[Imc-finance] IMC Atlanta suggestions and responses for moving forward

[frank]

[German Summary Follows English Summary]

These are the ideas that we came up with as something to strive toward in
our financial policy.  I know I'm not the regular liaison for Atlanta IMC,
but he has unfortunately been too busy to forward this message.

The reason we, Atlanta, asked for such long delays before decisions being
made is that all proposals would need to be translated into all necessary
languages and THEN local collectives, some of which meet only biweekly or
monthly, would have to have time to discuss.  We don't see how this could
all happen in one or two weeks time.  Perhaps if we said one week AFTER each
IMC has acknowledged receipt and translation.  That would insure that there
was plenty of time left for each to discuss.

We say this because we assume that the collective wants to keep the people
on this list as *liaisons* and not as *representatives*.  If we want to
switch to a representative model, we would be able to make decisions much
more quickly.  I believe time is the common argument against direct
democracy...

So that it is noted, Atlanta still has the same concerns with the proposal
as before.  I imagine if we are the only group that has concerns about
translation and discussion time, we will stand aside with the idea that some
better propositions will be worked out -- but I will have to check with the
collective first.

Frank Salerno
IMC Atlanta backup liaison


----- Original Message -----
From: "James Worthington" <jworthington@atl-imc.org>
To: "Frank" <frank@riseup.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 5:42 PM
Subject: FW: [IMC-Atlanta] Re: PLEASE READ- REVISED Proposed Response to St.
Louis


