<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>Godaeth,<BR> <BR>I might have read the wrong email. I thought I read someone else suggesting we go further and allow for $50 in expenses for each officer per year, or something along those lines. You are right, some officers do put their own money down on things that could be expensed through the group, and they do this voluntarily. I alone go through a small amount of postage, paper and printer ink with what I do, and I cannot imagine what costs some others might incur. However, I was not implying that people would just waste money, à la Kwame Kilpatrick. (Gold-filigree court armor - "Check out my grillz!"; Pennsic tents with built in wine cellar, AC and sauna; "donations" to royalty which result in landed titles for pets, etc.) It's precisely those expenses you mentioned that we need to consider. (This also goes for this new rule of one-meeting approvals for $50 or less.) Gregiore is right in that more people will likely bring expenses for the barony to reimburse. Expenses that people might just pay on their own right now. I'm fine with people spending money out of pocket for this hobby. Making it easier for people to get reimbursed will drain our group's funds faster, like it or not and the barony can probably spend its money toward more useful expenses. By that I mean that our group funds might be better used toward large purchases that most of us would not just shell out for on our own, like a new wagon for Pennsic, or new flooring for the fighters. It's worth considering for the topic of one-meeting approvals as well. If we make it easier for lots of little expenses to be reimbursed, we could also wind up losing a lot of money in the long run, one small reimbursement at a time. At least with the one-meeting approval process, we can all see what it's being spent on. We do not have to reimburse anyone, either with the current or future process, if they just spend money on their own. The group still has a say in it. That wouldn't be true if we gave officers that allotment. If I, as exchequer, decided that I needed a tabulation machine and found one for $50 and had an expense account which I could use toward a purchase without anyone having to approve it.... I don't think that's a good idea.<BR> <BR>Basically, long story short, I was not implying that no one in Cynnabar knows how to manage money. Far from it. I was implying that making it easier for people to spend money, even for good, legitimate reasons, will likely encourage them, even unintentionally, to spend the barony's money faster than it's going out now. That should be weighed.<BR> <BR>To Gregoire, I don't think having a one-meeting rule for approving $50 expenses or less will lead to abuse specifically. How often do we find inappropriate requests for funds? How often do we turn people's requests down? Not often. People bring expenses to the barony to be reimbursed not infrequently. Nothing is really changing as far as what we approve. Just the how. You are very correct in the more serious concern of how fast we can draw down our funds.<BR> <BR>I don't particularly care of we do it this way or the old way, since the how doesn't change. An expense of $50 or less is likely not serious enough to cause most people hardship just because they have to wait through two extra meetings for an approval. The old method, aside from being annoying for those kinds of expenses, is fine. If our funds starting down dangerously quickly in either case, I'll be sure to let the group know.<br> <BR>-de la Vega<BR> <BR><div>Subject: Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 16<br>To: barony@cynnabar.org<br>Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:20:03 +0000<br>From: barony@cynnabar.org<br><br><pre>Send Barony mailing list submissions to<br> barony@cynnabar.org<br> <br>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br> <a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony</a><br>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br> barony-request@cynnabar.org<br> <br>You can reach the person managing the list at<br> barony-owner@cynnabar.org<br> <br>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>than "Re: Contents of Barony digest..."<br></pre><br><br>--Forwarded Message Attachment--<br>From: barony@cynnabar.org<br>CC: barony@cynnabar.org<br>To: a_scholar_and_a_gentleman@hotmail.com<br>Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:48:21 -0400<br>Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 12<br><br><div dir="ltr"><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Most Esteemed Exchequer --<br><br></div><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Your recent statement regarding your support of the proposed financial policy amendment prompts me to respond and I mean to do so in the spirit of chivalry. Specifically this:<br></div><div class="ecxgmail_extra"><br><div class="ecxgmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 7:28 PM, Ben Jackson via Barony <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:barony@cynnabar.org" target="_blank">barony@cynnabar.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="ecxgmail_quote" style="padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;">
<div><div dir="ltr">Dear Cynnabar,<br><br><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; display: inline;">"... 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?"<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">This is something of a non-sequitur. No one has "given" any officer money nor is that the intention of the proposal (as I understand it). "This will wind up draining ..." has yet to be proven. But more to my point, I don't think you realize that some officers may go over "about $50" in the conduct of our office annually without ever once asking for any reimbursement. It's just incidental to what we do, a loving part of our service. <br></div><br><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">I will take your wager that if you give *every* officer $50 to spend, they'll spend it. I know at least one officer who never has -- put it back on the Barony to support such an expenditure. I'll wager there are more of us, too.<br><br></div><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">I have two bows in my possession (and wrapped with a band black-red-white electrical tape) bought before Celtic Festival archery at Dick's Sporting Goods because we (Forester Grey and I) knew we would need lighter-poundage bows for young beginners at that demo. Total spent: about $75. Because for archery marshals, THAT'S "office supplies." <br><br></div><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">I honestly don't think you meant to suggest that Baronial officers will just find ways of spending the money they appear to be given. But at the same time, one of the unspoken and critical aspects of retention is gratitude and recognition for the "time-talent-treasure" that goes into being an officer in a volunteer organization. That includes yours! Rather than what might be interpreted (as I did) as an implied accusation of poor stewardship with other peoples' money.<br></div></div><br><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">I've been in your position: I've been the treasurer for a small volunteer organization (about 100 members) with several thousand in the bank. I know full well that it can go out a LOT faster than it comes in. Your caution is justified. I thank you for it.<br><br></div><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">And thank you for reading my reply to your opinion.<br><br></div><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">In Service,<br><br></div><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Godaeth<br></div><div class="ecxgmail_default" style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">-- "retiring" Group Marshal for Target Archery, Cynnabar<br></div><br></div><br></div></div>
<br><br>--Forwarded Message Attachment--<br>From: barony@cynnabar.org<br>CC: barony@cynnabar.org<br>To: a_scholar_and_a_gentleman@hotmail.com<br>Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:53:28 -0400<br>Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 12<br><br><div dir="ltr"><div class="ecxgmail_extra"><div class="ecxgmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 7:28 PM, Ben Jackson via Barony <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:barony@cynnabar.org" target="_blank">barony@cynnabar.org</a>></span> wrote:</div><div class="ecxgmail_quote"><br><blockquote class="ecxgmail_quote" style="padding-left: 1ex; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid;">
<div><div dir="ltr">" I cannot foresee any method to abuse this new system."<br></div></div>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div><div class="ecxgmail_extra">Hi All-</div><div class="ecxgmail_extra"><br></div><div class="ecxgmail_extra">I expressed concern because I can. Even small abuses are abuses, and death by a thousand cuts is a real thing. </div><div class="ecxgmail_extra"><br></div><div class="ecxgmail_extra">-Gregoire. </div></div>
