[77] in UA Financial Policy Review Committee
Re: Final report of the FPRC?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Bennie)
Sun Mar 7 13:52:40 2010
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2010 13:52:35 -0500
From: Mike Bennie <mbennie@MIT.EDU>
To: Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu>
CC: "ua-fprc@mit.edu" <ua-fprc@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <4B93839F.9010404@mit.edu>
I think Rachel and Catherine caught a good deal of the minor issues I
had with the document. I approve of the document in its current form
(although I think Senate might want some more clarification around 2.4).
As we wrap up the work of the FPRC, I just want to thank the committee
members that met over the summer and during the term to assemble what is
truly a definite knowledge of the financial policy of the UA. This is a
solid piece of work and easily the most significant internal policy work
accomplished this year.
I also want to single out Alex for going above and beyond the line of
duty to make this happen. Alex, thanks for undertaking such a big
project and producing a remarkable report.
-Mike
Alex Dehnert wrote:
> I'd still love to hear more replies.
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> On 03/05/2010 11:06 PM, Alex Dehnert wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I've (finally) performed what I hope is the final editing pass of
>> the FPRC report. It's online at
>> http://web.mit.edu/ua/committee/fprc/report/4th/report.pdf. I'll be
>> sending it out to the Senate in about an hour, and I think they'll
>> want to approve it at the Monday meeting. If you have final comments
>> before either of those, I'd be open to hearing them.
>>
>> It would be nice if what Senate approved was formally the report of
>> the FPRC, but I don't feel comfortable saying that without something
>> resembling a vote. There are few changes (some stuff from SAO, some
>> proofreading, not much else, I think --- you can check the git repo
>> for details) since the drafts were approved way back in ~August, so
>> hopefully this won't be a problem.
>>
>> Anyway, I'd appreciate hearing back by Sunday at 1PM with one of:
>> 1) "Approve" (hopefully I'll get a lot of these...)
>> 2) "Reject"
>> 3) "I need more time" ("I'm hosed right now, but I'd like to take a
>> closer look" --- please indicate when you can take such a closer look)
>> 4) "Abstain" (roughly "I don't care anymore")
>>
>> You can also recommend changes --- if you do, please send them to the
>> whole list, not just me, so that others can object.
>>
>> However, I'm not really open to major changes --- as I wrote in
>> http://diswww.mit.edu/charon/ua-fprc/55:
>> > If we get out of the meeting without any controversial changes to a
>> > document, that document will be closed and will not be reopened at a
>> > meeting without a very good reason and several people indicating
>> their
>> > support (via email, personal discussion with me, etc.).
>>
>> I'm also not going to worry about "quorum" --- if somebody can't give
>> one of the four responses listed above by Sunday at 1PM, I'm going to
>> interpret that as not wanting to be on the committee any more or
>> something.
>>
>> ~~Alex
>
