Minutes of Planning Meeting - 17 February 2005

Seniors’ Association Centre,
56 Francis St., Kingston

1.   Call to Order – 09:30

2.   Roll Call of Officers – Vice President, Ron Henderson; Vice President, Marlyn Convery; Treasurer, Jim Spencer; Director Memberships, Jim Etherington; Branch Report Editor, Donna Henderson; Directors at large, Reace Jackson,  Ron Aquino, Peter Convery, Gilbert Wilcox.
Absent – Past President, Bill Wornes; President, Jack Julian; Directors, Marjorie Julian, Tom Chakungal.

3.   Proposed Agenda – reviewed and approved

4.   Minutes of the Previous Meeting.
a.   Errors or Omissions;
b.   Discussion;
c.   Motion – Moved - Ron H, accept minutes as circulated.
     Second – Ron A.
Passed

5. Business Arising from the Minutes.

a. Calendar of activities – Ron H advised that due to oversight on his part, we would not be able to hold the BBQ in June as planned.  The arrangements had not been completed in time to be included with the Spring Branch Report.  Several options were discussed.  It was decided to try to reschedule for August 16.  Marlyn advised she might know of a facility in the Napanee area.  She will check and advise at the March planning meeting.

b. Brockville luncheon – All felt the Brockville Luncheon went over extremely well – thanks in large part to the efforts of George and Annie Healey of Brockville.  In all 56 members from many different areas of our Eastern Zone attended and were treated to a fine lunch.

c. Special K & DB phone number – Marlyn reported the special phone, with executive mailboxes would cost over $100.00/month, plus installation.
Rejected as too expensive.

d. Rental of Office space from Legion – Reace will research the possibility of renting office space from one of the three legions in the city and report at the March planning meeting.

e. National Office visit – Tabled until Jack’s return.

f. Web site – Tabled until Jack/Bill’s return.
 

g. Tattoo program advertising – Ron H reported an advertisement would appear in the Tattoo program at a cost of $75.00.   Ron circulated a copy of the ad, as it will appear.

i.  Whig supplement – No information as yet on this.

h. Branch Boundaries – Tabled for now.

i. Claim forms – Ron H reported the cost of the newly designed claim form would be much higher than expected due to the sequential numbering.  After discussion, it was determined the numbering was not essential to our audit procedures and expense tracking, and could, therefore, be eliminated.   Agreed.

6. Correspondence.

a. National Office “Request for Branch Input” and accompanying “Survey Questionnaire on number and Designation of Accredited Delegates to Triennial Conventions” (attached).  The questionnaire/survey was discussed at some length.  The responses, determined by the majority of the Executive are attached.

b. Bulletin to Branches – January 2005 click here

i.  National Recruitment campaign.  Ron H reported there has, apparently, been some negative response to the recent national, direct mail campaign. Jim E advised he had received several messages from members who were upset with the tone of the message.  It would appear to stem from either an incomplete reading of the enclosure or a misunderstanding of its contents.  All members of the Executive are encouraged to read the January 2005 Bulletin to Branches so they are conversant with its contents and are able to field comments or questions from members of the Branch.

c. Bulletin to Branches – December 2004, 04-12 click here

i  Guidelines to Branches – Annual audited statements.  It appears help may be on the way from NBOD with regard to the difficulties we experienced last year dealing with these statements.

ii  Branch Liability insurance.  The NBOD has reconfirmed the decision to purchase Comprehensive General Liability Insurance for all branches for the period 1 October 2004 to 1 October 2005 to be paid for from Association funds.

iii  National bylaws require branches to. . . “hold a properly constituted Annual General Meeting . . . . . and to forward a certified copy of the minutes of the Branch Annual General Meeting . . . to the Executive Director within 60 days.
 Ron H posed several questions regarding this bylaw.
 1)  What is meant by “a certified copy”?
 2)  Certified by whom?
 3)  How can they be certified within 60 days when they aren’t ratified by the branch membership until the following year?
 4)  In addition, the submission to National following AGM 04, made by Ron H on behalf of the branch regarding “financial statements” did not comply with requirements of National By Laws.  . . . .” include names and addresses of all banking institutions with which the branch deals and the account numbers of all accounts maintained in such institutions.”  Are there privacy issues here?
We need clarification from our Regional Director or from National Office.

