Motions
Below are the motions that were voted on at the February Face-2-Face Senate meeting in Houston.
S-1213: Strategic Plan Update PASSED on 25 JAN
Revision: Adoption of Revision to FY12 Strategic Plan
Revise objective 2.3 from goal #2 (professional excellence) to include internal award. FY13 focus on objective 2.3 rather than 2.4. Revising objective 5.2 of goal #5 (membership) to state increasing opportunities for international members rather than increase international membership to 1000.
.
S-1209: Treasurer Financial Reports PASSED
Revision to article III sections 2.D.2 & 4: Amends reporting requirement to ‘in person’ meetings only
Revision to article VI section 4.A.3: Change the calculation method for number of RCRs from quantity of collegiate members to quantity of collegiate sections For every 20 Sections, a Region will get an additional RCR, not to exceed two.
It was also recommended that this be taken back and have the RCT and duties of the collegiate leaders be looked at so that the RCRs/RCCEs/RCSs don’t get overwhelmed or under worked, and the correct number of leaders can be determined.
Revision: Split the current procedure into 2- secretary procedure & communications procedure
Revision: Several updates to committee structure & responsibilities and incorporation of responsibilities for SWE reserve fund oversight
Revision to S-1001: Amends motion to remove requirement for repayment of CRF loan in FY10
In FY10, the Senate approved Motion S-1001 Contingency Reserve Fund Withdrawal for the withdrawal of $625,000 from the Contingency Reserve Fund (CRF). The motion included the requirement that the money be repaid to the CRF by the end of FY15. Based on recollection of discussions at the time of the withdrawal, the Senate expressed concern that the CRF was intended for emergency use only, not simply for balancing the budget, and therefore any withdrawal needed to be repaid in order to maintain the Society’s ability to respond to emergencies. At that time, the fully funded level of the CRF was to be 120% of the general operating expenses. Just prior to the withdrawal, the fund was at 71% of the general operating expenses, based on FY09 audited financials. In other words, the fund was not at the fully funded levels. At that time the Senate, less than one month into its new structure, had not yet been involved in the Strategic Planning Process, and in general was not comfortable that there was sufficient focus on the financial viability of the Society. In the time since, the Senate has been provided training on a range of Society issues including the financial and strategic planning processes, and is much more aware of and involved in these processes. The result of all these efforts is more transparency in and understanding of SWE’s financial decision-making process among SWE’s leaders and Senators. In the time since, the Strategic Financial Task Force has also completed its work and the recommendations from the task force are being implemented in FY12. The SWE Reserves Task Force has also provided more analysis, background, and information on what the appropriate level of reserves should be.
Pros:
• Also, concerns have been expressed that this action might be perceived as the BOD reneging on a prior commitment, or might set a precedent so future loans of this nature would not require repayment.
Revision to article 5, section 2.B: Change the wording from ‘contingency funds’ to ‘Reserve Fund’
[...] Motions [...]
FY12 Preparation for Annual Meeting « Sonora Senate
September 24, 2011
Special thanks to the Region B Senators for hosting a telecon on 10/5/11 to present and discuss the motions. Also, thanks to the Region Governor for sending out supporting CRF documents (also posted in the Senate Community) to telecon attendees. Below are my comments on the motions:
- S-1202: SWE Reserves Task Force recommendations – The background information provided a detailed review of the reserve fund policy recommendation and I learned a lot by reading it in combination with the SWE Financials, as posted in our Annual Report. Our $7M annual net income was a surprise to me. I was also pleased to see the Society Conference has had an overage the past several years. Overall, I think this motion is ok, however I have concern about what constitutes an emergency vs. a special project, as well as how this fits into the overall financial strategy of the society. How we got to the position where we are today does not appear to be driven by investment loss or conference loss due to economic conditions that might constitute an “emergency.” However, our operating losses did increase substantially. This study was completed independent of the repayment of CRF withdrawl and has a lot of good information, but I don’t have a good idea of how this is going to play out in reality. It would have been helpful to see forward-looking best, worst, and most-likely case forecast projections through the next 5-10 years, as well as documented alignment with our financial strategy. Since “the reserve strategy and amount needs to be appropriate to the organization’s own circumstances,” I don’t know if we’ve defined our own circumstances going forward. However, if we have to start somewhere, this may be as good as any.
