[Evergreen-governance-l] ***SPAM*** RE: Minutes from Today's Meeting

[Watson, Sylvia]

Galen,

Your assumption is correct.

Sylvia


-----Original Message-----
From: Galen Charlton [mailto:gmc at esilibrary.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 3:05 PM
To: Watson, Sylvia
Cc: 'Sharp, Chris'; 'evergreen-governance-l'
Subject: Re: [Evergreen-governance-l] ***SPAM*** RE: Minutes from Today's Meeting

Hi,

On Jul 20, 2010, at 2:38 PM, Watson, Sylvia wrote:
> Having said that, you could still keep foundation as part of the group's name, unless the state laws the group is organizing under have different requirements.  Hopefully this answers the question more thoroughly

And of course, if we get to that point and establish a (US) 501(c)3, I would assume that we would be able to pick whichever state was most favorable.  Even if the choice were restricted to states that housed major Evergreen stakeholders, that covers a lot of territory and will cover even more by the end of next year.

Regards,

Galen
--
Galen Charlton
VP, Data Services
Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source
email:  gmc at esilibrary.com
direct: +1 352-215-7548
skype:  gmcharlt
web:    http://www.esilibrary.com/