Greetings all, "State Incorporations, Questions for candidates" Candidate Tim Stowell asked two questions in reply. (The original thread is below the answers.) Tim Stowell's first question: "I'm still not sure what benefits accrue to the CCs that they don't already have by incorporating at a state or county level. Would you care to elaborate or educate us as to what are these supposed benefits?" Answer: Since I never exercised my teaching credential, I will not assume to "educate" anyone. I will however, I will try to answer with my *ever so humble* opinions. First, all references are to incorporation as a nonprofit organization. An incorporated state unit would have the benefit of *Autonomy.* In a properly established set of bylaws, the state unit would have the privilege and obligation to control its internal affairs without interference. An incorporated state unit would have the benefit of *Immortality.* That is to say, by being incorporated, the state unit would go on after the death of any of its leaders. In order to accomplish this, it is mandatory to include in the Charter (Articles of Incorporation) a statement that there will be members, and best if it is stated in that Charter that there will only one class of members. Next, the provisions of membership *must* be included in the bylaws, and that those provisions *must* spell out that all members are equal. The membership provision guarantees that no one person owns the state unit. An incorporated state unit would have the benefit of *Formalized Legality.* That is to say, by being incorporated, the state unit would be registered within the state of its choice, it would be a formalized legal entity. Provided the bylaws were properly drawn, the County Coordinators in the incorporated state unit would be the sole voice via a democratic vote. The CCs could remove the state unit from the USGenWeb project only by a clear and democratic vote. No State Coordinator could remove the state unit from the USGenWeb by committing a lone capricious act. On the other hand, if the USGenWeb Project went sour, that its leadership decided to lead the project in a direction that was unacceptable (i.e. gate fees), it would be easy for an incorporated state unit to remove itself from the project. Actually, separate incorporation of all the state units would offer protection to the USGenWeb Project as a whole. If every state unit was incorporated, then no clique of self serving national politicians would be able to have there way over the states. Yes, I know some say, "if national went bad, Im out the door." Well, do we really want that? Would it not be better if the ripe plumb the USGenWeb Project -- was not so lucrative a target? Tim Stowell's second question: "Could this incorporation of the states be a power play by some setting up their own little fiefdoms or the groundwork of a parallel project?" Answer: Could be. I can't answer for all folks across our nation who might have considered incorporation. I can answer for me though. No, I have no desires for fiedoms or kingdoms or even political offices. I would love to see the fighting stop, and see the Project grow the way it should. And I would like to have an formal *trustworthy* entity to which we could "leave" our work when we retire from the project. Unfortunatly, the *trustworthy* entity is not yet the USGen Web Project. To be specific, if you take the time the time to re-read the messages posted over the USGENWEB-ALL-L list over the last two months, you will see a lot of anger, hate, accusations, passion, and most of all, distrust. It is that preponderance of evidence that brings me to my opinions. Respectfully, Fred Smoot, TNGenWeb Tim Stowell wrote: > > At 12:27 PM 7/18/98 -0700, Fred Smoot wrote: > >Greetings all, > > > >1. Will you oppose the efforts of any state unit (XXGenWeb) to > >incorporate as a nonprofit genealogical association, provided that their > >incorporation standards meet or exceed the standards of the USGenWeb > >Project, including, but not limited to the spirit of volunteerism and > >free public access, and further provided that the state unit does NOT > >use the XXGenWeb name in its corporate title? > > > No as long as their proposed bylaws don't try to tread on the standards of > the USGenWeb Project. > > >2. Will you attempt to remove from the USGenWeb Project, or deny access > >to the USGenWeb Project, any state unit that is now incorporated, or > >becomes incorporated, provide that the state unit meets or exceeds the > >standards mentioned in question number one? > > > As long as that state association abided by the rules of the USGenWeb > Project there'd be no need to. But would I personally do so? No, but then > I'd not have but one vote. If it came to that it would be a corporate > decision of either the Board and/or the Project at large. > > > >3. Are you opposed to the use of XXGenWeb names being used in the > >corporate titles of any future state unit incorporation effort? > > > Yes. > > Comments: > > Some questions and musings of my own in return: > > I'm still not sure what benefits accrue to the CCs that they don't already > have by incorporating at a state or county level. Would you care to > elaborate or educate us as to what are these supposed benefits? > > Could this incorporation of the states be a power play by some setting up > their own little fiefdoms or the groundwork of a parallel project? > > Timothy S Stowell email - tstowell@chattanooga.net > Chattanooga, TN > > Candidate for National Coordinator USGenWeb Project - > > http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndgenweb/elec > > NorthDakotaGenWeb State Coordinator - http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndgenweb > > ==== USGENWEB-ALL Mailing List ==== > The USGenWeb Project is not a commercial project.