iv.  Jim E presented an informal request that he’d received via e-mail from his daughter who works at City Hall, wondering if our organization sponsored community events.
 As time was short, Ron H suggested we table to another meeting.

v.  Ron H. presented a letter we’d received from the Tattoo Society, thanking us for placing an ad in the Tattoo program.
 

7. Reports of Officers and Committees.

a. President;  No report.

b. Vice President M&R;  Nothing to report.

c. Vice President H&B/Finance;  Nothing to report.

d. Treasurers report & bills;  Jim circulated a copy of the financial report for the quarter showing expenses against our proposed budget.  He also asked if anyone knew of an expense item of $513.92 for Gateway Services.  It was an expenditure incurred prior to Jim taking over as treasurer, however, there was no information or supporting documentation to account for it.   As no one present could provide an answer, it was determined we need to investigate further.
Ron H complimented Jim on the quarterly report format.  It provides us with a very clear picture of where we are financially
Moved by Jim S,
Seconded by Donna,  accept report as circulated.
 Passed.

e. Membership;  Jim E circulated his membership report.
Moved by Jim E,
Seconded by Donna,  accept report as circulated.
Passed

f. Past President;  No report.

g. Directors & Committees

i  Recruiting – Ron A, nothing to report.

ii Branch report – Donna, sent to National. A copy was circulated.

iii  Seniors Liaison – Reace, nothing to report.

iv  Telephone – Gilbert asked about the status of the phone survey.  Ron H asked him to retain what he has for now and it would be discussed further at the next meeting.

v  Transportation – Peter asked the question, if someone transports one of our members to an event and an accident occurs, who is liable?  The consensus was that liability insurance carried by most owners covers all occupants, however, if anyone has any doubts, they should be contacting their insurance carrier to get specific answers.

vi  Visitation – Marlyn advised her announcement regarding the visitation program is included as part of the Spring Branch Report and she would be waiting for responses to the notice.

8. New Business.
a. 30 day plan;  )
b. 60 day plan;  )   Nothing new
c. 90 days & beyond; )
d. Sympathy cards – Tabled for now

9.   Next Meeting  -  17 March – Kingston planning meeting

10.  Adjournment.    Moved – Donna
Seconded – Marlyn
Passed
Time – 1135

The National Board of Directors “Resolutions Committee” requested branches complete the “Survey Questionnaire on Number and Designation of Accredited Delegates to Triennial Conventions”
Following are the results of the questionnaire as determined by the Kingston and District Executive Committee at it’s regular planning meeting held 17 February 2005.

1.  What formula should be established to determine the number of delegates from your Branch to best represent your interests?

      Change the current formula by enlarging the size of the membership bands.

Rationale:  Changing the number of delegates per membership band will have the
                   effect of reducing the overall number of delegates to convention while
                   still allowing for equal representation.

2.  Under the current formula, Regional Directors – as members of the NBOD – have the status of accredited delegates.  Should this practice continue?

 Yes.
Rationale:  There will continue to be a need for a regional voice/vote.
                   New regions must continue to be approved at convention.

3.  Under the current formula, Deputy Regional Directors have the status of accredited delegates.  Should Deputy Regional Directors continue to be accredited delegates to Convention?

 No.
Rationale:  If the intent of the exercise is to reduce numbers and branches are
                  being required to reduce delegates, then DRDs should not be
                  automatically accredited simply as a result of their status.  Only in the
                  event the Regional Director is unable to attend Convention,  the
                  Deputy could take the place of the Regional Director.

4.  Currently, Regional Directors Elect are not delegates to convention, unless accredited by a Branch.  Should they be designated as delegates?

