1 |
Thanks Grant for giving this extensive overview! Indeed, there's been a |
2 |
lot of talk about the offer of drobbins, so it's good to hear "the other |
3 |
side of the story" now. |
4 |
|
5 |
i also fully agree with John Alberts, about putting this on the front |
6 |
page as news! Or at least put up a link to it! |
7 |
|
8 |
Thanks again! Keep us posted please! |
9 |
|
10 |
Senno During |
11 |
|
12 |
On Jan 18, 2008 9:15 PM, Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@g.o> wrote: |
13 |
> Here's an update. It's the same as on my blog. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Current state of affairs |
17 |
> ------------------------ |
18 |
> |
19 |
> With help from Renat Lumpau (rl03), I spent some time this week talking |
20 |
> to the Foundation's lawyers, collecting documents, and sifting through |
21 |
> old e-mails. As I posted on gentoo-nfp a couple of days ago, the state |
22 |
> of New Mexico did, indeed, revoke the charter for the Gentoo Foundation, |
23 |
> Inc. in October of 2007. It's still not entirely clear why, since I |
24 |
> mailed a check along with the (then) current and past-due annual reports |
25 |
> to the state of NM way back in July. Since the check never cleared, it |
26 |
> seems a good guess that the paperwork went astray, but we won't know |
27 |
> until Renat's request (and $5) are processed by NM and they get back to |
28 |
> him. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> In any event, having the Foundation's charter revoked is exceptionally |
31 |
> embarrassing, but not catastrophic. The state of NM has a |
32 |
> straightforward procedure for reinstating a revoked charter, as long as |
33 |
> the request to do so is filed within two years of the charter's |
34 |
> revocation. This morning I sent by USPS Express Mail (tracking number |
35 |
> EO 943 358 815 US for those who want to play follow-the-paperwork from |
36 |
> home) an envelope to the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission, |
37 |
> Corporations Bureau containing an application for reinstatement, copies |
38 |
> of the missing annual reports, and a check for $60. |
39 |
> |
40 |
> Does the Foundation currently exist? |
41 |
> ------------------------------------ |
42 |
> |
43 |
> Yes. |
44 |
> |
45 |
> Many, many people have assumed, quite understandably, that with the |
46 |
> Foundation's charter having been revoked, that the Foundation has thus |
47 |
> ceased to exist. That's not really true. You can see this by looking |
48 |
> at the NM statutes, but it's simplest to see by looking at what happens |
49 |
> when NM receives the application for reinstatement. The New Mexico |
50 |
> public regulation commission will determine if all of our paperwork is |
51 |
> in order. If it isn't, they'll let us know what we need to do to |
52 |
> complete it. Once it is, the commission will cancel the certificate of |
53 |
> revocation and file a certificate of reinstatement that takes effect "as |
54 |
> of the effective date of the administrative revocation and the |
55 |
> corporation resumes carrying on its business as if the administrative |
56 |
> revocation had never occurred". |
57 |
> |
58 |
> http://tinyurl.com/2v6qtl |
59 |
> |
60 |
> Who is in charge here, anyway? |
61 |
> ------------------------------ |
62 |
> |
63 |
> Well, for the moment, I am. Of course, since I'm one of the people who |
64 |
> let the Foundation's charter get revoked, that's probably not a good |
65 |
> thing, but that's what we have right at the moment. Who am I? I'm one |
66 |
> of the two Trustees who hasn't resigned. (The other is pauldv.) I'm |
67 |
> also one of the original Trustees from when the Foundation was |
68 |
> incorporated. During that initial period I was made the Secretary of |
69 |
> the Foundation so that I could establish banking (which requires that |
70 |
> the Secretary sign the forms), and in 2005 I was chosen by the |
71 |
> then-newly-elected Trustees to be the President of the Foundation. The |
72 |
> important part from the above is that I had the legal authority to sign |
73 |
> the application for reinstatement that I mailed earlier today. |
74 |
> |
75 |
> Could somebody else be in charge? |
76 |
> --------------------------------- |
77 |
> |
78 |
> Yes, but it would take some time. |
79 |
> |
80 |
> The Foundation has members. Those members could set up an election, |
81 |
> vote out the current bums, and choose new, more dedicated folks to run |
82 |
> things. Who are these members? It's anybody who voted in a previous |
83 |
> Trustee election, and all current Gentoo devs who have been a developer |
84 |
> for one year at the closing of the election poll and actually vote in |
85 |
> the election. The Gentoo Foundation has a _lot_ of members. |
86 |
> |
87 |
> An alternative is for the existing Trustees to appoint new trustees to |
88 |
> fill the gaps left by those Trustees who have left. That would take |
89 |
> less time, but I'd feel much better doing that if new elections were |
90 |
> scheduled to occur within a reasonable amount of time. |
91 |
> |
92 |
> What happened to the SFLC? |
93 |
> -------------------------- |
94 |
> |
95 |
> Weren't we going to consider joinging the Software Freedom Law Center's |
96 |
> Software Freedom Conservancy (http://conservancy.softwarefreedom.org/)? |
97 |
> Yes, and the SFC was, and still is, interested (as of just a few days |
98 |
> ago, anyway), although they have some concerns about managing the legal |
99 |
