[Foundation-l] Foundation Discretion on Personnel Matters

[Anthony]

On Dec 15, 2007 3:30 AM, Florence Devouard <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> As you know, we are looking for a highly experienced treasurer. We got
> no proposition coming from the community. As from the expertise field,
> we also got no proposition which would seriously fit the profile we
> asked for. To put it bluntly, no seasonned professional is willing to
> pour hundred of hours *for free* to be on the board of Wikimedia
> Foundation.

Gee, that was really hard to predict.  I'm pretty sure I said exactly
that when I found out that you were looking for a treasurer who was
also a board member, and that you weren't willing to revisit your ban
on paying board members.  "I highly doubt you'll get the best
candidate for the position since board members cannot be paid."  The
only remote response I got was that there's a difference between a
"treasurer" and a "bookkeeper".  Gee, I know that.  Doesn't mean the
treasurer shouldn't be qualified.

That leaves two possible intelligent ways to solve the problem.  1)
Hire a treasurer who isn't a board member; or 2) Agree to pay the
treasurer/board member for his/her actions as treasurer, despite the
fact that s/he's also a board member.  In the longer term, there's
probably 3) Get your books together to where you can publish financial
reports on a quarterly basis, file tax returns on time, and pass
audits which don't take months to complete, and maybe a seasoned
professional will be willing to spend a few hours a week sitting on
the board and overseeing the financials.

Don't bring up bylaws.  Bylaws can be changed.  If they have to be,
which is unclear, but surely Mike can advise.