Author Topic: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here  (Read 15073 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jim Cossitt, 1976 rider

Folks,   I believe in transparency & accountability.   Please post your thoughts here so I see them.


THE DISPUTE IS FRAMED AS A 3 LEGGED STOOL:
 
1.   The BOD wants the sale outcome.   Vote YES

2.   The SAVE group  wants the no sale outcome, further study and hit the pause button.  Vote NO

3.   COSSITT wants a fair and balanced voting process, consistent with a good faith and reasonable application of MT law, so both the SAVE group and the BOD can present their positions to the members and the members can make an informed voting decision. Vote NO.




THE COMPLAINT IS STRUCTRED AS FOLLOWS:

Background 1-44

Investigation & goal of investigation  at 25-45

Claims at  48-81


LAWSUIT STATUS UPDATE:
      served on ACA, no response for 21 or more days.  Not yet served on the listing real estate firm.

VOTE OUTCOME and IMPACT ON LAWSUIT:       With the outcome of the vote not known, I see a couple of outcomes that both the BOD and I will take into consideration in determine how much resources to put into the path forward:

LANDSLIDE:      Vote is not close, 80% or more for / against ?  Carry on with procedural lawsuit or _____________________ ?
 
CLOSE:      Vote is close, razor thin ?   For or against by 005 to 5,000 votes ? Stay in the fight ?  Walk away ?  Demand a recount ?
 

PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD:      I’ve received a significant amount of email and LinkedIn messages and most cover the same topics.   In order to bring order and impose limits on my time, this discussion thread  is:

1.   The only one I am going read / review;

2.   The only one I will respond to;

3.   If you see something on another post that you want a response to, cut, paste and post it under this thread so I can see it;

4.   Is intended to solicit input  (good, bad, indifferent, please just keep it polite, respectful and don’t be bashful about clarity, bluntness, being direct and forthright, and assertive if you desire.  I want to know your thoughts as this process grinds on.

This is a dynamic and changing process and I plan to reconsider how I manage the litigation in light of future developments.  I’m going to soak up all views (SAVE views and whatever I get from this forum)  that is reasonable, plausible, material, thoughtful and not ranting.

Opinions expressed prior the publication or disclosure of the outcome of the vote will be particularly probative / credible and I will give such opinions  more weight in deciding how to manage the lawsuit going forward.  Continue it, put it on hold, seek common ground for the good of ACA, dismiss it or charge forward and prosecute it.

All options are on the table. This effort was begun as stated on pages 9-12 of the complaint, paragraphs 29-31.  The goal is to get adequate information from the BOD ad ACA to evaluate the request by the BOD to approve a sale and make a voting decision on an informed basis.

I have attempted but not been able to post documents here due to website problems.  ACA is working in good faith on that and advised today that:

“While working on the issue you reported regarding posting PDF files to the forums, I wanted to acknowledge that it is taking a bit longer than expected to resolve the matter.

As a temporary workaround, I suggest uploading the PDF file to a cloud service like Google Drive or Dropbox. You can set the sharing permissions to 'anyone with the link,' then copy the generated URL and share it within your post.

I am committed to fixing this issue, but I don’t want you to have to wait to publish the material you would like to share with the community.

Thank you for your patience and understanding”


Thank you for your thoughtful, material and good faith comments & criticisms.   For those of you who have chosen to snarl, demean, question the motivation and integrity, thank you for your views also.   I may not agree with them, but I need to hear them and I learn about the group in the process, which will assist me in managing the lawsuit.

Thank you.  Jim Cossitt    1/16/2026
Jim Cossitt
Cell    406-260-6969
E:    cossittlaw@gmail.com

Offline Jim Cossitt, 1976 rider

Re: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here
« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2026, 08:41:55 pm »
The lawsuit was provided to ACA counsel a full week prior to filing with a request to cut a deal.  Filed as a last resort in the face of serious stonewalling and violations of MT law.      95 % of all lawsuits settle and Montana has mandatory mediation prior to trial calendar.    One of the goals of the lawsuit was to elevate the priority of the issues, get senior management and BOD, along with counsel, to put some eyeballs on it and get serious beyond the stonewall job that was taking place.
Jim Cossitt
Cell    406-260-6969
E:    cossittlaw@gmail.com

Offline Jim Cossitt, 1976 rider

Re: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here
« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2026, 08:47:13 pm »
Complaint cannot be posted, error message received.

Background allegations cannot be posted, max length exceeded.   

Para 1-31 read:

JURISDICTION, VENUE & PARTIES
1.   The Montana  District Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to MCA  § 3-5-302.
2.   Venue is proper in Missoula County pursuant to MCA §§ 25-2-118, the county of the principal place of business of Defendant.
3.   James H. Cossitt (“Cossitt”) is a natural person, a citizen of Flathead County Montana and a dual resident of Montana and Iowa.
4.   Cossitt became a member of Bikecentennial 76, the predecessor organization of ACA, in 1975.   He became a life member of ACA in about 2006.
5.   Cossitt was a member of the State Bar of Montana from 6/25/1998 to 3/31/23  (SBM # 4773)  was in private practice full time in Kalispell during the same time period.  Cossitt remains licensed and in good standing in the state and federal courts of Iowa.
6.   Adventure Cycling Association (“ACA”) is a Montana non profit corporation with a principal office or place of business in Missoula Montana.  It is the successor entity to Bikecentennial 76, (“B-76”), a Montana corporation.
7.   Sterling CRE Advisers is the dba of Sterling Commercial Management LLC (C1041758), a Montana Domestic Limited Liability Company with an office at 2829 Great Northern Loop, Suite 200 Missoula, Montana 59808.


ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO A LL COUNTS
BACKGROUND & HISTORY of B-76 and ACA:   BIRTH & YOUNG ADULTHOOD  FROM 1974 to 1991

8.   As an organization, Bikecentennial was created in 1974 to organize a trans-America bicycle event along a dedicated route (the TransAmerica Bicycle Trail, mostly on rural roads) to celebrate the United States’ Bicentennial in 1976. 4,100 people participated in Bikecentennial by riding all or part of the route, individually and in small groups. By all accounts, the event was a huge success in promoting bicycle touring and contributing to an overall renaissance in cycling in America.
9.   Following the 1976 event, Bikecentennial aimed to become a more diversified organization with a full program supporting bicycle travel around the United States. However, funding support evaporated and staff was reduced to just three paid personnel.
10.   The organization stabilized and eventually rebuilt itself through direct mail appeals. As staff positions were added back, Bikecentennial developed a routes and mapping program, guided tours, and a printed magazine. Membership grew steadily and was the primary form of financial support. From 1974 to 1991, the organization operated out of rented offices in Missoula, Montana.
11.   In 1992, the name of the organization was changed from Bikecentennial to Adventure Cycling Association (ACA).

MID LIFE STABILITY & THE BUILDING AT THE HEART OF THIS DISPUTE:  THE ACA HQ

12.   In 1991, the organization had the opportunity to purchase a permanent home, in the form of a church and connected offices at 150 E. Pine Street in downtown Missoula. Bikecentennial was able to secure grants and loans at favorable terms in order to buy and renovate the property but needed a long-term revenue stream to pay off the loans and cover further building improvements.
13.   Also in 1991, the Bikecentennial board of directors authorized the use of a Life Member Fund, which had been established in 1988, for the purpose of covering costs (mortgage payoff and improvements) related to the building. Individuals or couples could make a one-time payment for a life membership. A portion of the payment would be reserved to cover the projected costs of the membership and the remainder would go into a dedicated Life Member Fund for building-related costs. For more than two decades, life memberships were promoted and sold with the guarantee that the proceeds would be used only for building-related costs, such as mortgage payments, renovations and repairs.
14.   ACA’s building at 150 E. Pine Street was renovated multiple times between 1991 and 2019, and expanded significantly (to 10,000 square feet) in 2012-13. The headquarters was purpose-built as offices (for more than 40 staff plus volunteers), visitor center (especially for traveling cyclists), archive and museum (displaying treasures and artifacts related to bicycle travel and ACA’s history), library (with hundreds of historic volumes and photographs), and meeting and gathering places.
15.   The expansion and renovations were specifically designed to create a state-of-the-art workplace for employees and museum and gathering place for members and other visitors. The building was also sensitive to the urban fabric and feel of downtown Missoula, and the expansion project earned a local historic preservation and design award.
16.   The expansion and renovations were paid for primarily by the Life Member Fund, which continued to grow, at least through 2019. Through 2013, the Fund was devoted exclusively to investments in the headquarters building. Later, the Fund was used for a few projects (such as development of a navigation application for ACA’s bicycle route network), which were considered to be one-time capital investments in the long-term functioning of ACA and its programs.
17.   The Life Member Fund was always characterized – and used – as a dedicated fund to purchase and improve ACA’s long-term home and headquarters in Missoula, and several other one-time capital investments. The Fund was not used for regular ACA operational expenses. Individuals and couples who bought life memberships believed that they were becoming part of the organization for the long haul, and were investing in the long-term health and stability of ACA.
18.   The Life Member Fund was regularly replenished with hundreds of new members and by 2020, despite having been tapped for major building costs, exceeded more than $1 million. Meanwhile, the expanded and revamped headquarters was fully occupied by more than 40 staff (plus volunteers) and was a globally beloved “mecca of bicycle travel” attracting more than 1,000 long-distance bike travelers annually. The building was at the heart of ACA’s huge 40th anniversary celebration in 2016.
19.   ACA continued to grow as an organization, all the way through 2020. The organization was the largest cycling membership organization in North America with more than 54,000 members. ACA employed 42 staff and had a 2020 budget of $6.9 million, up from $2.5 million in 2005.
20.   Starting in 2020, and especially since 2023, ACA experienced a precipitous membership, financial and programmatic decline. Membership has dropped below 20,000. Income has dropped below $5 million (or possibly $4 million). Staff now numbers 17. Programs have been slashed, with steep drops in tour offerings (from more than 100 to 18 in 2026), elimination of most of the sales and advocacy departments, and a large reduction in the page count and editions of the organization’s award-winning magazine, Adventure Cyclist. Additionally, the organization’s operational reserves were tapped and reduced by nearly $2 million and the Life Member Fund was also

ACA ANNOUNCES IT INTENDS TO SELL THE HEADQUARTERS BUILDING IN JUNE 2025.  FOUNDING MEMBERS & LONG TERM SENIOR STAFF CREATE AN INFORMAL GROUP TO  CONTACT ACA & REQUEST THE BOD CONSIDER LESS DRASTIC ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

21.   On 6/25/25, in a Quarterly Board Update – June, A Message from the Adventure Cycling Board of Directors, the BOD announced:
Dear adventure cyclists,
The Adventure Cycling Board of Directors recently decided to put its longstanding headquarters up for sale. We’ve made this conservative fiscal decision for multiple reasons and would like to share more information. . . . . . . . .

Signed,   John McDermott, Board Chair;  M. E. Price, Board Secretary

22.   An organization identifying itself as Save ACA HQ – composed mostly of the four founders of Bikecentennial and former staff leaders who had orchestrated the purchase of the building, the creation of the Life Member Fund, and the growth of ACA through 2019 – conducted an analysis of ACA’s governance and finances over the last decade. They based the analysis on ACA’s audited financials (through 2024).
23.   The analysis was delivered to the ACA BOD chair in August 2025 and identified multiple reasons for the precipitous declines, including poor fiduciary and management oversight by the ACA BOD. Of special note were:
a.   the constant turnover in executive directors (in late 2021 and early 2025);

b.   lack of rigorous financial oversight, which resulted in significant deficit spending and reserve drawdowns;

c.   elimination of popular programs like advocacy; and

d.   damaging decisions to dramatically increase member fees while deeply cutting services, such as tours and Adventure Cyclist magazine. (The service cuts and fee increases correlated strongly with the membership drop, which accelerated in 2023.)

