Committee Minutes March 2010

nzLARPS
#41

I don’t have any problem with how the committee handled it in terms of following Adam up, only with the lack of disclosure to the members. Good reporting is an core function of the committee, not just a side concern. The committee, by actively restricting the reporting in order to contain this incident (which is how I read the committee member responses here), did make a mistake in terms of the “attention and due concern” given to the issue. It’s a totally understandable mistake, and not a huge deal, but I just wanted to be clear that deliberately hiding information that the members have a right to know shouldn’t happen in the future, even if the intentions are good. As IdiotSavant said, full disclosure should be society’s policy.

EDIT: It’s much easier to perceive this communication error from outside the committee. If I had been on the committee I might possibly have gone along with mushrooming the membership in order to deal with this issue with minimum drama. But from the outside it’s much clearer that hiding info is contrary to basic democratic principles.

#42

Thank you to everyone that has put forward suggestions for improved committee function, transparency, and communication with the membership. The concerns of the society regarding our transparency and communication are important to me, I have taken them on board and the committee will be discussing them at the next meeting.

I would like to apologise for the inadequacies in the way the current situation was handled. There is a large degree of trust in the way the committee operates, in that I trust everyone implicitly to do the integral tasks of their role as a matter of course (taking into account things like the unavoidable interference of life.) There was initially some miscommunication and difficulty in coordinating timings to visit the bank to arrange signatory access, and Adam had assured me in late November that he was on top of the deposit and would take care of it when he got his internet banking access. I had anticipated this to be a matter of a week at most, as we were only waiting for his signatory access to process (we were told it would take a few working days) I then further compounded my error by mistaking a different deposit as the one we were expecting from him and did not realise my error until late January/early February when double checking my game actuals (the deposit was actually one I had made with the takings from the November 14th St. Wolfgang’s) At this point the rest of the committee was alerted, and discussion and communications ensued. These were again a little slower than they could have been, due to some of the personalities involved, uncertainty of what the exact nature of the situation was and communications issues with Adam due to his demanding work schedule.

It is clear a better system needs to be in place for these matters if they ever arise again in the future, so that we can track these things, escalate them earlier and be completely transparent with our society. This situation was a speed bump that has highlighted some gaps in the system, of which the inadequate communications was a symptom. I would like to apologise to the membership for this - I and the committee have learnt a lot from this, and together with that, and your valuable feedbacks, we will be going forward a stronger, more streamlined committee with clearer communications.

#43

I would hardly consider the amount of effort put into the pursuit of this issue - as “hounding” perhaps if they had phoned or even knocked on the door that is walking distance from both the secritary and presidents door then I might have said - I am being hounded - the very fact that it took several months to even get access to our bank and put both my self and the new secritary on as signitories indicates just how long various things take to proceed.

Considering I recieved the money 6 months ago it took the president and secritary 4 months to actually get round to asking me about the funds - and another one on top of that with communication issues. When I was asked to do so I gave a date by which I could garantie it would be done not a date it might maybe perhaps get done somtime if I could. I don’t do that - I give actuals.

Are my actions responsible for the money not being depoisited sooner? Yes - just as my actions are responsible for me typing this message.

Perhaps if some urgency had been enforced when the money was given to me - or infact in any of 5 months prior to this I would feel that maybe I should have put the money in sooner. As it was the only thing that was asked was “is the money safe?” Somtime after Porl’s house was broken into. There was no follow up of - “and when will you be depositing it.” Somthing I don’t feel there was need for its not like I was vacationing in the Bahamas.

I could lie to you and say that I regret not getting this done sooner - but then I would be lying to you. So which would you prefer - that I lie and say that I am sorry for the delay in my actions. Or would you rather the Treasurer - the person who deals with the society’s money - was honnest and just said that I regret being a tight wad and not paying a bank to do what it should do and I can do for free - was I put in this position again I would still refuse to pay a bank to do somthing I can do for free.

edit: The time delay is not an accusory against any member of the committie but more a critisism against our bank - somthing I know Anna and I have talked about on at least one occasion as well as ponder the benefits of moving.

#44

[quote=“Xcerus”]Considering I recieved the money 6 months ago it took the president and secritary 4 months to actually get round to asking me about the funds - and another one on top of that with communication issues.

(Snip further excuses)

Perhaps if some urgency had been enforced when the money was given to me…[/quote]

They shouldn’t have had to ask. They shouldn’t have had to “enforce” urgency. You should have just done it, or made arrangements for someone else to do it on your behalf if real life was getting in the way. Because it’s not their responsibility; it’s yours, because you’re the Treasurer.

Sheesh, is it really that hard to understand?

Anyway, money deposited, problem solved, huzzah.

#45

Hi Adam,

Forgive me for responding when I said my former post would be my last. I feel compelled to comment again because I’d hoped you’d man up, apologize for not doing your job efficiently and bringing some closure to this issue.

Instead you continue to antagonise.

So I must say, in response to your above question, that at this point, given the way you’re continuing to communicate I’d personally prefer that you stepped down from the role as Treasurer.

