National body

nzLARPS
#21

Pretty sure Wellington does want to govern themselves through a committee. Who wouldn’t, really? And the constitutional amendment we passed at the AGM strongly implies that.

This is the part I don’t understand. Why pass it back? What does the central body need it for? Why should regions submit to having their funds redistributed, when submitting to having their excess funds loaned to other regions if required would achieve the same result without them losing autonomy?

I think you need to bear in mind that the regional funds will be largely profits from their local events. Local players in Wellington will not want profits from events they personally paid for to leave their region’s control, and rightly.

#22

If this were the case, then voting ammendment 6 at the last AGM was a complete waste of our time. Wasn’t the whole point to have one society, with regional branches?

It might very well be easier for the national entity to retain all membership fees as this will likely be it’s only source of income. That way, after the national spend on websites/hosting/party hats, there’s a bit of kitty in case one of the regions needs a bit of help with something (like Adam suggests), and at the end of each financial year whatever’s left can be divvied proportionally to the regional accounts based on the location/contribuition of the members (like Ryan said).

#23

At least not at this stage, when we need to build up a gear library and a pool of cash for funding project costs upfront.

#24

The more important point when realocating funds to the main pool is you can then justify at a later date respending money “lent” out to the other regions for example:

We lend wellington $1,000 for kit. They spend it and stock up on some kit. They run some very successful events and it turns out that they end up with $500 being made from events at the end of the finnancial year.
Meanwhile Auckland decide to buy a van and have raised $6,500 in the kitty and need $7,000.

Wellington say they would like the $500 incase they need a deposite for a venue.

Auckland needs the van because - for whatever reason - they have lost access to the generous folk who tow their trailor around.

Wellington tecnically ow’s Auckland $1,000 anyway…

How should we act?

The van will be an asset that we can write off plus it will allow auckland to run events autonomously and without begging / borrowing.

The money in Wellington will encourage them to book another venue and hopefully run a new larp.

What should the society do? - What will be more beneficial for the society?

#25

It would probably be less headaches all round if we could avoid as much to-and-fro with the money as possible.

In your example, Wellington’s priority needs to be repaying the “loan”, while Auckland couldn’t get the $500 they need until Welly has done so and NZLARPS has the money to redistribute.

Regarding “loans” though, is there any reason it needs to be a “loan”? I thought the point was to simply seed a new regional committee, the expenditure of which would just get chalked up to NZLARPS as a whole. Lending money between the regional branches seems like an overly cumbersome prospect when in reality, we’re a single organisation…

#26

You have to account for the money - if its not being spent by the auckland branch then it becomes a donation to the wellington branch - at which point the tax man asks us why we are not paying tax when we can make donations to other charities…

It’s easier to do it as a “loan” with no fixed time for repayment nor any intrest. That way we don’t make anything but we don’t lose anything and the books balance…

#27

But that’s just it - Wellington isn’t another charity (by which I’m taking you really mean NPO), it’s another branch of the same non-profit organisation. What you’re suggesting is effectively NZLARPS loaning money to itself. What I’m suggesting is just move the money from account A to account B, both belonging to the same entity, only A is for Auckland to use and B is for Wellington to use.

#28

[quote=“Xcerus”]We lend wellington $1,000 for kit. They spend it and stock up on some kit. They run some very successful events and it turns out that they end up with $500 being made from events at the end of the finnancial year.
Meanwhile Auckland decide to buy a van and have raised $6,500 in the kitty and need $7,000.

Wellington say they would like the $500 incase they need a deposite for a venue.[/quote]If you want to get technical, loan’s generally come with repayment terms - due dates, and a set amount of interest (which can be zero when it’s between friends). Maybe just make your example that one branch wants to buy something big, and the other branch(es) don’t have much of a surplus to share right then.

#29

In terms of the legal entities involved, the thing is that this “local branch” structure isn’t something we’ve invented, it’s governed by NZ law.

Here’s some info on incorporated societies in NZ:

societies.govt.nz/cms/incorp … ed-society

Note in the “creating a branch” section: “The Incorporated Societies Amendment Act 1920 sets out the procedure for incorporating branches. This procedure is generally the same as the procedure for incorporating a new society.”

