[Cynnabar] Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 12
Ben Jackson via Barony
barony at cynnabar.org
Mon Sep 22 23:28:57 UTC 2014
Dear Cynnabar,
As the guy in charge of our money right now, adding a $50 expense account for each officer is a lot of extra work for dubious benefit. It will require the exchequer, (me for now) keep track of 12 separate expense accounts. Not an issue for me as I have formal training in accounting, but it may be a major hassle for one of my successors. Next, if we give every officer $50 to spend, I'm willing to wager they'll spend it. Was our barony really lacking $600-ish worth of goods this year? I am not sure people realize that this will wind up draining our coffers faster than before. We have a decent amount of money. Right now. Do we want to spend several hundred dollars extra on "office supplies"? Aren't there better uses for the group's money?
That being said, allowing a single meeting for discussion for expenses of $50 or less sounds ok for me. I don't see how three weeks of discussing a $15 purchase for reasonable supplies yields the group any greater benefit than one meeting's discussion. It still creates a control mechanism where the group can monitor and limit how the group's money is spent. I cannot foresee any method to abuse this new system.
My two pence.
-de la Vega
Chancellor of the Exchequer for the Barony of Cynnabar
Subject: Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 12
To: barony at cynnabar.org
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 19:50:53 +0000
From: barony at cynnabar.org
Send Barony mailing list submissions to
barony at cynnabar.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
barony-request at cynnabar.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
barony-owner at cynnabar.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Barony digest..."
--Forwarded Message Attachment--
From: barony at cynnabar.org
CC: barony at cynnabar.org
To: boc.seneschal at gmail.com
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 10:06:47 -0400
Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Proposal to amend Cynnabar's Financial policy
Overall I like the changes. I agree that the people at the meeting should be able to approve minor budget items in one evening. In my four years of meetings, I cannot recall a single time a budget item of $50 or less was ever an issue. I don't see how this could be easily abused since anyone the group trusts as Seneschal can decide that it needs three meetings or point out that this is another request. Personally, if I had any qualms with the proposal, I would say this: I don't think it goes far enough. I would like to see this for any expenditure under $50 regardless if they are an officer. The same restrictions would apply (must be occasional, is not guaranteed, etc.). Rarely are small budget items brought up by non officers, but I think it is worth considering. For instance choir and dance practice are not ran by officers. What if they need supplies (choir more likely than dance)? Just a thought. One thing to stress: This does not mean that you can see someting under $50, buy it, and then bring it to the Barony with a guarantee that you will be reimbursed. At that point you would be purchasing something with a risk that it will not be approved. To Lady Bree's point: My concern is that not every officer needs the money, but the exchequer will have to keep a seperate set of books to keep track of the $650 allocations. It is not a bad way of doing it, but I think with our financial stability and overall good stewardship of the money, Finn's suggestion fits our needs better.
Ermenrich
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Cynnabar Seneschal via Barony <barony at cynnabar.org> wrote:
My answers for Sir Gregoire’s questions: Final discussion or any adjustments to my proposed wording will be done at the meetings. Is there a proposed number of times an item can be brought up after it is shot down once? [Finn] – Is this really a concern? What’s to stop someone doing the same thing now with the existing process? This is where a good seneschal should step in (if this ever happens) and say this was already decided upon by the group and move on.
Is there a limit to the number of $50 requests that can be made per unit time? [Finn] – No. And it was done on purpose. The key word is ‘occasionally’. This is to get the point that it should not be a common/frequent item, but at the same time we should allow proposals that may happen quickly back to back due to the need/situation at the time. Trying to timeframe this into specific unit/time blocks can create rules-lawyering (opps, you have to wait another 2 weeks before you can ask that!) or even hamper simple requests that are may be needed (Hey, can we get $20 to help with fighter food at a demo next weekend?). On the other hand someone making $50 requests every week should be questioned why and it should be readily apparent that something is not right. Thus the group still needs to approve.
Is there a minimum number of people required to be present to pass the request? [Finn] – Same was what is required for every group approval on our current 3-meeting process.
Does this still follow consensus, or is it an absolute vote? [Finn] – Consensus, as normal.
