[Owasp-board] Motion to approve proposal 2

Noreen Whysel noreen.whysel at owasp.org
Tue Oct 13 19:18:25 UTC 2015


My experience with negative balances (Bolivia and Belfast so far) is that
they often go negative when a charge is covered by Community Engagement
funds. I believe that Alison records this in her processes, but it is not
necessarily shown in the public documents: US/EU Chapter Funds PDF and
US/EU Project Funds PDF. These documents show the expenses but don't show
the Community Engagement credit.

Noreen Whysel
Community Manager
OWASP Foundation

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Paul Ritchie <paul.ritchie at owasp.org>
wrote:

> Hi Fabio, All:
>
> Trying to keep all the email threads straight, and I believe this question
> on proposal #2 is still open.
> (Although I believe we have 5 Yes votes already)
>
> *Are there any complications on proposal #2, from accounting perspective?*
>
> To remove the negative balances is not a big challenge.  The accounting
> folks have already identified the method of credits and debits required to
> balance the books.  Since the actual payments have already been made in the
> past, there is no change to our actual cash balances.  It is an internal
> set of bookkeeping entries that offset each other.  As of October 2, there
> was about $800 of negative balance on the Chapter list and about $500 on
> the Project side.  Since the Foundation "already paid" these bills on
> behalf of the project/chapter....this is like a debt owed back to the
> Foundation. By making the balance zero, we are essentially 'writing off'
> that 'over-spend' by the project/chapter.
>
> *The Caution:*   As long as this proposal retains the "subject to
> Foundation approval' for "out of budget requests" clause I am OK
> >>  Normal approval process remains in effect if a project or chapter asks
> for more money than in their budget.
> >>  Special 'out of budget' requests would be approved if they met
> guidelines AND we had excess money in the Community engagement Buckets.
> >>  Special 'out of budget' requests would NOT be approved if they DID NOT
> meet guidelines......or the Community & Project Budgets were low or empty.
>
> Best Regards, Paul Ritchie
> OWASP Executive Director
> paul.ritchie at owasp.org
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:02 AM, Fabio Cerullo <fcerullo at owasp.org> wrote:
>
>> Paul,
>>
>> Are there any complications regarding this proposal from an accounting
>> perspective?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Fabio Cerullo
>> Global Board Member
>> OWASP Foundation
>> https://www.owasp.org
>>
>> On 13 Oct 2015, at 2:55 a.m., Matt Konda <matt.konda at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>> For #2 I vote yes.
>>
>> I assume that Michael does since he seconded it above.  We also have Jim,
>> Josh and Andrew's votes.
>>
>> Missing Tobias and Fabio.  Input?
>>
>> Matt
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 7:01 AM, Andrew van der Stock <vanderaj at owasp.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I like this one. I will vote for it.
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Josh. So I second all funding proposals on the table that need
>>>> seconding. Will wait for discussion to vote.
>>>> --
>>>> Jim Manico
>>>> Global Board Member
>>>> OWASP Foundation
>>>> https://www.owasp.org
>>>> Join me at AppSecUSA <http://appsecusa.org/> 2015!
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 4:24 AM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To follow the process...discussion first, then votes.
>>>>
>>>> ~josh
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 9:23 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I vote yes for all current funding proposals on the table.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jim Manico
>>>>> Global Board Member
>>>>> OWASP Foundation
>>>>> https://www.owasp.org
>>>>> Join me at AppSecUSA <http://appsecusa.org/> 2015!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 12:25 AM, Michael Coates <michael.coates at owasp.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Second.
>>>>>
>>>>> (I'd be fine to vote for the entire series of proposals too, but happy
>>>>> to move along this one)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Michael Coates | @_mwc
>>>>> <https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=_mwc>
>>>>> OWASP Global Board
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Josh Sokol <josh.sokol at owasp.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to motion that we approve proposal 2 of the funding
>>>>>> initiative discussed at the last Board meeting.  The exact wording is as
>>>>>> follows:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *There should be no such thing as negative account balances for
>>>>>> chapters or projects going forward.  If the intent is to spend more money
>>>>>> than is currently in the account, the money should be taken and approved
>>>>>> from Foundation funding sources, subject to Foundation approval. *
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do I hear a second?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ~josh
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>>>>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>>>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Owasp-board mailing list
>>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Owasp-board mailing list
>> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Owasp-board mailing list
> Owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20151013/6fd19d7b/attachment.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list