I have been lurking on this conversation so far, but here are a few thoughts:
The greater the complexity of this organization, pseudo-organization, or bank account, the less likely it is that the organization will represent the greatest number of coworking spaces. 1. Keep it simple. Fine, we decide to organize in some way. This group is extraordinarily diverse. Let's keep the organization as flat as possible, be inclusive as possible, and only raise what we think we need for 1) the objective or 2) a series of objectives + a small percentage contingency. This prevents a hierarchy of spaces and people. This also means that there isn't some big surplus of cashing sitting around in a bank account for us to worry about. Should the group suddenly disappear, our greatest loss would be trust and not money. One of Suite133's partners is president of our local downtown business association. While very old school in membership, the issues we're talking about are amazingly similar. 2. The right answer may be some form of non-profit / membership based organization. Something that I don't think has been mentioned would be for us to find a fiscal agent willing to handle our money and non-profit status while we figure things out. Plus, we could, in theory, apply for grants to support something like a conference. There are fees involved, but it's a lot cheaper than incorporating - then changing our minds. Shunpike.org, for example, does this for arts organizations in Seattle/Tacoma and has been a regular user of Suite133 for nearly a year. I used this model when setting up a new non-profit a few years ago in partnership with our local community foundation. I just saw Alex's email ... I'll stop now and chime back in next week. Derek Young Suite133 - Tacoma, WA [email protected] On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:55 AM, Alex Hillman wrote: > If you're interested in creating an entity to help support the conference you > want to run, then I say: do it! There are future endeavors that may even be > able to find value in supporting or being a part of that supporting entity. > But trying to make it an umbrella for EVERY possible thing that comes up in > the future is not something I think is a mission I can support. > > Mixing it in with the ownership of the domain, my tax liabilities, and the > direction of the larger community is a different issue though, and one that > the group does not seem to cohesively support, myself included. > > None of us would be here having this conversation today if that's how this > movement had started. > > -Alex > > > /ah > indyhall.org > coworking in philadelphia > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:35 AM, rachel young <[email protected]> wrote: > > Exactly why do people want to set up a charitable organization? What would it > get us? > > Charitable organisations mean something different in some countries. In > Canada, a charity is only one type of non-profit organisation, and is one > that is more a stringent structure because it can issue tax receipts for > donations. A corporation can still be a non-profit (one that operates for > self-benefit and that redistributes surplus towards its goals) without being > a charity. > > I admit that I've been skimming some e-mails in the last few days. Did > someone recommend an actual charity? Or do you mean to ask why people are > interested in forming a non-profit? > > I am in favour of forming some sort of organisation, traditional like a > non-profit (but not a charity, I don't think we need charitable status) or > co-operative, as a way of formalising all of us as a cohesive industry, as > long as it is still a legal entity in some form. > > The domain purchase is only one issue. There has been talk of a conference > (which I still dig), leveraging our collective buying power, etc. These are > all things that one cohesive body could do, and since there has been/could be > money involved, it would keep it all legal and with checks and balances. Alex > is the most awesome person to manage the domain issue, but I do worry if > managing the funds could have any sort of negative taxation impact on him, > which of course none of us would want. Forming a separate legal entity could > solve/avoid just such an issue. > > The buying of the domain was the first time that money has come into the > equation and that was an anomaly IMO. > > So then, what if something else comes up that involves money? How many times > will there be an exception? Who knows if there will be a next time, but > there also wasn't a first time until the domain issue came up, so it is > possible. > r. > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Coworking" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Coworking" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Coworking" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/coworking?hl=en.