>
> ************************************************************************
> Below is the exact wording of the Atlanta IMC's formal proposal. Anything
> else mentioned above that is not included in the formal proposal below is
> simply for the purpose of example, suggestion, or clarification.
> ************************************************************************
>
> Proposal to Establish an IMC Finance Methodology
>
> All proposed expenditures must be considered in the following manner:
>
> 1. Each expenditure must fall into a predetermined category or type of
> expenditure. If an appropriate category or sub-category does not exist, it
> shall be created.
>
> 2. Each category must have a defined process and procedure for
> discussion and approval of any expenditure which is contained in the
> category or sub-category.
>
> 3. Each category and expenditure shall have a defined mechanism for all
> funding and disbursement of funds.
>
>
> **********************************************
>
>
>
> **********************************************
>
> Auf Deutsch
>
> So gut wie Ich kann, verzeihen Sie mir, bitte. Und Sie koennen lachen : )
>
>
> **********************************************
>
> Ein Antrag eine IMC Finanz Methodenlehre zum herstellen.
>
> Alle Auslage muss wie folgt angedankt geworden:
>
> 1. Jede Auslage muss in einen vorher bestimmte Kategorie oder Type
gehoeren.
> Wenn gibt es keine gute Kategorie oder Unter-Kategorie, muss eine
erschafft
> geworden.
>
> 2. Jede Kategorie must einen bestimmten Prozess und Verfarhrensordnung
> haben, den alle Diskussionen und Billigungen des Auslages kontrolliert.
>
> 3. Jede Kategorie und Auslade muss einen bestimmten Prozess fur alle
> Anlegungen und Ausladen haben.
>
> *********************************************
>
> Bitte, verbessern wenn Sie koennen. Danke.
>
> *********************************************
>
> To put our proposal in context we have included the follow portion of
Global
> finance's discussion.
>
> Global finance discussion-
>
> A few weeks ago the Atlanta IMC collective called for amendments to the
> proposed global finance spending plan. They were:
>
> ************************************************************************
>
> DRAFT for transmission to IMC-Finance -24 Hour window for suggestions-RE:
> PROPOSAL A
>
> Regarding Proposal A, the Atlanta IMC was not comfortable with the speed
> with which the meta-proposal segments passed, and does not want to use an
> unmodified version of that process for future structural changes to
> IMC-Finance. It is our belief that the 1-week discussion period allotted
is
> too short for any sort of consensus process to happen on the local level.
> We would like to add an Amendment to Proposal A that the initial
discussion
> period be lengthened to 30 days (rather than 1 week.)  [This is simply to
> make sure that the expenditures have time to be translated and discussed
by
> all local IMCs.  Several IMCs don't meet weekly, so one week's notice
> wouldn't be enough time, even if the proposal had been translated into all
> necessary languages.] With this ammendment, we will support proposal A.
>
> The key section of Proposal A, as amended would read:
>
> 1. Week long discussion period; -Amended to "30-day Discussion Period"
> 2. Week-long discussion extensions by request;
> 3. Clearly defined decision deadlines;
> 4. Posting pending working group decisions/deadlines to our summary page.
>
>
> DRAFT for transmission to IMC-Finance -24 Hour window for
> suggestions-RE:PROPOSAL B:
>
> Atlanta IMC supports proposal B (Including the St. Louis amendments)   but
> only as a temporary and provisional method of fund allocation.
>
> It is the sense of the group that we need a budget-based fund allocation
> procedure, rather than the line item-expenditure process outlined in B.
We
> are concerned that if we look at each proposal individually, we will
rapidly
> spend our funds without properly prioritizing them.
>
> Atlanta IMC is working on ideas for a draft of a budget based expenditure
> procedure.
>
> Atlanta IMC suggests as an amendment that a sunset clause be added to
> Proposal B;  that proposal B expire on July 31st 2002. This will allow us
to
> fund extremely pressing needs in the short term, give us all a chance to
> create a more balanced budgeting process for the future, and ensure that
we
> are not locked in into an unwise spending process.
>
> Proposal B as amended would read:
> For making fund allocations we will follow the following decision-making
> timeline:
>
> ·       EMERGENCY FUNDING: 2 Days
>
> ·       REGULAR FUNDING below 500$: 1 week -- with 1 day extensions by
> request.
>
> NOTE: original text was 4 days -- with 1 day extensions by request.
> Ammendment proposed by St. Louis IMC.
>
> ·       REGULAR FUNDING above 500$: 2 weeks -- with 2-day extensions by
> request.
>
> NOTE: original text was 1 week -- with 2 day extensions by request.
> Ammendment proposed by St. Louis IMC.
>
> ·            SUNSET CLAUSE: This process will be used as as an interim
> measure only until 7/31/02
>
> ************************************************************************
>
> St. Louis IMC opposed our amendments. They wrote:
>
> CAN YOU FIND THIS? I MUST HAVE ERASED THEIR RESPONSE.
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************************
> ************************************************************************
> ************************************************************************
> ************************************************************************
>
> Atlanta IMC response and budget proposal:
>
> We would like to see St. Louis provide some details of their opposition to
> our proposed amendments to aid discussion and resolution, although we hope
> this response can make that unnecessary.
>
> We think it likely that the time frame suggested by St. Louis is most
> appropriate for some types of expenditure decisions. We think it likely
that
> the time frame suggested by Atlanta is most appropriate for other types of
> expenditures decisions.
>
> We believe it to be both extremely difficult, as well as unwise, to
> attempt to apply uniform procedures for widely varying needs and desires.
>
> Our concern about the financial process is not as much with the details as
> with the methodology. Our objective in proposing a sunset clause was to
> provide a mechanism for desperately needed expenditures to occur now,
while
> making a thorough review of the entire process necessary and allowing us
> time to develop and propose the following:
>
> ************************************************************************
> The Atlanta Indymedia Collective proposal for a global finance budget
>
>
>      A Suggested Framework for IMC Finance Methodology
>
> Explanation:
> For the purpose of clarity the following includes a lot of explanation and
