[sac-board] Re: SAC Budget 2002
- From: jack.jones@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: sac-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 09:53:41 -0700
The Board has to vote on everything. Over the years it's been the
interpretation that if it involves an expenditure over $100 then it has to
go before the general membership. I don't know about your new
interpretation. This should be discussed at the next board meeting.
Also the telescope parts do not 'go to the grants'. They are mostly club
assets. The Board action when they were acquired a couple years ago was that
the Holmquist stuff was for the grants/scholarship fund, and the Schwaar
stuff was general Club property (for Club use). Reason being this is per the
instructions from those who donated it. The Holmquist stuff is inventoried
and the Schwaar stuff is not. This should be discussed at the next board
meeting too.
Jack
> >
> > After having had some time to reflect on this message, I wonder; do we
> have to
> > vote on this? I seem to remember, from the constution(?), we vote on
> items that
> > exceed $100.00.
> >
> > Regardless, my original vote still stands!
> >
> > aj
> >
>
Paul wrote:
> I always thought it was $100 too, but I decided to reread the constitution
> (it was on the CDs I was selling at the club meeting):
>
So rental of the porta-pottie might come under B, not A.
Also by B, the budget that was approved by the board in February would
have to go for a vote by the membership if the membership were less than
153 members (or equivelent family/newsletter-only dollar amounts) minus
expected revenue income (do we have any given that the telescope parts go
to the grants).
Other related posts:
