[FAWG] OB fiscal sponsorship by UFE/ Draft letter to B Miller

Steve Revilak steve at srevilak.net
Thu Mar 28 20:33:08 EDT 2013


>FAWG people
>Below is draft of a letter to B Miller  requesting more info about requirements
>for Friends of Occupy Boston group.  Could you read and and make suggestions, 
>and then with your permission I would send it to B Miller

I can weigh in with some comments.


>Greetings Brian
>
>My name is Joe Cugini, writing for Occupy Boston's FAWG working group.  Three
>weeks ago about half a dozen of us met you in your office, to discuss options
>by which UFE could become a fiscal sponsor of OB.

There were actually four of us (as opposed to half a dozen).


> When we left, we realized we
>had not resolved a very central issue, namely--- what does UFE require for the
>structure of the intermediary group that we have been calling "Friends of
>Occupy Boston".   

Good question.


>There is very broad opposition in OB to becoming a 501c3
>group; that was an option we rejected in favor of getting sponsorship.    If
>you would require F OB to become a  501c3,  to a lot of folks that would pretty
>much defeat the purpose.

I'd omit these two sentences.  I recall some opposition to OB becoming
a 501(c)3, but OB and FOB are the same thing.  The whole point is that
they're two separate organizations.


>The option  more likely to be accepted would be that FOB simply be a Working
>Group of Occupy Boston, reporting to them,  dedicated to the task of relaying
>fiscal/expenditure information  from the OB General Assembly to you.   That
>group might have 2 or 3 members, who would themselves have no authority to ask
>for money from UFE;   FOB would only do the bidding of the GA.   That is along
>the lines of how the FAWG group operates right now.

I'd omit this preceding paragraph.  IMHO, if we're asking how FOB is
supposed to work, then we shouldn't be speculating on the answer to
that question.


>Would the latter option be acceptable to you?  If not,  what else would you
>need, short of becoming as 501c3? 

I think the preceding two sentences can be omitted; it's redundant
with earlier material.


>Also--- in the near future we would like to meet with you to wrap up this
>process.   We don't have a date to suggest yet. but-- would weekday eves @6:00
>be good? that was time of last meeting.

IMHO, we should offer concrete meeting dates.  Maybe "we'd like to
meet with you in April.  Perhaps 6pm during the week of April 15th?"


>Thanks for all your help so far,  here's to a good--contract?? or whatever, and
>a good relationship between you and us.

I'd leave "Thanks for all your help so far", and stop after that.

Steve
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mayfirst.org/pipermail/fawg/attachments/20130328/cf9c9387/attachment.pgp>


More information about the FAWG mailing list