This is going out to the COO Core Collaborators, and will also be posted in the UNA-SF Board subgroup of the UNA-SF InterMix listserve.
I am sorry to report that the UNA-SF Board, at its Nov 19th meeting, would not allow that the COO have a bank account under its own name. I have been in a quandary since, trying to figure what we (the COO) might do. I have decided to take the matter to the UNA-SF board again at its January meeting, normally held on the second Wednesday - Jan 14. I will ask also at that meeting if Pablo Castro, UNA-SF President and Mary Steiner, UN 70th Committee Chair would be willing to co-chair the COO with me. Then the COO can have its meeting the following day, January 15.
We, the COO, do need to realize that although we are a "Council" by name, we must consider ourselves to be a committee of UNA-SF. This is a requirement from UNA-USA National if the COO is to consider itself UNA related, which from the beginning we have been.
However, being a committee of UNA-SF cannot mean that we are not the Coalition that I have always conceived we were. If the COO cannot act together as the COO members decide, for instance by supporting a grand UN 70th Celebration, or down the road perhaps by supporting the Bay Area implementation of the UN's post-2015 sustainability goals, then what is the point?
As I see it, to build such a Coalition of like-minded organizations to support the goals of the UN in the Bay Area is a wonderful strategy for UNA-SF to pursue. As leader and organizer of the Coalition, UNA-SF will become better known and better supported and respected. How not? But it does require that the COO decide for itself as a coalition, and not be told what to do by UNA-SF.
So how is this semi-autonomy of the COO best handled? To me the answer is pretty simple. The COO has to be responsible for its own finances, but UNA-SF must have an OK on the COO annual budget, and UNA-SF must be able to track COO monies to be sure the COO is staying within the agreed budget. This OK over the budget by UNA-SF brings the COO under the UNA-SF as required. Yet the COO will decide what budget it wants to present to UNA-SF. There could be some back and forth in the process.
For this to work, the COO needs its own bank account for two reasons: 1) so we can write checks when we need to without having to wait on UNA-SF and 2) as an aid to keeping the money straight. To be clear, such an account will be owned by UNA-SF, though under the name of the COO by using a fictitious business name.
The assumption will be that the COO will raise the money it spends and not dip into the regular UNA-SF treasury. The COO may want to donate to UNA-SF, but that will be the decision of the COO, not of UNA-SF. The COO money has to be kept separate, but the UNA-SF Treasurer has to have access to the COO account, to verify that the COO is sticking to the agreed budget. This means that UNA-SF has ultimate control of the money, so the COO needs to trust UNA-SF. As long as there is a separate bank account, so there is no chance of things getting muddied up, that should be fine. But without the COO bank account in its own dba name (tho still under the UNA-SF) the arrangement doesn't work. If the UNA-SF Board still refuses to agree to a separate bank account at its January meeting, I will have to resign as COO Chair and the COO will have to decide either to disband or go ahead on its own.
I hope that is not too involved. Please add your comments.
Happy Holidays to All!
-- Roger Eaton
UNA-SF COO Chair
rogerweaton@gmail.com
415 933 0153
