Right, I think Dean has done the best with what he has. He a creative guy!
If you look at a lot of the committees on Dallas they function in a similar way in regards to incubating a new area-committee. There are many SIGs listed under the main committee’s areas. Many specifically call out that their area has spawned many successful spinoff areas (just like erp/jewelry).
I think James is correct that a lot of the current shortcomings have to do with lack of engagement of the membership. But I think the committee proposal might be a way to encourage engagement. I’d be hopeful that a structured process such as what is proposed would make it easier for people to become involved in supporting an area that they are interested in. I think it could become easier to be part of the process with lower initial levels of responsibility and grow into higher levels of responsibility. I think some structure can make it more clear what is expected to be part of the process, which makes it easier to jump in.
And, on the negative side of things, it might be a more objective way to determine that a area needs to be downsized or dissolved when interest in that area wanes.
As a current area lead, I generally support the proposal. I think some of the tweaks discussed are good, but the overall idea seems positive to me. Of course if we really can’t get enough people to become involved, then it might not work. But I’d be game to try it.
I’m all for committees, it’s a more formal version of the three nerd rule. We may need a definition of attendance though. Perhaps a discourse server?
Attendance is kept for all meetings and posted to the wiki along with minutes and all the other info.
What is the purpose of this type? My initial reaction is that this is covered by a committee originating by the board of which is also abolished by the board? (Which is covered under the initial proposal?)
It’s just a clarification of types, but it also allows the board to form short term committees such as elections or if information needs to be gathered to complete or decide on a task.
What will be the omphalos for these committees? There is a certain point where the board won’t be able to function because they are busy listening to committees.
It may take a while but I envision the committees being largely autonomous with the authority to handle everything in their area (if they have a set area) from upgrading lighting to purchasing new equipment.
Edit: looking over Dallas BoD meetings they don’t seem bogged down with committees are all.
https://dallasmakerspace.org/wiki/Category:2019_Meetings
Interaction with board members could be more along the lines of budgeting and resources or building modifications. That sort of thing. With meetings being documented on the wiki the board could easily see what a committee is doing and bring up issues they see with the committees actions.
I have one concern about the Autonomous Committee with authority.
Fundraising. I speak from having run a business for 30 years, that supported local groups such as MakeICT. I had my share of great pitches about supporting this program or that program of the same organization. It happened enough that I got to the point that support of that organization would stop.
It doesn’t matter if you are a small 5 Million dollar business, as I did, or ome the size of Spirit, Textron or Koch. Unorganized, disorganized or piecemeal asking for funds or gifts in kind are going to cost the organization support.
In the autonomous committee with authority, fundraising ideas should be presented to the Fundraising Committee for Coordination and perhaps depending on size or scope, the application approved by the board.
We are primarily about making, not fundraising. We need the funds and must be considerate of those individuals, foundations or businesses in the community that enjoy helping organizations improve the Quality of Life in our community.
There are so many ways to fundraise, having to have them all approved seems like overkill. But I do get what you’re saying @John.Nicholas. I think there is a line somewhere where donations or support is made to the organization as opposed to each individual area. I honestly have no idea what the current fundraising looks like, or if there would be a net loss in the foreseeable future if committees were all out there banging the drum also.
We do have a fundraising committee currently ran by @kthutch. We do what we can but there are certain things we are missing that prevent us from doing more. We are doing small things we can without that information and working on what we need to get that information. These committee would not be able to fundraising outside of MakeICT, but if they wanted X they could make members aware they are collecting funds for X.
I accept a difference between fundraising and grant writing. There is a difference between types of fundraising, that a line can be drawn, to help get everyone on the same page.
I think a committee should be allowed to fundraise outside of makeict. Ceramics would likely have many reasons they might attend fairs selling member created works and taking commissions and donations. They might also create GoFundMe pages or even Facebook donations specific to their cause. Garage sales, auctions… etc… Even approaching manufacturers, I know from experience that a lot of manufacturers will “place” equipment strategically in active organizations and businesses. I’ve been the recipient of some of them. Didn’t even ask tbh. It’s my opinion that there is a line, but blocking committees the ability to explore options… I just think that exploration should be encouraged in fundraising.
Then we better have a good plan in place to capture all their activities because we have to report all those funds and any equipment to the IRS.
In the last two months, the fundraising committee got $1,500 in grants. We’ve got another $180,000 in requests out there (assuming I can get a copy of the IRS letter and 2018 Form 990).
We need to have a dedicated account for tracking our fundraising, and to be able to report the donations (both the equipment and the bits here and there that get put into the cashboxes). The IRS does get testy about such things. Not saying that individuals can’t get donations, just we need to be able to track them in a coordinated way. There is a risk that we could lose our non-profit status if we don’t follow the tax rules.
I’m trying to work out loud on these things, because I want to show that we’re responsive to the needs of the community, and that we’re showing some success.
Also, currently if funds are earmarked for a specific area, then that monies gets spent on that area.
If the ERP lab holds a bake sale and raises $200. The board cannot allocate that money to the woodshop for new band saw blades. The same holds true for a project. If I raise money for a google assistant style system, the board members can’t assume that is frivolous and redirect that spending without due course of action.
I forget how or where it is in the bylaws but I remember some heated discussions about it.
This same concepts of sales, and donations from manufacturer’s could apply to every maker space we currently have and many we do not. I have seen it apply to wood working. Malissa mentions reporting for IRS Purposes. Sales would require Sales Tax and the State is being very aggressive in pursuing smaller vendors.
Sales, soliciting and/or accepting equipment or material from a manufacturer is very different from public fundraising with in the community.
All good points that I hate even talking about much less trying to navigate. I did recently take a tax class but it was geared to businesses and had nothing to do with 501c3s. Framework would definitely need to be in place and strictly followed.
In fact this is probably an issue that will need a lot of consideration. In this entire thread funding and tracking of funds really has been the main concern.
We have a very competent accountant who deals with these issues for us, for the very reason that there are so many pitfalls and gotchas.