Sorry to be once again the devil's advocate but I think SugarLabs has no resource to pay for a Financial Manager. We can't both support the cost of a SFC and the cost of a Financial Manager. I think the job done by SFC and nice reports by Adam and Laura (and others) are enough for a small organization - without regular budget - like SugarLabs. If we need to have a Financial Manager so we need to think seriously to exit of SFC.
Best regards from France. Lionel. 2016-05-07 18:20 GMT+02:00 Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org>: > On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddr...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Adam Holt <h...@laptop.org> wrote: >> > >> > ... >> > >> >> In other words that SL's effective payment to SFConservancy (for >> >> legal/financial/administrative service) is equal to 10% of all >> expenditures >> >> (outlays) each fiscal year, i.e. March 1st to end of February. >> >> >> >> (But someone else can correct me if I'm wrong!) >> > >> > I think you are wrong, but I am still looking for the proof. It is my >> > understanding that SFC takes 10% of incoming donations only, not a 10% >> > cut of all transactions (inbound and outbound). >> > >> > That is what is described in their template Fiscal Sponsorship >> Agreement. >> > >> > http://sfconservancy.org/docs/sponsorship-agreement-template.pdf >> > >> > "Fees. >> > The FIXME-SIGNATORIES agree to donate ten percent (10%) of the >> > Project's gross revenue (including, but not necessarily limited to, >> > all income and donations) to Conservancy for its general operations." >> > >> > I'm looking for an executed copy of the current SugarLabs-SFC FSA to >> > confirm, unfortunately the wiki version looks at variance with the >> > template, but as a wiki page, it has no "official" status. >> > >> > https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/SFC_Fiscal_Agreement >> > >> > cjl >> >> >> Adam, >> >> As SFC contact, could you please confirm that this 2012 version of the >> Amended FSA is the currently effective agreement? >> > > There no reason to believe otherwise. This agreement is what stands > unless you have information that nobody else has :-) > > Note, it shows the 10% cut of revenue, no transaction fees. >> > > 10% of initial capital too? Sorry am traveling non-stop for the coming > days, but someone should read the agreement (attached by CJL, Thanks!!) > carefully please if they have time this weekend please. > > Then if there are outstanding questions accumulating, I can collect those > and communicate those questions to SFConservancy intermittently, if we as a > community have done our own homework first, Thanks! > > >> cjl >> > > -- > Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org ! > > _______________________________________________ > SLOBs mailing list > sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs > >
_______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel