Re: AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals

[gary white <in2iris@yahoo.com>]

Hello all,
 
I have not yet withdrawn my motion or amended it for a couple of reasons.  One
of these is that I hope to have a simpler and quicker motion in a day or
two.   Another is that the suggested path to redemption of this process was
prefaced with reprimands that I object to and are, in my view at least,
unfounded.
 
Firstly, Will is correct in that the Scientific Advisory Committee's primary
responsibility is to make recommendations to the Board, and in relation to
iris research, this is:  "To evaluate proposals for funding Iris-related
Research and make recommendations to the Board of Directors for funding." 
(That is from the SAC chairman position description).  And, as you may recall,
I posted the committees recommendations to AISDiscuss a couple of weeks
ago.....without a motion at that time.   Once the motion that was then being
discussed was resolved, I as a voting member of the BOD made the motion to
fund these projects.  Any voting member of the Board could have made a motion
in regards to the projects and the recommendations of the Scientific Advisory
Committee.   As it happens, Bob Pries seconded the motion.  Bob is also a
member of the Scientific committee.    The committee, as Will noted, does not
make the financial decisions on
 these matters. That is up to the Board.  So, the committee itself does not
make motions to fund grants, adjust the budget, etc.   The committee completed
it's duty in advising the Board in regards to the scientific worthiness of
these research proposals and its recommendation to fund them .  However, as a
member of the Board (and, in the past the Chairman of the grants committee was
usually not a voting board member), I am exercising my right to make motions
regarding the recommendations of the Scientific committee, as any other board
member could also exercise. 
 
Second, the statement was made in a previous email that "The scientific
committee should have submitted a motion to increase their TWO-year budget
authority to cover the cost of both grants at least a month before submitting
a motion to approve these grants."
If there is indeed a rule requiring any expenditure outside of the approved
budget first go before the Board in a motion restating that budget (or portion
of it), at least one month in advance of the actual motion to make the
expenditure, I would like to see that rule.  I don't believe that has occurred
in the past, certainly not in the past three years that I have been on the
Board, and I question the existence of such a requirement.   And, I am not at
all sure what a TWO-year budget authority is.  AIS operates on a ONE year
budget and I don't see how the scientific committee could increase that
authority (even if indeed they had any budget oversight) to two years.   The
Guo proposal is an unusually small one as scientific grant proposals go.  The
Meerow proposal is more in line with what we have usually seen in the past,
and with those that the AIS Foundation typically encounters.  Of course, the
Scientific committee is cognizant of proposal
 costs and  granting period requested, and we discussed those issues in making
recommendations that we believe are in the interests of AIS.   And, of course
we hope that the second year (or third year, possibly) would be funded in
those multiple-year cases recommended for funding.   But, if only recommended
proposals for support that already have sufficient earmarked funds in the
restricted account will be even considered by the Board, then we should not
even review proposals except single year research requests or very modest ones
such as the Guo request.
 
Third and last, I dont think that this motion puts the Board in the
untenable position of violating sound accounting principles if we approve BOTH
grants before the deadline of September.    Budgets are not written in stone
and they are a guide based on past performance and future expectations.  If
the money is simply not available, then that is something to be dealt with. 
But if the budget can be simply adjusted as in the past (without the previous
month in advance motion, as suggested was required), I dont see this motion
leading the Board into financial despair.  The over-budget request amounts to
roughly 1% of the overall budget, if my sleep-deprived calculations are
correct (I have been working 12-hour nights, and am still awake at Noon).
 
Now, if you have made it this far, I commend you and please stay tuned for
further developments.
 
Hey Brad, I know you like a good debate, but this will have to suffice for
now.
By the way, I won Best Specimen of Show with a stalk of one of your IBs  Gnu
Rayz at the Lincoln show in May.   
 
