[sudo-discuss] Monthly Funding Model, Call for Feedback

[Hol Gaskill]

i like the 'notconfusing' after the confusing arrows :)

max - i think we had put utilities under variable costs coming out of the 'operations' fund.

so the gist of the drawing is that we have a logic sequence for month to month finances:
1) sum up recurring revenues
2) pay fixed costs (rent, internet, fixed license or insurance, mortgage, etc...fixed)
3) pay operations costs including utilities, all previously approved programs, legal & booze permits, maybe toner cartridges, etc, month to month hum-drum
4) some percentage (say 20%) goes straight into the rainy day fund at this time
5) remaining revenue can be discussed and allocated to any projects, programs, or one-time purchases that are on the agenda and reach consensus
6) remaining revenue is split 50/50 between rainy day and maintenance/capital funds

we need to discuss program/project confirmation process - should be simplified for those requiring no money and only want to use sudo room name/logo.  for example, i got approval at last week's meeting to have sudouino officially associated with sudo room in order to use the name in fundraising material, but asking for no money, and turning over 100% of net to general revenue once we have purchased equipment to make and populate the circuit boards in house.  Any project or program using the sudo name, whether requesting funding or not, should have open finances per whatever standards we come up with.  Some capital-intensive programs will have to reinvest 100% of revenues for years in order to build operational capacity.  For example, though I haven't helped with subiir I know that beer brewing is capital-intensive; at my old co-op we reinvested 100% back into inventory and new equipment, occasionally deploying a 5gal keg during dinner as "dividends."  For others there could be a set, one-time purchase like a single piece of equipment, with all further revenues going back into the sudo general revenue stream.  Whatever the financial plan for a given project or program is, as long as it has open and clearly defined finances, and is agreed to by membership, I want the general membership process to steer clear of micromanaging that operation.

I just want to reiterate that this is very much a brainstorming document, looking at how we say we do things in the articles and applying some classification that is used as logic input, as well as drafting a few structural classifications that will aid in transparency and consistency as we move forward and things inevitably become more complex.  i consider this akin to having a conflict resolution procedure prior to the first conflict, in that the document we craft will define uniform standards for everyone, thereby reducing the feeling of personal attack in the event a project or program comes up short of our transparency or conflict of interest standards.

As most of this is based on the articles, if you wish to help brainstorm and haven't read the financial sections of the articles, it would be wise do so in order to know which parts we are intending to bring up for discussion.  The whole document will have to be revised and submitted anyway in...60 days now?

cheers,
hol