<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 9/03/2011 4:17 PM, Tim Bowden wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTi=PzQ98NWFQxLtmOoB+OwbA9Nt70f2+RojWQvuO@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Is there any need for PLUG to still be incorporated? I believe SLUG
is looking at the possibility of being a subcommittee of LA as an
alternative to incorporation for when legal/insurance/financial issues
need to be looked after.
Just a thought.
Tim Bowden
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Hi Tim,<br>
<br>
Thanks for the question. This is something we've been watching very
closely. James Polley, current president of SLUG, is putting a
motion to the SLUG AGM. Its not been ratified by the membership, but
its a reasonable idea. SLUG would (if passed) wind up, give all its
assets to LA, and LA wound then form a sub committee for LA Sydney,
appoint two officers to the sub-committee, and then have elections
to the rest of the sub-committee, from what I recall. LA would/could
issue a bank account for the sub committee. SLUG has been chargin
$25/year for membership, and spending $800/year on insurance (which
we haven't been). LA's insurance would then cover the sub-committee
and its activities, LA would regulate and supply funding. LA will
also supply hosting for web site, mailing list, etc, and admin team
to look after this (they've already offered this to us, but we have
our own arrangements already and have done for many years).<br>
<br>
The entity that was SLUG would no longer need its own incorporation,
constitution, Public Officer, mail box, tax returns, etc. SLUG
apparently has around 40 financial members (PLUG is around 33). As
to tax returns; Incorporated bodies in NSW are required to submit
tax returns; PLUG is not currently required to submit tax returns in
WA.<br>
<br>
This is all very appealing to me, but at the same time, being on
control of ones own destinty, finances, and policy is another. As
Linux Australia is based in NSW, there is a general feel that the
overlap there is great. I spoke with Linux Australia President John
Felito yesterday about this. Apparently the feeling is that Brisbane
won't become a sub-committee; they're too active and independent.<br>
<br>
The regional LUGs have nominally and voluntarily come under the
umbrella of LA when LCA has been on; this reorganisation would make
this arrangement more concrete.<br>
<br>
Of course, one could say that to run a LUG, you don't need any
administrative overhead; you chose a venue, you get together, and
that's it. The decision taken a long time ago to incoporate offered
the organising participants (who became the committee) some legal
protection, plus gave the organisation a recognised identity so it
can have a bank account, etc. When the world was a much more
distributed place, this was useful. In our ever more connected space
we live, perhaps this is redundant.<br>
<br>
From the committee meetings we have had at PLUG, the desire has been
to take a "wait and see" approach. I suspect that by the end of the
year, we'll have a feel for how successful this is, and what the
draw backs are. At the same time, one needs to consider the
advantages of offloading this overhead, to the advantages of having
that structure at YOUR (PLUG's, the <i>local </i>community's)
disposal.<br>
<br>
<b>What does the rest of the membership feel about this?</b> I
suspect the cessation movement that rears its head every few years
may have some bearing here! ;)<br>
<br>
<br>
James<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mobile: +61 422 166 708, Email: james_AT_rcpt.to</pre>
</body>
</html>