Gary White
AIS Director
Chair, Scientific Advisory Committee
Secy/Treasurer AIS Foundation

--- On Mon, 8/4/08, Michelle Snyder <AISSecretary@irises.org> wrote:

From: Michelle Snyder <AISSecretary@irises.org>
Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
Date: Monday, August 4, 2008, 9:47 AM

Hello all,

According to my review of the various emails regarding this matter,
Garry White made the motion on Aug. 1, and the motion was seconded by
Bob Pries the same day.  The motion has been open for discussion since
that date.  There have been several emails regarding the correctness of
the motion, especially regarding the funds currently available.  There
was an email mentioning revising the motion but nothing has been done to
either withdraw the original motion or amend it; just a lot of
discussions and possible suggestions.

Michelle


Robert Pries wrote:
> Jill; I seconded Gary's motion the same day he made it--Bob
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jill Bonino" <aistreas@earthlink.net>
> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
> Sent: Sunday, August 3, 2008 5:14:50 PM (GMT-0500) America/New_York
> Subject: RE: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
>
> Hi All,
>
> I went to the original proposals from Gary from Miss Guo and Mr. Meerow...
>
> Project #1--Miss Guo
>
> The two-year costs for this project are $2,280.  This is well within the
Scientific Restricted Funds of $4597.
>
> Project #2--Mr. Meerow
>
> The first year cost is $4,840
> The second year cost is $4,125
>
> I agree with Brad that we should not just approve year #1 for a project
and then not be able to fund years 2 or subsequent.  We may have done this in
the past but it may not have been the best decision.
>
> As of now, we could afford to take the excess funds needed out of the
General Fund to take care of all of Miss Guo's project and year #1 of Mr.
Meerow's but not year two of Mr. Meerow's project.
>
> I am concerned that we will get the AIS Budget over committed and then
something happens like a surprise insurance bill for next year (which has
happened in the past) that wipes out our "cushion".
>
> John is correct that only $3000 of his $8,000 proposed expenses for
revamping the AIS website are budgeted to come out of the General Fund which
gives us less "cushion" than I originally thought.
>
> My thoughts so far....Jill
>
> PS Technically no one has seconded Gary's original motion for funding
both year's of the two grant proposals, so there isn't an active motion
out there to discuss...JB
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>> From: Brad <zebrairis1@aol.com>
>> Sent: Aug 3, 2008 1:29 PM
>> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
>> Subject: RE: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
>>
>> Hi Will,
>>
>> I don't believe there is any confusion on my part.  Since at least
2 members
>> of the Advisory Scientific Committee are also voting members of the
Board
>> AND they submitted the Scientific Committee's recommendation in
the form of
>> a motion, it is no longer just a recommendation.
>>
>> Some of our Advisory Committees have restricted funds available with
the
>> approval of the Board, but the motion assumes that General Fund moneys
can
>> be spent without the necessary Budget authority to spend them. Not
only does
>> it require 2008 General funds, but it assumes that General funds will
also
>> be granted next year to fund the second year of these grants. I trust
that
>> the Scientific Committee wouldn't be foolishly recommending only
funding the
>> first year of two-year grants without expecting the Board to also fund
the
>> second year. Additionally, I also believe that "sound accounting
principles"
>> are legally required of all groups including non-profits. I also
believe
>> that the AIS board is required to formally appropriate General funds
prior
>> to considering a motion to spend them.
>>
>> Jill, you are the expert here and I'm counting on you to
"straighten me out"
>> if I'm wrong on any of this. I truly don't wish to foolishly
inject any
>> incorrect thoughts over this because I'm in favor of both grants
once the
>> money has been properly authorized.
>>
>> I'm sorry if this is causing a lot of problems for the folks on
the
>> Scientific Committee because I know this motion was submitted with
total
>> integrity and I consider all of you as my friends or friendly
acquaintances.
>>
>> Cheers! Brad Kasperek
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
[mailto:owner-aisdiscuss@aisboard.org]
>> On Behalf Of William Plotner
>> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2008 11:22 PM
>> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
>> Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
>>
>> I think that ther is some confusion....The Scientific Committee is an
>> advisory committee and do not make the financial decisions.  The Board
of
>> directors make those decisions.  The Scientific Committee only
