Sounds like “Phong Robotics” is just jealous that
"Something New Entertainment" thought of it first. Seriously, what do you
propose would be a
good approach? All I hear is bickering
about what should have been done. Yes a
mistake was made; we need to fix it so the board doesn't do it again. Ripping
up the lease and moving his stuff out
is unnecessary. Legally we are in the
same boat as riding out the 6 months vs. kicking it out now, am I wrong? How
about we just be excellent to each other
and deal with the issue without creating any unneeded anger.
On Thursday, March 6, 2014 1:28 PM, Torrie Fischer <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thursday, March 06, 2014 09:35:44 alex kot wrote:
> Craig makes a good point. The way I see it all your doing is creating
> unnecessary drama, let the 6 months ride out. Justin did this whole thing
> out of good intent, probably caused him more of headache then if he just
> spent his money at the place it was already at. Issue is already done we
> don't need to create any more issues after this.
I am thoroughly concerned that you see this as "unnecessary".
Any other board member might as well go and sign some other contract that
leases out the space without public discussion. What is preventing someone
from leasing out that front room to Phong Robotics? Letting this go sets us up
for unfathomably awful problems in the future. If I pull out a a wad of cash
and offer $500 on the spot for the exclusive rights to use that room for six
months, and Craig signs the contract, there is nothing that can be done about
it. According to this, they don't need to ask the membership if its alright,
discuss the terms of the lease in advance with the board, or even confer with
the board in any fashion. Just a brief casual mention at the end of a weekly
meeting that seems to suffice.
Heck, it doesn't even have to be Phong Robotics. If OSC Tech Lab wants space,
and the deal is sweet enough, there is nothing stopping them from slicing up
the space into private and common spaces.
Money for a new laser cutter? Sure! You just need to give a corporation the
exclusive right to access a significant portion of the floor space. No need to
consult the members. No need for a board vote. Don't talk to the treasurer,
they won't mind the hurdles. Lawyers are overrated, too.
The road to ruin is paved with good intentions.
>
>
>
> On Thursday, March 6, 2014 12:14 PM, Craig Bergdorf <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> imo a 990-t must be filed either way, (not cashing the checks means nothing
> with a sublease that has the building owners signature on it (as he will be
> filin it eitherway)), so why not just run it for 6 months. afaik it's too
> late to do anything else (legally) without pretending events didn't happen
> which could get us in real trouble.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:02 PM, a l <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure how you can claim consensus, when as you've pointed out,there
> hadn't been a vote.
> >My point was that, as far as I understand, just because activity is taxable
> >does not mean we cannot conduct it.we just need to file and collect taxes
> >on these activities. As I pointed out this is additional work and the
> >costs and benefits must be weighed. I have requested that this be brought
> >to the vote since it was brought up in discussion in January. This has not
> >happened. Regards,
> >Andrew L
> >On Mar 6, 2014 10:32 AM, "Torrie Fischer" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >On Wednesday, March 05, 2014 10:00:39 a l wrote:
> >>> Thanks for the relevant sources and calm voicing of concerns. To this
> >>> end:
> >>> Just because things require taxing does not mean we cannot conduct them.
> >>> We
> >>> would just need to weigh the benefits and time involved.
> >>
> >>As the chief financial officer who is ultimately responsible for
> >>maintaining our tax records, I would very much rather not bring about any
> >>potential for audits. This is *not worth it* and will require substantial
> >>effort to convince me to deal with it, unless someone else wants to
> >>doocratically step up and handle any unrelated business income and
> >>maintain that for the next few years. The Champions are also welcome to
> >>initiate a coup to usurp my position.
> >>
> >>We lose physical space, I lose more time for non-treasurer things, I'm
> >>responsible for even more legal overhead, future treasurers and
> >>secretaries
> >>will be responsible for maintaining the paper trail for the next few years
> >>to prevent audit, etc.
> >>
> >>And we want volunteers to handle this? I believe I'm exceptionally lucky
> >>among hackerspace treasurers in that I have a flexible situation of
> >>office space, financial advice, and employment.
> >>
> >>Is this $600 worth the pain, including this heated argument that has been
> >>going on for over a week, tearing us apart, and making us look
> >>dysfunctional to the whole freaking planet?
> >>
> >>I'm confident that the community of SYNHAK has reached consensus: Do not
> >>do
> >>this.
