Report from the Grand Council: April, 2003
Directors of the SCA (and cc: Grand Council):
A. ACTION ITEMS
NONE.
B. POLICY INTERPRETATIONS
The Grand Council was asked its opinion on what the official
response of the SCA, Inc. should be regarding individuals convicted
of crimes outside the SCA and if particular crimes needed special
attention. After discussion the Council considered several motions,
with the conclusion being that actions and convictions unrelated to
the SCA should only be considered if the individual's actions
affect the SCA, Inc., the running of events or individuals at
events. When consideration of outside actions is made, care should
be taken to consider the nature of the crime in relation to the
person's SCA activities, and as a marker of whether a person will
respect and follow the SCA precepts of chivalry, courtesy, and
honour. Further, the Council is strongly in agreement that outside
background checks should not be required of participants in the
Society.
C. NEW POLICIES
None.
D. COMMENDATIONS
None.
E. GENERAL STATUS REPORT
The Grand Council proceeds as ever. Several members have asked to
take administrative leave due to obligations in other parts of the
world. The Nominations Committee should have a report of new
members next quarter.
F. PUBLISHABLE SUMMARY
The Grand Council was asked to consider, and answer, these
questions: "What should the official response of the SCA be to
individuals convicted of committing modern crimes outside the SCA?
What crimes deserve an official response and what circumstances
should be taken into consideration (offenses committed while a
minor, jail time served, etc.)? Where should the line be
drawn?"
The Grand Council voted on several motions responding to these
questions. In brief summary, the Grand Council believes
that:
The Grand Council is separately examining the status of the office of Minister of Children, and whether any special consideration should be given there. A report on these discussions will be provided in the next quarter. Several other motions, including mandating that the Kingdoms send the whole NMS to the Corporate Office, establishing a structure for Society-wide voting, adding language to the minor waiver and adult waivers, and for a franchise structure for the Society, are pending and will be addressed next quarter.
G. "UNDER THE ROCKS"
Nothing.
Respectfully submitted, etc.,
Margo Lynn Hablutzel, Esq.
SCA: Morgan Cain - #014527
Barony of Steppes, Ansteorra
DETAIL
1) QUESTION FROM THE BOARD - WHETHER PENALTIES FOR BREAKING MODERN LAWS OUTSIDE THE SCA SHOULD BE IMPOSED UPON SCA PARTICIPANTS.
The Grand Council was given this question by the Board: "The SCA does not condone the breaking of modern laws at Society events, and officially takes the position of denying membership to individuals who do so.
"With this in mind what should the official response of the SCA be to individuals convicted of committing modern crimes outside the SCA? What crimes deserve an official response and what circumstances should be taken into consideration (offenses committed while a minor, jail time served, etc.)? Where should the line be drawn?"
The Grand Council discussed these issues at length, and six motions were proposed, seconded, and voted upon. Each motion, and the vote, is given below (one member's vote was received after the deadline, and when reviewed does not materially change the below numbers):
MOTION #1:
That the Grand Council recommend to the Board of Directors that
legal action taken outside of the SCA should NOT result in
disciplinary action or restrictions within the SCA, except if there
will be a direct impact on SCA participants and activities, or the
Corporation. Along these lines, if a person's behaviour in the SCA
warrants, information about past or outside-the-SCA activities of a
similar nature may be brought forward to show a habit or tendency
that could direct the Board's decision.
VOTE: 30 total - 6 YES, 13 yes, zero abstain, 6 no, 5 NO
Raw total = 8 (19 for and 11 against)
Weighted total = 9
Discussion: There were concerns about the length of time since the activity had occurred, the rehabilitation of the person, and other factors that would make a black-line rule difficult. The majority of the Grand Council believe that while there are instances where this should occur, it must be taken on a case-by-case basis.
MOTION #2:
That the Grand Council recommend to the Board of Directors that if
a person is applying for reinstatement while their rights to
participate are revoked and denied, or early termination of a
revocation and denial of the right to participate, their activities
outside the SCA may be taken into account to show whether the
actions that led to the R&D are likely to recur, and/or whether
the person's current behavior meets the standards of chivalry and
courtesy espoused in the SCA.
VOTE: 30 total - 15 YES, 13 yes, zero abstain, 1 no, 1 NO
Raw total = 26 (28 for and 2 against)
Weighted total = 40
Discussion: Most persons on the Grand Council indicated in discussion that this rule, while not perfect, does allow more protections to the individuals who have ancient history that could be an issue, because it looks at current activities.
MOTION #3:
That the Grand Council recommend to the Board of Directors that
individuals should be judged on a case by case basis, with their
actions within the SCA being weighed against possible harm to the
SCA. If their actions are deemed harmful to the SCA, then other
factors, such as history outside the SCA, should be used to guide
the BOD's judgment as to the severity of sanction and pursuit of
civil lawsuits to recover damages.
VOTE: 30 total - 9 YES, 10 yes, 2 abstain, 6 no, 3 NO
Raw total = 10 (19 for, 9 against, and 2 abstain)
Weighted total = 16
Discussion: Some members of the Grand Council felt that this rule still has too much greyness.
MOTION #4:
That the Grand Council recommend to the Board of Directors that
background checks should not be required of participants in the
Society.
VOTE: 30 total - 26 YES, 4 yes, zero abstain, zero no, zero
NO
Raw total = 30 (30 for and none against)
Weighted total = 56
Discussion: The vote speaks for itself.
MOTION #5:
That the Grand Council recommend to the Board of Directors that the
Board should consider requiring some proof of financial stability
and/or credit or background report for Treasurers, or that certain
critical officers (Treasurer, Seneschal) or financial signatories
be bonded. The cost of such investigation and/or bonding must be
considered before such demands are made, as well as any negative
effect such request may have on the willingness of individuals to
participate in the office(s) involved, and such demands should come
only from the corporate level and are not to be performed locally
without prior corporate approval.
VOTE: 30 total - 2 YES, 1 yes, 1 abstain, 7 no, 19 NO
Raw total = -23 (3 for, 26 against, one abstention)
Weighted total = -40
Discussion: Again, the vote speaks for itself. Cost and invasiveness were the two greatest reasons for opposition. A number of Grand Council members felt that it is hard enough to get people to volunteer for positions; this could make it impossible.
MOTION #6:
That the Grand Council recommend to the Board of Directors that the
SCA, Inc. should not allow placing an individual with a known
conviction in a position of trust related to that conviction,
especially in the area of finances. Variances may be granted with
the concurrence of the appropriate Society Officer and the Society
Seneschal. If an individual knowingly conceals information
regarding prior convictions in order to serve in such capacity, and
appears to cause problems while acting in that capacity, that
individual may be removed from office and subject to SCA discipline
and/or modern legal action.
VOTE: 30 total - 5 YES, 4 yes, zero abstain, 8 no, 13 NO
Raw total = -12 (9 for, 21 against)
Weighted total = -20
Discussion: Again, the issue of how the information about past incidents is brought forward, or required to be brought forward, was the key issue in regard to this motion. The Ministry of Children, Exchequery, Seneschallate, and major events were all raised as areas of especial concern. One suggestion was to limit this to events of a certain minimum budget level, designed to cover primarily interkingdom events and wars, due to significant past incidents in this area.
2) OFFICE OF THE MINISTER OF CHILDREN
In the course of the above analysis, a recommendation was made to
disband, refigure, and/or rename the office of the Minister of
Children to reflect the fact that the activities are designed for
children with their parents. It was pointed out that it is the
responsibility of the parents to manage, control, and care for
their children, and the SCA and its officers and volunteers should
not accept this responsibility (currently reflected in the
suggestions contained in the Seneschal's Handbook). However, it
remains important to have ways to educate children in the ways of
the SCA, history, and other elements. The Grand Council will
discuss whether the office needs to be reconstructed, and whether
officers and/or volunteers should be required to undergo security
or other background screenings. The fact that the Minister of
Children is also considering restructuring the office, or the
guiding pages from the Seneschal's Handbook, was brought to the
Grand Council's attention.
In the course of this discussion, two motions were brought forward that will be voted upon in the next quarter. They are:
It was also discussed whether the last two sentences in (b) should be placed in the adult site waiver, in the adult membership waiver, and otherwise disseminated to the public so that there is no question but that disruptive persons can be asked to leave the site. Although this is understood policy, it is not memorialized in writing.
Part of the discussion observed the problem that not all persons--adult or minor--are required to sign a site waiver. Therefore, implementation of this language could require having all paid members sign a new waiver if their membership extends beyond the implementation period. The discussion varies as to whether the waiver should be rolled in as people join or renew, or whether it should be implemented within a certain specific timeperiod that may be less than the length of existing memberships.
