What is the appropriate organisational structure for HA3?
Presently there is a HAF USA 501(c)(3) tax exempt Foundation and HA3 USA for profit that is by resolution of the HA3 USA board, owned by HAF USA 501(c)(3).
Presently there are none of the necessary conflict of interest policies in place for this structure to legally operate as a for profit subsidiary of HAF 501(c)(3) required for tax exemption. There are no no democratic decision making processes for HAF 501(c)(3) and it's members, or HA3 USA, HAF Morocco or HA3 Morocco. There is no central transparency of accounts and transparency of wages is forbidden. There is no project management system, legal library and the business plans advertise personell who have left and a rate of production that is not possible because production machinery necessary is not in place. There is no plan in place to get from where things are to where they want to be. There is not the level of transparency needed for a social impact bond, or democratic processes or perhaps to keep the factory open.
Presently HA3 USA is supposed to own HA3 Morocco which is the but at present HA3 Morocco is solely owned by Yossef so receiving funds to this structure under the advertised structure is illegal.
Yossef detailed that HA3 Morocco does not seek to be a democratic co-operative, it seeks to be wholly owned and controlled by HAF, which means Yossef, whereby he is the sole communicator of information back and forth from HA3 to HAF. There is no other proposed protocol.
This means that receiving funds for a 501(c)(3) which needs to be totally transparent by law, and have democratic procedures in place, is impossible. So what can be done to create a vehicle that can achieve the goals of developing co-operative organic arboriculture in Morocco? What is the appropriate structure?
Poll Created Thu 3 Dec 2015 2:06PM
I PROPOSE WE DO WHAT WE TELL THE MOROCCANS THEY SHOULD DO Closed Fri 4 Dec 2015 1:07PM
We set up a democratic and transparent co-operative that hires whoever is best at providing the services it needs as it's open membership decides is the most expedient to the service of all life, specifically in Morocco. This loomio.org platform a democratic decision making too we can use for the main actors working towards this goal.
Said co-op could have a contract with member HAF that HAF provides organic certification, co-operative training and tree nursery establishment (essentially primary production capacity building) complimentary to the intention of HA3 as described in the business documentation and a constitution that directs the surplus funds to those solutions that are most expedient to life in Morocco according to principles of harmlessness, Ahimsa, or Satyagraha.
This structure our Sustainable Lawyers and Foundation For Common Good 501(c)(3) can set up said structure (I have scheduled a call between HAF, Sustainable-Lawyer.com and us tomorrow) with a co-operation of groups from the High Atlas including HAF. There is too much of a concentration of power here to set this up so that the present undemocratic and falling apart HAF structure manages it in my opinion. HAF obviously can not manage it's existing work load and the danger of these structures being put to use by someone who is not as benevolent as Yossef is real.
So I propose a transparent, democratic co-operative with principles of harmlessness with tools like this for the members to propose ideas and decide what is in-fact most expedient to all life. This is what I am willing to set up and structure a social impact bond with independent verification organisation instiglio.org for funding through HRH Prince Charles' sustainability unit's financier network and almond processing technology partner from Spain to equip and train up the almond production line to serve as the regenerative economic engine for this co-operative -- with you all if there is support among this community of sovereign and universally responsible actors?
Very much looking forwards to you becoming the change you want to see in others, responding to this proposal with your comments and votes and putting forwards other proposals if you have them.
|Results||Option||% of points||Voters|
1 of 2 people have participated (50%)