Re: [OSM-talk-ie] OSM IRL Annual General Meeting
Re: CLG creation before or after. For me, I think after the AGM makes sense as the community gets to ratify the names officially. Once the paperwork is ready to go, the filing is quite straightforward I believe so timing shouldn't matter. Re: schedule - 24th works really well for me. There is another event happening that day that I would like to at least pop into so +1 for that date. Re: constitution and other articles - the Google drive was certainly used during the first meetup. I didn't make the most recent one so can comment on that. Happy to contribute if needed (even if it's to corrals people to do stuff). Regards Donal On 28 Feb 2018 23:40, "Dave Corley" wrote: Hi, My answers inline below 1. What I would like to clear up before the AGM is whether the members of this mailing list wish the nominated group to proceed to form the company before the AGM, or post the AGM. It may shape how the meeting takes place. If there will be advice available to assist in the decision making process, it would make sense to wait. 2. Also Bob Tallent cannot attend on the 10th March and I think it would be better to have him there to facilitate questions. His real value to us is advising on what we need to assemble on us. Would the members be ok if we postpone the AGM until the 24th? I have checked with Tadeusz and it appears that Tog is available on that date. 24th is fine. Again, makes sense to adjust to avail of the support 3. Also, can those guys who were working on a constitution and memos and articles bring these to some advanced stage and propose them for the AGM? Is the Google drive still the location for these? Dave On 28 Feb 2018 21:19, "Ciarán Staunton" wrote: Hi All I am sorry if this is a longer than usual message and I will try to be brief as there is a lot of ground to cover. And 3 questions at the end. I have secured (free of charge) the services of Robert Tallent of Synergy Group. He is a sound person, he has a lot of experience of non-profit and charity company formation, and provides advice on registration and compliance for a range of different clients but usually small and formative. His website is available if your websearch for his name with "Synergy". As regards the conversations I have had with Bob I gave him the following brief (which was what was agreed at the last): - Which structure will protect the members and directors against legally liability, and will share the limited liability equally? - Which structure will closely match the requirements of the Foundation to be non-for-profit? - Which structure will allow for the eventual registration as a charity (enabling donations) - Which structure might in the future enable seeking a grant or employing someone Bob has outlined to me that a Limited Partnership is a dangerous option unless the lead partner is also a salaried executive director. The optimal structure to satisfy all these is a *Company Limited by Guarantee (CLG)*. The CLG once registered can then later seek charitable status from the regulator, and is also free to apply for grants or other funds. The understanding of non-for-profit with CLGs is simply to monitor that profit seeking is not the main objective of the majority of activities, and that when profits arise there is a plan to re-invest them. The DAC structure is limiting in the scope of things the company may want to do which is why CLG is not recommended. 1. What I would like to clear up before the AGM is whether the members of this mailing list wish the nominated group to proceed to form the company before the AGM, or post the AGM. It may shape how the meeting takes place. 2. Also Bob Tallent cannot attend on the 10th March and I think it would be better to have him there to facilitate questions. His real value to us is advising on what we need to assemble on us. Would the members be ok if we postpone the AGM until the 24th? I have checked with Tadeusz and it appears that Tog is available on that date. 3. Also, can those guys who were working on a constitution and memos and articles bring these to some advanced stage and propose them for the AGM? I'm sorry again for the long email. Please speak up on all three. I know you are all snowbound, so no excuses :) Ciarán ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
Re: [OSM-talk-ie] OSM IRL Annual General Meeting
Hi, My answers inline below 1. What I would like to clear up before the AGM is whether the members of this mailing list wish the nominated group to proceed to form the company before the AGM, or post the AGM. It may shape how the meeting takes place. If there will be advice available to assist in the decision making process, it would make sense to wait. 2. Also Bob Tallent cannot attend on the 10th March and I think it would be better to have him there to facilitate questions. His real value to us is advising on what we need to assemble on us. Would the members be ok if we postpone the AGM until the 24th? I have checked with Tadeusz and it appears that Tog is available on that date. 24th is fine. Again, makes sense to adjust to avail of the support 3. Also, can those guys who were working on a constitution and memos and articles bring these to some advanced stage and propose them for the AGM? Is the Google drive still