24.   On numerous occasions throughout the summer / fall of 2025 there were conversations between the SAVE group and ACA, at which time the parties discussed, inter alia:
a.   the building being put onto the market and SAVE expressed it’s collective dismay at this decision;

b.   the “engagement funnel” model and how it had been a niche that ACA occupied in the bike travel industry and the cornerstone of ACA’s success in the past. Neither the board chair nor the treasurer had any familiarity with this concept, or understood that by cutting programs, the board had dismantled the model, leading to the current downward spiral of the organization;

c.   the condition of the current BOD; these meetings were between several SAVE members and John McDermott/Board Chair. It was stated by the board chair that many BOD members appeared to have been selected based on enthusiasm and not much else;

d.   the various skills and expertise that were needed and offered to prepare a letter to the Board Chair recommending that the board needed to be re-vamped and describing said skills and expertise. We also described a “board matrix” of skills and expertise that was used by prior BODs; this was unfamiliar to the board chair;

e.   the discussions briefly mentioned the 8/15/2025 white paper but not in any particular detail. The essence of the comments from the board chair was that “it was having an impact.”


ACA: 1)  NEVER DISCLOSES THE SPECIFIC TEXT OF THE BOARD RESOLUTION or ACTION MEMORANDUM (WHATEVER THE BOD APPROVED) TO THE MEMBERS; and 2) PROVIDES THE MEMBERS WITH EVER SHIFTING DESCRIPTIONS OF WHAT IS TO BE VOTED ON. 

25.   On 10/13/25, in a “Highlights from the Member & Community Webinar, the ACA announced:
Dear Adventure Cycling Members,    Being Transparent About Our Challenges
As part of our financial recovery plan, the board listed our Missoula headquarters building for sale in June.  . . . . . .  If we receive an offer, members will have the opportunity to vote on acceptance; these are your rights as a member organization, and we will honor them.

26.   On 10/31/25, in an “ED Update: Challenges and Building Sale”, the ACA announced:
 . . . . . . which is why we listed our headquarters building in Missoula for sale this summer.  . . . . .   Adventure Cycling has received an advantageous offer to purchase our Missoula headquarters building for approximately $2.55 million, . . . . .
We heard clearly from our members that preserving our physical presence in Missoula in our historical location is a priority. In response, as part of this sale, we have negotiated favorable terms to lease back storefront office space in the building. This ensures we maintain our local presence while providing community access to our historic bikes and memorabilia in a portion of the same beloved space that has been home to the organization for decades. . . . . . . Selling our headquarters provides a $2.55 million financial runway to rebuild Adventure Cycling  . . . . . . The building is symbolic . . . . . .

27.   In a 12/9/25 ED & BOD update, ACA announced:
“. . . . . we negotiated a purchase offer with an outside buyer that includes an agreement that Adventure Cycling will remain in the building as a tenant, releasing cash for needed investment  . . . .  , Montana law permits action without holding a member meeting. . . . . . there are additional steps to closing the sale. Wherever we land, you have our commitment to transparent information, regular updates on our progress, and maintenance of your membership rights.

28.   In an  ED & BOD update on 1/2/26, the ACA articulated the purpose of vote as:
Selling our building helps  . . . . . . Casting a FOR vote means you authorize the board to evaluate and pursue the sale of the building under terms that are beneficial to the organization.

COSSITT REQUEST #1:   THE ACA STONEWALL BEGINS -  COSSITT MAKES HIS 1ST WRITTEN REQUEST TO INSPECT THE RECORDS OF ACA, TO WHICH IT AGREES and  NEVER PERFORMS ON THE AGREEMENT

29.   In September and October 2025, Cossitt made a records inspection request to ACA as follows (“JHC request #1”):

“From: Jim Cossitt <jim.cossitt@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 12:15 PM
Subject: Questions & document request for BOD & for new Exec Director at Friday, Oct. 10 webinar
To: Jessica Zephyrs <jzephyrs@adventurecycling.org>


Jessica,    Thanks for the response and nice to see you on the screen the other day.   I still have not received any BOD minutes or the other docs I asked for from anyone at ACA, staff or BOD secretary.  . . . . . . BTW, I practiced law in the Flathead for 25 years and live there about half the year, normally December to March / April.   For 40 years I have specialized in debtor / creditor, bankruptcy, reorganization and insolvency.   Accordingly, my interest in companies or non profits with $$ challenges / problems is likely much more significant than the average ACA member

Thanks    Jim Cossitt,        Cell: 406-260-6969 
922 Thornton Avenue, Des Moines, IA   50315-3036


On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 3:42 PM Jessica Zephyrs <jzephyrs@adventurecycling.org> wrote:
Hi Jim,

Thanks so much for submitting your questions. I collected all questions and provided them to our Board Chair, new Executive Director, and Interim Executive Director to help them prepare for the upcoming webinar. Your input is greatly appreciated as it tells us what it most important to members. We've received a very wide variety of questions and many of them. I hope we can suitably address most of them during the webinar.

Best,      Jessica Zephyrs    she/her     VP of Marketing & Communications

________________________________________
 
----------- Forwarded message -----------
From: jim.cossitt@gmail.com
Date: September 30, 2025 at 8:35 AM MDT
Subject: Questions & document request for BOD & for new Exec Director at Friday, Oct. 10 webinar
To: info@adventurecycling.org
Cc: governance@adventurecycling.org
Ms.  Zephyrs,  I submitted the following Q to the new Exec Director for the 10/10/25 webinar.

