money handling

Josh Berkus josh at
Sun Jul 16 20:40:40 UTC 2006


> First off, SPI already HAS a relationship with a CPA.  Please google
> for cpa  The board also authorized this while you
> were on it.  In short, between our legal counsel and bookeepeing firm,
> plus that CPA, we have everything taken care of that a CPA might need
> to do, plus advice on what needs to go to a CPA and what to give to one.

Quite frankly, this is news to me and I think to  Jimmy and Branden as 
well.  Jimmy?  Perhaps I could have a phone number for this CPA?

> You don't hire an expensive CPA to do basic bookkeeping and daily mail
> processing, which it sounds like you've been trying to suggest we do.

Actually, this was my suggestion.  Our current bookkeeping firm is quite 
passive and needs nagging to take care of routine tasks.    Here in San 
Francisco, my personal business hires a CPA firm, which employs several 
bookkeepers to deal with non-filing issues and the CPA to deal with taxes 
and the like.   This makes more sense to me than hiring two different 
agencies and having the treasurer responsible for being the bridge between 

> I don't recall an officer ever doing the sort of thing a CPA would
> (file taxes and the like).  

See the recent board mailings.  Currently the treasurer is doing 100% of 
the filings, which is why we are into double-extension territory.

> Why would you have SPI hire a CPA to do 
> bookkeeper's work?  The bookkeeper is to take the load off the
> officers.

But Mark's Bookkeeping is not doing so.   It's my opinion that we need to 
find a more involved bookkeeping agency/CPA office.

Mind you, all of this assumes that I'm going to be elected, which is still 
a matter of conjecture.


Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

More information about the Spi-general mailing list