suggests that
>>
>> they are worthy.
>>
>> All My Best
>>
>> Will
>> A member of the Scientific Committee and not a member of the Board of
>> directors.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Brad" <zebrairis1@aol.com>
>> To: <aisdiscuss@aisboard.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2008 2:08 PM
>> Subject: RE: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thankz! again Jill,
>>>
>>> As I suspected the scientific committee doesn't have budget
authority to
>>> issue BOTH grants at this time in spite of Bob's argument that
they should
>>> have this authority because they gave up some of their budget to
the
>>> electronic committee.
>>>
>>> The scientific committee should have submitted a motion to
increase their
>>> TWO-year budget authority to cover the total cost of both grants
at least
>>> a
>>> month before submitting a motion to approve these grants.  If they
had
>>> they
>>> would know whether-or-not the Board was willing to fund BOTH
grants.
>>> Because
>>> they didn't the Board is now being put in the untenable
position of
>>> violating sound accounting principles if we approve BOTH grants
before the
>>> deadline of September.
>>>
>>> Since I support both grants if we can find and approve the money
to fund
>>> them, I would like to offer my option for working this situation.
>>>
>>> 1.) Since there is no way the Board can approve the current motion
without
>>> violating sound accounting principles, it should be withdrawn
posthaste
>>> and
>>> be replaced with one to approve Jinyan Guo's two-year grant(it
is unfair
>>> to
>>> the grantee and a waste of our money to only fund the first-year
of a
>>> two-year grant)since the Restricted Scientific Fund currently
contains the
>>> funds to pay for both years. (I hope we could limit the discussion
period
>>> to
>>> only 7 days to keep things moving.)
>>>
>>> 2.) Next that the scientific committee be allowed to submit a
second
>>> motion
>>> requesting Budget approval to also fund Alan Meerow's grant as
soon as the
>>> their first motion goes to AISVote.  Alan Meerow should be
contacted and
>>> asked if he would still be interested in approval of his grant
even if it
>>> is
>>> delayed by a few weeks.  At this time there is no way to know if
the
>>> funding
>>> will be available unless someone or a group of folks on AISdiscus
wish to
>>> donate the necessary funds to the Restricted Scientific Fund.
>>>
>>> 3.) Regardless of whether-or-not the funding motion is approved,
the
>>> scientific committee be allowed to submit a motion to approve the
Alan
>>> Meerow grant when their budget motion goes to vote.  This motion
can be
>>> withdrawn if the budget approval motion fails, but the discussion
can be
>>> started.
>>>
>>> Finally, that the Board members and Past-Presidents start an
informal
>>> discussion on asiconfer about whether-or-not there is a realistic
hope of
>>> approving the necessary budget funds for Alan Meerow's grant.
I real do
>>> hope
>>> we can find the funds to approve his grant.
>>>
>>> If anyone has other options on how to solve this funding and time
dilemma,
>>> I'm sure everyone on the Board would like to consider them so
please put
>>> them of aisdiscuss.
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>> Brad Kasperek
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
[mailto:owner-aisdiscuss@aisboard.org]
>>> On Behalf Of Jill Bonino
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2008 12:30 AM
>>> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
>>> Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
>>>
>>> Currently, the Restricted Scientific Fund holds $4597 that can be
used for
>>> Grants.  This is short of the current request of $6160 by $1563.
As Bob
>>> mentioned, the amount budgeted for the website update of $8000 (of
which
>>> only $5000 comes out of the General Fund) has not been used to
date.
>>>
>>> So far this year, Bulletin expenses (which is the AIS's
largest expense)
>>> is
>>> well within budget.  Income has also been close to what we
estimated.
>>>
>>> I would recommend approving the Scientific grants for 2008 only at
this
>>> point.  We can discuss the 2009 outlay in November when we discuss
the
>>> budget.   Between now and the fiscal year end 9-30-08, our budget
can
>>> afford
>>> the overage of $1563 to approve the 2008 grant amounts.
>>>
>>> This might involve an edit of Gary's motion to specify that
the approval
>>> is
>>> for 2008 only....
>>>
>>> Jill
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>
>>>> From: Robert Pries <robertpries@embarqmail.com>
>>>> Sent: Aug 1, 2008 3:02 PM
>>>> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
>>>>
>>>> I was at the fall meeting when the budget was created. At that
time we
>>>>
>>> allocated $5000 to the scientific fund to be added to $5000 that
was
>>> already
>>> in the fund. We also had $2000 for Advertising. At that point the
budget
>>> was
