Cake or death?

Posted by: Jon Olsen on: July 22, 2009

• In: Organizational
• Comment!

Participating groups would affiliate with this organization by mutual choice

• Partner organizations would vote to affiliate through a contract arrangement.
• Unless otherwise agreed, relationships would be reporting relationships, rather than managerial
• Affiliation agreements would be dissolvable by either party but only with significant lead time—at least one year.
• Affiliating organizations would participate in revenue sharing.

Other structures may need to be analyzed and considered

The revenue sharing matter is one that needs additional thought and detail. It probably should have gone to the top of the list above, so I’ll discuss it now.

One comparison that’s been mentioned is a kind of “Geek United Way.” In other words, combine the contributions and volunteerism of our communities of imagination, along with those of other community partners, into a substantial cross-boundary effort that enables projects of greater size.

We would like to make an organization that fundraising organizations and non-profits would be proud to give to on a regular basis. Something akin to what Anime Detour Con-Chair Kale Ganann made note of in earlier comments:

Is it better to say that since it potentially could be something we don’t want to fund we should walk away, or should we pariticpate in the discussion and see if it can’t become something we would want to fund?

We want to build something to which you want to contribute.

Some additional points on revenue sharing as a concept: mutual benefits. In one sense, if these organizations raise profits, those profits need to go somewhere or they’ll have to pay taxes. It’s been pointed out that both CONvergence and Anime Detour make profits. They do both fund year round activities.

What if those year round activities took place in partnership with this league? What if the MISFITS educational initiatives and community events took place in a shared building environment? MISFITS would bring a highly valuable track record (and face it, respectable imprimatur!) of community service, and both they and this league entity would share the benefit scheduling events in league property.

(Not well known: CONvergence is not the only fundraiser for MISFITS, it is simply the largest. MISFITS does other activities which in time may grow to increase their coffers, and they will no doubt find themselves able to donate to other organizations if they chose to. )

Having a large, but accessible community partner in the area would be of vital benefit to small, one-shot, or startup non-profit fan/community groups. The ability to share revenues from multiple streams with startups would be markedly increased by bringing them together in one place. In some instances it would alleviate the burden of some of the fundraisers from searching! There’s also the opportunity for fiscal sponsorship of the kind described by our friends at Springboard for the Arts.

Trying to build this project into a trusted partner for a multitude of groups is very intentional. I hold a hope that instead of simply asking everybody to ‘just get along’, we make diffuse the focus on partners’ personal animosities/competitions, and sharpen the focus on something that we relate to on our own terms.

Thus we instantiate a virtual community center as important as a material one. That is to say, a center construed as a center point. One made real in organizational structure before we make it a substantial building or complex.

Well to get there would require money, and a fairly sizable amount of it, flowing fairly regularly. In addition to league driven fundraising (which would need to be substantial), we would seek additional revenue in donations from partner organizations that are able to make them.

Now to the other matters. To think about how partners would engage with this league, I’ll keep it simple and sweet: participation is not mandatory.

This is a fairly important value to embrace. It’s essential that partner organizations retain autonomy and that the new structure (league, community, etc) also be autonomous. (Hence the ironic title, “cake or death?” Yes? Yes?)

Organizations’ affiliation would only be as permanent as their ongoing leadership decisions allow. However, I believe it would also be important to protect this partner entity by asking that contracts be signed between affiliating organizations and this one, and that dissolution of partnerships would come with a clause requiring notice. Well, this would give a much stronger basis for activities of the third party entity, because it could look ahead to exclude those “not-yet-lost” revenues from its planning, or choose to do its own fundraising on that need basis.

What this means would be …let’s say CONvergence entered into a partnership agreement. And let’s say CONvergence committed to share a set portion of our revenues with this entity in 2010 and 2011, let’s say $7,000. If this new body has a fiscal year from June to June and CONvergence decides it wants out of the agreement, it must honor its 2010 contract, and notify the “league entity” of its self-removal intent not later than June 2010.

Some people are probably wondering why. Well if this new body is charged with a mandate to conduct activities on behalf of its partners, and it’s receiving a portion of its funding from these partners, it needs to have planning time to adjust for revenue alterations.

Furthermore, the question might occur “what about those amounts? wouldn’t we just ask organizations to give what they can give?” I would challenge this community, the participating organizations, and this new potential model, to set aside that thinking and be more structured. Let partner organizations commit to a precise amount, and then give them plenty of time to raise it—whether their normal event does the trick or if they choose to do additional activities. Suppose CONvergence committed to an agreement of $14,000, seven grand in each year, and lost money in 2010? (it’s partly my job to ensure we don’t, by the way) We could still come through on our contractual commitments through other fundraising efforts outside of the convention.

So let’s take aim. At an organization that people will want to support. At connecting without worrying after the internal affairs of partners. At preserving the core values of participants, while promoting additional community values that support, not supplant them. At something new and capable of staying alive and carrying out our bigger dreams.