 No.
Rationale:  If the intent of the exercise is to reduce numbers and branches are
                   being required to reduce delegates, then Regional Directors Elect
                   should not be accredited simply as a result of their status unless:
 a.  Accredited by a Branch; or
 b.  Neither of the elected/confirmed Director or Deputy is able to attend Convention.

Footnote to questions on Regional/Deputy Directors.
 Matters touching on Regional issues should be discussed and voted on at Regional meetings with the regional representative voting accordingly at Convention.
Question.  Should Regional Director’s vote be weighted by regional membership numbers?

5.  Should the Association place a maximum to the number of accredited delegates?

 No.
Rationale:  It would not allow for true democratic representation.
                   It could become too easy to manipulate voting at Convention.
 

At Convention ’04, there was considerable discussion about the number of delegates for future conventions. The National Board of Directors (NBOD) was concerned that the Convention was becoming too large, creating problems in administration, operations and costs.

Accordingly, the NBOD proposed resolution G-10, which reads as follows:
“Be it resolved that Section 18.1 of FSNA By-laws be replaced to read:
The number of accredited delegates to Triennial Conventions be limited to
a total of 150 and that the delegates to be accredited are:
(a) the National President and the three National Vice-Presidents
(b) the immediate Past National President
(c) each Regional Director
(d) each Deputy Regional Director
(e) one delegate per Branch
(f) for any Branch having more than 2,000 members, a number determined by a prorating formula.”

The formula was not accepted and after much discussion and consideration by the former NBOD, a motion was passed that referred the whole question to the new NBOD “.... to review the location and the formula to determine the number of delegates at a Triennial Convention and to have the location and the formula determination ratified by the President’s Conference 18 months from now.”

NBOD has tasked the Resolutions Committee (RC) to study this question. Prior to developing recommendations on this very important issue, the RC requests your input, ideas and suggestions. Following receipt of the completed surveys, an evaluation of all the comments received will be undertaken by the RC. Recommendations will then be provided to NBOD who will ultimately decide on the content of the motion and submit this to the President’s Conference to be held in February 2006.

To meet this deadline, the RC requests that the attached SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE be completed by March 15, 2005 and submitted to your REGIONAL DIRECTOR. He/she will then return all the Branch Survey Questionnaires to the Resolutions Committee Chair, Bob Gayner.

Thanking you in advance for taking the time to complete this survey.

The members of the Resolutions Committee
Bob Gayner, Ottawa/St. Lawrence Regional Director
Anita Cox, Manitoba/Northwestern Ontario Regional Director
Gary Oberg, Alberta, NW Territories & Nunavut Regional Director

The Resolutions Committee offers the following comments to assist in your analysis:

1. There is currently in the FSNA Bylaws a formula that determines the number of delegates accredited to each Branch for Convention.

FSNA Bylaw 18.1 reads:
“At Annual General Meetings, Special General Meetings and Conventions each chartered branch is entitled to the number of accredited delegates as indicated hereunder

2. Currently, all members of the National Board of Directors and Deputy Regional Directors are accredited delegates to Convention. Incoming Regional Directors, whose appointments are ratified at the close of Convention, unless accredited by a Branch, are not voting delegates.

3. With the current formula, there were 178 accredited delegates at Convention ’04, of which 148 were Branch Delegates. The total attendance was 338, including alternate delegates, observers, spouses and the staff of the National Office.

4. At Convention ’04, a resolution was passed that requires a minimum of one hundred members in good standing for a new Branch to qualify for a charter. Convention must approve the establishment of a new Region. With the current formula, each new Branch would add a minimum of one delegate and each additional Region would add two delegates.

5. Currently, FSNA has more than 130,000 members in 83 Branches in Canada and one Branch in Britain. These members tend to be highly concentrated in some parts of Canada. In other areas they are spread over large geographical areas. For example, Ontario has four Regions with approximately 46,200 members with the Lakehead Branch being part of Manitoba and Northwestern Ontario Region; and British Columbia has three Regions with approximately 21,000 members. Each of the remaining provinces has only one region, with Quebec having some 20,000 members and Prince Edward Island Region being the smallest with about 1,300
members.