the location for these? Dave On 28 Feb 2018 21:19, "Ciarán Staunton" wrote: Hi All I am sorry if this is a longer than usual message and I will try to be brief as there is a lot of ground to cover. And 3 questions at the end. I have secured (free of charge) the services of Robert Tallent of Synergy Group. He is a sound person, he has a lot of experience of non-profit and charity company formation, and provides advice on registration and compliance for a range of different clients but usually small and formative. His website is available if your websearch for his name with "Synergy". As regards the conversations I have had with Bob I gave him the following brief (which was what was agreed at the last): - Which structure will protect the members and directors against legally liability, and will share the limited liability equally? - Which structure will closely match the requirements of the Foundation to be non-for-profit? - Which structure will allow for the eventual registration as a charity (enabling donations) - Which structure might in the future enable seeking a grant or employing someone Bob has outlined to me that a Limited Partnership is a dangerous option unless the lead partner is also a salaried executive director. The optimal structure to satisfy all these is a *Company Limited by Guarantee (CLG)*. The CLG once registered can then later seek charitable status from the regulator, and is also free to apply for grants or other funds. The understanding of non-for-profit with CLGs is simply to monitor that profit seeking is not the main objective of the majority of activities, and that when profits arise there is a plan to re-invest them. The DAC structure is limiting in the scope of things the company may want to do which is why CLG is not recommended. 1. What I would like to clear up before the AGM is whether the members of this mailing list wish the nominated group to proceed to form the company before the AGM, or post the AGM. It may shape how the meeting takes place. 2. Also Bob Tallent cannot attend on the 10th March and I think it would be better to have him there to facilitate questions. His real value to us is advising on what we need to assemble on us. Would the members be ok if we postpone the AGM until the 24th? I have checked with Tadeusz and it appears that Tog is available on that date. 3. Also, can those guys who were working on a constitution and memos and articles bring these to some advanced stage and propose them for the AGM? I'm sorry again for the long email. Please speak up on all three. I know you are all snowbound, so no excuses :) Ciarán ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
[OSM-talk-ie] OSM IRL Annual General Meeting
Hi All I am sorry if this is a longer than usual message and I will try to be brief as there is a lot of ground to cover. And 3 questions at the end. I have secured (free of charge) the services of Robert Tallent of Synergy Group. He is a sound person, he has a lot of experience of non-profit and charity company formation, and provides advice on registration and compliance for a range of different clients but usually small and formative. His website is available if your websearch for his name with "Synergy". As regards the conversations I have had with Bob I gave him the following brief (which was what was agreed at the last): - Which structure will protect the members and directors against legally liability, and will share the limited liability equally? - Which structure will closely match the requirements of the Foundation to be non-for-profit? - Which structure will allow for the eventual registration as a charity (enabling donations) - Which structure might in the future enable seeking a grant or employing someone Bob has outlined to me that a Limited Partnership is a dangerous option unless the lead partner is also a salaried executive director. The optimal structure to satisfy all these is a *Company Limited by Guarantee (CLG)*. The CLG once registered can then later seek charitable status from the regulator, and is also free to apply for grants or other funds. The understanding of non-for-profit with CLGs is simply to monitor that profit seeking is not the main objective of the majority of activities, and that when profits arise there is a plan to re-invest them. The DAC structure is limiting in the scope of things the company may want to do which is why CLG is not recommended. 1. What I would like to clear up before the AGM is whether the members of this mailing list wish the nominated group to proceed to form the company before the AGM, or post the AGM. It may shape how the meeting takes place. 2. Also Bob Tallent cannot attend on the 10th March and I think it would be better to have him there to facilitate questions. His real value to us is advising on what we need to assemble on us. Would the members be ok if we postpone the AGM until the 24th? I have checked with Tadeusz and it appears that Tog is available on that date. 3. Also, can those guys who were working on a constitution and memos and articles bring these to some advanced stage and propose them for the AGM? I'm sorry again for the long email. Please speak up on all three. I know you are all snowbound, so no excuses :) Ciarán ___ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