> hypothetical examples. Our formal proposal comes afterwards if you wish to
> view it first.
>
>
> These are the 3 basic steps for any expenditure request:
>
> 1. Categorize
>
> 2. Proceduralize
>
> 3. Fund
>
> ____________________________________
>
> 1. Categorize
>
> Not all expenditures are created equally.  They may require different
> disbursement methods (ie a one time payment or recurring expense). They
may
> have different priorities or importance. The merit of an expenditure is
NOT
> a categorization criteria. This process simply creates a context for all
> discussions, providing an easy picture of the relationship of any proposed
> expenditure to the full overall financial situation. It allows for
different
> policies and procedures to be established for different types of
> expenditure.
>
> As a working example, let's use these 4 suggested categories:
>
> 1. Cover our Ass (aka Legal)
> 2. Making Things Run (Operational)
> 3. Spread the Word ! (Development)
> 4. Oh Shit ! (Emergency Reserve)
>
>
> Every expenditure must fall into one of these categories or a
sub-category.
> If it doesn't, make a new category.
>
> These catagories are just suggestions. Many different catagories are
> possible. We are only concerned that we establish catagories.
>
> We anticipate that working groups could be formed from the body of global
> finance to handle funding requests within each catagory.
> ____________________________________________________________________
> 2. Proceduralize
>
> This process defines all detailed methods for discussing and approving
> different types of expenditures within a category or subcategory.
>
> A. Legal   --   Each request to be determined individually. No requests
> considered except impacting the global collective.
>
> B. Operational--
> Recurring expenditures
>        less than US$100  Some process
> more than US$100  Another process
>
>                          One time non equipment expenditures
> less than US$100  Some Process
> more than US$100  Another Process
>
>                          One time Equipment expenditures
>                                 less than US$100  Some Process
> more than US$100  Another Process
>                                 etc, etc. as needed.
>
> C. Development -- Each request to be determined individually.
>
> D.      Emergency Reserve  -- Each request to be determined individually.
No
> requests considered except impacting the global collective.
>
> These procedures are just examples. Many different procedures are
> possible.We are only concerned that we establish procedures for each
> different catagory.
> ________________________________________________________
> 3. Fund
>
> ***Establish framework for overall allocate of current and future
> non-earmarked funds between the categories.
>
> Example:  All current unallocated funds and future donations shall be
> apportioned equally between all categories.
>
> Currently, using the 4 suggested categories that would be.
>
> Legal- $10,000
> Operational- $10,000
> Development- $10,000
> Emergency Reserve- $10,000
>
> This is just a suggestion. Many different allocations are possible.
> We are only concerned that we establish a framework to allocate funds.
>
> There may be times at which it might be desirable to transfer funds or
> allocate a larger proportion of future non-earmarked funds to a particular
> category. Such a decision wwould require the consensus of the Global
Finance
> working group.
>
> Examples:
>
> The global collective can consense to proposals of a strategic or even
> tactical perspective, say require Finance to "fund" a new IMC, suggest
> Finance allocate more future funds to the development category.
>
> Or perhaps a new server is needed but not enough funds exist in the
> operational category. The Global Finance WG could choose to transfer the
> missing funds from another category.
>
> We could also leave a large portion of funds unallocated. This itself
would
> constitute another catagory if we decided to do this.
>
> All options are still open for global to set direction for Finance.
>
> Global Finance should also encourage other funding methods such as:
targeted
> fundraising projects and matching grants.
>
> _____________________________________________________
> In Conclusion:
>
> This methodology for financial decisions provides complete flexibility,
> ensures that all discussions will occur in context, allows specific
> procedures to be established for different types of requests, and
encourages
> many innovative funding initiatives.
>
> It creates a funding process that is easily monitored and updated. Global
> Finance WG can be tasked with accounting and reporting on all aspects of
the
> expenditure process for various projects as well as tracking donations and
> funds raised.
>
> Nothing in this proposed methodology determines what our money will be
spent
> on. Following this methodology could still lead to one category, one
policy,
> and one lump sum expenditure, i.e. spend it all on one thing now. It
simply
> defines how to think about finances, not what to spend money on.
>
> Like the original spending proposal, by using this framework procedures
> within each catagory can be set up to allow smaller amounts of money to be
> disbursed quickly while requiring more time for discussion for larger
> expenditures. However, by dividing the expenditures into
> categories/subcategories, developing different discussion/approval
processes
> for each, and creating an overall framework for fund allocation to these
> categories, the Atlanta IMC's proposed methodology puts all global finance
> decisions into a "big-picture" context, thereby helping to ensure that we
> spend our money wisely.
>
>
> ************************************************************************
> Below is the exact wording of the Atlanta IMC's formal proposal. Anything
> else mentioned above that is not included in the formal proposal below is
> simply for the purpose of example, suggestion, or clarification.
> ************************************************************************
>
> Proposal to Establish an IMC Finance Methodology
>
> All proposed expenditures must be considered in the following manner:
>
> 1. Each expenditure must fall into a predetermined category or type of
> expenditure. If an appropriate category or sub-category does not exist, it
> shall be created.
>
> 2. Each category must have a defined process and procedure for
> discussion and approval of any expenditure which is contained in the
> category or sub-category.
>
> 3. Each category and expenditure shall have a defined mechanism for all
> funding and disbursement of funds.
>
>
> **********************************************
>
>
>
>
> 'Never doubt that a small group of committed citizens can change the
world;
> indeed it is the only thing that ever has'
>
> -Margaret Mead
>