[Linux-aus] [LACTTE] Notes for Council Meeting 2010/02/17

[Steve Walsh]

Peter Lieverdink wrote:
> ----- "Andrew Ruthven" <andrew at etc.gen.nz> wrote:
>   
>> I've been suggesting this to everyone who will listen.

So that fell down in that by the time the LCA2010 team needed access, it 
had been quite some time since they were in Australia, and could have 
visited a Westpac branch, gotten IDs, and signed all the necessary 
paperwork. Adding people to bank accounts with multiple signatories is a 
long and (partially necessary) convoluted process,and not something that 
can be done over the phone.

> An account yes. Is there such a thing as "the" account? There wasn't one for 08. Don't know about 09. 07 had one... perhaps the legacy one is the 07 one.
>   
There is 1 (one) LCA account, that gets transferred from year to year. 
It was named LCA2007 in 2007, LCA2008 in 2008, and oddly enough, LCA2009 
in 2009, which is the name it still has.

Yes, the LCA2008 team did not get access to an account. That was the 
decision of one or two council members who wanted to see if it the team 
needed the access, or if the council could deal with all the banking. 
The result was: Yes, they needed access, and No, the council could not 
deal with all the banking, but the decision was reached far too late to 
be able to change the signatories without the risk of the change 
impacting on everything (mainly due to paperwork that was lost/missing 
with westpac).

> Wouldn't it be relatively easy for the winning team to set up an account at a *local* Westpac branch as soon as they know they've won and have the relevant council members added shortly after the election? When LCA is over and the finances are done, move what's left back to the LA account and close that LCA account.
>
> It's not as if the LA ctte necessarily need full access to the LCA account. Just read-only is fine. All LA need to do is make sure the LCA account has enough money in it to pay bills.
>   
In previous years there has been a transaction limit on the LCA account, 
so that transactions over a ceiling required one of the 4 token holders 
to sign off on. It wasn't because we didn't trust people, it was so that 
the council could undertake due diligence and governance, and be aware 
of, and sign off on, $40k leaving the conference account. I'm sure the 
LCA2009 team members that are on the list can advise if this requirement 
was onerous or not.
> I believe Westpac have consistently refused to remove old council members off the LA account, so in theory there are signatories now that should not have access. By starting a brand new shiny account for each LCA rather than re-use old ones, you prevent that from happening.
As far as I'm aware, and from ringing and talking to 4 difference people 
at westpac, the only signatories on the LCA09 account are the LCA2009 
people nominated on the form submitted in early 2008.

Steve

-- 
--==--
Steve Walsh, RHCE
Some random guy who does things with linux and conference networks