501c3 Discussion - ahashop_directors

The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Message from discussion 501c3 Discussion
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of nymis...@gmail.com designates 209.85.223.171 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.223.171;
Message-ID: <5060CC7A.1040...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 17:11:22 -0400
From: N Y <nymis...@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120910 Thunderbird/15.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ahashop_directors@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: 501c3 Discussion
References: <505A5423.8070...@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <505A5423.8070...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hey guys,

Just a friendly reminder that the board really needs to take a look at
these issues, and that there has been no activity here since I posted. 
I know you're all very busy and that this is awful paperwork, but it
probably won't take more than 30-45 minutes to look over and give a
"yeah, this looks good so far", or "oh my goodness this is a giant mess;
we must fix <section>".

-- Nate Y.

On 09/19/2012 07:24 PM, N Y wrote:
> Hello, lovely board members!
>
> It's that time! I am opening up this email thread to discussing our
> thoughts, what we've found during our research, and what remains to be
> done on our 501c3 application.  *Everyone* should have something to
> contribute by now, so let's make this a useful discussion and get this
> over with already. :)
>
> I'll start by saying that I notice we have a few key areas that have not
> been adequately responded to, namely:
>
> - 5.3.a. should probably be filled out by Josh with the rough number of
> hours he worked.  I am updating 5.3.b. to be "no".
>
> - 5.5.a. We don't have a specific conflict of interest policy, though it
> is briefly mentioned for our officers (but not the board).  The note
> below this section on Form 1023 points out: "A conflict of interest
> policy is recommended though it is not required to obtain exemption." so
> maybe we are good with what we have.  Noisebridge has a much more
> thorough policy, but Hive13's is just a brief section near the end of
> their bylaws.  Thoughts?
>
> - 6.1.a/b. We need to flesh these out on the wiki.  Does this apply to
> Bright Futures? Our Gemsi (or similar) fund-raiser?
>
> - 7.1. Anyone have any input on this section? We need to identify
> someone who can help us with this (Mrs. Hunter?) if not.  Schedule G
> itself looks fairly easy to fill in, but need to make sure we answer
> them carefully due to the somewhat peculiar nature of our acquisition.
>
> - 7.2. We still need to complete Schedule E, relating to us not
> submitting this stuff prior to 27 months after formation.
>
> - 8.2.c. We need to clarify this part.  We have indeed done fundraising,
> even if it's not much.
>
> - 8.11. I'm pretty sure "real property" means things related to
> buildings, facilities, etc..  For what it's worth, Noisebridge answered
> "no".
>
> - 10.1. I believe this is "no".  Noisebridge also has "no".
>
> - 10.5. Should probably check "h" (see Noisebridge)
>
> - 10.6. I think since we're more established, we should choose the
> Definitive Ruling option here.  Might require some lawyering and/or
> records searching.  Input?
>
> Onward/tally ho/etc., directors!
>
> -- Nate
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
Account Options
