Senators,
        I have been asked by many to respond to the resolution issued
this morning by Lenny and Sydney.  I have quite a few thoughts so I will
try to relay them all.

First I would like to speak to the resolution and the sections directed
towards my role as Treasurer.

1.  The resolution states that I "approved" and increase in the living
stipend for the Pres, VP, and Treasurer.
        I did not approve the increase.  Binh called a meeting between
myself, Jen, and himself to ask us a question.  He posed the question,
do we think that we need a stipend increase.  I responded that it would
obviously help me, but I didn't know if we could just decide to increase
it.  Binh asked me what the policy was on stipend increases and I told
him that one did not exist.  I TOLD BINH THAT I FELT SENATORS NEEDED TO
BE INFORMED.  I was then told not to say anything to senators because
this was an office decision that the President was going to make.  I did
not make the decision to increase stipends, but I did suggest senators
know about it.
        On the same section, but different topic.  Lenny, you metion in
your email as well as in the resolution about consulting senate before I
make decisions.  If I am to consult with Senate on all of my decisions
then my job does not exist.  I agree that Senate should have been
informed, but I was told not to do so.  I also did not make the
decision, nor was I going to make a decision to increase stipends, so it
wasn't for me to consult with senate on.  I can't consult on anythig if
I am not making a decision on anything.  I did not need any kind of help
making a decision becuase I wasn't making a decision.

2.      I will this accept this section because it is accurate with the
xception of the word "consulting."  SENATE SHOULD HAVE BEEN INFORMED.
That is true, but I don't understand where the "consulting" is relevant
because I did not make any decision.
        I did in fact recieve the stipend so this is accurate.

3.  The resolution states "For allowing the financial assitant to make
an inappropriate loan"
        I did not allow for this loan.  I knew nothing about it until
after the fact.  Binh asked Blanka for the loan and for reasons
discusses in my memo, Blanka executed it.  I was not part of the
situation until Binh had not paid it back on time.  I knew nothing about
the loan, so I in no way allowed for it.  If I were here when Binh
informed Blanka that he needed it and was part of the conversation then
I would understand.  However, I wasn't there and I had no idea the loan
existed until after it was issued.  So I feel this statement needs to be
removed.

4.  As we all know, Lenny is correct in my failure to report to Senate.
IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE.  However, I was simply told by the President
not to do so.  I was told it was an office decision that I shoul dinform
Senate about.  I simply followed an order of some sorts by Binh.  And
yes, it was wrong for me not to inform, but I didn't know if I should
just ignore the order of my "boss" theoretically.  It could have had
lasting results if I had done so.

Lastly, I would like to speak to your email this morning.

Lenny M III:  "Also, it is reasonable to expect treasurer Holmes to
request the permission of the Senate because the amount now being spent
is not budgeted for.  The treasurer frequently makes that argument that
a club may not spend a penny unless it is budgeted for.  Therefore, the
treasurer is either guilty of unapproved spending and/or abuse of his
discretion if he is drawing the funds from another account, take
retained earning for example, is clearly not for the living stipend."

        You are correct in that the amount being spent is not budgeted
for.  However, it is my job to make the financial decision of spending
for the SGA.  If I were to request permission on my decisions, my job
would not be necessary.  As treasurer, I am in place to make those kinds
of decisions.  Now, becuase Binh is the President he is in some ways in
place to make those decisions.  Because there was not policy regarding
increases, Binh felt he could make the decision as the Pres.  Also, if
something is not budgeted for, we all clubs to still spend money in
there account it there is some left over.  For instance, Homecoming did
very well with their bargain shopping this year and saved $800.  That
money still exists in their budget and if they wanted to spend it, as
long as it benfitting the club they can do so.  I am not however, saying
that we as handled the situation correctly, SENATE SHOULD HAVE BEEN
INFORMED.
        I am in no way guilty of unapproved spending.  In terms of abuse
of discretion, that claim is false because I am not drawing funds from
other accounts.  Although it is my job to sometimes reconfigure the
account, I have not done so in this case.  The pres, and vp stipends do
in fact come from Retained Earnings, per order of the resolutiono passed
last year.  There is money in that account to cover the increase, so no
money was needed from other accounts.  The treausrer stipend comes from
the Professional Services section of oue budget and ther is plenty of
money in that account to cover the increase as well.  SO NO DECISIONS
WERE MADE WHERE MONIES WERE NOT PRESENT TO SUPPORT THE DECISION.  NO
MONEY TRANSFERRED FROM OTHER ACCOUNTS.

I greatly value this type of dialogue and I appreiciate everyones
comments.  I hope we can continue this discussion.

Repectfully,
        Treasurer Holmes

AJH
Andrew Holmes, SGA Treasurer
B156 Billings Student Center
phone: 802-656-7734
fax: 802-656-7719
[log in to unmask]