<br><br>--Forwarded Message Attachment--<br>From: barony@cynnabar.org<br>To: barony@cynnabar.org; barony-request@cynnabar.org<br>Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:17:55 +0000<br>Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 15<br><br><pre>I went on line to change my email address to pattivash@gmail.com.<br> <br>apparently it did not stick.<br> <br>can you help me out?<br> <br>thank you!<br> <br>Heather<br>aka Patti Kenney<br> <br> <br> <br>Quoting via Barony <barony@cynnabar.org>:<br> <br>> Send Barony mailing list submissions to<br>> barony@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>> <a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony</a><br>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>> barony-request@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> You can reach the person managing the list at<br>> barony-owner@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>> than "Re: Contents of Barony digest..."<br>><br>><br>> Today's Topics:<br>><br>> 1. Southeastern Michigan Youth Combat practice<br>> (Lord Kazmer via Barony)<br>> 2. Mass Meeting Directions & Parking (Genoveva von L?beck via Barony)<br>> 3. Re: Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 12 (Ben Jackson via Barony)<br>><br>><br>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>><br>> Message: 1<br>> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 11:40:03 -0400<br>> From: Lord Kazmer via Barony <barony@cynnabar.org><br>> To: Barony of Cynnabar <barony@cynnabar.org>, Canton of Ealdnordwuda<br>> <Ealdnordwuda@yahoogroups.com>, Middle Youth Middle Youth Marshal<br>> <MiddleYouthMarshal@yahoogroups.com>, Barony of Roaring Wastes<br>> <RoaringWastes@yahoogroups.com>, Pentamere Free Company Company<br>> <PentamereFreeCompany@yahoogroups.com>, Altenberg Shire Shire<br>> <shire-of-altenberg@googlegroups.com>, Hawkland Moor Hawkland Moor<br>> <hawklandmoor@googlegroups.com>, Barony of Andelcrag<br>> <andelcrag@yahoogroups.com>, Barony of Northwoods<br>> <NorthwoodsBarony@yahoogroups.com>, Canton of Iron Oak<br>> <Canton_of_Iron_Oak@yahoogroups.com><br>> Subject: [Cynnabar] Southeastern Michigan Youth Combat practice<br>> Message-ID: <4975B23B-C1AD-43A6-9BDD-CAEA864A3787@aol.com><br>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"<br>><br>> The next regularly scheduled Southeastern Michigan Youth Combat <br>> Practice will be next Sunday, September 28th, 2014.<br>><br>> Norman J. Halmich Park,<br>> 3001 East 13 Mile Road,<br>> Warren, MI 48092.<br>> 1:00pm - 5:00pm<br>><br>> This is the same day/time/location as the adult Armored Combat and <br>> Rapier practice.<br>><br>> This will be the last Roaring Waste Baronial Picnic day of the year.<br>><br>> This will also be Spinning in the Park day.<br>><br>> As always I will bring the loaner gear and there will be youth rapier.<br>><br>> Nyilas Kazmer, OP<br>> Middle Kingdom Deputy Earl Marshal<br>> Youth Combat<br>><br>> ?Don?t take life so serious, son. It ain?t nohow permanent." - Pogo<br>> Walt Kelly US animator & cartoonist (1913 - 1973)<br>><br>> -------------- next part --------------<br>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>> URL: <br>> <<a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/pipermail/barony/attachments/20140922/39d90382/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/pipermail/barony/attachments/20140922/39d90382/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>><br>> ------------------------------<br>><br>> Message: 2<br>> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:04:42 -0400<br>> From: Genoveva von L?beck via Barony <barony@cynnabar.org><br>> To: cynnabar <Barony@cynnabar.org><br>> Subject: [Cynnabar] Mass Meeting Directions & Parking<br>> Message-ID:<br>> <CA+5x1xSX799oGzb3DsDnSCW=j4T_vu=G+Ox868Z_4E_UZHG1kg@mail.gmail.com><br>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>><br>> Mass Meeting is Tuesday (TOMORROW) night from 7:00-9:00 pm at the Michigan<br>> Union (Anderson Ballroom on the first floor). We need Cynnabar folks there<br>> -- in garb/armor -- to help us talk about and demonstrate the activities<br>> that make the SCA a fun thing to do! We also need new folks -- please bring<br>> any SCA-curious friends or family you have to this meeting!<br>><br>> Directions to the Michigan Union (located at 530 S State St., Ann Arbor, MI<br>> 48109) are at <a href="http://uunions.umich.edu/content/directions-michigan-union" target="_blank">http://uunions.umich.edu/content/directions-michigan-union</a><br>><br>> Parking is most likely to be found at the Thompson Structure behind the<br>> Union. You could also check for on-street parking near the Union, but it<br>> will be scarce.