[Board] MOTION: Change IRS non-profit application to ask for 501c4 or 501c6 instead of 501c3

[Jachym Cepicky]

+1

Jachym

Dne 16.8.2013 21:18, Daniel Morissette napsal(a):
> Hi Board,
> 
> Following up on the great exchanges on this question in the last week or
> so, and since we seem to have come to a consensus, let's go ahead with a
> formal motion to approve the decision.
> 
> MOTION: It is decided to change OSGeo's IRS non-profit application to
> ask for 501(c)(4) or 501(c)(6) status (instead of 501(c)(3)) and to
> mandate Daniel Morissette (Treasurer) to work with David Atkin our
> Attorney to proceed to get this approved by the IRS. The choice between
> c4 and c6 will be left to David's advice.
> 
> And I start with my +1
> 
> Daniel (OSGeo Treasurer)
> 
> P.S. See for reference below the summary of our plan which I had sent to
> this list 2 days ago.
> 
> 
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [Board] Update on non-profit status plan after board meeting
> Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 00:21:49 -0400
> From: Daniel Morissette <dmorissette at mapgears.com>
> To: OSGeo-Board <board at lists.osgeo.org>
> 
> Board, and all OSGeo members,
> 
> Here is a quick update on the 501(c)(3/6/4) status discussion at the
> board meeting that just ended. Please see for reference the responses
> received from our attorney earlier today that were forwarded to this list.
> 
> The consensus among the board members present at the meeting is that:
> 
> 1- We are going to stop seeking 501(c)(c3) status given the
> complications that this implies (running two orgs, etc.) and since the
> charitable donations from individuals have never been and never will be
> a significant part of our revenues
> 
> 2- Once we give up on 501(c)(3), we can switch our current non-profit
> application to either 501(c)(4) or c501(c)(6) and operate with a single
> organization and maintain most (all?) of our current activities. Our
> attorney is confident that this status would be grented to us
> retroactively to the date of our original c3 application.
> 
> 3- About deciding between c4 or c6: they seem to provide the same
> benefits to OSGeo in the end, so we'll let our attorney advise on which
> one he thinks is better.
> 
> We will keep the floor open for discussions on this important question
> for the next 2 days, to leave time to everyone to read our attorney's
> responses (see other threads) and to bring up questions and comments.
> 
> After the end of those 2 days, if we still agree on the above plan then
> I will make a formal motion on this list to confirm the decision and
> then I will proceed to execute the plan with David, our attorney.
> 
> Note to all board members: please keep an eye on the list on the next
> few days to ensure that we can come up to a decision quickly.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Daniel (OSGeo Treasurer)
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

-- 
Jachym Cepicky
Help Service - Remote Sensing s.r.o.
jachym.cepicky at gmail.com
HS-RS: jachym at hsrs.cz http://bnhelp.cz
http://les-ejk.cz

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20130819/13e490eb/attachment.sig>