>>> balanced. But just before adjournment it was proposed that $9000
was
>>> needed
>>> to redo the website. In order to balance the budget My committee
forfeited
>>> the $2000 and the scientific committee forfeited the $5000 to
compensate
>>> for
>>> the change. To my knowledge there have been no proposals for the
use of
>>> the
>>> $9000 this year so I would assume we are presently that far ahead
in our
>>> budget and it seems likely that the proposals for its allocation
will not
>>> be
>>> realized until the next budget. Therefore I would suggest that the
money
>>> should be available for the science committee in this calender
year if we
>>> so
>>> choose.--Bob
>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Brad" <zebrairis1@aol.com>
>>>> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 1, 2008 4:56:19 PM (GMT-0500)
America/New_York
>>>> Subject: RE: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> I believe this motion commits more money than the current
budget
>>>> recognizes
>>>> for research. Is this motion appropriate for changing our
current budget?
>>>>
>>> Or
>>>
>>>> should a budget increase be approved prior to agreeing to
spend more than
>>>>
>>> is
>>>
>>>> currently allotted?
>>>>
>>>> What appreciate Jill and Roy's opinion on this.
>>>>
>>>> All the best,
>>>> Brad Kasperek
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
[mailto:owner-aisdiscuss@aisboard.org]
>>>> On Behalf Of Robert Pries
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:40 AM
>>>> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
>>>> Cc: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
>>>>
>>>> I second the motion in the message below.
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "gary white" <in2iris@yahoo.com>
>>>> To: aisdiscuss@aisboard.org
>>>> Sent: Friday, August 1, 2008 11:58:18 AM (GMT-0500)
America/New_York
>>>> Subject: [AISdiscuss] AIS- Scientific Grant Proposals
>>>>
>>>> The Scientific Advisory Committee received two research grant
proposals.
>>>>
>>> The
>>>
>>>> first proposal is by Miss Jinyan Guo, titled
"Phylogenetic and
>>>>
>>> developmental
>>>
>>>> study of Iris subgenus Limniris section Lophiris and related
species".
>>>>
>>> The
>>>
>>>> second proposal is by Dr. Allan Meerow, and titled
"Heterogeneity,
>>>> ecological
>>>> specialization and introgression in a large population of Iris
>>>> savannarum".   Both of these proposals were reviewed by
the committee
>>>> and recommended for funding by the American Iris Society.
The total
>>>> first
>>>> year cost is $6160.   Both are two-year studies.  The total
second year
>>>>
>>> cost
>>>
>>>> is $6405.   Payments to researchers can be made in increments
throughout
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>> two-year period.
>>>>
>>>> I move that the AIS fund both Miss Guo's research grant
request and Dr.
>>>> Meerow's research grant request.
>>>>
>>>> Gary White,
>>>> AIS Director
>>>> Chair of Scientific Advisory Committee
>>>>
>>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
>>>> <aissecretary@irises.org>
>>>> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
>>>> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>>>>
>>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
>>>> <aissecretary@irises.org>
>>>> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
>>>> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>>>>
>>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
>>>> <aissecretary@irises.org>
>>>> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
>>>> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>>>>
>>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
>>>> <aissecretary@irises.org>
>>>> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
>>>> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>>>>
>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
>>> <aissecretary@irises.org>
>>> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
>>> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>>>
>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
>>> <aissecretary@irises.org>
>>> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
>>> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
>> <aissecretary@irises.org>
>> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
>> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
>> <aissecretary@irises.org>
>> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
>> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
> <aissecretary@irises.org>
> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
> <aissecretary@irises.org>
> The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
> http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.12/1589 - Release Date: 8/3/2008
1:00 PM

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
<aissecretary@irises.org>
The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
<aissecretary@irises.org>
The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/