3) SUBCOMMITTEES.
Not much has happened with regard to the Subcommittees in this
quarter.
A. NOMINATING COMMITTEE
As noted in the last report, the Nominating Committee is reviewing
the membership in the GC, noting openings, and accepting
nominations shortly. The procedure should conclude around June,
2003, and be summarized in the next quarterly report. The new Chair
of the Nom-Com is Haraldr Bassi.
B. FRANCHISE AND VOTING
Cedric MacRory, Chair of the Subcommittee, was taken ill
unexpectedly and forced to resign. The Committee's reigns were
caught by Peter the Uncertain, who presented this report, that will
be further discussed and voted upon next quarter:
A Proposal to Allow Geographic Based Participation Rolls in the SCA - Revised 21 March 2003
(Note: At each spot in this proposal where an officer is mentioned as responsible, the additional phrase "or designated deputy" shall be understood.)
Any participant in the SCA has the right to register as a pollster, or voting participant, in one (1) local group. This may be the group whose boundaries include their residential address (known as the territorial group), OR the group where they participate the most (known as the participation group).
Each kingdom shall decide a minimum age for a pollster to register, which shall not be higher than the local age of legal majority, and may be as low as the kingdom finds appropriate and prudent.
A request for registration in ones territorial group will automatically be granted. A request for registration in ones participation group may require some small proof of participation. This can be attestation of other participants, a receipt from a group event, etc. In the event of dispute, the matter will be passed to the kingdom seneschal for resolution.
It shall be the responsibility of the local seneschal, to maintain a list of those who have registered as pollsters in that group, and to provide a current list to the appropriate kingdom officers in the event of a multi-group or kingdom poll.
In the event of a multi-group or kingdom poll, it shall be the responsibility of the kingdom seneschal to collate a current list of all registered pollsters eligible to vote. There shall be no attempt to maintain a continuing current list of pollsters at higher group level. (Footnote 1)
A pollster is entitled to vote in all local, principality and kingdom polls by virtue of their one registration at the local group level.
A registration shall include the details of a pollsters name (mundane and SCA) postal address, phone and e-mail. The seneschal shall treat all mundane contact information as private and privileged, to be used for the verification of status and the delivery of polls only. The seneschal is free to make a list of pollsters available to interested parties or for publication, but shall provide SCA NAME ONLY.
In the event that a participant should move from one group to another, it shall be the participants responsibility to communicate with both seneschals to arrange for their polling registration to be cancelled in the former group and activated in the current group.
In addition, groups may choose to offer polling status to outsiders as an honour or as a show of affiliation. This honourary status will apply to LOCAL GROUP POLLS ONLY, so there is no possibility of someone casting multiple votes in principality or kingdom polls. The group seneschal shall maintain a separate list of such honourary members so that they will not be included in any kingdom poll.
In addition, groups may choose to offer polling status to outsiders as an honour or as a show of affiliation. This honourary status will apply to LOCAL GROUP POLLS ONLY, so there is no possibility of someone casting multiple votes in principality or kingdom polls. The group seneschal shall maintain a separate list of such honourary members so that they will not be included in any kingdom poll.
Honourary pollster status does not compromise the right of registration in ones geographic group, or the right to request registration in ones participation group, or the associated rights to participate in polls as a member of these groups. One may require registration in ones singular geographic group, or request registration in one singular participation group, but one may be offered, and may accept, honorary polling status (restricted to voting on local issues) in as many groups as feel inclined to make the offer.
It is possible that local authorities may abuse the honourary pollster provisions in order to manipulate the results of local polls. It is suggested that no more than two such honours be granted per year. It is also suggested that blatant attempts to manipulate the polling process by abuse of this mechanism be cause for removal from office, and possible revocation of honours and denial of future polling status.
The kingdom will define common standards for registration waiting periods, period of registration and circumstances in which registration lapses. For example, the kingdom may require that a person is not eligible to poll for thirty days after applying, that registration must be renewed every two years, and that a pollster who has not responded to two polls in a row be asked to show cause why they should not be stricken from the roll. The details, however, will be left to the kingdoms. (Footnote 2)
POLLING REGISTRATION SHALL BE FREE OF CHARGE. (Footnote 3)
Registration as a pollster IS NOT a requirement for any SCA office, title or award, either ceremonial or organisational. A non-pollster can be an officer, a crown, enter tourneys and competitions, receive awards, be inducted into orders and in all other ways be a full participant in all SCA activities. However, ONLY REGISTERED POLLSTERS VOTE IN POLLS.