Here’s the original legislation, the Incorporated Societies Act 1908:

legislation.govt.nz/act/publ … 75775.html

And here’s the 1920 amendment to the Act:

legislation.govt.nz/act/publ … 09bbd1.pdf

The members of each branch are also members of the society. They fall under the parent society’s rules. So in that sense we are all part of the same organisation. But the branches also have their own rules, so in that sense there is a degree of independence. And they are “incorporated branches”, which I believe means that they are separate legal entities. Somewhat like how company can own other companies, a society can have branches.

I imagine banks would be happy to open separate accounts for such incorporated branches, which would make online access to branch accounts much simpler. We could make a rule that the national body treasurer would have access to all such accounts, so that the national body has oversight. The regional treasurers wouldn’t be given access to each other’s accounts, or the national body’s account. The reason who has access is important, at least with the bank we are with, is that there is no “view only” log in. Anyone who can log in can move funds.

I see no mention of how to handle branch funds in the acts, so presumably it is decided by the society members and enacted in our society’s rules.

#30

Separate bank accounts for each branch sounds like the way to go, with quarterly or semi-annual audits/reports to the national body to make sure everyone is keeping their books clean. This should eliminate (or at least limit to Really Big Expenses) any time-consuming petitioning of the national body for funds, and avoid the back-and-forth as Dave mentioned.

As far as loaning/gifting between branches goes, perhaps some of the excess expected from membership fees should - instead of being sent directly to the branches - be held by the national account for just that purpose. That way it isn’t really “Auckland’s” money paying for a “Wellington” function or vice-versa. Again with lessening of back-and-forth of giving one branch money and then months later asking for some to be sent to the other branch, and it should avoid any potential hurt feelings of “they’re spending all our money.” With careful auditing and reporting there should be no abuses and if there are then perhaps that branch’s charter gets pulled or suspended and they lose their autonomy until they can prove they’ve straightened up.

My point of reference here is my involvement in a youth group which was a local assembly of an international organization. The assembly had its own bank account and pretty much did its own thing, with the larger organization serving mainly to oversee and regulate and be a “higher power” which could be appealed to in drastic circumstances. I realize it’s not apples-and-apples but I think the basic idea is relevant.

#31

OK, so we need 15 members in the Wellington branch before we can even set it up…

#32

I agree with Ryan’s initial idea of the branch being as autonomous as possibly - separate committee, separate bank account, and since the NZ Regulations already have provision for it, it could be separately incorporated which will make the setting up of a separate bank account far simpler.

When a branch is initially set up, the National committee (presumably made up from regional president treasurer and secretarys) determine how much $ is given by each existing branch to make the initial funds of the new branch.

As time goes on, any National projects (eg, website costs, Armageddon…) can be funded pro-rata fro mthe branches according to membership.

If at any time a branch needs additional funds, it can negotiate an interest-free loan from any other branch as required between the respective treasurers.

This keeps it all as simple as possible and avoids the beaurocracy of a great National committee controlling everything - the nat committee would only need to sign off on a small number of things with national impact. No problems with how to slice up the membership fees pie and allocate resources as they are already allocated. Then we can all get on the the primary aim of the society…

#33

Hi everyone - I hope to clear up Wellington’s perspective here (and I hope I’m capturing all of my fellow Wellingtonian’s views.)

On becoming a regional branch
I’m well aware of how to set one up and have the paperwork nearly completed. We ensured we had 15 members before the AGM.

The benefit of setting ourselves up as a regional branch, as opposed to just being members of NZLARPS is that regional branches are able to apply for funding that sometimes isn’t available at the national level. I cite my experience working as a fundraiser for a national non-profit with a host of regional branches beneath us. Part of my job was dividing the national funding opportunities from the regional ones.

Another benefit of forming a regional society is that each region has it’s own culture, pool of players and set of challenges. Best the people who live in the region are on the front lines for organising games and working to recruit new members.

On the matter of money
In my initial conversations with Anna, we discussed how the money might work and I understood that each region would have a sub-account of the main NZLARPS bank account. This would allow us to do our own thing in terms of bookkeeping and accounting, but would also provide some transparency for the National office.

I see fees working like so:

To join any regional branch you have to be a member of NZLARPS. Those membership fees go to the main bank account, the money going toward services that serve players nation-wide.

I see funding working like so:

Any funding a regional branch secures through their own efforts (such as applying to community grants, or profit from games/fundraising efforts/bake sales/etc …) goes into the regional sub-account for the regional branches use. Presumably this will be funneled back into buying kit and props and organising games.

I see loans working like so:

If we pitch a game through the existing process, and get funding from NZLARPS for that, it’s managed exactly as it’s been managed in the past with people in Auckland/Wellington. Why reinvent the wheel here?

