Talk:Proposed Bylaws Current Draft - Revision history

Rfs at 02:15, 21 July 2005

2005-07-21T02:15:51Z

Rfs at 02:14, 21 July 2005

2005-07-21T02:14:17Z

Oso at 21:47, 19 July 2005

2005-07-19T21:47:11Z

New page

I just want to go on the record one more time to say a few things:

I still feel that completely changing the bylaws is a mistake. We should be amending them to suit our needs.

If the idea is to help other Free Geek's be more like us, I feel that we are doing them a great dis-service, that will cause them problems getting their 501(c)(3) status.

I felt that Joe (the lawyer) has urged caution on this direction and his advice is being ignored for the most part. That is not good either.

In my opinion, it would be better to leave the bylaws alone (or make at the most, some minor changes). We then create a document that is essentially a bill of rights, a list of amendments that makes the structural changes we want without involving the IRS. This can be consented to by us (as we already have concensus) and would be voted in as the second action of new Free Geek Bds. after electing themselves. In that document, you spell out all the stuff we want codified, but should just keep out of the "official" bylaws. I have NEVER heard an informed opinion that encourages trying to make these types of structural changes to non-profit bylaws. I have only heard the opinion I keep reiterating: Keep it simple boilerplate language to get the tax exempt status, amend as needed to make it fit the culture (which, BTW, is perfectly legal).

My fear is that in trying to make things perfect (as opposed to functional) we will open up a pandora's box of intrusion and inquiry by the IRS that will undo our status as a 501(c)(3).

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:15, 21 July 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Oso's comments moved to discussion page on [[~~Proposed~~ Bylaws ~~Working Draft~~]].	+	Oso's comments moved to discussion page on [[New Bylaws Project]].

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:14, 21 July 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~I just want to go on the record one more time to say a few things:~~	+	Oso's comments moved to discussion page on [[Proposed Bylaws Working Draft]].
−
−	~~I still feel that completely changing the bylaws is a mistake. We should be amending them to suit our needs.~~
−
−	~~If the idea is to help other Free Geek~~'s ~~be more like us, I feel that we are doing them a great dis-service, that will cause them problems getting their 501(c)(3) status.~~
−
−	~~I felt that Joe (the lawyer) has urged caution~~ on ~~this direction and his advice is being ignored for the most part. That is not good either.~~
−
−	In my opinion, it would be better to leave the bylaws alone (or make at the most, some minor changes). We then create a document that is essentially a bill of rights, a list of amendments that makes the structural changes we want without involving the IRS. This can be consented to by us (as we already have concensus) and would be voted in as the second action of new Free Geek Bds. after electing themselves. In that document, you spell out all the stuff we want codified, but should just keep out of the "official" bylaws. I have NEVER heard an informed opinion that encourages trying to make these types of structural changes to non-profit bylaws. I have only heard the opinion I keep reiterating: Keep it simple boilerplate language to get the tax exempt status, amend as needed to make it fit the culture (which, BTW, is perfectly legal).
−
−	~~My fear is that in trying to make things perfect (as opposed to functional) we will open up a pandora's box of intrusion and inquiry by the IRS that will undo our status as a 501(c)(3)~~.