Branch size shall be determined by number of registered pollsters excluding honorary pollsters. SCA, Inc. shall determine the thresholds for each branch type as soon as hard numbers of registered pollsters are accumulated and analysed. (Footnote 4)
(Footnote 1)An alternate proposal was to allow registration at the principality or kingdom level for people who would prefer not to affiliate themselves locally. There was opposition to this proposal as it was felt that this would complicate a system which was designed to be simple, and in the worst case turn into de-facto kingdom registries with all the associated cost and work.
(Footnote 2) The initial proposal suggested a waiting period of 90 days before one could poll, and a registration expiry period of two years. The reasons were to prevent poll stacking. If anyone can become a pollster in their territorial group simply by asking, it is easy to round up a busload of friends who become pollsters, vote, and are never seen again. Likewise, if a registration never expires, one can recruit the same pack of warm bodies, plus people who haven't thought of the SCA in 10 years or more for the same result. After some discussion, it was decided to replace the specific recommendations with language giving the kingdoms the option to set terms that seem prudent to them.
(Footnote 3) An alternate proposal was to permit a small fee to be charged for registration, sufficient to cover no more than two letters posted a year. It was felt that this would be sufficient to make the system self-funding. There was opposition to the proposal, based on the fear that the fee could be increased to the point of becoming a poll tax.
(Footnote 4) It was suggested that cancelling polling registration could be a disruptive political tool, if pollster numbers were used to define group status. It was proposed that polling registration should be non-cancellable until it expires, but the issue was not fully discussed. In addition, groups may choose to offer polling status to outsiders as an honour or as a show of affiliation. This honourary status will apply to LOCAL GROUP POLLS ONLY, so there is no possibility of someone casting multiple votes in principality or kingdom polls. The group seneschal shall maintain a separate list of such honourary members so that they will not be included in any kingdom poll.
C. GRAND COUNCIL CHARTER
Given that the GC has evolved since its formation in 1994 and
reorganization in 1996-97, a subcommittee is being formed to review
whether the charter should be revised for currency. Master Hrolf is
the chair. No further activity of note has occurred as of this
writing.
4) OLD BUSINESS
A. Revisiting the issues from Q4-2002, Edwin of Caid submitted a
revision to his Group Franchise Proposal. It will be discussed next
quarter.
Group Franchise Proposal, Final
PREFACE: Our first priority should be to live within the means
available, and belt-tightening as possible. In other words, avoid
the problem entirely and avoid adding additional fees at all. A
supplementary fee of any kind should ONLY be activated as an
emergency measure when a significant budgetary shortfall is
predicted. Should no shortfall actually occur, then no money should
be collected. The concept is to spread the temporary burden of a
shortfall across the SCA Inc. while giving local chapters plenty of
time and options on how they want to collect it (which may include
a local NMS). When the deficit crisis is over, any supplementary
fee MUST be dropped, and not become a permanent feature of how the
SCA Inc. acquires operating expenses.
INTRODUCTION: This proposal will be called, a "Territorial Levy." It is based on minimum populations of geopolitical units as delineated by Corpora, not actual membership nor population. Specifically, a Barony or Province would be treated as having a membership of 25 persons or more, and a Shire would be treated as having a membership of 5 persons or more. No other geopolitical units are involved in this proposal.
This proposal was originally designed to offer an alternative for the NMS to mitigate the $77,000 shortfall projected in the SCA 2002 budget. Unlike the SCA-wide NMS, the Franchise fee would give local branches a choice of how to collect necessary funds, and provide a Cap above which they would no longer have to pay.
This proposal is designed to create a new income source and to supplement but not replace current income mechanisms. The first variation was specifically crafted as an alternative to the Non-Member Surcharge. The second variation is adapted to work within a Membership-funding model (such as we have currently) or Non-membership funding model such as that proposed by Frederick of Holland. The Proposal uses specific fees as examples below. However in actual usage, the amounts will vary depending upon actual deficit amounts.
