The following proposals passed:

Proposal 1: Financial Subcommittee

Committee: General

Vote Summary:

Passed on April 08, 2016

Votes on this proposal:

6 out of 8 voting members have voted.

Agree: 6, Disagree: 0, Abstain: 0.

Background

From Olaf:

We are still not done with getting back our non profit status and still have to do several tax documents for 2010 up to today. Jim did a lot of work already but didn't finish it (as it seems to be a complicated task all over). However, Ann and Marty now offer their help to bring this story to an good end and Jim already start to hand out all documentation to them to make them able to work. Marty will also hunt again now for an D&O insurance to have that active before we do the final steps.

Right now we should start that financial committee and set an amount of budget that they can use to finish all that issues related to our tax status.

The committee would be run by Jim, Ryan and me (I hope all of you agree) and would have a Budget of 5000$ to initialize all needed activities. Right now we don't think that we need all of the money but at least the D&O insurance will cost us about 3000$ or more.

Beside this another 10000$ would be blocked to have some money save to pay taxes in case we need to. This is money we simply block.

Proposal

Financial committee: Jim Sowers, Ryan Woessner, Olaf Schlote

Budget: 5000 USD

Blocked money for possible tax payments: 10000 USD

Body

So please send your voting as soon as possible for this committee:

This will make us able to act fast and hopefully finish that open issue before Unicon.

References

Proposal 2: Traveling cost for visits before Unicons to visit venues / support the host ...

Committee: General

Vote Summary:

Passed on April 13, 2016

Votes on this proposal:

5 out of 8 voting members have voted.

Agree: 3, Disagree: 1, Abstain: 1.

Background

Up to now we add no clear rule how to pay traveling cost / if we pay for them / if the host pay for them. So we add to decide about it case to case in the past which need time and paperwork. So here is a proposal how we should handle it in the future which includes also one pending payment from the past that we can use a good sample.

Proposal

Once we decide about a new Unicon host we will make a contract with the host immediately. This contract should contain details about a host has to keep his budget transparent, how he has to collect membership fee and how he has to transfer it to the IUF, several other points we should discuss and also how needed trips done by IUF Board members (or people we send instead of our self) will be payed.

This Proposal is about the payment term we should use now and for the future for every official event that work together with the IUF.

If there is a need for an IUF Board member (or a person send by the IUF Board) to visit the Host / Venue / City of an upcoming event (typically Unicon), the host is responsible to pay the traveling cost and the accommodation for this trip. The IUF will cover the cost in advance to prevent the Board Member from paying it by himself. Once the event is over and the host provides the final financial result, they have to repay all traveling cost to the IUF as long as the event does not have a negative financial result. The estimated traveling cost should be already included in the host's first budget. The estimated budget for the IUF has to be defined once the next destination is decided upon as the traveling cost may be different depending on the location. However, I think a number of 5000 USD as maximum should be a good general number.
The Board member that plans to make a trip has to provide a clear statement from the host in advance that the host agrees to do this trip under the conditions written above.

So with this proposal you vote for the general system of payment in the future and also you agree to use this system already right now for the last pending flight cost from 2014 under similar conditions (373.82 USD).

Body

This way we would prevent all Board members to pay trips from their own money and then maybe get it back later or never. It would be a clear commitment.

Actually we still have one not paid trip done by Scott in October 2014 to Donostia. As Scott is a student it is more than bad for him to don’t get it payed. So I talked to the host and they agree to commit for this trip to our new idea and pay for the trip as long as they end up with a profit. So I don’t see any problem to pay the amount of 373.82 USD to Scott and then hopefully get it back from the Unicon host in September. This way Scott will get back his money and we can approve the system and also we can state to the upcoming Unicon host that we already act like that in the past.

References

Proposal 3: Rule change Downhill finals for Unicon

Committee: General

Vote Summary:

Passed on May 22, 2016

Votes on this proposal:

5 out of 8 voting members have voted.

Agree: 5, Disagree: 0, Abstain: 0.

Background

Based on the final location to held the Downhill races while Unicon there is a need to do the finals in a different way then ususal. At least there exist no rules for the finals so there is no serious need to change the rules but as there is one sentence already written about short tracks, I would like to get approved the proposed idea just to provide the ORGA team our support. I already talked with Lutz (Muni Director) and he agree to the solution.

The Track they they use for Beginners and Qualification is about 1,5 km - 2 km long, so this will be done as usual. For the finals they have 4 different tracks with a high technical level but all are about 500m long only. So in the past they use all 4 tracks and add the 4 times to determine the winner.

As the ORGA team need a fast decission, we have to vote for this imediatly to hopefully get a decission until Tuesday night.

Proposal

old rule:

or a course length less than 2 km, two separate runs should be held. In this case the ranking of the riders is based on the fastest of the two runs.

new rule:

or a course length less than 2 km, two separate runs should be held. In this case the ranking of the riders is based on the fastest of the two runs.In case there are several short but good tracks, the finals could be also done by using up to 4 different tracks and adding the time. This format should be only used if the usefull tracks are far below 1000 Meter.

Body

This all is needed because the originaly planned track owners seems to be now less interested in the event and therefore asking for an increadible amount of money while only offering 1 track instead of two we would need.

References

Proposal 4: Postpone Unicon 20 to Summer 2021

Committee: Unicon

Vote Summary:

Passed on March 28, 2020

Votes on this proposal:

7 out of 8 voting members have voted.

Agree: 7, Disagree: 0, Abstain: 0.

Background

Based on the actual Situation it seems to be the best decission to postpone Unicon. We also got a request from the host if we see any problem if they reshedule it to Summer 2021.

Proposal

We as the IUF Board will send an answer to Francois (representative of the Unicon host). In this answer we will inform him that we see no issue with postponing it to Summer 2021 and that we also see this new date as the best option. We also state there that we recomend to postpone it based on the global situation.

Body

See our discussion