In the interim, can you please forward this to the Secretary of the BOD or other officer of the corporation for a response ?

"Please update us on the proposed sale of the ACA office, including specifics related to:

1.  whether the BOD has reconsidered that decision and if so what the updated plans may be;

2.  how the decision was made (when it landed on the radar screen, how many months it was under consideration by the BOD);

3.  what notice was provided to the membership about the proposed action;

4.  what other options were considered by the BOD, the relative pros / cons of each other option;

5.  what business judgment justifications supported the selection of the sale option over the other options.

Please provide me with a copy of the minutes of all BOD meetings wherein this topic was considered or discussed well in advance of this webinar.  Those minutes may shed some light on my questions.

Thank you.  Jim Cossitt, life member, 1976 rider, TAWK601” 

30.   On 10/1/25, ACA consented to and agreed to the request:
From: John McDermott <john.mcdermott.email@icloud.com>
Subject: Your Questions for Adventure Cycling
Date: October 1, 2025 at 10:30:10 AM MDT
To: jim.cossitt@gmail.com

Jim,      I am the Board Chair at Adventure Cycling.  The Executive Director forward me some questions you had about Board decisions.  You are certainly welcome to access Board Meeting minutes, but if a conversation with me would be more helpful, let me know and I’d be happy to set up a call,

John McDermott

31.   To date, Cossitt has never received the requested documents and Mr.  McDermott, speaking on behalf of ACA, as chair of the ACA BOD, has never made good on the commitment he made on behalf of the ACA.
Jim Cossitt
Cell    406-260-6969
E:    cossittlaw@gmail.com

Offline Jim Cossitt, 1976 rider

Re: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here
« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2026, 08:49:18 pm »
Complaint cannot be posted, error message received.

Background allegations cannot be posted, max length exceeded.   

Para 31-44 read:

31.   To date, Cossitt has never received the requested documents and Mr.  McDermott, speaking on behalf of ACA, as chair of the ACA BOD, has never made good on the commitment he made on behalf of the ACA.

ACA SCHEDULES and CONDUCTS VOTE #1, BUT THE VOTE IS SO RIFE WITH PROBLEMS and NONCOMPLIANCE WITH MONTANA LAW, THAT ACA SCRAPS THE OUTCOME

32.   Sometime in late 2025 ACA conducted vote #1.
33.   On 12/9/25, ACA emailed an ED & Board update in which it asserted that:

  “We conducted the vote in good faith, in concert with legal counsel, and with independent audit oversight.”
34.   Notwithstanding the self serving statement of adherence to good faith, the  ED & Board update acknowledged at least 6 major concerns with vote #1 identified as follows:
“Concern 1: A formal member meeting was not held to discuss the sale
Concern 2: Members should have access to the membership list and contact information if requested
Concern 3: Members did not give consent to vote electronically
Concern 4: Montana law does not allow or disallow for voicemail voting
Concern 5: Multiple votes could be made by the same person
Concern 6: Household members should vote on a pro rata basis.”

35.   In December 2025, the ACA ED and BOD scheduled vote #2.
   

COSSITT REQUEST #2:   THE ACA STONEWALL CONTINUES - THE 2ND  WRITTEN REQUEST TO INSPECT THE RECORDS OF ACA

36.   On 12/8/25  Cossitt transmitted a letter to the ACA BOD and again requested / demanded that he be allowed to inspect records (“JHC request #2”):
37.   In that letter, Cossitt stated:
“All things considered, the conduct of the BOD outlined herein appears to be part of a carefully crafted multi pronged strategy among the BOD & staff of ACA   (conspiracy) to stack the voting deck in favor of the BOD position by:

a.   withholding information from members after reasonable requests, thus precluding them from making informed decisions;

b.   stifle  / kill off any awareness among the membership, let alone discussion of alternatives to the BOD recommended position;

c.   stifle and choke off any dissent within the organization and the membership; and

d.   violate Montana law with respect to the election process.

Based on my prefiling investigation, I have concluded that this conduct, and pattern of repeated incidents, violates numerous provisions of the statutes cited in the 11/21/25  letter to the BOD.   It also violates the common law fiduciary standards / duties of directors under Montana law and likely subjects those who breached those duties to damage claims.”

38.   The ACA BOD completely failed to respond in any manner to JHC request #2”.

COSSITT REQUEST #3:   THE ACA STONEWALL CONTINUES - THE 3RD   WRITTEN REQUEST TO INSPECT THE RECORDS OF ACA

39.   12/19/25 Cossitt  made a 3rd records inspection request to ACA as follows (“JHC request #3”) which read in part:
From: James H. (Jim) Cossitt
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2025 09:53
To: Justin K. Cole <jkcole@GARLINGTON.COM>; Dylan T. Barkley <dtbarkley@GARLINGTON.COM>; Tessa A. Keller <takeller@GARLINGTON.COM>
Cc:  . . . . . . .
Subject: ACA / Request per MCA 35-2-907. Inspection of records by members / M or TU December 29 or 30, 2025

Justin,             Thanks.  Please confirm receipt of this email, it has yes / no buttons attached.

As part of my annual winter migration to the Flathead and snow country, I have adjusted my travel schedule and will incur extra cost to be in Missoula all day on Monday & Tuesday December  29 & 30, 2025 and available for a records inspection both days for the specific purpose of this inspection.    This email constitutes my:   “written notice or a written demand at least 5 business days before the date on which the member wishes to inspect and copy.”   Please ask your client to timely comply with the statute and provide: “ a reasonable time and location specified by the corporation, any”. 

40.   All 3 of Cossitt’s requests to inspect the ACA records related to the sale of the HQ building were intended to be for the following purposes:
“The reason for my request was to ensure that your client really made an informed decision, considered all the options and had fulfilled their duties in accordance with the Business Judgment Rule (“BJR”) that governs corporate decision making and challenges to same.

