> -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Litt [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 4:53 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Wednesday's meeting agenda > > > I think the most important thing we should discuss and come to a > > consensus about is how to avoid this scenario in the future where all > > of our eggs are shoved into a single individual's basket. The 'smart' > > action to take would be to incorporate the LUG and formally elect > > officials for the entity. > > I'd think twice about incorporating. That means a drain of about $300/year if > you incorporate Florida nonprofit, it means somebody must do a complicated > report to the state once a year. Year after year, the new person doing that > report is farther separated from the original incorporation, and the report > seems harder and harder. You must every year do taxes for the corporation, > so you need to pay an accountant (that was part of my $300 estimate). You > need to maintain a business checking account, and who knows, that might > cost ten bucks a month. > Somebody must be responsible for remembering all that stuff. > > As a practical matter, the minute you incorporate you need to start collecting > dues. Now it's not all that difficult to collect, let's say, $35/year from willing > members -- it's well worth it to belong to a LUG. But heaven help you if > another LUG, that doesn't charge dues, opens nearby. >
Excellent points and insight Steve. Recognize that I believe the whole point of incorporating would be for protecting the assets of the LUG. Right now the assets of the LUG are tied up into a single soul, who could get hit by a freight train tomorrow (let's hope not!). Incorporating gives you "legitimacy" as it pertains to the law. Incorporating also doesn't have to be as a NFP, thus drastically reducing the burden and costs, while providing the same level of legality. I think disregarding any incorporating 'could' ultimately produce an undesirable result, as we all just nearly witnessed in the last two days, thus I think it's worth more than just a casual conversation. Finally, I don't see this as a representation of Jacksonville Linux Users Group. It clearly and definitively has become the William Linux Users Group. That's not a jab at William in any way and his efforts. It's merely a statement of legal fact. LEGAL fact. Until those assets are disbursed in a formal manner, this LUG will continue to be at the ultimate mercy of a single individual. The last sentence above from Steve drives home my point of view also. What could be the damages incurred if another group not only "claiming" to be the Jacksonville Linux Users Group, but IS, by law, the Jacksonville Linux Users Group, LLC/Inc.? I don't have the answer to that, but again I think it's worth discussing and not be completely disregarded. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive http://marc.info/?l=jaxlug-list&r=1&w=2 RSS Feed http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.xml Unsubscribe [email protected]
