[Owasp-board] Project and Chapter Funding Proposal

Josh Sokol josh.sokol at owasp.org
Sun Oct 4 22:09:28 UTC 2015


Richard,

Would you mind walking me through where you are seeing that language?  I
don't see where you are seeing that you would lose the money that you do
not spend.  The only place you would potentially lose money is if:

1) You don't provide a budget.
2) As a Leader you request funds outside of your Chapter account, it gets
approved by the Board and budgeted, and you fail to spend it.

~josh

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Richard Greenberg <
richard.greenberg at owasp.org> wrote:

> Josh,
> In rereading your updated language several times, nothing has changed. If
> I create a budget, and I don't spend it the way I stated I would, then I
> lose the money. Still the same, still bad, still should NOT be approved.
>
> Richard Greenberg, CISSP
> President, OWASP Los Angeles,
> www.owaspla.org
> ISSA Fellow
> President, ISSA Los Angeles,
> www.issa-la.org
> LinkedIn:  http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardagreenberg
>
> (424) 261-8111
>
>
> On Oct 2, 2015 2:03 PM, "Josh Sokol" <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> I think there is a major technical glitch at the moment with the mailing
>> lists which is preventing me (and likely others) from seeing the responses
>> in my e-mail.  I had to go back to the list archives in order to respond to
>> some of the feedback:
>>
>> 1) Jim Weiler: Proposal 7: Regarding not having to have the staff notify
>> leaders.  Technically, this already started happening within the past month
>> or two.  The problem was we had a lack of education with many leaders on
>> how much money they had and what they could spend it on.  This provides an
>> automated, monthly, update so that leaders can make an informed decision.
>>
>> 2) Larry Conklin: Proposal 4: Can you please elaborate on "something
>> else, but not sure what"?  I have no idea what you mean.
>>
>> 3) Larry Conklin: Proposal 8: Regarding what happens if a chapter wants
>> to divert money from one thing to another.  This is not a problem.  There
>> is nothing in the plan that prevents the transfer of funds or re-budgeting
>> throughout the year.
>>
>> 4) Larry Conklin: Proposal 10:  Regarding working with those in excess of
>> $5k first.  Absolutely.  This would be part of the budgeting process with
>> support from the staff.  There will also be a massive communication plan
>> associated with this effort.  Nobody wants to take money away.  We just
>> want to make sure that everyone has a plan for the money they have.  Does
>> the proposal affect chapters with sponsors or chapters/projects with
>> grants?  Yes.
>>
>> 5) Zac Fowler: Regarding $4500 being a big fine, it's not a fine, but I
>> agree that there should be a major effort to try to work with people before
>> they lose funding.  See my answer #4 above.  That said, I like your revised
>> language and made a few small tweaks to it presented below.  Thank you for
>> presenting alternate wording.  This is exactly the kind of constructive
>> effort we were hoping to get by presenting it before a vote.
>>
>> 6) Richard Greenberg: While I love the passion, I'm afraid there is a big
>> misunderstanding around Proposal 9 and this shows me that I need to revise
>> the language.  This proposal was intended to act in isolation of the other
>> proposals and I'm realizing that isn't clear.  The idea was that if a
>> leader created a budget for funds that weren't in an account, those funds
>> were approved by the Foundation, and the money was never spent, those funds
>> are not "ring fenced" like other funds are today.  They would basically be
>> considered unexecuted expenses and if the leader wanted to try again the
>> following year, they would need to re-budget for it.  See my revised
>> language below.
>>
>> *My Proposed Revised Language:*
>> Change Proposal 9 to:
>> *Separate from the aforementioned budgeting process for chapter and
>> project accounts, any OWASP Leader can create a budget and provide it to
>> the OWASP Board prior to November 1 for inclusion in the Foundation budget
>> planning process.  The budget would be reviewed by the Executive Director
>> and Board, and, if approved, incorporated into the overall OWASP Foundation
>> budget for the following year.  This would effectively set aside the funds
>> to use at the appropriate period of time, in the future, with no further
>> approvals necessary.  Money that is budgeted in this manner, that wasn’t
>> spent during the calendar year, would be returned back to the OWASP
>> Foundation general funds.*
>>
>> Change Proposal 10 to:
>>
>>
>>
>> *Accounts with a balance of $5,000 or more as of December
>> 1,with no proposed budget for spending their funds, will be contacted by theOWASP staff
>> directly to review their account balance. The chapter will berequired to create a budget to allocate the funds for the upcoming year.*
>> *Unbudgeted funds may be diverted to other project(s), chapter(s), or*
>> *Community Engagement Funding accounts if the chapter cannot be contacted
>> or a budget is not received prior to January 1.*
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> ~josh
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20151004/36335fe1/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list