By denying me the opportunity to review the minutes, they denied me the
opportunity to assess the quality and veracity of their decision, whether it complies with applicable legal standards and the soundness of the recommended action to the
membership. The insolvency / reorg specialist wants to see the records and make his own independent assessment of the quality of this choice, not be spoon fed or told
by John McDermott or others that this is the last best option.”

My involvement in this issue is intended to independently confirm and ensure, to my satisfaction, and share with other members in a meaningful manner prior to the next vote on the issues facing the ACA,  . . . .  is making the best decision(s) it can to ensure its future for another 50 years, or more, and what appears to be a critical juncture or turning point in the life of the organization.

Specifically, my investigation is intended to assess if this BOD has complied with it’s duties under MCA 35-2-416. General standards for directors  and any other applicable standards.  The 8/16/25 Rebuilding Report raises serious questions in that regard, and the stonewalling I have received  since 9/30/25 is fully consistent with the conclusions expressed on pp.  14-15 of that Report.”

41.   On 12/22/25, counsel for ACA replied, offered to mail records to Cossitt in Iowa and refused / failed / chose not:
a.   to designate the time and location on behalf of ACA;
b.   to allow the inspection; and
c.   to comply with the statute.
42.   On 12/23/25, Cossitt responded and advised ACA that:
Your client’s response is couched in someone’s unilateral justifications of:   “efficiency considerations, and in an effort not to cause you any additional time or expense you referenced as being involved in traveling to the ACA office, we will be mailing you the documents next week. “   Look, the statue says what it says and the plain meaning rule applies.  The statute is reproduced below and relevant parts are bolded . . . Looks like a thinly veiled attempt to delay or degrade the process designed as the “we are only trying to help you Jim”, as we define it.  Hogwash.  Mutual agreement only or strict compliance with the statue.

Please ask your client to reconsider the response and comply with the statue in good faith.    For the reasons stated above, I reject the suggestions in your email below and demand compliance with the statue.   If we are going to deviate from statutory compliance, it will solely by mutual agreement documented appropriately and not by unilateral reckless disregard for clear statutory provisions.  That is called anarchy.

43.   On 12/27/25 Cossitt again requested ACA comply with the statute and provide: “ a reasonable time and location specified by the corporation . . . ”.” and stated:
Your client remains obligated to comply with the applicable statute and I do not consent to any deviations therefrom.  The dates specified in my notice or demand to inspect remain intact.
 
44.   The ACA completely failed to provide 1 scrap of record, nothing, no paper and no digital or ESI in any manner to JHC request #3.
45.   In fact, to date, after the 3 attempts noted above, Cossitt has been provided absolutely nothing.
Jim Cossitt
Cell    406-260-6969
E:    cossittlaw@gmail.com

Offline Jim Cossitt, 1976 rider

Re: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2026, 08:52:12 pm »
Complaint cannot be posted, error message received.

Background allegations cannot be posted, max length exceeded.   

Counts I and II  read:

45.   In fact, to date, after the 3 attempts noted above, Cossitt has been provided absolutely nothing.


ACA SCHEDULES and BEGINS CONDUCTING VOTE #2, BUT:   1) THE PROCESS FAILS TO COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE LAW;  2) IS CONDUCTED BY ACA IN BAD FAITH SO AS TO DEPRIVE ACA MEMBERS OF MEANINGFUL  PARTICIPATION IN THE PROCESS; 3) IS STACKED / SLANTED SO AS TO PRECLUDE A FAIR, BALANCED and REASONABLE PRESENTTION OF THE ISSUES TO THE VOTING MEMBERSHIP

46.   In the 12/9/25 ED & Board update, the ACA stated:  “If required to conduct a second vote, we will address the procedural concerns raised:
•   We will hold a special member meeting, in which the group will be provided a dedicated time slot to present their arguments, and also permit an opportunity for members to make comments at the meeting.”

47.   In the 12/15/25 ED & Board update, the ACA stated:
How the Second Vote Will Work    We've designed this process to address every procedural concern while making it as accessible as possible for members:
Member Meeting (January 13, 10:00 AM to 12:00 PM MT): We'll host a member meeting, allowing members to speak publicly. Members who want to talk will be able to RSVP for one 2-minute time slot, and with whatever time remains after those who RSVP, we will open the floor for additional comments. Keep an eye out for complete details on how to join this virtual meeting and how to RSVP in a separate communication.

COUNT I 
(Denial of Right to Inspect)

48.   Plaintiff(s) replead(s) ¶¶ 1-47.
49.   As noted above, Cossitt has made repeated requests to inspect ACA records:
a.   on 9/30/25 in  JHC request #1;  and

b.   on 12/8/25 in  JHC request #2;  and

c.   on 12/19/25 in  JHC request #3.


50.   As outlined above, ACA has delayed, deflected, stonewalled and otherwise frustrated  / denied Cossitt the right to inspect the requested records.
51.   The Montana Nonprofit Corporation, requires that ACA maintain records at it’s principal office that can be accessed within 2 business days:
52.   Cossitt requests the Court order ACA to allow him to inspect all records, documents and ESI from 1/1/23 to the present arising from or relating  to:
a.   Agendas for all BOD meetings;

b.   Agenda packets for all BOD meetings (attachments, reports, etc. materials described MCA 35-2-416 (2);

c.   Minutes of all BOD meetings;

d.   All BOD resolutions or other records of actions taken or authorized;

e.   All internal email among BOD & ACA staff related to $$ distress, financial challenges, options to address same;

f.   All documents within the scope of MCA 35-2-416. ”(2) In discharging the duties, a director is entitled to rely on information, opinions, reports, or statements, including financial statements and other financial data, if prepared or presented by:”

g.   how the decision was made (when it landed on the radar screen, how many months it was under consideration by the BOD);

h.   what notice was provided to the membership about the proposed action;

i.   what other options were considered by the BOD, the relative pros / cons of each other option;

j.   what business judgment justifications supported the selection of the sale option over the other options;

k.   All documents within the scope of MCA 35-2-906(5).