PROPOSED: "Territorial Levy"
The fees presented were derived from the $77,000 shortfall
originally predicted by the Society Treasurer for 2002:
VARIATION 1:
Using a shortfall of $77,000 as an example amount to be mitigated
the Levy would consist of:
$350 per year from Baronies/Provinces, internationally and $70 per year from Shires internationally.
The Levy amount will be announced at least 9 months prior to the due date, and will be collected annually. If the shortfall drops substantially or is eliminated through other means, the SCA Inc. will either discount or waive the Levy for that year.
How I came up with the numbers:
a) I did a rough estimate of all Baronies/Provinces in the SCA
excluding Lochac (128 US, 19 non-US, and 147 total); and of all
Shires and incipient Shires (approximately 289 US, 78 non-US, and
367 total).
b) Using SCA published minimum membership requirements for each
territorial unit (Barony/Province > 3D 25, and Shire > 3D 5
members), I determined that they represented a statutory minimum
population of approximately 5510 people.
c) Dividing $77,000 by 5500 people, I came up with $14.00.
d) Baronies 3D (25 X $14.00) 3D $350.00, and Shires 3D (5 X $14.00)
3D $70.00
VARIATION 2:
The Levy will be based total SCA Insurance Costs as a known
budgetary line item to be paid by US-based geopolitical units only.
Non-US units will be exempt if they cannot take advantage of
US-based insurance.
Projected 2002 Insurance Cost: $72,561
$400 per year from SCA US Baronies and Provinces
$ 78 per year SCA US Shires
The Levy amount will be announced at least 9 months prior to the due date, and will be collected annually. If the shortfall drops substantially or is eliminated through other means, the SCA Inc. will either discount or waive the Levy for that year.
How I came up with the numbers:
a) I did a rough estimate of all US-based Baronies/Providences and
of all Shires and incipient Shires (approximately 289 US
groups).
b) Using SCA published minimum membership requirements for each
territorial unit (Barony/Province > 3D 25, and Shire > 3D 5
members), I determined that they represented a statutory minimum
population of approximately 4645 people.
c) Dividing $72,561 by 4645 people, I came up with $15.62.
d) Baronies 3D (25 X $16.00) 3D $400, and Shires 3D (5 X $16.00) 3D
$80.00
JUSTIFICATION:
a) The Levy must be based on a confident figure such as a
well-documented projected shortfall or budgetary line item. So
used, the Levy allows for that portion of the total cost of the SCA
budget, and is therefore a known quantity. Local groups will have
the bulk of the fiscal year to generate the funds. The Levy also
provides a Cap so that more active groups are not penalized for
their greater activity.
b) The SCA is comprised predominately of three basic territorial units: Baronies, Shires and smaller units. Since Kingdoms and Principalities are collections of all these units, they are not separately charged. Likewise, Baronies and Shires include dependent collections of smaller units. Units under a Territorial Levy will be allowed local authority to generate the money needed by any means allowed by Corpora, including participation fees, surcharges, auctions and art sales, demos etc. This allows local groups to fund SCA operations in whatever way is most appropriate for them.
c) Since some base costs of the SCA are consistent and all groups share benefits equally and independently of activity levels, this proposal assures equal treatment for all groups of equal status. Also, since the Levy is based on minimum population, the Levy will not be an undue burden on smaller groups, and will be facilitated by the extra dispersion of the fee among members of larger groups.
d) [Variation #2 only] By charging only US groups for services enjoyed exclusively by US groups, the SCA cost recovery will be more fairly distributed.
WHAT IF GROUPS DON'T PAY?
The consequences of non-compliance are the same as those under ANY
other funding scheme, including probation and possibility of
downgraded group status. Exemptions can be made on a case-by-case
basis dependent upon demonstrable need. Ultimately, the purpose of
this proposal is to protect the financial stability of the SCA
Inc., and not to unduly burden its component parts.
B. Edwin of Caid also proposed a motion that the Board mandate that all Non-Member Surcharges (NMS) be paid to the Corporate Office, none being retained at the local level. There was some discussion about Kingdoms and smaller groups that have been charging a local NMS in addition to the Corporate one, or who charged one when there was no corporate mandate for a NMS. Since the NMS is predicated upon membership, which comes only from the Corporate Office, all NMS should be remitted to the Corporate Office. This proposal will also be discussed next quarter.
For more information on the SCA, see the SCA Home Page
Last changed: 29-Nov-2007
Copyright of this site is retained by the original contributors. Contact webmaster prior to using elsewhere.