<html> <head> <style></style></head> <body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'><br><br><div><div dir="ltr"><div class="ecxgmail_extra"><div class="ecxgmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div>OK….</div><div><br></div><div>It has been asked why do we need to have incidental expenses under a certain amount approved by the Financial Manager (and larger amounts approved by the board). Up until now, some people have spent funds and asked for permission to do so later. While most of these expenses were legitimate and would probably have been approved right away, we have seen incidences of reluctance of the SLOB to approve some expeditures that were made without prior consulting. Don't ask for specific examples. If you want an example, read through past SLOB meetings and you will find them.</div><div><br></div><div>Almost every orgainzation I know of, be it public, private, for profit, or non profit has a proceedure like this to handle small expenses without having to bring them to a full vote of their boards. Why would this be? What are the advantages of having a procedute for "petty cash" type expenses?</div><div><br></div><div>Here are just a few reasons:</div><div><br></div><div><div><b>Efficiency:</b> Being able to spend needed small amounts of money without full SLOB approval at a monthly meeting allows things to move ahead smoothly and reduces the "clutter" at meetings.</div></div><div><br></div><div><b>Flexibility:</b> If meeting were weekly rather than monthly there might be no need for this proposal. However, with a once a month meeting with an over-full agenda, there is no flexibility to move quickly on opportunities that come up.</div><div><br></div><div><b style="font-size: 12pt;">Economy:</b><span style="font-size: 12pt;"> money may be saved by getting a "second opinion" on an expenditure. The Financial Manager may know of sources that are less expensive or of other ways to do something that will cost less. We saw this when Samson got help with his proposal for expenses for his translation project. It could apply to any expense. We need to be good stewards of SugarLabs funds.</span></div><div><br></div><div><b>Compliance: </b>The Software Freedom Foundation wants more accountability re: spending of SugarLabs funds. This will help achieve that goal. This is, perhaps, the most important reason listed here.</div><div><br></div><div>I could probably go on with more and I'm sure many of you know of other good reasons that we could add but, I think these are excellent arguments in favor of allowing small amounts of $Y with approval of the Financial Manager and reporting monthly to the SLOB. (with Y set by SLOB and revised as seen fit).</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers!</div><div>CAryl </div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div> </div></div></div> </div></body> </html>