[Gatesedge] Fw: [Ravensfort] FW: [SCA-Exchequers] Exchequers are COOL!

[Darlene Vandever]

I thought this was way cool! Everybody hug Don Brian at the next meeting!
From: "Isobail inghean Gilla Chriosd" <isobail at ev1.net>

> Forwarded with permission--
>
> Piroska--the next time I see you I owe you a hug (read on and find out
> why)..
>
> In Service I Remain....
> Lady Isobail inghean Gilla Chriosd
> Acting Kingdom Exchequer
> exchequer at ansteorra.org
>

> From: SCA-Exchequers at yahoogroups.com >
> Greetings.
>
> It has come to my attention that there are some areas of the SCA where
there
> is a difficulty finding and retaining competent exchequers. I want to try
to
> stop that by explaining just how easy and cool and nifty it really IS to
be
> an exchequer!
>
> 1) I believe it is an HONOR to be an exchequer. You are being trusted with
> commonly held assets, trusted to manage those assets correctly, trusted to
> keep the records of those assets so that anyone else could understand the
> branch's finances, and trusted to report back to the group accurately the
> use of assets by the group.
> Good exchequers should be respected!
>
> 2) I believe the office of exchequer is the second-most important office
in
> the group, second only to the position of Seneschal.
> Branches that don't have money don't thrive. Branches that don't use their
> money effectively stagnate. Branches that let their assets decay from
misuse
> or neglect don't last long. Good exchequers help keep branches healthy!
>
> 3) I believe the office of exchequer is instrumental in branch decision
> making - because almost every decision a branch makes involves an asset of
> some kind, usually cash. The Exchequer provides information for
proposals -
> can we afford to do X with what we have?
> How do we estimate a budget so we can not lose money on this activity?
What
> were the budgets for the last three events of that kind that we held so we
> can start there for the budget for this year's event? etc. Good exchequers
> help direct branch activity!
>
> 4) I believe the office of exchequer is essential to keeping the branch
out
> of financial trouble - by making sure that any transaction follows the
> rules. They don't have to approve every transaction, they just have to
make
> sure they're allowable. The finance committee (which includes the
exchequer)
> decides approvals of transactions once the exchequer says they are
> allowable. BUT, the exchequer is the first gate for any transaction to
> screen out the transactions that would get a branch in trouble. Good
> exchequers keep the branch out of financial trouble!
>
> 5) I believe the office of exchequer is interesting - you get to know
about
> all the activities of the branch, see all the cool things people do, and
> help them find ways to do more cool and interesting things with the
> community funds, as well as try to increase the community funds for the
> benefit of all. Anyone who helps a branch find ways to earn more money to
do
> more stuff should be considered a hero!
>
> 6) A successful tenure as exchequer can be used on a résumé to show
> trustworthiness for being a local treasurer for a branch of an
international
> non-profit organization.
>
> 7) I believe the office of exchequer is the EASIEST office in this
> organization to hold. Really! Here's why:
> a) The reports are all templates - and now even easier to use. I don't
know
> of any other office in this organization where your entire report is
> basically fill in the blanks, and you can see right away if the report is
> acceptable because it balances.
> b) The rules are based on current reality - not on something someone would
> have to research or learn that they wouldn't use in their modern life. The
> duties of this office (balancing a checkbook, etc.) all are the same as
> duties you need to perform for yourself anyway.
> No specialized skills or knowledge required.
> c) The rules are 99.9% black and white, pretty clearly laid out, and
easily
> accessible. The rules are based on common sense. If the rules say NO, then
> the answer is NO. Every time. The exchequer determines whether a
transaction
> is allowable.
> d) The decisions regarding allowable transactions (once they are ruled
> allowable) are *shared* with others in the branch - so no one person has
to
> own the responsibility of saying yes to spending decisions using community
> property on their own. That's why we've been working toward the financial
> committee model all the way down to the local branch level. The exchequer
> can veto unilaterally based on the expense being against the rules, but
once
> the transaction is said to be allowable, then a *team* determines
desirable.
>
> Therefore, it is easy, cool and nifty to be an exchequer! Go hug yours
> today! :)
>
> NOTE: There is a difference between allowable and desirable which is where
> some people might get an incorrect impression of either their duty as
> exchequer or the decisions an exchequer makes.
>
> There are certain things we *cannot* do with our funds. The exchequer
> determines *allowable*.
>
> There are a lot of *other* things that we maybe shouldn't do but are still
> allowed: buy something unnecessary or buy something necessary at that
price
> or at that time. Desirable depends on your viewpoint.
> The branch's financial committee (at least three people) determine
> *desirable* as a team. They have to, by a majority, agree that the
purchase
> should be made before it can happen.
>
> If a shire decides to spend $500 on a gold-plated gem-encrusted wubbie in
a
> velvet-lined oaken box with leather bindings that they only take out once
a
> year to wave around for five minutes to show everyone that they have it,
> they can. It's a pretty useless item to most of us, but if it has some
> significance to the branch and the financial committee approves the
> purchase, they can have it. Their justification could be that making the
> gold-plated gem-encrusted wubbie with the velvet-lined oaken box with
> leather bindings was a medieval project so that branch members could learn
> medieval techniques for gold-plating, gem-mounting, velvet-lining, box-
> making, and leather-binding. They don't need one as long as the financial
> committee approves it (even if the exchequer votes against it).
>
> If a shire decides to spend $500 on a set of knives for the chef's guild
but
> they only have one event a year, that's fine. It would be good if they
> shopped around to see if they could get the same or similar set of knives
> for less somewhere else, but if they have to have it now, and the
financial
> committee approves the purchase (even if the exchequer votes against it),
> they can have it.
>
> If a shire decides to accept a $10,000 donation from someone with the
> stipulations that a demo is performed every year for the next five years
at
> a faire that the donor holds with at least 10 fighters attending, an
> ironwork and cooking demo with brick ovens, and at least 7 period tents
> showing different medieval crafts, otherwise the shire will have to pay
for
> professional demonstrators of the missing items to appear, and they think
> they can commit to those requirements, then they can accept the donation.
It
> may not be seen as a good idea by others, but if that branch's financial
> committee thinks they can fulfill those requirements and accept the
> consequences if they don't, then they can accept the donation with the
> stipulations. If the donation depended on providing mead for madrigal
> dinners for the next 7 years, then we couldn't accept the donation because
> alcohol was involved. If the donation specified that the donation (all or
in
> part) must be returned if the stipulations are not met, we cannot accept
the
> donation because once money is donated to us, it can't be returned. The
> exchequer would have to deny the donation for the last two versions, but
> turn over consideration of the donation to the financial committee for the
> first version.
>
> I hope this clears things up, and shows that being an exchequer is no
worse
> than any other office, is easy to hold, and can be an interesting job in
our
> volunteer organization.
>
> Susan Earley
> Maestra Margherita Alessia, known as Ghita Society Exchequer
>
> Permission is granted to copy this to other email lists, newsgroups, or
> print in SCA, Inc. newsletters.
>
>
>
>
> If you have any questions regarding this list, please refer them to either
> the list owner (SCA-Exchequers-Owner at yahoogroups.com) or the Society
> Exchequer (Exchequer at sca.org).  To unsubscribe from the list, send an
email
> message to "SCA-Exchequers-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com" with "unsubscribe
> SCA-Exchequers" in the text and a blank subject line.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SCA-Exchequers/
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     SCA-Exchequers-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52 - Release Date: 7/19/2005
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52 - Release Date: 7/19/2005
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ravensfort mailing list
> Ravensfort at ansteorra.org
> http://www.ansteorra.org/mailman/listinfo/ravensfort
>