[78] in UA Financial Policy Review Committee
Re: Final report of the FPRC?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Liz A. Denys)
Sun Mar 7 13:53:40 2010
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2010 13:53:37 -0500
From: "Liz A. Denys" <lizdenys@MIT.EDU>
To: Mike Bennie <mbennie@mit.edu>
CC: Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu>, "ua-fprc@mit.edu" <ua-fprc@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <4B93F5F3.7010505@mit.edu>
I just finished reading it, and I agree with Bennie.
Thanks Alex!
Mike Bennie wrote:
> 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
>>
>
--
Liz A. Denys
lizdenys@mit.edu
