[Global_chapter_committee] Discussion on New Chapter Finance Policy

Mandeep Khera mkhera at owasp.org
Wed Jun 29 21:16:02 EDT 2011


I agree with Tin that the money left over should not be automatically
transferred to the Foundation. I think this will encourage the chapters to
spend the money even if not necessary. This is obviously not the right
motivation. As far as the Treasurer role goes, I think of Kate as the
defacto treasurer for all the chapters anyway since all the money
transactions go through (as far as I know) through Kate/Sarah. We don't need
to have a formal Treasurer at the chapters. Chapter leaders should act
responsibly in conducting business and not take on financial
responsibilities. Unless we are seeing major abuse anywhere, I think less
cumbersome the process the better.

Mandeep

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Kate Hartmann <kate.hartmann at owasp.org>wrote:

> The inclusion of the treasurer is to allocate responsibility of the funds
> should be called for specifically when the amount exceeds a particular
> threshold.  To point to the chapter handbook doesn't really work as those
> are "suggestions" on how to run a chapter.  We should be very careful when
> referencing the handbook since, as I think we all know, the community is
> allergic to policies.  :) The handbook should be used as " best practices"
> not policies.
>
> That being said, when we are referring to finances, there needs to be
> checks in place to prevent potential accusations and to protect our leaders.
>  Since the local funds reside as a liability on the foundations p&l
> statements, the foundation retains ultimate responsibility for oversight.
>
> The treasurer can be the chapter leader, but there needs to be clear
> accountability within the chapter for use of funds.
>
> Again, this all probably is not as critical for chapters with $200 or so
> who want to order pizza, but more so for chapters with thousands.  Thus, the
> threshold for balances or amounts.I
>
> How about a reimbursement request form that requires two chapter leader
> signatures for an amount over (insert amount here) and maybe over another
> amount needs to be addressed as "new business" at a chapter meeting.  It's
> not any different at the global level.  I can not expense or purchase
> anything over $500 without approval of the board, no matter how important i
> think it might be to global operations.  It's just good accounting to make
> sure that expenses are approved.
>
> If we approach this with the intention of protecting the chapter leaders
> and not restricting them, then we should be able to collectively develop a
> process that works.
>
> Kate Hartmann
> OWASP Operations Director
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2011, at 10:04 PM, Tin Zaw <tin.zaw at owasp.org> wrote:
>
> Dear Committee Members,
>
> *This is rather an important topic that we should discuss* on before
> sending it to the board for vote.
>
> The details are outlined at
> <https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Chapter_Finance_Policy_and_Procedure>
> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Chapter_Finance_Policy_and_Procedure
>
> In short, *I disagree with this policy proposal*. Here are the reasons.
>
> First, I think it is redundant to state that "have a named treasurer
> listed on their chapter page". I believe the chapter leader handbook
> requires that each chapter need a treasurer and that the chapter leader may
> be the treasurer. This is, however, a minor issue.
>
> *The important issue is the automatic transfer of "expired" chapter funds
> to the Foundation*. The 60/40 split between the Foundation and the chapter
> is based on the principle that the chapter's funds are for local purposes.
> When we recruit members -- individuals and companies -- we always make a
> commitment that 40% of the dues stay locally, and we put our personal
> reputation on it. We should honor that commitment. As the Foundation's funds
> from local membership don't have expiration date, the chapter funds should
> not have expiration either.
>
> As an alternate, I propose the following.
>
> 1. At the end of the year, *chapters are asked to allocate their extra
> funds to the Foundation, other chapters, OWASP projects, or other special
> purposes* such as OWASP Summit. This is like the a *fund raising drive for
> the foundation*. It should be OK for the chapters not to participate.
> 2. Above option should be available to the chapters at all times.
> 3. At the end of the year, each chapter with significant funds (to be
> decided, I am OK with $3000) needs to *acknowledge that they will continue
> to use the funds to advance OWASP mission*. Failure to do so may result in
> automatic transfer of funds to the Foundation. (In practice, we should
> contact chapters that did not do that in the first call so that we can be
> sure they don't have technical issues, etc. If a chapter does not respond
> after three tries, automatic transfer happens).
>
> Please let me know what you think.
>
>
> --
> Tin Zaw, CISSP, CSSLP
> Chapter Leader and President, OWASP Los Angeles Chapter<http://www.owaspla.org/>
> Chair, OWASP Global Chapter Committee<http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Global_Chapter_Committee>
>
> Google Voice: (213) 973-9295
> LinkedIn: <http://www.linkedin.com/in/tinzaw>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/tinzaw
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Global_chapter_committee mailing list
> Global_chapter_committee at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/global_chapter_committee
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/global_chapter_committee/attachments/20110629/aa22d6ca/attachment.html 


More information about the Global_chapter_committee mailing list