<br>><br>> If you have any questions, please let me know. If you need to reach me<br>> after 6:00 pm tomorrow, you can text me at 734-276-5721. I look forward to<br>> seeing you there! Thank you in advance for all your help. :)<br>><br>> Genoveva<br>> Cynnabar Chatelaine<br>> -------------- next part --------------<br>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>> URL: <br>> <<a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/pipermail/barony/attachments/20140922/7d926183/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/pipermail/barony/attachments/20140922/7d926183/attachment-0001.html</a>><br>><br>> ------------------------------<br>><br>> Message: 3<br>> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 19:28:57 -0400<br>> From: Ben Jackson via Barony <barony@cynnabar.org><br>> To: "barony@cynnabar.org" <barony@cynnabar.org><br>> Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 12<br>> Message-ID: <BLU180-W328961D1379704F083C21ABFB30@phx.gbl><br>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"<br>><br>> Dear Cynnabar,<br>><br>> As the guy in charge of our money right now, adding a $50 expense <br>> account for each officer is a lot of extra work for dubious benefit. <br>> It will require the exchequer, (me for now) keep track of 12 <br>> separate expense accounts. Not an issue for me as I have formal <br>> training in accounting, but it may be a major hassle for one of my <br>> successors. Next, if we give every officer $50 to spend, I'm <br>> willing to wager they'll spend it. Was our barony really lacking <br>> $600-ish worth of goods this year? I am not sure people realize <br>> that this will wind up draining our coffers faster than before. We <br>> have a decent amount of money. Right now. Do we want to spend <br>> several hundred dollars extra on "office supplies"? Aren't there <br>> better uses for the group's money?<br>><br>> That being said, allowing a single meeting for discussion for <br>> expenses of $50 or less sounds ok for me. I don't see how three <br>> weeks of discussing a $15 purchase for reasonable supplies yields <br>> the group any greater benefit than one meeting's discussion. It <br>> still creates a control mechanism where the group can monitor and <br>> limit how the group's money is spent. I cannot foresee any method <br>> to abuse this new system.<br>><br>> My two pence.<br>><br>> -de la Vega<br>> Chancellor of the Exchequer for the Barony of Cynnabar<br>><br>> Subject: Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 12<br>> To: barony@cynnabar.org<br>> Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 19:50:53 +0000<br>> From: barony@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> Send Barony mailing list submissions to<br>> barony@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>> <a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony</a><br>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>> barony-request@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> You can reach the person managing the list at<br>> barony-owner@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>> than "Re: Contents of Barony digest..."<br>><br>><br>> --Forwarded Message Attachment--<br>> From: barony@cynnabar.org<br>> CC: barony@cynnabar.org<br>> To: boc.seneschal@gmail.com<br>> Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 10:06:47 -0400<br>> Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Proposal to amend Cynnabar's Financial policy<br>><br>> Overall I like the changes. I agree that the people at the meeting <br>> should be able to approve minor budget items in one evening. In my <br>> four years of meetings, I cannot recall a single time a budget item <br>> of $50 or less was ever an issue. I don't see how this could be <br>> easily abused since anyone the group trusts as Seneschal can decide <br>> that it needs three meetings or point out that this is another <br>> request. Personally, if I had any qualms with the proposal, I would <br>> say this: I don't think it goes far enough. I would like to see <br>> this for any expenditure under $50 regardless if they are an <br>> officer. The same restrictions would apply (must be occasional, is <br>> not guaranteed, etc.). Rarely are small budget items brought up by <br>> non officers, but I think it is worth considering. For instance <br>> choir and dance practice are not ran by officers. What if they need <br>> supplies (choir more likely than dance)? Just a thought. One thing <br>> to stress: This does not mean that you can see someting under $50, b<br>> uy it, and then bring it to the Barony with a guarantee that you <br>> will be reimbursed. At that point you would be purchasing something <br>> with a risk that it will not be approved. To Lady Bree's point: My <br>> concern is that not every officer needs the money, but the exchequer <br>> will have to keep a seperate set of books to keep track of the $650 <br>> allocations. It is not a bad way of doing it, but I think with our <br>> financial stability and overall good stewardship of the money, <br>> Finn's suggestion fits our needs better.