WHEREFORE, James H. Cossitt demand(s) judgment against Defendant Adventure Cycling Association, Inc., in accordance with MCA § 35-2-907. Inspection of records by members as follows:
a.   That he be allowed to inspect all of the records identified above, at the ACA offices, on a date, time and duration of his choosing; and

b.   He be allowed to designate those records he seeks and that copies or duplicates be provided to him within 10 days, all at the expense of ACA; and

c.   He be awarded attorney fees and costs of this action; and

d.   He be awarded compensation and actual expenses for his past time spent in travel to inspect records; and

e.    That if any records are withheld by ACA under a privilege claim or for any other reason (employment privacy, etc.)  that ACA be required to prepare a detailed privilege log and provide the same within the same 10 day period after inspection;

f.   for such other and further relief as is just and equitable.


COUNT II 
(All actions by ACA to implement the
BOD decision are void as ultra vires )

53.   Plaintiff(s) replead(s) ¶¶ 1-52.
54.   At some point in 2025, the ACA BOD made a decision to sell the HQ.
55.   The ACA BOD is authorized to conduct business outside the ordinary course of business (“OOCB”)  only as permitted by the Montana Code Annotated  (MCA), which provides it “may” do so only “if” approved by (2):
35-2-617. Sale of assets other than in regular course of activities. (1) A corporation may sell, lease, exchange, or otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of its property, which may include the good will, other than in the usual and regular course of its activities on the terms and conditions and for the consideration determined by the corporation's board if the proposed transaction is approved as required by subsection (2).
(2) Unless this chapter, the articles, the bylaws, or the board of directors or members, acting pursuant to subsection (4), require a greater vote or voting by class, the proposed transaction to be authorized must be approved:
(a) by the board;
(b) by the members by two-thirds of the votes cast or a majority of the voting power, whichever is less; and

56.   Approval as required by MCA § 35-2-617(2)(b) is a condition precedent to the organization obtaining proper authority to engage in the conduct (sale, lease, exchange or otherwise dispose of)  under consideration.
57.   In the absence of  approval as required, an organization lacks legal the  authority to engage in the proposed transaction, because the statute grants that authority only if and when:   “ if the proposed transaction is approved as required by subsection (2).”
58.   Applied here, ACA has completely ignored the requirements of the statute as a condition precedent to offering the HQ for sale, entering into a listing agreement or taking any action whatsoever to implement the decision it made unilaterally.
59.   The ACA BOD lacked the authority to take any action to implement it’s unilateral decision (enter into a listing agreement, etc.)  and, if the membership never approves the BOD decision, there never will be any authority for this renegade BOD to implement the unilateral decision.
WHEREFORE, James H. Cossitt demand(s) judgment against Defendant Adventure Cycling Association, Inc., and Sterling Commercial Management LLC in accordance with MCA § 35-2-617 and Title 27, Chapter 8, as follows:
a.   That the ACA BOD has failed to obtain proper legal authority for the proposed sale of the HQ building; and

b.   Voiding all actions, including the listing agreement, any buy sell agreements, any contracts and vote #2 (to the extent is seeks approval of a the specific transaction identified by ACA as pending) and any other steps taken by ACA to implement the unapproved action; and

c.   Awarding Plaintiff attorney fees and expenses pursuant to MCA §
27-8-311; and

d.   for such other and further relief as is just and equitable.
Jim Cossitt
Cell    406-260-6969
E:    cossittlaw@gmail.com

Offline Jim Cossitt, 1976 rider

Re: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2026, 08:55:19 pm »
Complaint cannot be posted, error message received.   Counts III and IV  read:


COUNT III 
(ACA has “played games” with providing the
membership list and, in doing so, violated MCA § 35-2-535 )

60.   Plaintiff repleads ¶ 1-59.
61.   MCA § 35-2-535 requires generally that a Montana non profit corporation provide a membership list to allow members of the entity to communicate timely and effectively, on the same footing or basis as the organization, in a commercially reasonable manner, with the entire membership.
62.   This provision is designed to  ensure that communications on contested topics are made in a fair, balanced and reasonable manner so as to allow members to be fully apprised of the issues to be voted upon, the pros & cons and to make an informed voting decision.
63.   ACA has engaged in an intentional, pervasive and coordinated pattern of bad faith conduct designed to create the false imprimatur of superficial statutory compliance, but in reality, coldly calculated to degrade, delay, impede and frustrate meaningful and good faith compliance with the provisions of § 35-2-535.
64.   ACA breached it’s duties and obligations imposed by § 35-2-535(1)  in each of the following respects:
a.   ACA failed to provide an alphabetical list as required (the list received by Cossitt was alphabetized by first name, not last name); and

b.   The list provided to Cossitt failed to contain a disclosure of the  “authenticated electronic identification”; and

c.   The list provided to Cossitt and others failed to contain a disclosure of the “number of votes each member is entitled to vote at the meeting”; and

d.   The list provided to Cossitt contained different information than the content of lists provided to other persons;

e.   ACA failed to prepare “on a current basis through the time of the membership meeting, a list of members, if any, who are entitled to vote at the meeting but not entitled to notice of the meeting.


