[59] in UA Financial Policy Review Committee
Re: Finishing the FPRC more
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alex Dehnert)
Wed Aug 26 18:05:14 2009
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:04:57 -0400
From: Alex Dehnert <adehnert@MIT.EDU>
To: Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu>
CC: ua-fprc@mit.edu
In-Reply-To: <4A90C2C3.9020601@mit.edu>
I've incorporated the minor changes I saw in operating --- you can see
the changes at:
cd /mit/ua/committee/fprc/report-working
git diff bf86415c5585ba3b7b8c9bd842f3fbd42c20de6c --color-words
You can get the full report as it now stands from
/afs/athena.mit.edu/activity/u/ua/committee/fprc/report/2nd/report.pdf
I haven't had an opportunity to incorporate the changes from last week
--- sorry about that. (I've been a bit distracted by Work Week and my
job finishing up. Not mention, uh, watching TV...) I'll try to do that soon.
Tonight, we'll definitely be talking about:
3.5.2: Large Events
* Other funding sources
* Why not fully sponsoring
We can also certainly talk about:
Fundraising: Sending Emails: Leave to UA Admin, or include? (default:
include)
3.3.3: Retrospective: UAT vs committees (default: committees)
3.5.1 Food at Meetings: Cutting "The UA Treasurer should consider
implementing some system for charging committee accounts for the food
they use from this common supply." --- seems like it could resolve some
potential objections to the report (default: keep)
3.5.1 Food at Meetings: Other cuts --- seemed to be the view of the
committee to include them? (default: keep)
I generally prefer the default I list, but if anyone agrees with the
original suggester (or the original suggester wants to argue their
case), we can certainly discuss it.
Of course, we can also discuss any other changes you'd like to have made
(at least, if they were suggested at last week's meeting, or you have an
excuse for why they weren't).
I'll bring printed copies of the new Operating section for everyone (but
not the marked up one, unless somebody asks).
~~Alex
Alex Dehnert wrote:
> *sigh* Well, it isn't perfect, but no day will be. Looking at the emails
> I have which mention other days, most other days next week look to be
> not much better, if at all. Given that Way Back When (well, like two
> weeks ago) we concluded Wednesday would be the standing meeting time,
> I'm sticking with it.
>
> So: Wednesday night @ 7:15PM we'll meet again in the UA office. Please
> look over the notes from last week and be ready to discuss the
> controversial points.
>
> I'll try to have
> * revisions from last week incorporated, so you can review them
> * non-controversial changes to Operating from the notes
> ready well before the meeting for review.
>
> Also, if you'd be willing to write up a couple of the bills that I
> intend to include as appendices, let me know. I'd send you brief
> description of bills and pointers to the relevant parts of the report,
> and you'd produce bill text.
>
> If you can't make it, feel free to send me comments in advance
> (presumably mostly "please change <part>", but also "<part> is really
> good, and seems like it might be controversial --- please leave it that
> way for <reason>").
>
> Also, if you see a comment that you think I might see as
> non-controversial (but you think is controversial), let me know about
> that too.
>
> I'll see most of you Wednesday.
>
> ~~Alex
>
>
> Alexander W Dehnert wrote:
>> Hi again,
>> We're not going to meet Saturday. How do people feel about next
>> Wednesday (Wed Aug 26) at 7:15PM? Please let me know whether or not
>> you can make it by Saturday afternoon.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
>>
>> (For those of you keeping track, Work Week stuff will be done before
>> then for the day.)
>>
>> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Alex Dehnert wrote:
>>
>>> Our last meeting was fairly productive --- we basically closed off:
>>> * Senate funds (though I'm drafting a paragraph or two on reasoning
>>> and stuff that will need to be revised)
>>> * Finboard
>>> * Class councils
>>> * ASA
>>> * LEF/ARCADE
>>>
>>> I'll try to have revised versions of those up soon. At this point,
>>> the only changes I'm accepting are:
>>> * obvious grammar/spelling mistakes, and some minor wording changes
>>> * Changes that were proposed but I forgot to put in
>>> * Changes that several people agree are critical and notify me before
>>> a meeting need to be discussed
>>>
>>> Still to do:
>>> * Operating
>>> * Invested Reserve
>>>
>>> If you don't already have photocopies of the comments on these two
>>> sections, you should be getting them soon (I have catherio's and left
>>> rkw's in her room, Rachel and I have copies, I think Mike and Liz's
>>> are in the office, and a scan will be posted online for the other
>>> members).
>>>
>>> It would be good to begin discussion of controversial points in advance.
>>>
>>> Anyway... We won't have a meeting tomorrow. How would you guys feel
>>> about 3PM on Saturday? I'd like to get this done before Rush and
>>> classes. ET Work week starts Sunday (which makes that week bad for
>>> Rebecca and I), and presumably the other fraternities also have work
>>> week.
>>>
>>> ~~Alex
>>>
>
