Safe Building Compliance & Technology [2023]

Safe Building Compliance & Technology V Michelle Bernholtz Iowa Legal – This organization is not on the most recent IRS list of tax-exempt organizations, but we have data associated with this Employer Identification Number. We have reconstructed basic organization information (such as name and tax number designation) from an old list of exempt organizations. Unfortunately, though, this information may be out of date. It is also possible that the organization no longer has tax-exempt status or no longer exists.

Ranking (NTEE)

Management and technical assistance (of public utility, social – multipurpose and more)

Nonprofit Tax Code Designation: 501(c)(3)

Defined as: Organizations for any of the following purposes: religious, educational, charitable, scientific, literary, public safety trials, promotion of national or international amateur sports competitions (as long as they do not provide facilities or equipment for athletes), or the prevention of cruelty to children or animals.

Donations to this organization are tax-deductible.

Other Resources: GuideStar

Receive notifications: sign up to receive updates on our data.

Income tax return per year

IRS Form 990 is an annual statement of information that most organizations claiming federal tax-exempt status must file annually. Read the IRS instructions for Form 990.

If this organization has filed an amended statement, it may not appear in the data below. Duplicate download links may be due to new submissions or changes to an organization’s original statement.

Mission

This Organization Exists To Promote The Health, Safety And Welfare Of The Public And Lessen The Burdens Of The Local And State Government By Performing Building Code Inspections And Other Essential Municipal Code Compliance And Evaluation Services.

Financials

Unlock non-profit financial insights that will help you make more informed decisions. Try our monthly plan today.

Analyze a variety of pre-calculated financial metrics

Access beautifully interactive analysis and comparison tools

Compare nonprofit financial data with similar organizations

Processes

The people, governance practices and associates that make the association work.

Principal Officers, Directors, Managers and Employees

Build relationships with key people who run and lead nonprofits with GuideStar Pro. Try a low-commitment monthly plan today. Analyze a variety of pre-calculated financial metrics

Access beautifully interactive analysis and comparison tools

Compare nonprofit financial data with similar organizations

Want to see how you can improve your nonprofit search and unlock more information? Learn more about GuideStar Pro.

Highest-Paid Employees – Safe Building

Figure relationships with key people who manage and lead nonprofit organizations with GuideStar Pro. Try a low-commitment monthly plan today.

Analyze a variety of pre-calculated financial metrics

Access beautifully interactive analysis and comparison tools

Compare nonprofit financial data with similar organizations

MICHELLE BERNHOLTZ- Claimant

Iowa Code § 96.6 – Timeliness of Appeal
Iowa Code § 96.5 – Voluntary Quitting

Declaration Of The Case:

The claimant filed a plea for the December 1, 2017, (reference 01 ) unemployment Insurance decision that denied benefits based on her voluntary quit. The revelries were properly Notified of the hearing. A telephone hearing was held on January 5, 2018. The claimant Participated and was represented by attorney Erik Fisk. The employer participated through President Dennis Bernholtz.

Issues – Safe Building

Is the appeal timely?
Did the claimant willingly quit the employment with good cause attributable to an employer?

Verdicts Of Fact – Safe Building

After having reviewed all of the evidence in the record, the administrative law judge finds: A disqualifying unemployment insurance decision was mailed to the claimant’s last known address Of record on December 1, 2017. The claimant did not receive the decision until December 12, 2017.
The decision confined a warning that an appeal must be postmarked or received by the Appeals Bureau by December 11, 2017. Immediately upon receiving the decision, the claimant Filed her appeal, which was received on December 12, 2017.

The claimant began employment on February 28, 2011, and was employed most recently full time as
Until this employment ended on October 12, 2017, the vice president when she voluntarily quit.
The claimant and her husband, Dennis Bernholtz, co-founded the subject employer, which is a non-
Profit entity.

There is a Board of Directors, but both parties testified the board generally deferred To them for decision making. At some point in 2017, the couple decided to divorce. According to claimant, the work environment became intolerable following the initiation of divorce Proceedings.

The claimant testified Bernholtz brought the staff into their issues by asking The office manager to clear his calendar anytime she saw appointments the claimant had scheduled involving their minor children. She testified he spent down the company’s cash reserves by Paying down the company’s debts and making purchases for the company without telling her.

By mid-September 2017 claimant had resolved to leave the company and was working on a Severance agreement. During this same time, the company was the subject of an IRS audit.

The claimant consulted with the attorney who was hired to handle the audit about what effect the Severance agreement might have on those proceedings. When Bernholtz learned of this he sent an email to the Board of Directors and the attorney, which alleged that the attorney and the the claimant had acted unethically, given that the attorney was hired for the sole purpose of Handling the audit and not assisting with the severance agreement. This was the last straw for On September 28, 2017, the claimant submitted her written resignation. In accordance That resignation claimant’s final day of employment was October 12, 2017.

Reasoning & Conclusions Of Law: Safe Building

The primary issue in this appeal is whether the appellant’s plea is timely. The administrative law judge controls it is Iowa Code § 96.6(2) provides:
The appellant did not have an opportunity to appeal the unemployment insurance decision Because the decision was not received in a timely fashion. Without timely notice of a Disqualification, no meaningful opportunity for appeal exists. See Smith v. Iowa Emp’t Sec.

Here, the claimant resigned effective October 12, 2017, after her work environment became increasingly uncomfortable throughout her divorce from her husband, the business’s co-founder, though she had already resolved to resign before this and was working on a severance Agreement. The claimant contends she was subject to intolerable working conditions. However, she has not shown these conditions were with good cause attributable to the employer, rather than Her situation.

Claimant disapproved of the way her husband was spending company funds on paying down company debts and making purchases for the business, though as The President of the company was entitled to make these decisions. The final incident which led a claimant to resign was one where Bernholtz accused her and their attorney of unethical Behaviour. While ultimately this allegation was unfounded, Bernholtz was not acting unreasonably when he questioned the appropriateness of discussions between the attorney and claimant, as he was not a party to those discussions and the attorney was being paid by the
Company.

While claimant’s work situation was undoubtedly uncomfortable due to her personal the situation, and though her leaving was almost certainly based upon good personal reasons, it was Not for a good-cause reason attributable to the employer according to Iowa law. Benefits are denied.

Decision:

On December 1, 2017, the unemployment insurance decision is affirmed.

The claimant’s appeal is timely. The claimant willingly left her employment without good cause Attributable to the employer. Benefits are withheld until such time as she has worked in and been paid wages for insured work equal to ten times her weekly benefit amount, provided she is otherwise eligible.