<br>> Ermenrich<br>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Cynnabar Seneschal via Barony <br>> <barony@cynnabar.org> wrote:<br>> My answers for Sir Gregoire?s questions: Final discussion or any <br>> adjustments to my proposed wording will be done at the meetings. Is <br>> there a proposed number of times an item can be brought up after it <br>> is shot down once? [Finn] ? Is this really a concern? What?s to stop <br>> someone doing the same thing now with the existing process? This is <br>> where a good seneschal should step in (if this ever happens) and say <br>> this was already decided upon by the group and move on.<br>> Is there a limit to the number of $50 requests that can be made per <br>> unit time? [Finn] ? No. And it was done on purpose. The key word is <br>> ?occasionally?. This is to get the point that it should not be a <br>> common/frequent item, but at the same time we should allow proposals <br>> that may happen quickly back to back due to the need/situation at <br>> the time. Trying to timeframe this into specific unit/time blocks <br>> can create rules-lawyering (opps, you have to wait another 2 weeks <br>> before you can ask that!) or even hamper simple requests that are <br>> may be needed (Hey, can we get $20 to help with fighter food at a <br>> demo next weekend?). On the other hand someone making $50 requests <br>> every week should be questioned why and it should be readily <br>> apparent that something is not right. Thus the group still needs to <br>> approve.<br>> Is there a minimum number of people required to be present to pass <br>> the request? [Finn] ? Same was what is required for every group <br>> approval on our current 3-meeting process.<br>> Does this still follow consensus, or is it an absolute vote? [Finn] <br>> ? Consensus, as normal.<br>> If there are more feedback or suggestions, please let me know!<br>> -Finn<br>> From: Barony [mailto:barony-bounces@cynnabar.org] On Behalf Of <br>> Greg Less via Barony<br>> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 6:40 PM<br>> To: Cynnabar Seneschal<br>> Cc: Barony of Cynnabar<br>> Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Proposal to amend Cynnabar's Financial <br>> policy Hi Finn-<br>> Just as many non-Cynnabar people are on the email list as Facebook.<br>> A few questions that come immediately to mind:<br>> Is there a proposed number of times an item can be brought up after <br>> it is shot down once?<br>> Is there a limit to the number of $50 requests that can be made per <br>> unit time?<br>> Is there a minimum number of people required to be present to pass <br>> the request?<br>> Does this still follow consensus, or is it an absolute vote?<br>> Thanks,<br>> Gregoire<br>> On Sep 19, 2014 6:32 PM, "Cynnabar Seneschal via Barony" <br>> <barony@cynnabar.org> wrote:Greetings one and all.<br>> We had discussed earlier at a business meeting ways we can help <br>> speed up approving some smaller expenditures by officers in carrying <br>> out the duties of their office. Several ideas and ways to do this <br>> were brought forth. However, it kind of went by the wayside for a <br>> bit. A couple of items came up recently that has rekindled me <br>> thinking about this. Normally, I would just bring this up at a <br>> meeting, but since the change I am going to propose below will <br>> update our only ?official? document (our Financial Policy), I wanted <br>> to give the chance for the larger group to give some feedback on this.<br>> Please note: I am NOT putting this on Facebook. Many, many people <br>> that are not Cynnabar are part of that group, so please keep this <br>> conversation to the Cynnabar e-mail list or in person. In short, the <br>> below update to the Financial Policy is to speed up minor purchases <br>> by officers. The reason for this is to remove some of the <br>> bureaucracy and unnecessary burden for minor items. But to still <br>> have the budget items proposed and allow the request to be reviewed <br>> and approved (or denied) by the group. Many ways were discussed <br>> previously on how to limit (via wording/restrictions) these requests <br>> so they don?t get abused. In the end, keeping things simple and <br>> trusting both the officers in their role and the group in general to <br>> know when things are being abused should help curtail any issues. <br>> Thus my wording below of ?occasionally request? is there on purpose. <br>> The proposed addition to the Cynnabar Financial Policy: 2. ii. 3. <br>> Group officers may occasionally request minor expenditures (up to $50<br>> or so) for carrying out the duties of their office. These minor <br>> budget line item requests can be requested by the officer at a <br>> business meeting and then approved or denied by the participants at <br>> that same meeting. Feel free to give feedback here or to me <br>> directly on adding this to our Financial Policy. This will be <br>> brought up at a regular business meeting and run through the normal <br>> 3 meeting discussion/approval process to make the final decision. <br>> In service,-Finn, Seneschal.