However, if we come to the National office and ask for a major loan, then we’ll set up terms and agreements to the paying back of that loan at the time.

We aim to be as self-sufficient as possible, with a minimum of fuss and paperwork. Other than being able to bank on the saftey-net of getting funding for a game to ensure we’re covered in the (hopefully unlikely) event of a loss, we haven’t discussed any great plans for using the National office as a major money lender.

I hope this clarifies a few things. Happy to answer any questions anyone else has.

Thanks

Jackie

#34

Here’s something to note as well.

At the AGM, all of us Wellingtonians in the room (11 I think?) voted to have Auckland as the central committee (ie. not to decentralise NZLARPs) , at least for the moment.

This is all a bit new, and I don’t think anyone is quite sure of the work or responsibilities involved with decentralising NZLARPs.

I think we agreed that it would need to occur in the future, but those of us there seemed to be satisfied to let the status quo stay. Particularly since Auckland area (and I include Hamilton here) has the most experience with NZLARPs as an organisation.

I just mention this as a point of interest. But not to bind anyone to that at this point. We may wind up being able to work out the details in this discussion.

#35

Yeah, there was a brief moment of bewilderment at our end when your vote for that came through. :wink:

Personally I agree that we will eventually have a decentralised national body (because it’s the most fair and least parochial approach), but I disagree that we need a stepping stone to get there. Let’s just change the constitution once and get it right.

As for the society’s organisational experience currently being in Auckland, if that’s the view of members in Wellington then year they could vote for Aucklanders for the national body’s committee or president this year. Or not vote on that at all. Then in future years, when the organisational experience is more spread around, a more nationally representative national body could be elected. In other words, we can get the end result you want this year, under a structure that is more future-proof.

I also agree with those who’ve said that it doesn’t matter if the national body doesn’t do much. That’s fine, the national committee can have very brief and possibly infrequent meetings. But the national body will have some functions, some of which are important, and it should have a committee to oversee it.

I like Dave’s idea that all the membership fees go to the national body, and it can distribute any surplus to branches that are most in need (rather than proportionately). That gives some freedom to give new branches a leg-up to help them establish themselves. And the national body could gift such seed funds rather than loaning them, because it doesn’t need them back. The national body could also use such funds to hold workshops and gift the gear created to a branch, much as NZLARPS did for Hamilton. That way craft skills in one city can benefit members in another.

#36

Keep 'em guessing, I always say. :laughing:

Indeed. I think at the time it was the simplest option to get the relevant clauses created and let us (NZLARPs) get on with it. Since we do have this time to discuss it, it’s worth doing it right. Or at least as best we can with the information we have.

#37

The only tricky thing here is that access to one sub-account will give you access to all the accounts and the abiilty to withdraw funds from them. There is no read-only option. While we certainly trust you, we need to be confident that if some nefarious type might ever hold the role of treasurer in any of our many future regional branches, it would be preferable if they weren’t able to drain all of the society’s accounts.

Of course that would be illegal in any case, but prevention is better than punishment. So having the firewall of regional treasurers only being able to access their regional account would help.

Perhaps instead of opening separate accounts we could move to a bank with a less neolithic online security model, where different logins can have different permissions on the sub-accounts?

#38

A suggestion on the bank accounts fornt… just set up a joint account (at the same bank as the national one) for the regional account. Then the national treasurer can see both accounts and the regional treasurer can only see one.

#39

Yes indeed. ANZ allows this. I currently have two society bank accounts attached to mine that are totally not mine, but are read only. (This induced a brief moment of tragi-comedy when I was applying for a mortgage and they lumped those accounts with mine to determine my eligibility. I’m glad I noticed and was able to correct them…)

Having said that, these are separate accounts, not sub-accounts. But it’s worth asking.

If they can’t, then is it a problem to have completely separate accounts? If the security model can allow read only access to separate accounts, then presumably the master NZLARPS account could have the regional accounts attached to it so that the treasurer can see what’s going on… Or something?

Bear in mind that if the account has a requirement for 2 signatories, it should be impossible to actually do any online withdrawls, since there’s no way of ensuring that two people agree that the money should go out. I wish there was some way of doing that online…

The point being that even with linked accounts, I don’t think it’s possible to drain an account without collusion. Unless this account doesn’t require two signatories…?

#40

I don’t know, but Anna, Steve, and others will.