> aspects of an entire distribution. (Gentoo would be larger, by far, |
100 |
> than any of their current member projects.) I still think that's the |
101 |
> right way to go, although it's ultimately going to depend on what the |
102 |
> Foundation's members want. The bottleneck right now is the assembly of |
103 |
> documents that the SFC needs to go forward: |
104 |
> |
105 |
> * Certificate of Incorporation (or analogous document for your org) |
106 |
> |
107 |
> * Existing By-Laws for the Organization |
108 |
> |
109 |
> * List of Directors (and historical list of previous directors, if |
110 |
> available) |
111 |
> |
112 |
> * List of Officers (and historical list of previous officers, if |
113 |
> available) |
114 |
> |
115 |
> * Minutes from all Board meetings for the last three years |
116 |
> |
117 |
> * All Board Resolutions passed by the Directors |
118 |
> |
119 |
> * Membership meeting minutes (if your organization is a membership |
120 |
> organization) |
121 |
> |
122 |
> * All Membership Resolutions (if your organization is a membership |
123 |
> organization) |
124 |
> |
125 |
> * All annual reports (published, or filed with any state or federal |
126 |
> agency) |
127 |
> |
128 |
> * All audited annual finanicals (if any were audited and/or filed) |
129 |
> |
130 |
> * All financial reports of any kind for the last three years |
131 |
> |
132 |
> * Copy of all state and/or federal filings (particularly including but |
133 |
> not limited to tax-related filings) for the last three years. In |
134 |
> particular, be sure to include: |
135 |
> |
136 |
> + the IRS determination letter for the status of your filing |
137 |
> |
138 |
> + Your IRC Form 1023 filing |
139 |
> |
140 |
> * List of any ongoing threats of litigation, or other disputes, and |
141 |
> documentation of any resolved past litigation |
142 |
> |
143 |
> * A list of all assets currently held by the organization (including |
144 |
> backup documentation, such as copy of bank statements, etc.) |
145 |
> |
146 |
> + Include a copy of *all* bank statements for the last year |
147 |
> |
148 |
> * Any contracts that the organization has executed in the last three |
149 |
> years (plus any older than that if they remain active) |
150 |
> |
151 |
> * A list of any outstanding loans, leans, or other debts held by the |
152 |
> Organization |
153 |
> |
154 |
> Much of this stuff needs to be assembled by me (because I have most of |
155 |
> the docs), and I got rather busy the last six months and didn't do any |
156 |
> of it. I'm going to try to pull together as much as possible this |
157 |
> weekend, but I could use help on a couple of items. Our sponsored ads |
158 |
> on www.gentoo.org presumably constitute contracts of some sort, so if we |
159 |
> have anything in writing I could use a copy. Our major tangible assets |
160 |
> are the various gentoo boxes that we have, so a list of those would be |
161 |
> helpful. I vaguely remember that once upon a time we fired a dev who |
162 |
> then threatened to sue us (but never did, fortunately). Nonetheless, |
163 |
> we'd best include that info as well. Help from devrel on that one, |
164 |
> please? I'd like to have all of this stuff sent to the SFC on Monday, |
165 |
> if at all possible. |
166 |
> |
167 |
> Looking forward |
168 |
> --------------- |
169 |
> |
170 |
> So, what's next? |
171 |
> |
172 |
> We need new Trustees. I don't think anybody will disagree there. |
173 |
> |
174 |
> We need to decide (again) what the role of the Foundation should be. |
175 |
> Currently, the Foundation exists to handle Gentoo's financial matters, |
176 |
> protect and defend Gentoo's trademarks and other intellectual property, |
177 |
> and provide ownership of various "hard" assets, such as the various |
178 |
> Gentoo server boxes. The Foundation has almost no influence right now |
179 |
> over actual Gentoo (the OS) development. The only caveat there is that |
180 |
> Gentoo needs to satisfy the requirements of a non-profit organization, |
181 |
> and it's the Foundation's job to let the Council know if something is |
182 |
> happening that might threaten the Foundation's non-profit status. I |
183 |
> believe that this role is what the majority of the Foundation's members |
184 |
> actually want, and it's one that I believe would be even better served |
185 |
> by having the SFC handle it instead of us. That said, there has been a |
186 |
> lot of support for what drobbins has proposed |
187 |
> (http://blog.funtoo.org/2008/01/here-my-offer.html), which would make |
188 |
> the Foundation responsible for the health and direction of Gentoo as a |
189 |
> whole. That's a discussion that's certainly worth having, and |
190 |
> gentoo-nfp@g.o is standing by.... Let's try not to take forever |
191 |
> having this discussion, so consider Monday, 23:59 UTC, to be a deadline |
192 |
> for your electronic voice to be heard. |
193 |
> |
194 |
> What about drobbins' proposal? |
195 |
> ------------------------------ |
196 |
> |
197 |
> I'd like to push off until Monday any actual decision, so that the above |
198 |
> discussion can happen first. I don't think drobbins will mind the |
199 |
> delay, although he's not around right now for me to check first. |
200 |
> -- |
201 |
> Grant Goodyear |
202 |
> Gentoo Developer |
203 |
> g2boojum@g.o |
204 |
> http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum |
205 |
> GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 |
206 |
> |
207 |
-- |
208 |
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |