(March 31, 2016) Once an item of some contention, the OPA Board was easily able to pass changes to resolution F-01 last Thursday, thanks to a compromise hammered out on the previous day during a committee meeting.
On March 23, the budget and finance committee met to discuss several items. F-01 was not one of them, but it still got the bulk of the discussion time.
Directors Dave Stevens and Jack Collins attended the session and both came with questions about the resolution, which they asked during public comments.
Director Tom Terry, the board liaison to the committee, was also at that meeting.
The resolution, which received a first reading during a February board meeting, adjusted the language of the association’s investment guidelines. Primarily, Chairwoman Pat Supik said it offered the community certain safeguards.
“There is nothing protecting this organization for investments. We have a two-sentence investment policy,” she said. “This is much more protective – and much more restrictive – than our current policies.
“Given the size and complexity of the organization, there is nothing that we do in practice that insures that we are going to have someone with sophisticated financial background on our board, or management,” she continued. “That is a risk, and if we don’t protect this organization with somewhat sophisticated documents – to me, that is a shame on us.”
Stevens argued that the resolution was hard to comprehend, in part, because it was “not well written.”
“I don’t think we have people that necessarily will understand all the terms in this,” he said. “You talk about ‘laddering strategies.’ I think I know what that is, but, on the other hand, is some new board member or somebody three years from now going to know what that means?”
Supik fought back.
“So we have a free and easy investment policy statement, because we don’t have the wherewithal to have somebody that understands it?” she asked.
“You don’t dummy down … this document, simply because the members of the board of directors can’t understand all the finances of it,” Terry said. “As a document, this still makes sense.”
Collins said he was concerned about an item on Government Sponsored Entities (GSE), which would have included both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The committee agreed to remove that section of the resolution entirely.
Under the suggestion of Stevens, the committee also consented to revert to previous language regarding the introductory purpose statement, using a July 2009 document, and to amend the overview statement to include the words “operation funds” and “reserve funds.”
Original language had also mentioned “investment cash” and “restricted funds” in the same context.
Wording in a section titled “Delegation of Authority” was also amended, changing the treasurer’s role from that of “conducting investment transactions” to “oversight” of said transactions.
Duties of those transactions were also changed and were assigned to the general manager and controller.
On the following day, March 24, the board unanimously approved the amended resolution.
Terry said the committee, with Stevens and Collins, had a “very good and healthy” debate on the document, which was sent to the other board members just hours after that meeting adjourned.
Collins concurred, calling the discussion “a good back and forth.”
On March 23, the budget and finance committee met to discuss several items. F-01 was not one of them, but it still got the bulk of the discussion time.
Directors Dave Stevens and Jack Collins attended the session and both came with questions about the resolution, which they asked during public comments.
Director Tom Terry, the board liaison to the committee, was also at that meeting.
The resolution, which received a first reading during a February board meeting, adjusted the language of the association’s investment guidelines. Primarily, Chairwoman Pat Supik said it offered the community certain safeguards.
“There is nothing protecting this organization for investments. We have a two-sentence investment policy,” she said. “This is much more protective – and much more restrictive – than our current policies.
“Given the size and complexity of the organization, there is nothing that we do in practice that insures that we are going to have someone with sophisticated financial background on our board, or management,” she continued. “That is a risk, and if we don’t protect this organization with somewhat sophisticated documents – to me, that is a shame on us.”
Stevens argued that the resolution was hard to comprehend, in part, because it was “not well written.”
“I don’t think we have people that necessarily will understand all the terms in this,” he said. “You talk about ‘laddering strategies.’ I think I know what that is, but, on the other hand, is some new board member or somebody three years from now going to know what that means?”
Supik fought back.
“So we have a free and easy investment policy statement, because we don’t have the wherewithal to have somebody that understands it?” she asked.
“You don’t dummy down … this document, simply because the members of the board of directors can’t understand all the finances of it,” Terry said. “As a document, this still makes sense.”
Collins said he was concerned about an item on Government Sponsored Entities (GSE), which would have included both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The committee agreed to remove that section of the resolution entirely.
Under the suggestion of Stevens, the committee also consented to revert to previous language regarding the introductory purpose statement, using a July 2009 document, and to amend the overview statement to include the words “operation funds” and “reserve funds.”
Original language had also mentioned “investment cash” and “restricted funds” in the same context.
Wording in a section titled “Delegation of Authority” was also amended, changing the treasurer’s role from that of “conducting investment transactions” to “oversight” of said transactions.
Duties of those transactions were also changed and were assigned to the general manager and controller.
On the following day, March 24, the board unanimously approved the amended resolution.
Terry said the committee, with Stevens and Collins, had a “very good and healthy” debate on the document, which was sent to the other board members just hours after that meeting adjourned.
Collins concurred, calling the discussion “a good back and forth.”