Hi folks,
I am glad to see the level of interest in keeping the group going.
As a now-former member of the board, I felt that it was very important to
get reports filed to government agencies by their deadlines. Many of the
reports are relatively simple for CWUG, but not having them done on time
leads to fines. The City of Seattle was particularly upset last year with
CWUG, and I received a not-so-nice email from them in which they expressed
their dissatisfaction. My experience was that WMF is more flexible about
reporting deadlines than government agencies are.
It seems to me that the board and officers should be ahead of the curve on
filing deadlines for reports to government agencies. I realize that
sometimes unplanned events happen, but as a general matter I feel that when
people agree to be in certain roles, as I was for a few years, that with
those roles come responsibilities. Overdue reports to government agencies
which might be minor concerns if they happened on a rare basis and involved
minor fines become of greater concern if reports are weeks late and may
involve larger fines. Long period of silence about reports are also
something that I feel is very concerning.
I am no longer a part of conversations that happen privately among board
members, but Joe's email from March 11 suggested to me that there was radio
silence internally about getting reports done. For a nonprofit corporation,
that's a problem, and for that to happen for months between January and
March when there are multiple important reports due suggests to me that the
organization either needs to get the reports done and pay the government
agencies what they want, or choose to dissolve. My hope is that the reports
will get done and Cascadia can continue to exist, because as others have
noted there are benefits to having a formal organization and 501(c)(3)
status. For that to continue, the reports must get done and the regulators
must be paid. The responsible alternative is to wind down the organization
in an orderly manner, which I think that none of us wants, but I think that
it's important to be candid about what the options are. The worst option is
to let the organization go into a tailspin of overdue paperwork and fines,
and I hope that the organization never goes there.
I'm encouraged to see the interest in maintaining the organization and
running programs. While running programs can be done without being a
nonprofit corporation, I think that being a nonprofit corporation is wise
because it provides some legitimacy and may provide some liability
protections, and someday the 501(c)(3) status may be very helpful. The
corporation is a means to an end, but like someone's personal car or truck,
timely maintenance is required to keep it operating in good condition and
with the least possible cost.
Thanks,
Pine
(
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )