Proposed resolution: Waive SPI 5% administrative fee for 2020 associated project conferences

[Martin Zobel-Helas]

Hi, 

On Mon Jun 08, 2020 at 17:13:43 -0400, Michael Schultheiss wrote:
> SPI is having a special meeting on 2020-06-22 at 20:00 UTC in #spi on
> irc.oftc.net to vote on this proposed resolution:
> 
> Resolution 2020-06-08.mcs.1:
> 2020 Conferences and SPI 5% fee
> 
> WHEREAS
> 
> 1. Software in the Public Interest, Inc. (SPI) is a Debian Trusted
>    Organization.
> 
> 2. The annual Debian Conference (Debian) utilizes SPI to collect
>    some of the conference sponsorship funds.
> 
> 3. SPI has inconsistently charged its 5% administrative fee for
>    conference sponsorships.
> 
> 4. SPI has not yet determined the effect of waiving the 5%
>    administrative fee for conference sponsorships in perpetuity.
> 
> THE SPI BOARD RESOLVES THAT
> 
> 1. For conferences held by SPI associated projects in 2020 where
>    SPI collects the conference sponsorship funds, SPI will waive 
>    its 5% administrative fee.
> 
> 2. SPI will refund the 5% administrative fee to Debian for the 2016-2019
>    Debian conferences
> 
> 3. Future administrative fee decisions for conference sponsorships will
>    be determined at a later date.

I dislike at least section 2 here, where we only refund Debian, but not
other conferences.

Also DebConf can not say they do not know about the 5%, as it is
well-known and documented per SPIs Projects howto:

| All transaction costs (such as the fees we are charged to process credit
| cards and wire transfers) are deducted from the contribution, to the
| extent we are able to identify and attribute these costs.  5% of the
| remainder is deducted for SPI overhead. The remaining money is held on
| behalf of the project. 
(Source: https://www.spi-inc.org/projects/associated-project-howto/)

We might have made the mistake to not decuct the 5% in the past properly
and consistantly, but at least since 2017 we are doing this very
consistantly.

I would also outline that a good amount of transactions *AND WORK* of
SPI's treasuruer and since mid 2019 paid accountant is actually DebConf
transactions. So just waiving the fees for past DebConfs while SPI still
has to pay fees for the work done on DebConf seems inappropriate to me.

Having a paid accountant and having an official audit of SPI's fund do
cost money, and if DebConf wants those transactions being audited
externaly then it only seems fair to me they pay parts of those costs.

Given the above, i will definitely vote against such a resolution.

Best regards,
Martin
-- 
 Martin Zobel-Helas <zobel at spi-inc.org>
 Software in the Public Interest, Inc. | Member of the Board of Directors
 GPG Fingerprint:  6B18 5642 8E41 EC89 3D5D  BDBB 53B1 AC6D B11B 627B