65.   ACA breached it’s duties and obligations imposed by § 35-2-535(2)  in each of the following respects:
a.   The statute requires ACA to provide a list for the purpose of “communication with other members concerning the meeting” which normally would have been via email, as ACA regularly does with the ED and BOD updates;

b.   ACA went out of its way to act in bad faith by providing an unusable list or a very difficult to use list so as to degrade, impede and undermine the ability of members to use the list for the statutory purpose of communication in a meaningful and timely manner;

c.   ACA’s bad faith conduct, as described herein, is the functional equivalent of the outright refusal to comply with the statute, which requires ACA to provide a list for a specific purpose:    “for the purpose of communication with other members concerning the meeting”; and

d.   ACA failed to designate or disclose if the list would be available in 2 business days and whether it would be available at either  “the corporation's principal office or at a reasonable place identified in the meeting notice in the city where the meeting will be held.”


66.   The duty to provide a list comes with an explicit sanction for non compliance or for bad faith compliance: “the improper refusal to comply” results in the application of MCA § 35-2-535(5) which invalidates the action taken at any meeting.
67.   As a result of ACA’s intentional failure to comply with the statute in good faith, it has refused to provide a list for the communication purposes as required by the statute.
WHEREFORE, James H. Cossitt demand(s) judgment against Defendant Adventure Cycling Association, Inc., in accordance with MCA § 35-2-535 and Title 27, Chapter 8, as follows:
a.   “summarily order the inspection or copying at the corporation's expense” of the same list that ACA uses for bulk emails and in the same format as it provides to any commercial 3rd party service for such email blasts; and

b.   “postpone the meeting for which the list was prepared until the inspection or copying is complete,” and

c.   “order the corporation to pay the member's costs, including reasonable attorney fees, incurred to obtain the order”; and

d.   Invalidates any action taken at a member meeting; and

e.   for such other and further relief as is just and equitable.


COUNT IV 
(ACA has  violated multiple provisions of
TITLE 35, CHAPTER 2, Part 5, MCA
relating to the member meeting & voting process)

68.   Plaintiff repleads ¶ 1-67.
69.   Part 5 of MCA § 35-2 generally provides for member meetings and governs the voting process.
70.   In general, each member gets one vote and if the membership “stands of record in the names of two or more persons ”(a) if only one votes, the act binds all; and (b) if more than one votes, the vote is divided on a pro rata basis.”  See § 35-2-536, MCA.
71.   The sole methods available to ACA to accept votes are limited to those set forth in:  §  35-2-542. Corporation's acceptance of votes. (1) which provides:   “If
a.   the name signed on a vote, consent, waiver, or proxy appointment corresponds to the name of a member; or

b.   is the authenticated electronic identification of a member.”


72.   If the vote meets one of those two criteria, then the good faith  requirement is also added:
the corporation, if acting in good faith, is entitled to accept the vote, consent, waiver, or proxy appointment and give it effect as the act of the member.


VOTING BY TELEPHONE INCLUDING VOICEMAIL
73.   ACA has announced that it will allow votes to be cast via telephone and voicemail.
74.   Telephone and voice mail voting violates MCA§ 35-2-533, which provides for a “written ballot”. While the statute allows ballots to be transmitted by electronic means, there is no provision for use of any procedure other than in writing.
75.   MCA § 35-2-542 provides that a corporation shall accept votes based on signatures of authenticated electronic identification, but does not expressly provide for voice voting in any case.
76.   Telephone voting lacks the security assurances of wet signatures or authenticated electronic records and violates MCA§ 35-2-533, which provides for a “written ballot”. While the statute allows ballots to be transmitted by electronic means, there is no provision for use of any procedure other than in writing.

MANIPULATION OF THE MEMBERSHIP CATEGORIES IN VIOLAITON OF MCA § 35-2-532

77.   The sole methods available to ACA to determine the membership entitled to vote are set forth in:  §  35-2-532. Record date -- determining members entitled to notice and vote.
78.   ACA has violated the provisions of that statute by:
a.   Allowing members to opt out of the member list; and

b.   Allowing members of a household to vote, even if they are not current ACA members or ever were ACA members (see 12/16/2025 email blast); and

c.   Allowing household members to vote who never registered or paid membership dues; and

d.   Allowing ACA members who did NOT opt out of electronic email for communications from ACA to receive paper ballots, and vote early prior to the stated date for the voting process to begin.    This allows members to vote early before they have received communications from the opposition group or anyone else who obtained a membership list.



WHEREFORE, James H. Cossitt demand(s) judgment against Defendant Adventure Cycling Association, Inc., in accordance with Title 35, Chapter 2, Part 5 MCA and Title 27, Chapter 8, as follows

a.   Invalidating the 1) opt out;    2) telephone voting; and 3)  pro rata membership methods chosen by ACA; and

b.   for such other and further relief as is just and equitable.
Jim Cossitt
Cell    406-260-6969
E:    cossittlaw@gmail.com

Offline Jim Cossitt, 1976 rider

Re: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2026, 08:57:50 pm »
Complaint cannot be posted, error message received.   the 2nd Count IV (should be count V, I made a mistake) reads:

COUNT IV  (Breach of the common law
Covenants of Good Faith & Fair Dealing)

79.   Plaintiff repleads ¶ 1-78.
80.   The conduct involved in the entire sale process (membership meeting, voting and all related process)  process is governed by numerous provisions Montana law, including, inter alia:
a.   MCA § 28-1-201. ”General duty of care. Every person is bound, without contract, to abstain from injuring the person or property of another or infringing upon any of another person's rights.”; and

b.   MCA § 28-1-211. Implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. “The conduct required by the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing in the trade.”

c.   MCA   35-2-416. General standards for directors. (1) A director shall discharge the duties as a director, including the director's duties as a member of a committee:   (a) in good faith;   (b) with the care an ordinarily prudent person in a similar position would exercise under similar circumstances; and (c) in a manner the director reasonably believes to be in the best interests of the corporation.