> >>
> >>As the Treasurer for SYNHAK, Inc, I wish to inform the board that they may
> >>disregard their treasurer's advice and concerns at their own risk at the
> >>upcoming meeting. I am legally obligated by the bylaws to serve the board,
> >>which I feel I have been doing faithfully and to the best of my abilities.
> >>
> >>I think many would agree that I am usually the first to give the benefit
> >>of
> >>the doubt regarding trustworthy actions. As a Member, I wish to inform the
> >>board that the individuals involved have lost my trust and the trust of
> >>many others for not having an open discussion about this up front.
> >>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Andrew L
> >>>
> >>> On Mar 5, 2014 9:24 AM, "Justin Herman" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> > Also since this has been brought up before...
> >>> >
> >>> > ...the following activities are specifically excluded from the
> >>> > definition
> >>> >
> >>> > of unrelated trade or business:
> >>> > - *Volunteer Labor*: Any trade or business is excluded in which
> >>> > substantially all the work is performed for the organization
> >>> > without
> >>> > compensation. Some fundraising activities, such as volunteer
> >>> > operated
> >>> > bake
> >>> > sales, may meet this exception. *[Bake SALE at the proposed
> >>> > Auction?]*
> >>> > - *Convenience of Members*: Any trade or business is excluded that
> >>> > is
> >>> > carried on by an organization described in section 501(c)(3) or by
> >>> > a
> >>> > governmental college or university primarily for the convenience of
> >>> > its
> >>> > members, students, patients, officers, or employees. A typical
> >>> > example
> >>> > of
> >>> > this is a school cafeteria. *[Selling Arduinos or other consumables
> >>> > in
> >>> > a vending area?]*
> >>> > - *Selling Donated Merchandise*: Any trade or business is excluded
> >>> > that consists of selling merchandise, substantially all of which
> >>> > the
> >>> > organization received as gifts or contributions. Many thrift shop
> >>> > operations of exempt organizations would meet this exception. *[All
> >>> > the donated Computers?]*
> >>> >
> >>> > http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Charitable-Organizations/Un
> >>> > rela
> >>> > ted-Business-Income-Tax-Exceptions-and-Exclusions>
> >>> >
> >>> > On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Justin Herman <[email protected]>
wrote:
> >>> >> This has already be researched....
> >>> >>
> >>> >> http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Page 17 Section Rental Income:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> "Generally, income derived from the rental of real property and
> >>> >> incidental personal property is excluded from unrelated business
> >>> >> income."
> >>> >>
> >>> >> It goes on to state HOW it would not qualify. (if there is a
> >>> >> mortgage, if
> >>> >> personal services are rendered, if a parking lot is charged)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I thought that this might not relate to us as this doc is targeted
> >>> >> for
> >>> >> religious orgs. So I called the IRS before and they stated that this
> >>> >> is
> >>> >> for
> >>> >> ALL 501(c)(3) orgs.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 9:03 AM, Devin Wolfe <[email protected]>
wrote:
> >>> >>> Can you please provide your source?
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Thanks,
> >>> >>> Devin
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Sent with AquaMail for Android
> >>> >>> http://www.aqua-mail.com
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On March 5, 2014 8:55:49 AM Torrie Fischer
> >>> >>> <[email protected]>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>> I'm wearing my treasurer hat for this.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>> After some digging around, I've come to the conclusion that leasing
> >>> >>>> out
> >>> >>>> this space is incredibly likely to be considered a violation of our
> >>> >>>> 501c3
> >>> >>>> status as it is unrelated income. That $100/mo will need to be
> >>> >>>> taxed
> >>> >>>> and
> >>> >>>> somehow proven that leasing out our space to non-hacking purposes
> >>> >>>> will
> >>> >>>> further our mission of providing infrastructure to creative people.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> I'm not cashing any checks that arrive.
> >>> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>> >>>> Discuss mailing list
> >>> >>>> [email protected]
> >>> >>>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> >>> Discuss mailing list
> >>> >>> [email protected]
> >>> >>> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >>> >
> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>> > Discuss mailing list
> >>> > [email protected]
> >>> > https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Discuss mailing list
> >>[email protected]
> >>https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Discuss mailing list
> >[email protected]
> >https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://synhak.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