- S-1208: International Member Rates – Concern about the business case for loweing dues. If their benefits cost less (ie no hard copy magazine), this may be appropriate. Again, it would have been helpful to see forward-looking best, worst, and most-likely case forecast projections through the next 5-10 years, as well as documented alignment with our financial strategy.
- No issue with the consent agenda motions.
Justina Mikals, SWE Tucson Section Representative
October 9, 2011
Email sent to the Senate on Sunday, October 9, 2011
FY12 Senate,
As we were preparing all the motions for next weeks meeting, a few issues arose that you should be aware of ahead of the meeting. All items have been posted on the Senate Community. The first is regarding S-1208.
Our international senators submitted a motion to change the dues structure for international members from certain countries, based on income. As the wording for this motion was being reviewed by the finance committee, our parliamenarian noticed a discrepancy regarding this motion and the previoulsy adopted motion establishing the current international dues structure. In FY09 the COR “authorize[d] the SWE board of directors to develop tiered-dues for international collegiate and professional members according to the United Nations categorization of countries.”
As such, there is no need for S-1208 as originally written. Therefore, the motion has been amended to request the senate “approve this recommendation” to the BOD instead. This discussion also highlighted an oversight in the senate procedure, which is item 2.
The current senate procedure has no mention of dues even though the senate is responsible for setting individual member rates. The current policies are also not captured anywhere formally. It was recommended that we include a new section 7 in the procedure to incorporate the previously adopted dues motions (from FY09). This section also includes a dues addenda (8.06) which will be a standalone document to list all the current dues rates. This will help clarify existing dues & associated policies for future reference. Adoption of these items has been added to the consent agenda on the updated version of the meeting agenda.
The updated agenda is the final item. As referenced above, item II.F has been added to the consent agenda to approve the senate procedure with the dues section added. Additionally, item V.C has been removed as the Role of Alternates Task Force has not yet started to meet. They are still looking for a few more members. Please contact Helen Patricia or task force chair Kavita Baba if you are interested in participating.
We hope you will continue to use the discussion threads on the senate community to continue dialog on these items ahead of the senate meeting next Saturday. The parliamentarian will be available on Friday from 8-9am and from 1-2pm to answer any specific questions you may still have at that time. And you can contact any member of the senate leadership team as well.
Don’t forget to tell your regions about the senate town hall on Friday from Noon-1pm!
See you next week,
Jonna Gerken
Senate Secretary
Deb W
October 9, 2011
Again, thanks to Region B Senators for hosting our 2/7/12 telecon to discuss the motions. Below are my comments on the two motions we discussed:
- S-1210: Determination of Number of RCRs – When I was a collegiate, I had very limited SWE involvement outside my section other than attending region conference. Basing the calculation method for number of RCRs on quantity of collegiate sections instead of quantity of collegiate members makes sense. I am curious as to what Region B RCR’s opinions are of this motion.
- S-1214: CRF Repayment – I posted in the Senate community: I agree that this motion should be postponed. There is a strong sense that the BOD needs to be held accountable for repayment, especially if a lot of the money was not needed for what it was originally intended. On the other hand, if the money could be spent on more worthwhile efforts to further our mission, and we are saying the CRF level is ok without repayment, why repay? This is a symptom of a bigger issue for SWE to develop a long-range strategic financial plan. Whether or not we repay this particular $625K is not as big of a concern as how we plan to have sustainable operations in the future.
- No issue with the consent agenda motions.
Justina Mikals, SWE Tucson Section Representative
February 7, 2012