81.   As outlined above, ACA as an organization, the staff and the BOD have breached those duties, specifically in each of the following instances:
a.   Conducting vote #1 in a manner inconsistent with Montana law and costing the organization at least $30,000 out of pocket + loss of confidence & goodwill; and

b.   Attempting to conduct vote #2 in a manner inconsistent with Montana law and in bad faith, as follows

i.       Failing to disclose the specific resolution or other board action that it seeks member approval of;
ii.       Providing ever shifting descriptions of the action for which membership approval is sought;

iii.       Intentional bad faith in providing a member list totally out of compliance with the applicable statute and lacking in commercial reasonableness; and

iv.       Intentional and repetitive stonewalling of Cossitt and the multiple requests for documents in utter defiance of the applicable statutes;

v.       making false statements, material misrepresentations, and assurances to Cossitt (playing “bait & switch”);

vi.       practicing law and making more false and misleading statements  , in the 12/9/25 ED update wherein ACA asserts:   “Montana law permits action without holding a member meeting.”;

c.   conducting both vote #1 and vote #2 by acting ultra vires outside the scope of conduct allowed by Montana law  (see ¶¶ above) by listing the ACA HQ building for sale prior to compliance with the statute requiring member approval.

WHEREFORE, James H. Cossitt demand(s) judgment against Defendant Adventure Cycling Association, Inc.,  and Sterling Commercial Management LLC in accordance with Title 27, Chapter 8, as follows:
a.   Order ACA BOD members to reimburse ACA for the cost of vote #1; and

b.   Postpone vote #2 until trial on the merits of this matter; and

c.   Invalidate any and all action that may be taken in furtherance of vote #2 including the listing agreement, any buy sell agreements, any contracts and vote #2 (to the extent is seeks approval of a the specific transaction identified by ACA as pending) and any other steps taken by ACA to implement the unapproved action; and

d.   Awarding Plaintiff attorney fees and expenses pursuant to MCA §  27-8-311; and

e.   for such other and further relief as is just and equitable.

I declare under penalty of perjury, pursuant 28  USC § 1746 and IRCP  1.413(4), that the preceding is true and correct.


DATED: January 16, 2026.      /s/  James H. Cossitt      



Signed as LSR counsel and not pursuant to verification:

DATED: January 16, 2026.      /s/  Andrew D. Huppert   


ACRONYMS, DEFINITIONS & CAST OF CHARACTERS


ACA   Adventure Cycling Association, Inc.
   
BOD   Board of Directors of ACA
   
Cossitt   James H. Cossitt, Plaintiff
   
ED   Executive Director of ACA
   
HQ   ACA office building located on  Pine Street, Missoula MT
   
Sterling CRE Advisers, a dba of Sterling Commercial Management LLC   Listing Agent / real estate firm
   
OCB   Ordinary Course of Business
   
OOCB   Outside the Ordinary Course of Business

Jim Cossitt
Cell    406-260-6969
E:    cossittlaw@gmail.com

Offline Jim Cossitt, 1976 rider

Re: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here
« Reply #7 on: January 17, 2026, 02:09:12 pm »
Along the lines of transparency & disclosure,   I am going to put this out there before someone else connects the dots and screams "bias".   One of the SAVE members and former ACA BOD member  (Andy Huppert) is serving as my LSR counsel in this lawsuit.   He is doing so merely because I no longer have Efiling credentials, having closed my MT practice in 3/2-23 after about 25 years.  He does not practice in corporate governance, biz law and related areas and I did not know him until about 2 weeks ago.

The substantive content of all the papers is mine or 97% mine.   The direction of the litigation will be by my independent judgment.

The LSR notice we have or will file with the court confirms  and discloses:

"Pursuant to  MRCP 4.1 & 4.2 and Montana Rule of Professional Conduct (MRPC) 1.2(c), Andrew D.  Huppert appears in this action on behalf of Plaintiff.   That appearance is governed by

Rule 4.1. Limited Representation Permitted -- Process.   (b) Providing limited representation of a person under these rules shall not constitute an entry of appearance by the attorney for purposes of Rule 5(b) and does not authorize or require the service or delivery of pleadings, papers, or other documents upon the attorney under Rule 5(b).

5.   The scope of the appearance is limited to the following specific tasks:

a.   Background advice & counsel (coaching)  to Cossitt and acting as a “sounding board” with respect to local practice, custom & culture; and

b.   Prefiling review of all papers for format and compliance with the applicable rules  (state & local district if any) and local practice; and

c.   Actual filing of all papers on behalf of Cossitt via the Montane Efile system;

d.   Receipt of service of all papers via the Montana E filing system & forwarding to Cossitt.

Other than the specific tasks set forth above, the scope of the LSR engagement excludes all other matters.  If the scope changes, an updated notice of appearance will be filed."

Thanks,   JHC  1/17/26
Jim Cossitt
Cell    406-260-6969
E:    cossittlaw@gmail.com

Offline bellantoni@mac.com

Re: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here
« Reply #8 on: January 17, 2026, 02:26:59 pm »
Folks,   I believe in transparency & accountability.   Please post your thoughts here so I see them.

Thank you.  Jim Cossitt    1/16/2026

My thought is, WE WILL NOT HAVE 40 PEOPLE IN MISSOULA FOR DECADES AT BEST.

Offline CDThomas

Re: Cossitt v. ACA, Missoula County DV-32-26-075-OC / Please comment here
« Reply #9 on: January 17, 2026, 05:59:28 pm »
Nothing good will come from this lawsuit. The fact is that ACA opted not to change with the marketplace for over 40 years. Backroads, Bikepacking.com and numerous others have eaten ACA's lunch, domestically and internationally. Americans are paying big bucks to ride in the USA, Europe and elsewhere with everyone except ACA.  We decided our niche would be low value camping trips . . . and an iconic building. We didn't end up here because of a new or woke Executive Director.  We ended up here thanks to the invisible hand of the market. Laws of economics and physics apply to all.