Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

way. Making C4L a legal >> entity with the board that formally governs with bylaws is a far far >> greater change to C4L as it currently is than getting a fiscal sponsor with >> a 3 or 5 year term limit for a fee in order to get us more stability in >> annual conference logis

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

that formally governs with bylaws is a far far >> greater change to C4L as it currently is than getting a fiscal sponsor with >> a 3 or 5 year term limit for a fee in order to get us more stability in >> annual conference logistics. >> >> Cheers, >> Bohyun >>

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

http://www.hshsl.umaryland.edu/> > ____________ > From: Code for Libraries <CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG>> on behalf of Kyle Banerjee < > kyle.baner...@gmail.com<mailto:kyle.baner...@gmail.com>> > Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 3

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

ORG> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening] On Jul 24, 2017 11:28, "Tod Olson" <t...@uchicago.edu<mailto:t...@uchicago.edu>> wrote: If we go the fiscal sponsor route, the fiscal sponsor would be able to receive

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening] On Jul 24, 2017 11:28, "Tod Olson" <t...@uchicago.edu> wrote: If we go the fiscal sponsor route, the fiscal sponsor would be able to receive such payments, assuming the Journal is part of Code4Lib for these purpos

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

If we go the fiscal sponsor route, the fiscal sponsor would be able to receive such payments, assuming the Journal is part of Code4Lib for these purposes. That would be part of the sponsor being able to "hold funds on behalf of Code4Lib." (FCIG report, p. 6.) The particulars of how the Journal

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

I think CLIR's fiscal sponsorship fee is amazingly generous to us. And ALA's 26.4% of gross revenue is very high when considered as a fiscal sponsorship fee. Fiscal sponsorship fees in general 501c3 world are typically 9-15%[1], often on the low end of that. Of course, ALA probably doesn't

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

> Assuming we went with ALA/LITA as a fiscal sponsor, I feel like paying for our conference chair's and vice-chair's membership to ALA/LITA is the least we, as an organization, could do, given how much of their time we ask for. To be clear, I believe we would be paying them substantially more

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

My personal objection to the requirement for the conference leadership to be a member of ALA / LITA is less financial and more philosophical. As someone else had written, I became part of Code4Lib because I didn't really believe (and still don't) that ALA and LITA does enough to represent what

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Hi all, DuraSpace has a long history of stewarding open source software communities as well as sharing infrastructure and resources for groups that need it. We act as fiscal sponsor to groups within our community. If the Code4Lib community thinks it could be a good fit, we can discuss what a

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Thanks for the clarification, Andromeda. I didn't mean to derail the larger discussion by mentioning that requirement, sorry. Assuming we went with ALA/LITA as a fiscal sponsor, I feel like paying for our conference chair's and vice-chair's membership to ALA/LITA is the least we, as an

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Agreed, my support for working with CLIR is even stronger given this info. On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Kyle Breneman wrote: > I am involved in Code4Lib precisely because I cannot afford an ALA/LITA > membership. > > Kyle Breneman >

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

ted funds for > > professional development, they are less likely to become a member of an > > association that requires them to join another organization as a > > prerequisite to membership. > > > > Elizabeth Leonard > > 973-761-9445 > > > > > > -Ori

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

ther organization as a > prerequisite to membership. > > Elizabeth Leonard > 973-761-9445 > > > -Original Message- > From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG] On Behalf > Of Tim McGeary > Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 8:21 PM

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

R.ORG] On Behalf Of Tim McGeary Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 8:21 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening] I would strongly oppose any requirement that forces membership to ALA / LITA. Thi

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG] On Behalf Of Tim McGeary Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 8:21 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening] I would strongly oppose any requirement that forces membership

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Point of order: *we do not have to incorporate, to have a fiscal sponsor*. That is a large part of the benefit of fiscal sponsorship. While we probably *should* have bylaws, none of the potential fiscal sponsors have called that out as a requirement. The requirements they've given us, that come

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

> The details depend on the fiscal sponsor. In all the cases we are considering, the fiscal sponsor is already incorporated as a legal entity and provides that legal entity status to hosted organizations as part of the hosting. Yes, this matches how it works with many non-library projects I've

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Just a couple notes. A) To repeat my earlier assertion, we need to form some kind of organization to do anything. Galen knows what this involves in Georgia, so I suggest that we ask for the community’s approval to do organize as a GA association. We will need bylaws, but we can start with some

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

I agree with all of this, except for the idea of using ranked choice voting (aka "instant runoff voting" aka "IRV") option. For reasons that are mathematically interesting , ranked choice voting is not the best tool to help us determine the will

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

On 20 July 2017, Galen Charlton wrote: If folks think we're ready to call a vote and move forward, what I suggest we do is a ranked preference vote among the choice of "maintain status quo", "incorporate as a separate entity", or "partner with a fiscal host". Narrowing like this, then finding

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Tod is accurate in describing the minimal level of formalization that would be required to be hosted by a legally defined non-profit. Each of them would (should) require a charter that details the purpose and characteristics of the project / organization it is hosting and likely a review at some

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

uly 19, 2017 2:20 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening] Could we roll out the Diebold-a-tron just to get a sense of where people stand on this? I, too, am in favor of the DLF/CLIR sponsorship, but it would be nice to see if th

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Could we roll out the Diebold-a-tron just to get a sense of where people stand on this? I, too, am in favor of the DLF/CLIR sponsorship, but it would be nice to see if the group has a strong preference in one direction or another. Can we vote on the three options, and possibly also allow for

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

I like what Coral, Kyle and Tod have said so far:  * work with an existing non-profit willing to be the community's fiscal sponsor  * watch how the community continues to evolve to see if our own incorporation makes sense  * lean slightly towards CLIR given past and present work with them, and

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Agreed that finding a fiscal sponsor does seem like the best option and that doing nothing is irresponsible. Largely for reasons that have already been articulated. By way of context, I currently sit on the Boards of two non-profit corporations and had some involvement in setting up a

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Eric Hellman wrote: > > ...Also, the new CODE4LIB could grow and prosper based on its superior > anarchistic management culture, then acquire CLIR/DLF, LITA and OLF. Then > the end result would be the same. > > While we're at it, we could stage

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Having created a non-profit, I can say that there's quite a range of ways to structure and govern such an entity. Code4Lib can't really be bottled up into any legal entity, so even if a Code4Lib entity were created to provide fiscal continuity for the annual conference, the relationship

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

On Jul 18, 2017, at 11:36 AM, Carol Bean wrote: > Thanks for bringing this up again, Eric. The first time around I pretty > much sat on the sidelines and watched. This time around, I'm waving my hand > vigorously for the incorporation option… > > But is there something I'm

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

I still think the same thing I posted first time this was on the listserv. I think a fiscal sponsor is the sweet spot, if a suitable fiscal sponsor with suitable terms can be found. Incorporating ourself takes a lot of work and additional expense -- both setup and ongoing. It's a real commitment.

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

I'd like to thank Eric, Carol and Tim for resurfacing this thread, Like Tim, I disagree with Eric's ordering, and would place chartering at the top of my list (with incorporation second and doing nothing last). I am not sure why Eric thinks that obtaining fiscal sponsorship from another

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

I think incorporation is long overdue, but I disagree with Eric's order of preference. I can say from experience on a project that incorporating ourselves is a lot more challenging than perceived, and also costly. As a past Code4Lib Conference co-chair and member of the Journal Editorial Board,

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

Thanks for bringing this up again, Eric. The first time around I pretty much sat on the sidelines and watched. This time around, I'm waving my hand vigorously for the incorporation option. Since 2009, when EBSCO began indexing the Code4Lib Journal, royalties have been accruing but unpayable

Re: [CODE4LIB] Fiscal Continuity IG report redux [silence has been deafening]

On Jul 10, 2017, at 6:37 PM, Galen Charlton wrote: > Back in January the Fiscal Continuity IG released our report > describing some options for establishing a more permanent fiscal > arrangement for Code4Lib activities, particularly the annual > conference. [0] When it