If there are more feedback or suggestions, please let me know!
-Finn
From: Barony [mailto:barony-bounces at cynnabar.org] On Behalf Of Greg Less via Barony
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 6:40 PM
To: Cynnabar Seneschal
Cc: Barony of Cynnabar
Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Proposal to amend Cynnabar's Financial policy Hi Finn-
Just as many non-Cynnabar people are on the email list as Facebook.
A few questions that come immediately to mind:
Is there a proposed number of times an item can be brought up after it is shot down once?
Is there a limit to the number of $50 requests that can be made per unit time?
Is there a minimum number of people required to be present to pass the request?
Does this still follow consensus, or is it an absolute vote?
Thanks,
Gregoire
On Sep 19, 2014 6:32 PM, "Cynnabar Seneschal via Barony" <barony at cynnabar.org> wrote:Greetings one and all.
We had discussed earlier at a business meeting ways we can help speed up approving some smaller expenditures by officers in carrying out the duties of their office. Several ideas and ways to do this were brought forth. However, it kind of went by the wayside for a bit. A couple of items came up recently that has rekindled me thinking about this. Normally, I would just bring this up at a meeting, but since the change I am going to propose below will update our only “official” document (our Financial Policy), I wanted to give the chance for the larger group to give some feedback on this.
Please note: I am NOT putting this on Facebook. Many, many people that are not Cynnabar are part of that group, so please keep this conversation to the Cynnabar e-mail list or in person. In short, the below update to the Financial Policy is to speed up minor purchases by officers. The reason for this is to remove some of the bureaucracy and unnecessary burden for minor items. But to still have the budget items proposed and allow the request to be reviewed and approved (or denied) by the group. Many ways were discussed previously on how to limit (via wording/restrictions) these requests so they don’t get abused. In the end, keeping things simple and trusting both the officers in their role and the group in general to know when things are being abused should help curtail any issues. Thus my wording below of “occasionally request” is there on purpose. The proposed addition to the Cynnabar Financial Policy: 2. ii. 3. Group officers may occasionally request minor expenditures (up to $50 or so) for carrying out the duties of their office. These minor budget line item requests can be requested by the officer at a business meeting and then approved or denied by the participants at that same meeting. Feel free to give feedback here or to me directly on adding this to our Financial Policy. This will be brought up at a regular business meeting and run through the normal 3 meeting discussion/approval process to make the final decision. In service,-Finn, Seneschal.
_______________________________________________
Barony mailing list
Barony at cynnabar.org
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
_______________________________________________
Barony mailing list
Barony at cynnabar.org
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
--Forwarded Message Attachment--
From: barony at cynnabar.org
CC: barony at cynnabar.org
To: malagemann at gmail.com
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 15:48:47 -0400
Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Proposal to amend Cynnabar's Financial policy
I approve of both Ermenrich and Finn's proposals.
~Birke
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Matt Lagemann via Barony <barony at cynnabar.org> wrote:
Overall I like the changes. I agree that the people at the meeting should be able to approve minor budget items in one evening. In my four years of meetings, I cannot recall a single time a budget item of $50 or less was ever an issue. I don't see how this could be easily abused since anyone the group trusts as Seneschal can decide that it needs three meetings or point out that this is another request. Personally, if I had any qualms with the proposal, I would say this: I don't think it goes far enough. I would like to see this for any expenditure under $50 regardless if they are an officer. The same restrictions would apply (must be occasional, is not guaranteed, etc.). Rarely are small budget items brought up by non officers, but I think it is worth considering. For instance choir and dance practice are not ran by officers. What if they need supplies (choir more likely than dance)? Just a thought. One thing to stress: This does not mean that you can see someting under $50, buy it, and then bring it to the Barony with a guarantee that you will be reimbursed. At that point you would be purchasing something with a risk that it will not be approved. To Lady Bree's point: My concern is that not every officer needs the money, but the exchequer will have to keep a seperate set of books to keep track of the $650 allocations. It is not a bad way of doing it, but I think with our financial stability and overall good stewardship of the money, Finn's suggestion fits our needs better.