<br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Barony mailing list<br>> Barony@cynnabar.org<br>> <a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony</a><br>> _______________________________________________<br>><br>> Barony mailing list<br>><br>> Barony@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> <a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony</a><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>> --Forwarded Message Attachment--<br>> From: barony@cynnabar.org<br>> CC: barony@cynnabar.org<br>> To: malagemann@gmail.com<br>> Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 15:48:47 -0400<br>> Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Proposal to amend Cynnabar's Financial policy<br>><br>> I approve of both Ermenrich and Finn's proposals.<br>> ~Birke<br>> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Matt Lagemann via Barony <br>> <barony@cynnabar.org> wrote:<br>> Overall I like the changes. I agree that the people at the meeting <br>> should be able to approve minor budget items in one evening. In my <br>> four years of meetings, I cannot recall a single time a budget item <br>> of $50 or less was ever an issue. I don't see how this could be <br>> easily abused since anyone the group trusts as Seneschal can decide <br>> that it needs three meetings or point out that this is another <br>> request. Personally, if I had any qualms with the proposal, I would <br>> say this: I don't think it goes far enough. I would like to see <br>> this for any expenditure under $50 regardless if they are an <br>> officer. The same restrictions would apply (must be occasional, is <br>> not guaranteed, etc.). Rarely are small budget items brought up by <br>> non officers, but I think it is worth considering. For instance <br>> choir and dance practice are not ran by officers. What if they need <br>> supplies (choir more likely than dance)? Just a thought. One thing <br>> to stress: This does not mean that you can see someting under $50, b<br>> uy it, and then bring it to the Barony with a guarantee that you <br>> will be reimbursed. At that point you would be purchasing something <br>> with a risk that it will not be approved. To Lady Bree's point: My <br>> concern is that not every officer needs the money, but the exchequer <br>> will have to keep a seperate set of books to keep track of the $650 <br>> allocations. It is not a bad way of doing it, but I think with our <br>> financial stability and overall good stewardship of the money, <br>> Finn's suggestion fits our needs better.<br>> Ermenrich<br>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Cynnabar Seneschal via Barony <br>> <barony@cynnabar.org> wrote:<br>> My answers for Sir Gregoire?s questions: Final discussion or any <br>> adjustments to my proposed wording will be done at the meetings. Is <br>> there a proposed number of times an item can be brought up after it <br>> is shot down once? [Finn] ? Is this really a concern? What?s to stop <br>> someone doing the same thing now with the existing process? This is <br>> where a good seneschal should step in (if this ever happens) and say <br>> this was already decided upon by the group and move on.<br>> Is there a limit to the number of $50 requests that can be made per <br>> unit time? [Finn] ? No. And it was done on purpose. The key word is <br>> ?occasionally?. This is to get the point that it should not be a <br>> common/frequent item, but at the same time we should allow proposals <br>> that may happen quickly back to back due to the need/situation at <br>> the time. Trying to timeframe this into specific unit/time blocks <br>> can create rules-lawyering (opps, you have to wait another 2 weeks <br>> before you can ask that!) or even hamper simple requests that are <br>> may be needed (Hey, can we get $20 to help with fighter food at a <br>> demo next weekend?). On the other hand someone making $50 requests <br>> every week should be questioned why and it should be readily <br>> apparent that something is not right. Thus the group still needs to <br>> approve.<br>> Is there a minimum number of people required to be present to pass <br>> the request? [Finn] ? Same was what is required for every group <br>> approval on our current 3-meeting process.<br>> Does this still follow consensus, or is it an absolute vote? [Finn] <br>> ? Consensus, as normal.<br>> If there are more feedback or suggestions, please let me know!<br>> -Finn<br>> From: Barony [mailto:barony-bounces@cynnabar.org] On Behalf Of <br>> Greg Less via Barony<br>> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 6:40 PM<br>> To: Cynnabar Seneschal<br>> Cc: Barony of Cynnabar<br>> Subject: Re: [Cynnabar] Proposal to amend Cynnabar's Financial <br>> policy Hi Finn-<br>> Just as many non-Cynnabar people are on the email list as Facebook.