Comment 59965

By H+H (registered) - website | Posted February 18, 2011 at 10:17:42 in reply to Comment 59961


You're right, I have no desire to throw the baby out with the bath water. What I might suggest is that we do an audit of who did receive monies from all Councillors in 2010 (a very simple task) and Identify those that fall into the category you describe. While there may not be many of them, as you highlight, there will be some.

Seed money is a good thing in many situations, but annual 'contributions' to the same organization most certainly would not fit my definition of seed money. I suspect not yours either. Having done work with the United Way in my past life in business, they have a set of criteria for qualification that, at a minimum, is worth reviewing to help focus our own thoughts about seed money. It ain't perfect, but what is?

Whether a maximum contribution of $350 from a Councillor will make the difference to an organized group going after charitable status, either directly or from an already formalized not-for-profit status, in order to remain viable is a question for which I do not have an answer. But I think it's a good one to ask as part of the criteria used to determine eligibility for contributions from taxpayers. Charitable status, as you may know, requires that a Board of Directors has already been established and has been meeting for a period of time. You don't tend to move directly from informal volunteer group to receiving registered charity status, no matter how much seed money you may have. At least not based on my own experience which, by definition, is limited.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools