Re: Staff Work WAS: SPI bylaws overhaul: Board Attendence

From: Bill Allombert <Bill(dot)Allombert(at)math(dot)u-bordeaux(dot)fr>
To: spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: Staff Work WAS: SPI bylaws overhaul: Board Attendence
Date: 2016-11-17 19:54:21
Message-ID: 20161117195421.GB3657@yellowpig
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: spi-general

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:32:15AM -0800, Josh berkus wrote:
> On 11/17/2016 11:27 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > On 11/17/2016 10:59 AM, Josh berkus wrote:
> >
> >> That's not relevant to why we need an admin. Nor has anyone suggested
> >> hiring a fundraiser.
> >>
> >> SPI is at this point a $500K organization. It is downright
> >> irresponsible of us not to have paid staff to handle the paperwork.
> >> Sooner or later, we will miss some important piece of paperwork and get
> >> disaccredited.
> >
> > Correct, which is why I am an advocate of paid officers. I am not
> > opposed to office staff either of course, but if we pay staff, at a
> > minimum we must pay who manages that staff.
>
> Do we have officers who could spend more time on SPI if they were paid
> to do so?

A NPO cannot pay officers and ex-officers without creating a major
conflict of interest.

Cheers,
Bill.

Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2016-11-17 20:04:20 Re: Staff Work WAS: SPI bylaws overhaul: Board Attendence
Previous Message Hilmar Lapp 2016-11-17 19:33:30 Re: Staff Work WAS: SPI bylaws overhaul: Board Attendence