<br>> A few questions that come immediately to mind:<br>> Is there a proposed number of times an item can be brought up after <br>> it is shot down once?<br>> Is there a limit to the number of $50 requests that can be made per <br>> unit time?<br>> Is there a minimum number of people required to be present to pass <br>> the request?<br>> Does this still follow consensus, or is it an absolute vote?<br>> Thanks,<br>> Gregoire<br>> On Sep 19, 2014 6:32 PM, "Cynnabar Seneschal via Barony" <br>> <barony@cynnabar.org> wrote:Greetings one and all.<br>> We had discussed earlier at a business meeting ways we can help <br>> speed up approving some smaller expenditures by officers in carrying <br>> out the duties of their office. Several ideas and ways to do this <br>> were brought forth. However, it kind of went by the wayside for a <br>> bit. A couple of items came up recently that has rekindled me <br>> thinking about this. Normally, I would just bring this up at a <br>> meeting, but since the change I am going to propose below will <br>> update our only ?official? document (our Financial Policy), I wanted <br>> to give the chance for the larger group to give some feedback on this.<br>> Please note: I am NOT putting this on Facebook. Many, many people <br>> that are not Cynnabar are part of that group, so please keep this <br>> conversation to the Cynnabar e-mail list or in person. In short, the <br>> below update to the Financial Policy is to speed up minor purchases <br>> by officers. The reason for this is to remove some of the <br>> bureaucracy and unnecessary burden for minor items. But to still <br>> have the budget items proposed and allow the request to be reviewed <br>> and approved (or denied) by the group. Many ways were discussed <br>> previously on how to limit (via wording/restrictions) these requests <br>> so they don?t get abused. In the end, keeping things simple and <br>> trusting both the officers in their role and the group in general to <br>> know when things are being abused should help curtail any issues. <br>> Thus my wording below of ?occasionally request? is there on purpose. <br>> The proposed addition to the Cynnabar Financial Policy: 2. ii. 3. <br>> Group officers may occasionally request minor expenditures (up to $50<br>> or so) for carrying out the duties of their office. These minor <br>> budget line item requests can be requested by the officer at a <br>> business meeting and then approved or denied by the participants at <br>> that same meeting. Feel free to give feedback here or to me <br>> directly on adding this to our Financial Policy. This will be <br>> brought up at a regular business meeting and run through the normal <br>> 3 meeting discussion/approval process to make the final decision. <br>> In service,-Finn, Seneschal.<br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Barony mailing list<br>> Barony@cynnabar.org<br>> <a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony</a><br>> _______________________________________________<br>><br>> Barony mailing list<br>><br>> Barony@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> <a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony</a><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>><br>> Barony mailing list<br>><br>> Barony@cynnabar.org<br>><br>> <a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony</a><br>><br>><br>><br>><br>> -------------- next part --------------<br>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>> URL: <br>> <<a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/pipermail/barony/attachments/20140922/3fdaa53b/attachment.html" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/pipermail/barony/attachments/20140922/3fdaa53b/attachment.html</a>><br>><br>> ------------------------------<br>><br>> Subject: Digest Footer<br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Barony mailing list<br>> Barony@cynnabar.org<br>> <a href="http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony" target="_blank">http://lists.cynnabar.org/listinfo/barony</a><br>><br>><br>> ------------------------------<br>><br>> End of Barony Digest, Vol 59, Issue 15<br>> **************************************<br> <br> <br>Rev. Dr. Patricia A. Kenney, pastor and teacher<br>St. Paul United Church of Christ<br>122 W Michigan Avenue<br>Saline, MI 48176<br>734-730-9808 (cell)<br> <br>Since you cannot do good to all, you are to pay special attention to <br>those who, by the accidents of time, or place, or circumstances, are <br>brought into closer connection with you. ~ Augustine of Hippo<br> <br> <br></pre></div> </div></body>
</html>