Amicus Brief in opposition to Google In December 2022 the National Police Association (NPA) joined the National Fallen Officers Foundation (NFOF) in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to limit statutory protection for Googles YouTube over its harm to law enforcement officers. That case, Gonzalez v. Google, was brought by relatives of Nohemi Gonzalez, who was killed by ISIS terrorists shooting into a Paris, France caf. The relatives argued that YouTube provides a unique and powerful tool of communications that enables ISIS to achieve [its] goals. They sued under federal laws banning aid to terrorism. Particularly at issue in the case are YouTube recommendations of the content of others on YouTube. Such recommendations led persons showing an interest in ISIS to ISISs own propaganda on YouTube. That brought terrorists together, radicalized viewers, and exposed them to encouragement to make such terrorist attacks. But according to the Ninth Circuit, those recommendations were protected against such suits by a federal law (section 230). Section 230 protects social media when they host third-party content. The only issue before the Supreme Court issue is whether that law protects those recommendations and not just ordinary publishing decisions. The NPA & NFOF friend-of-the-court brief argued that section 230 does not protect such recommendations. The brief established that police are also suffering from social-media-fueled hostility and attacks and that a court decision against section 230 protection for such recommendations would help damp anti-police attitudes and attacks. This is an important landmark case that will change the landscape of public safety for future generations. Facebook, Google and Twitter have enjoyed broad liability protection under CDA 230, while fueling societal instability and leaving police officers and citizens vulnerable to attacks facilitated by online radicalization. Its simply time to bring the outdated 1996 legislation in line with the 21st Century rule of law. James Bopp, Jr., of The Bopp Law Firm, PC and counsel of record for NPA & NFOF in the Supreme Court, says: The police have been suffering increased hostility and attacks in recent years. Much of that is fueled by social media, and a favorable decision for Nohemi Gonzalezs family will also help damp anti-police attitudes and attacks. The case is Reynaldo Gonzalez, et al., Petitioners v. Google LLC in the U.S. Supreme Court. Amicus brief filed in support of family of slain police officer In September 2022 the National Police Association filed a brief amicus curiae in the Washington State Supreme Court in the case of Estate of McCartney v. Pierce County. The case arose out of the tragic shooting and death of Deputy Daniel McCartney, whom Pierce County sent alone to confront two armed home invaders without adequate support or training. According to the lawsuit, Pierce County failed to adjust funding for staffing of the Sheriffs Office for 16 years, Other PAGE 12, PART XI, LINE 9, DONATED SERVICES Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e GRAPHIC DESIGN 38193. 13368. 3819. 21006. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e MAIL HOUSE FEES 236565. 82196. 25205. 129164. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e MAIL LIST RENTALS 447329. 141218. 84197. 221914. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e POSTAGE 2030801. 527008. 675637. 828156. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e PRINT & TYPESET 645288. 225851. 64529. 354908. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e SUBCONTRACTORS 199000. 0. 199000. 0. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e FUNDRAISING EXPENSE 4059. 0. 0. 4059. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e DATA PROCESSING 292311. 93316. 52355. 146640. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e GENERAL PRIZE EXPENSES 28638. 0. 15300. 13338. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e OFFICE SUPPLIES 1378. 0. 1378. 0. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e WEBSITE EXPENSES 36465. 36465. 0. 0. Form 990, Part IX, Line 24e PROGRAM SERVICES 857296. 857296. 0. 0.