> On Jul 14, 2008, at 16:36, Ted Roche wrote: > >> Well, that's exactly what we're hoping to achieve, some simple guidance >> for SIGs that say that your structure can be part of GNHLUG if you >> follow the same strictures of being a non-profit educational charity in >> the sense of 501(c)(3) as GNHLUG is expected to be, and understand that >> the board or its designees can take on financial obligations on the part >> of GNHLUG. That might be it, right there. > Bill McGonigle wrote: > Actually that's what I was suggesting might want to be avoided. :)
Well, by reductio ad absurdum, doing nothing is surely easiest. But it doesn't provide much in benefits to our members. If we would like to be able to represent to the IRS that our SIGs are part of a recognized tax-deductible non-profit educational charitable organization that teaches people about FOSS/Linux, then we need to have some rules. I really don't want to disappoint the SIGs and tell them what they are doing won't fly. So, we're looking for a reasonably minimal set of rules, and want to set them up in advance so that there aren't surprises down the line. > It might be a useful thought experiment to think about "what if GNHLUG > wanted to do an event with SwANH?" We wouldn't make SwANH conform to > any IRS strictures to co-sponsor an event. No, but we would also not not expect SwANH to claim non-profit status for their operations under our moniker (not that that need it, they are a 501(c)(3), I believe). SwANH is surely not going to claim to be a "SIG" of GNHLUG. That would be an arrangement between peers, most likely. > Could we do a GNHLUG/Redhat event? Sure - and > they're on the NASDAQ. Tread carefully here. If a commercial operation is involved with a charitable one, there are tripwires that need to be avoided in terms of what can be donated and in what amounts. Should Red Hat's contributions to GNHLUG exceed one-third of GNHLUG's annual revenue, GNHLUG might be considered a private foundation rather than a public charity, and many different strictures apply. This is exactly the concern of the Ubuntu LoCo, single support from another organization. We might be able to run a co-op event with them, like the SwANH example above, but an Ubuntu SIG might not qualify as a legitimate subsidiary because of the one-third rule. And if we structure the SIG so it looks like a sham operation whose only purpose is to shelter otherwise taxable proceeds that another organization is otherwise processing and profiting from, well, we're not just dealing with a bunch of pita bureaucratic rules at that point. For the small amount of monies involved and the good intentions on all sides, I would not like to have to discuss our transgressions with the IRS. So we need some rules. > Same for Ubuntu LoCo - they perhaps already have > their rules. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoWorkingWithOtherGroups https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoFAQ > But GNHLUG can work with them, no problem to be > co-sponsors on events, even recurring ones. Two separate organizations co-sponsoring an event should not be a problem. We run our part, they run theirs. But that's not what we're discussing here. >> Sounds like you ought to come down to Manchester and offer to help us >> with this :) > > I would if I didn't have a 'last Thursday' meeting that night... > Sorry you won't make it. You've obviously given this a lot of thought, and I appreciate your participation. > Right, I understand why GNHLUG wants to exist as a legal entity. And I > suspect that if a SIG wanted to become assimilated by the GNHLUG at any > time this could be done in very short order. However, with legal > entities come legal entanglements, so my thought was to keep the degree > of such entanglements as small as possible. So, the structure is there, > ready to use as needed, but it doesn't pervade all daily activities that > would otherwise proceed differently if not for such entanglements. That's what we're hoping to hammer out. A simple set of statements some SIG organizers can agree to, or criteria they can meet, that will make expectations easy to meet on both sides. This should have no effect on the daily activities of the SIGs. > Think about the potential downsides. If PySIG (I'm picking on PySIG > again) has a meeting and it's part of GNHLUG and Alex goes nuts and > trashes the ABI, then the GNHLUG BoD is legally responsible. We've beaten that poor dead horse before. If there's a potential legal liability, expect the lawyers to name everyone remotely involved whose wallets they think they can pick. That's the nature of a litigious society. Nothing we're discussing here changes that liability pro or con. We're not talking about liability issues here (and there are some pretty good defenses, btw, but that's another thread), we're talking about normal, routine day-to-day operations that could involve money. Like all of our business, GNHLUG should process monetary operations in a way that's transparent and above question. > If RubySIG > decides to pass the hat at the brewpub and buy everybody beers then > GNHLUG has to worry about the accounting on that. The liabilities for the drunks driving home might be of more concerns, but a social event that surrounds an official educational charitable event is pretty specifically defined as not part of the meeting and is undertaken by the members on their own and not as part of GNHLUG's charitable purpose. > But if the RubySIG > Event is merely co-branded with GNHLUG then this isn't a problem, it's > not a GNHLUG event. Does Martha's give free rooms to corporations or > just guys who buy beer and talk about strange stuff? Great question. I think they allow groups of diners and their friends to use the hall at no charge as long as there's not a paid event. > There are certainly advantages to having GNHLUG be a State-created > entity, but there are potential gotchas as well. My only point is that > such gotchas should be kept as small and contained as possible, and that > we should have something positive to say for, "what do we gain by doing > X?" if we're thinking about doing X. Well, that's exactly what these discussions are about. Creating a non-profit formal organization as an aspect of GNHLUG has some implications in terms of formality, a need for a (small) set of rules, and a group of volunteers willing to take on the efforts involved in creating and maintaining that structure. At every meeting I've attended, someone has repeated the belief that there should be no change in the experience for the average LUG member in attending our events as free, open to the public, and welcoming meetings. We want the non-profit org to be an additional aspect that those who _choose_ to be involved in can do so, and an organizational structure that can offer GNHLUG some new opportunities that it hasn't been able to do before. [The standard disclaimer applies: I am speaking as an individual here, and am not representing the agreed-upon views of the board. For those, please consult the official records.] -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com _______________________________________________ gnhlug-org mailing list gnhlug-org@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-org/