6. Branches pay an apportioned cost for each delegate, representing about 30% of their hotel room, meals and travel expenses. All other Convention costs, i.e. balance for each branch delegate, 100% of the cost for the NBOD and the Deputy Regional Directors, equipment rental, office expenses, translation etc., are borne by the National Budget and represented about 85% of total Convention ’04 costs.

7. Governance issues are important to ensure the Association is best represented to fulfill its mandate. Convention is the ultimate authority for the Association.

Survey Questionnaire on Number and Designation of
Accredited Delegates to Triennial Conventions

Please place an “X” beside the statement that best represents your opinion. If none of the responses adequately reflects your opinion, please provide any alternative method and supporting rationale.

1. What formula should be established to determine the number of delegates from
your Branch to best represent your interests?

  Only one delegate per Branch irrespective of its number of members.

  The current formula as outlined in FSNA Bylaw 18.1 not be changed.
(See item 1 page 2)

  Change the current formula by enlarging the size of the membership bands
(See item 1 page 2)

  Change the formula from assigning numbers of delegates by Branch membership to assigning numbers of delegates by Regional membership: one delegate per Branch plus, for each Region, one additional delegate for each complete membership band of 2,000 Regional members.

  Change the formula from assigning numbers of delegates by Branch membership to assigning numbers of delegates by Regional membership: one delegate per Branch plus, for each Region, one additional delegate for each complete membership band of 1,000 Regional members.

Can you provide any alternative method?
If so, please provide details and the rationale for your choice.

2. Under the current formula, Regional Directors - as members of the NBOD - have
the status of accredited delegates. Should this practice continue?
  YES   NO
Please provide the rationale for your choice.

Survey on Accredited Delegates
page 1 of 3

3. Under the current formula, Deputy Regional Directors have the status of accredited delegates. Should Deputy Regional Directors continue to be accredited delegates to Convention?

  Yes, under the current formula as if they were members of the NBOD.

  Yes, should automatically be delegates if the formula changes to allocate delegates on a regional basis.

  No, should not be delegates unless accredited by a Region or Branch.

Please include any other pertinent options and provide the rationale for your choice.

4. Currently, Regional Directors Elect are not delegates to Convention, unless accredited by a Branch. Should they be designated as delegates?

  Yes, add to current formula as if they were members of the NBOD.

  Yes, should automatically be delegates if the formula changes to allocate delegates on a regional basis.

  No, should not be delegates unless accredited by a Region or Branch.

Please include any other pertinent options and provide the rationale for your choice.

Survey on Accredited Delegates
page 2 of 3

During the discussion on Resolution G-10 at Convention ’04, a motion was passed to place a maximum on the number of delegates that could be accredited for Convention. The motion giving direction to the outgoing NBOD to place a maximum on the number of delegates is still on record. Any recommendation must either support or reject with cause the concept of capping the number of delegates. A cap specifies the maximum number of delegates that could be accredited for Convention. Even if the membership grows in number, the number of delegates would not be allowed to grow beyond the cap.

5. Should the Association place a maximum to the number of accredited delegates?

  Yes. The maximum number should be: _________

Please provide the rationale for your choice.

  No, there should not be a maximum number.

Please provide the rationale for your choice.

THANK YOU for completing this survey.

If you have any other comments or suggestions respecting Resolution G-10, please include them on a separate sheet. Your input is very important in the decision-making process. Once you have completed this survey and signed below, please forward it to your Regional Director no later than March 15, 2005.
____________________________                 ____________________________
Name of Branch President                                 Name of Branch
____________________________                 ____________________________
Signature of Branch President                             Date

Forward to your Regional Director no later than March 15

Survey on Accredited Delegates
page 3 of 3