Ermenrich
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Cynnabar Seneschal via Barony <barony at cynnabar.org> wrote:
My answers for Sir Gregoire’s questions: Final discussion or any adjustments to my proposed wording will be done at the meetings. Is there a proposed number of times an item can be brought up after it is shot down once? [Finn] – Is this really a concern? What’s to stop someone doing the same thing now with the existing process? This is where a good seneschal should step in (if this ever happens) and say this was already decided upon by the group and move on.
Is there a limit to the number of $50 requests that can be made per unit time? [Finn] – No. And it was done on purpose. The key word is ‘occasionally’. This is to get the point that it should not be a common/frequent item, but at the same time we should allow proposals that may happen quickly back to back due to the need/situation at the time. Trying to timeframe this into specific unit/time blocks can create rules-lawyering (opps, you have to wait another 2 weeks before you can ask that!) or even hamper simple requests that are may be needed (Hey, can we get $20 to help with fighter food at a demo next weekend?). On the other hand someone making $50 requests every week should be questioned why and it should be readily apparent that something is not right. Thus the group still needs to approve.
Is there a minimum number of people required to be present to pass the request? [Finn] – Same was what is required for every group approval on our current 3-meeting process.
Does this still follow consensus, or is it an absolute vote? [Finn] – Consensus, as normal.
If there are more feedback or suggestions, please let me know!
-Finn
From: Barony [mailto:barony-bounces at cynnabar.org] On Behalf Of Greg Less via Barony
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 6:40 PM
To: Cynnabar Seneschal
Cc: Barony of Cynnabar
Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Proposal to amend Cynnabar's Financial policy Hi Finn-
Just as many non-Cynnabar people are on the email list as Facebook.
A few questions that come immediately to mind:
Is there a proposed number of times an item can be brought up after it is shot down once?
Is there a limit to the number of $50 requests that can be made per unit time?
Is there a minimum number of people required to be present to pass the request?
Does this still follow consensus, or is it an absolute vote?
Thanks,
Gregoire
On Sep 19, 2014 6:32 PM, "Cynnabar Seneschal via Barony" <barony at cynnabar.org> wrote:Greetings one and all.
We had discussed earlier at a business meeting ways we can help speed up approving some smaller expenditures by officers in carrying out the duties of their office. Several ideas and ways to do this were brought forth. However, it kind of went by the wayside for a bit. A couple of items came up recently that has rekindled me thinking about this. Normally, I would just bring this up at a meeting, but since the change I am going to propose below will update our only “official” document (our Financial Policy), I wanted to give the chance for the larger group to give some feedback on this.
Please note: I am NOT putting this on Facebook. Many, many people that are not Cynnabar are part of that group, so please keep this conversation to the Cynnabar e-mail list or in person. In short, the below update to the Financial Policy is to speed up minor purchases by officers. The reason for this is to remove some of the bureaucracy and unnecessary burden for minor items. But to still have the budget items proposed and allow the request to be reviewed and approved (or denied) by the group. Many ways were discussed previously on how to limit (via wording/restrictions) these requests so they don’t get abused. In the end, keeping things simple and trusting both the officers in their role and the group in general to know when things are being abused should help curtail any issues. Thus my wording below of “occasionally request” is there on purpose. The proposed addition to the Cynnabar Financial Policy: 2. ii. 3. Group officers may occasionally request minor expenditures (up to $50 or so) for carrying out the duties of their office. These minor budget line item requests can be requested by the officer at a business meeting and then approved or denied by the participants at that same meeting. Feel free to give feedback here or to me directly on adding this to our Financial Policy. This will be brought up at a regular business meeting and run through the normal 3 meeting discussion/approval process to make the final decision. In service,-Finn, Seneschal.
_______________________________________________
Barony mailing list
Barony at cynnabar.org
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
_______________________________________________
Barony mailing list
Barony at cynnabar.org
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
_______________________________________________
Barony mailing list
Barony at cynnabar.org
http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cynnabar.org/pipermail/barony/attachments/20140922/3fdaa53b/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Barony
mailing list