[IAEP] [SLOBS] Motion 2017-08-10: Sugar Labs Financial Manager to have a monthly compensation
walter.bender at gmail.com
Thu Aug 10 08:53:06 EDT 2017
I disagree. While the quality of the reporting left much to be desired, the
relative importance of this issue to our organization seems to be pretty
minor. That said, if there was some assurance that a FM could somehow light
a fire under the SFC regarding responsiveness to financial inquiries, e.g.,
Samson's request for a travel advance to procure his visa, then I would be
all for it. But that seems to be a structural issue within the SFC, not
within Sugar Labs.
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 8:36 AM, Samson Goddy <samsongoddy at sugarlabs.org>
> Yeah i totally agree...
> +1 Laura
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Laura Vargas <laura at somosazucar.org>
>> Hi SLOB's and members all,
>> I think we should learn from experience and start compensating doing all
>> this work for Sugar Lab's Organization [keeping track of communications and
>> transactions with the Software Freedom Conservancy].
>> Motion: *Sugar Labs Financial Manager will have a monthly compensation
>> of US$ TBD* in exchange for:
>> 1 complete financial report per quarter and it's publication on the Sugar
>> Labs Finance Wiki page maximum 30 calendar days after the end of the
>> period. The format to be used should be compatible with the
>> International Financial Reporting Standards* or it's equivalent in the
>> *see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Financial_Report
>> To approve the proposed motion simplifies the July, 2016 SLOB's
>> motion/decision <https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Oversight_Board/Decisions>,
>> assigns a monthly compensation for the Financial Manager and above all, *assures
>> community has timely access to reports*.
>> I hope another SLOB can second the motion in order to start voting.
>> Suggestions to define the value are also welcome from all, specially from
>> Adam :D
>> Below I pasted some extracts from background emailing about the subject
>> in case anyone interested in reading.
>> Regards and blessings,
>> Laura V
>> 2017-08-05 19:31 GMT-05:00 Caryl Bigenho <cbigenho at hotmail.com>:
>>> Hi All...
>>> There was (and still seems to be) a lot of confusion regarding the topic
>>> of a treasurer's report. I think the main problem is that most of you are
>>> thinking of the SugarLabs "Books" (a big ledger will all the personal
>>> identifying information Adam was referring to) instead of a simple
>>> "Treasurers Report" which just includes the pertinent information without
>>> all the identifying details. The former, the "books," should be available
>>> to the SLOBs on request on a view only basis as mentioned elsewhere in this
>>> thread. The latter, the Treasurer's Report, should be available to all
>>> Sugar Labs members and other interested parties as appropriate.
>>> Maybe it is all the years I have spent in many types of organizations
>>> (4H, Girl Scouts, homeowner's organizations, teacher's orgs, Sierra Club
>>> groups, etc.) that make this seem very familiar, simple, and
>>> straightforward. Hopefully the information below can help make it work well
>>> for Sugar Labs as well.
>>> A quick Google search turns up this list of criteria for a simple
>>> monthly treasurer's report. It says it should include:
>>> 1. the name of the organization.
>>> 2. the period which the report covers.
>>> 3. the cash balance at the beginning of the period.
>>> 4. the income received during the period (with sources)
>>> 5. the expenses paid during the period (with what it was for and who
>>> was paid ... name only, no PII).
>>> 6. the cash balance at the end of the period.
>>> 7. the signature of the treasurer.
>>> Another easy to follow resource is this description of how to put such a
>>> report together: https://www.energizeinc.com/art/treasurers-report
>>> (Note: the sample they refer to in this is missing... you have to buy
>>> the book to see it!).
>>> Yesterday's financial report was very confusing and seeing Adam's email
>>> just seemed to make it worse. Maybe going forward we can simplify and we
>>> all will know what is happening. Oh, and by the way, there is no need to
>>> make the Income negative and the Expenses positive. This is for us, not the
>>> *From:* IAEP <iaep-bounces at lists.sugarlabs.org> on behalf of Tony
>>> Anderson <tony_anderson at usa.net>
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 5, 2017 1:07:55 AM
>>> *To:* SLOBs; IAEP SugarLabs
>>> *Subject:* [IAEP] Meeting August 4, 2017
>>> I am amazed at the discussion on finance.
>>> The governing bylaw is at https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/
>>> Oversight_Board/Decisions July 1, 2016.
>>> Oversight Board/Decisions - Sugar Labs
>>> This page (largely complete) is intended to be a one-stop place for
>>> reviewing all of the Sugar Labs oversight board (SLOB) actions and
>>> Our Finance Manager is Adam Holt. He must authorize every petty cash
>>> transaction (<$200) and the board must approve all other transactions.
>>> I am sure that in a given quarter, the number of approved transactions
>>> is less than a dozen.
>>> The quarterly report is the starting balance, transactions reporting
>>> receipts, transactions reporting expenses, and an ending balance.
>>> I suspect all of this could be could be recorded on fewer than a dozen
>>> 80 column punched cards. (About 10-6 GB).
>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> SLOBs mailing list
> SLOBs at lists.sugarlabs.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the IAEP