After Sudo Room has "donated" its 501c3 to "Omni Commons" and all of that transfer work goes through, can Omni Oakland Commons donate its 501c3 to some other group?
Perhaps CCL, YES, ABDC or Liberated Lens feels they're ready to become a 501c3? Obviously it's a lot of legal work changing the board, bylaws and such and we'd be doing it twice at the same time... but could be worth it??On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Jenny Ryan <tunabananas@gmail.com> wrote:______________________________It's still a bunch of work (come join the fundraising or finance working groups and help out!), but waaaay less work than dividing ownership, income and expenses between two organizations.Yes, Patrik explained it very well I think - essentially, because the current Omni organization is unable to receive the $1 million donation without becoming a private foundation (since the donor has previously donated to Omni in excess of $5,000), we are going to use the Sudo Room organization to receive *both* the donation and the loan.Then New Omni / Omni Commons pulls the option, opens escrow, and deposits the $1.95 million + closing costs / transfer tax fees. New Omni owns the building, under the same governing bylaws and Board of Directors as Old Omni.
Before that happens, we will hold annual board meeting for both Omni and Sudo back-to-back:
- At Omni's board meeting, we will dwindle the board down to 3 directors who are not interested in being on the New Omni board, and consent to transferring our option to purchase to Sudo Room as well as all current debt to community lenders (~$103,000).
- At Sudo's board meeting, we will consent to changing our name to 'Omni Commons' (Old Omni's official name is 'Omni Oakland Commons'), amend our bylaws to match Old Omni's, nominate a new board of directors that consists of one representative from each member collective, adopt Old Omni's current fiscally-sponsored projects, and recreate Sudo Room (or Sudo Space?) as a fiscally-sponsored project of New Omni / Omni Commons.
See this spreadsheet for the projected budget once we own the building!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rvkMc5lmd8PovoViNLdv lrv0tSyvrH7iB0SmGqaFec8/edit# gid=1281242457 \o/JennyHelp open a people-powered common space in Oakland, California!https://omnicommons.org/donate
`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`
"Technology is the campfire around which we tell our stories."
-Laurie Anderson
"Storytelling reveals meaning without committing the error of defining it."
-Hannah Arendt
"To define is to kill. To suggest is to create."
-Stéphane Mallarmé
~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~`~` On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 5:06 PM, almaz Y <ahana75@gmail.com> wrote:Patrik that sounds much better and clear. I will read Jenny letter as well.Thank youYou received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BayAreaPublicSchool-organizin--On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Patrik D'haeseleer <patrikd@gmail.com> wrote:PatrikThe people currently in the Sudo collective would have no more control over the new "Omni 2" than any of the other collectives. They could set up a new nonprofit organization - essentially having "donated" their old 501(c)3 to Omni - or they could become a sponsored project of Omni 2.Also make sure to check Jenny's latest thread: the very latest development is that this new "Omni 2" 501(c)3 could receive *both* the $1M donation and the $1M loan from our generous benefactor, which would hugely simplify things.Hi Almaz,The current idea is to essentially use the "shell" of the 501(c)3 organization that the Sudo folks set up, but change its bylaws and board such that the new organization is governed by the delegates meeting, exactly matching the current Omni organization. And likely change its name to something like "Omni 2"On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 3:47 PM, almaz Y <ahana75@gmail.com> wrote:I don't think Sudo buying half of the building is good idea. Some Sudo members already feel they have higher power now in this building and their are not welcoming to other people. If they own half of the Omni they will have more power to reject or kick out another collective.The mission statement of the Omni Commons will change. Please look for a different options.Thank you,On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Lesley Bell <zvezdalune@gmail.com> wrote:______________________________Alice, in theory it's a good solution, but for the amount of money being contributed, it has to be a well-established, existing nonprofit.
Not sure about the land trust, though.
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016, 9:32 AM beehappysolutions <beehappysolutions@gmail.com> wrote:I’ve seen a sign on telegraph ave southbound of the 24 frwy over pass that says something like “east bay community sharing” and I had the idea -
If they are a registered 501c3 why not buy a nonprofit for the purchase of the Omni building - I think all you would have to do is change the names of the officers.
I apologize if this is a stupid idea
and I apologized for not getting to Wednesdays sudo meeting - but family happens
with love
Alice
> On Oct 13, 2016, at 12:18 PM, Yardena Cohen <yardenack@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What if Omni shares ownership with Bay Area Community Land Trust? Last
> year the fundraising wg was leaning towards schemes like where BACLT
> owns the land and Omni owns the building. BACLT is a 501c3 and the
> kind of property stewardship we're assigning to "Omni2" is already
> their core mission.
>
> I'm sorry to say, I don't think power balance issues can ever be
> eradicated while Sudo owns half the building. One of the most
> important powers at Omni is the power to reject or kick out another
> collective. Not that I foresee anybody actually kicking out Sudo, but
> over the past few years, Sudoroom has exercised its blocking power to
> prevent several new groups from joining or remaining in Omni (Creative
> Empowerment Project, Oakland Nights Live), and to prevent other Omni
> groups from making important operating decisions which affected their
> status - such as Buried Seeds decreasing their rent, Homes Not Jails
> being a member collective without paying rent, Black Hole using the
> basement, Backspace's various plans, etc. Who would be able to hold
> Sudoroom to similar standards it's held for other groups? It's not
> about whether we trust each other. If you have to say "trust me" then
> you don't just have a "perceived power imbalance", you have a real
> one.
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
> https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_______________________________________________
sudo-discuss mailing list
sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org
https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/sudo-discuss
_________________
consensus mailing list
consensus@lists.omnicommons.org
https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/consensus
--Almaz Yihdego, MPA--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CCult Lab's Board" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to CultLabsBoard+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .
--Almaz Yihdego, MPAg" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bayareapublicschool-organizing+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
_________________
fundraising mailing list
fundraising@lists.omnicommons.org
https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/fundraising