#46

Reinforced and seconded. I’m not going to pretend that the committee as a whole doesn’t have areas to improve on, but at least other committee members seem to be acknowledging their shortfalls and taking things on board.

#47

I’d be happy enough with just a basic acknowledgement that it wasn’t acceptable, and an indication that it won’t be happening again in future and that money will be deposited in a timely (bearing in mind that this is a voluntary position and that real life can intervene) manner.

#48

I’d be happy enough with just a basic acknowledgement that it wasn’t acceptable, and an indication that it won’t be happening again in future and that money will be deposited in a timely (bearing in mind that this is a voluntary position and that real life can intervene) manner.[/quote]

I think Adam has made himself clear that this isn’t going to happen, Savant. I’m sorry, but I’m not buying rhetoric about trying to save fees on a non profit account which doesn’t actually have any transaction fees, or needing to wait for signatories to be sorted when a deposit can be made to any bank account, with any bank, by anyone who feels the urge. A general breakdown in communication? Yes. Could things have been handled better? Yes. Timelier? They most certainly should have, regardless of the other two and without the excuses we’ve had.

#49

I too would like you, Adam, to stand down from the position of Treasurer. You have stated that you do not regret taking 6 months to deposit the society’s moneys. You have claimed that you are a “tight wad” and are not wanting to pay the bank to do what you can do yourself. Well, your principles have cost NZLARPs money in lost interest. The fact that you seem to see no problem with keeping the society’s money for 6 months and have indicated that you do not think that members deserve an apology for this, or that your action even merits one shows me that you do not have an attitude appropriate for the position of treasurer.

In addition, as Treasurer you are unwilling to use internet banking and have great difficulty in getting to the bank regularly to do the duties of the Treasurer. Due to your stated principles that are counter-productive to the duties of the position that you hold, it is clear that you are not capable of preforming the duties of the position to any standard that is acceptable by the members of the society.

It is for these reasons that I think you should stand down from the position.

#50

We are on a 0% intrest accounnt so I have lost the NZLARPS no money.

Also - there are charges on this account:

09 December - Stop Payment Fee $25.00

There are others their reasons were justified by committie vote.

Let it be known that all projects that have forcaste a loss I have either voted against or absteined on the vote as well as any action that would result in NZLARPS losing money or being charged unessacarily.

#51

[quote=“Xcerus”]
Also - there are charges on this account:

09 December - Stop Payment Fee $25.00[/quote]

There are no account fees on this account. It was specifically set up by the first treasurer of the society as a not-for-profit society account and the society pays no fees for general usage on it - no transaction fees, no account fees, nothing like that. That particular fee you mentioned was to cancel the old chequebook after it was misplaced in the treasurer role handover. You and I discussed this and decided it was safest if we just had the chequebook cancelled and had a new one issued.

The nzLARPS account does earn interest. On 26/02/10 the nzLARPS account was paid $5.99 in interest minus $2.28 in tax. You should be able to see it on the bank statements.

#52

Though not a great deal of money from the sound of it - a couple of bucks at most. Its the delay and the total lack of acknowledgement of public dissatisfaction that’s the chief problem here.

#53

Do you understand the concept of investing in a project?

This is the kind of thing that the society was expressly created for. A larp campaign may lose money at early events while it invests in new setting-specific resources that it will be able to re-use at later events. Rather than the individuals having to have cash up front, the society covers the costs and hopefully makes them back from later events. Even if the campaign fails to make a profit in the long-term, the society is there to protect the individual from loss.

The committee shouldn’t be signing off on projects that look likely to make a loss in the long term. They should be encouraging the project manager to charge players higher event fees if that’s the case. But so long as a project looks like it is reasonably likely to make a profit in the long term, there’s no reason not to approve an individual budget that will make a loss.

EDIT: come to think of it, this is also the kind of thing I’d like to be able to see in the minutes. Not just how many people voted for or against a motion, but who voted for what, including abstentions (so that we can see that people are properly abstaining on matters they have a conflict of interest on). How can we assess how well committee members are doing if we can’t see when they’re making silly votes?

#54

Adam,

I also think you should stand down.

To me the time it took to pay the money in and your attitude to the situation, show that the role of treasurer is not for you.

Bryn.

#55

I am hopeless with money and receipts.

I always opt out of any club roles where there will be cash handling. Every once and a while when I get landed with jobs where I collect money things often go wrong. It’s not because I intend them to, or because I want to steal the money or anything like that I’m just a little disorganized. On at least two occasions, when I’ve ended up collecting money for the SCA, I’ve discovered a little plastic bag with some cash amongst my gear a year or so after the event. It always made it to the club eventually, but it’s not ideal for the club to have people collecting money who have my kind of attitude.

Recognising this, I refuse to collect money for events. I’d also rather spend out of my own pocket than use club money, because I’m equally as bad with receipts. For me, I’d rather spend a couple of hundred dollars of my own pocket than have the club chasing me up for receipts.

