Yes, I can be a group contact. I agree that chapter status is a ways off. I am mostly thinking about the liability protection we would get from incorporating along with the eventual benefits of 501(c)(3). Bylaws to start can be simple. If the user group evolves into an organization that accepts grants, runs programs, and so on, we can evolve the governance accordingly.
I have a little experience with these issues. I may be able to connect us with law students or attorneys who can help at reduced or no cost if needed. Fortunately, as as an incipient organization with no money, our needs are simple. Hopefully the organization will grow. (: There seem to be many mission-aligned user groups and organizations in the Seattle area, and it sounds like our Portland friends are experiencing success with events, so this is a good start. (: Pine Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 09:45:49 -0700 From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Wikimedia Cascadia] Cascadia page on Meta, and organizing ourselves Glad to see interest in formal organization. Perhaps we can continue this conversation at Meta? I, too, think we could have a successful application to obtain user group status. This would mean official recognition from the Wikimedia Foundation, provides funding opportunities, and is a step towards chapter status. Before we worry about bylaws, etc., I think we should focus on user group recognition. Pine, Mako, would you two be interested in being co-contacts for the Wikimedia Cascadia user group? I can be one, too, which makes three already. I had hoped to get some people together for an in-person Cascadia meetup at the upcoming WikiConference USA, perhaps for the purpose of putting together a user group plan. Perhaps this is easier to do remotely since there is already interest. Jason On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 5:25 PM, ENWP Pine <[email protected]> wrote: I may have some time in the next few weeks to get us more organized on Meta. Becoming a user group looks relatively lightweight and I think we would qualify if we put in an application. Of course, anyone else who wants to curate the Meta pages and submit a user group application can do so! If we start to do regular business, especially with people outside the immediate Wikimedia volunteer community or if we start to accept grant money, I think we should incorporate for liability protection and tax reporting reasons. Being an unincorporated nonprofit association that gets sued, such as because someone in our group made a copyright violation, would be bad. Also, incorporation may provide us more ability to get grants and in-kind contributions especially if we qualify for 501(c)(3). Incorporation is not difficult but it involves some time for applications to be created and processed. What gets tricky is selecting board members, drafting bylaws, and doing other necessary administrative work beyond the capacity of volunteers, so we'll need to think about that when the time comes. We are small enough now that all active participants could be board members, but if we scale to 30 members we will likely need an elected board. That is a good problem to have, and the Affiliations Committee can provide guidance for us throughout the organizing process. http://nonprofit.about.com/od/faqsthebasics/f/unincorporationassociation.htm https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affcom Pine _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-Cascadia mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-cascadia