It probably ends up costing me a fair bit of money, but in the end I just don’t want the stigma associated with not being 100% squeaky clean with club money. It’s not an option available to everyone, because many people don’t have the spare cash. But, over time, I’ve discovered it’s the best option for me.

#56

Derek, would it be possible to save your acceptance speech until after you’ve actually been voted in as Treasurer ?

:wink:

More seriously, I do not consider it particularly useful to call for Adam’s resignation. Sure, there is general agreement that timing was lacking in this instance, but considering that it has been rectified, there is little actual material disadvantage to the Society (and I’m sure that Adam would willingly pay the forgone interest if we calculate what it should be).

Unless there is a material risk to the Society, I think it is unhelpful to engage in this kind of rhetoric. There seems to be an element of singling out, and - as Ryan’s and others’ posts suggest - the rest of the committee could be subject to criticism in this matter as well. The costs and risks of a Treasurer role handover are documented in this very thread ($25 cost to cancel our cheque book), a sunk cost that is several times that of the estimated interest opportunity cost.

I do not foresee this issue arising again, especially if the committee provide timely minutes with a breakdown of who is responsible for collecting monies owed (with action dates).

We have an opportunity in September to decide on our Treasurer, and I think that is the appropriate time to change the Treasurer, if that is the will of the Society.

#57

[quote=“Mike Curtis”]More seriously, I do not consider it particularly useful to call for Adam’s resignation. …
Unless there is a material risk to the Society, I think it is unhelpful to engage in this kind of rhetoric. There seems to be an element of singling out, and - as Ryan’s and others’ posts suggest - the rest of the committee could be subject to criticism in this matter as well.[/quote]From my point of view, I’m concerned as to whether it’s going to be a one off occurrence or turns out to be a sentinel event for a bigger problem. I get that Adam got hit by work and health problems that he didn’t expect, that made the job a lot more laborious for him than he expected. I’ve seen that happen to other people who take on voluntary work, and sometimes that’s happened to me, and for every possible way he could have dealt with the situation he has taken the most adversarial and unhelpful one.* He has a demonstrated dysfunctional relationship with the rest of the committee, and it’s going to take goodwill on both sides to work past that. If he was a general officer of the committee, this would be frustrating for the people involved, but this is the Treasurer, the most responsible role there is.

So I’d like to hear from Adam - maybe at the next committee meeting when people have had time to let their tempers cool down a bit: Do you still want to be Treasurer? Do you think you’ll have the time and energy to do the work? (Not just deposits, but keeping the books and tracking payments, as well.) Are you willing to show goodwill to the rest of the committee?

  • OK, maybe not the most, maybe just almost the most.
#58

Sorry Mike, but I disagree. The committee in general, as I said before, do have areas to improve upon and most of them seem to be taking criticisms on board and have even offered apologies for being remiss. While this situation has been largely rectified, and admittedly could be left alone, Adam’s attitude on the matter is quite frankly revolting and as a result of that, the supporting evidence of his inability and apparent unwillingness to do the job, and the circumstances that have brought us here, I for one have no trust in him to do any of the tasks required of a treasurer, or indeed any other committee position.

With a couple of bigger games and Chimera coming before the next AGM, and the ambitious Teonn following so close after, I personally would rather take steps now to have someone I do trust in the position and will actually be on-the-ball when we need them to be.

#59

[quote=“Mike Curtis”]More seriously, I do not consider it particularly useful to call for Adam’s resignation…
We have an opportunity in September to decide on our Treasurer, and I think that is the appropriate time to change the Treasurer, if that is the will of the Society.[/quote]

Actually, I agree. While I’m not happy, the lesson from student politics is that rolling people is a hassle and leads to bad feelings, factionalisation, and a generally toxic atmosphere all round. We’ve made our expectations crystal clear; if he’s going to follow them and perform the role in a timely (for a voluntary society etc) fashion, and he can still work effectively with the rest of the committee, then I’m quite happy just to deal with it through the normal electoral process.

#60

I’m not calling for resignation or rolling, but I do have a foreboding feeling. As Dave has pointed out there’s a lot of business left for the society to do this year. Adam seems to believe that he was right in his actions. His refusal to admit any fault whatsoever doesn’t bode well for a change of attitude, as far as I can make out he’s saying he’s not sorry and would do the same thing again if the society wasn’t looking over his shoulder. He’s made no indication that he’ll change his approach to the role and put aside his excuses and paranoia about internet banking, except to say that he’s “willing to respect” our opinions that he should act otherwise. I hope that’s enough.

I agree with Idiot and Mike that we should try to maintain community good will and cohesion, and we should bear in mind that the roles we’re discussing are voluntary ones. No-one else stepped forward for Treasurer at the last AGM - except Hannah, who said she’d yield to any other contender.

If Adam remains as Treasurer, and continues to not step up, then it’s possible that Anna will be required to perform the duties of Treasurer as she’s the other signatory with access to the accounts. If the society, and Anna, can swallow this further expansion of her roles, then fair enough.