| a.
Legislative Update
Mr.
Woehlke advised the Executive Committee that its most recent
conference call on June 9 may not have met meeting notification
requirements under New York law and the Society’s
bylaws and, therefore, actions taken during the conference
call should be ratified.
Mr. Hoops then read for the record the following summary
of the points and actions taken during the June 9 conference
call:
The
Executive Committee discussed a recent meeting attended
by Messrs. O’Leary and McCoy with staff from State
Senator LaValle’s office regarding Accountancy Bill
302-B. Others in attendance included lobbyists for the Big
4, representatives of the Coalition for Affordable Accounting,
a representative of Majority Leader Bruno’s office,
and Bob Kent from the Society’s outside lobbyist firm
Pinsky & Jacobs.
Mr.
McCoy led the committee through changes made to the bill
as a result of the meeting. The committee also discussed
such issues as affirmative defense language, gross incompetence
and whether auditing should be included as part of the experience
requirement.
Upon
a vote taken by President Hoops, the committee agreed that
there was nothing in the revised bill that it was adamantly
opposed to, and it recommended that the Society support
the bill as is; however, the committee directed Mr. O’Leary
to consult with the Society’s lobbyist whether language
regarding non-licensed practitioners and substantial equivalency
could be amended. Executive Committee members Grusd, Love,
Doran, Hudson and Kirby did not participate in the vote,
which numbered 7 in support of the bill. Ms. Hudson and
Ms. Kirby announced before leaving the call that they desired
the bill to be “stronger” in some respects,
but nonetheless supported it.
The
committee then discussed at length whether a “same-as”
bill should be introduced in the State Assembly. Mr. Hoops
cautioned that doing so could result in a substantially
amended bill in the Assembly, and possibly alienate the
Assembly Speaker. In response to a question, Mr. O’Leary
noted that there was no obligation to put forth a “same-as”
bill in the Assembly. After further discussion of the issue,
the committee by consensus recommended that the Society’s
lobbyist approach the Assembly regarding submitting a “same-as”
bill as a courtesy; however, not to push the issue.
Mr.
Kearney moved to ratify the actions taken at the June 9,
2003 conference call as summarized by Mr. Hoops. Ms. Kirby
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Ms.
Doran and Mr. Grusd did not participate in the vote.
b.
Real Estate Task Force Update
Messrs.
Grumet and Schmelkin provided an update on negotiations
for a future Society office location. Several Executive
Committee members raised concerns regarding security at
one of the locations, and staff agreed to explore the issue
and report back.
c.
Leadership Conference Update
Mr.
Schmelkin provided an update on the Leadership Conference,
which was to be held in Saratoga, New York commencing July
13, and distributed a conference schedule.
d.
AICPA Governance Task Force
Mr.
Hoops reported on the first meeting of the AICPA Governance
Task Force by giving a brief summary of its mandate to study
the effectiveness of the AICPA Council. He noted that New
York pushed for a broader task force mandate to study all
aspects of AICPA governance, but the task force was given
some leeway to recommend a broader scope. A final task force
report was nearing approval.
At this
point, Mr. Hoops was called from the meeting and Mr. Kearney
presided for a time.
e.
Appointment of Policy Task Force
President-Elect
Kearney discussed the need for formal Society policies on
issues such as conflicts of interest, among others. A brief
discussion ensued with respect to conflicts of interest,
during which it was noted that a task force of the Board
previously examined the issue but did not ultimately recommend
a specific policy.
Ms.
Kirby moved to authorize the president to appoint a new
task force to prepare a conflict of interest policy, among
other policies, for Board consideration. Ms. Hudson seconded
the motion. There being no objection, the motion passed
unanimously. Mr. Hoops did not participate in the vote.
f.
Recent Society Comments
Mr.
Kearney commended outgoing President, Jo Ann Golden, for
her May 16, 2003 comments to the Regents “Proposed
Promulgation of Subdivisions (d), (e), (f), and (g) of Section
29.10 of the Rules of the Board of Regents Pursuant to Sections
207, 6504, 6505, 6509, and 7401 of the Education Law Relating
to the Definition of Unprofessional Conduct in the Practice
of Public Accountancy”.
He also
commended the NYSSCPA Task Force on Simplification, chaired
by Alan E. Weiner, for its May 27, 2003 comments suggesting
alternatives to decrease the complexity in certain sections
of the Internal Revenue Code; and the NYSSCPA Auditing Standards
and Procedures Committee, chaired by Margaret Wood, for
its May 2, 2003 Comments to the Auditing Standards Board
on Exposure Draft of Seven Statements on Auditing Standards
Related to Audit Risk.
Lastly,
Mr. Kearney commended the NYSSCPA Government Accounting
and Auditing Committee, chaired by Eugene D. Mahaney, for
its May 2, 2003 Comments to the GASB on Exposure Draft,
Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment
Benefits Other Than Pensions.
A committee
member suggested that commentary be solicited on the issue
of workload compression. The committee agreed by consensus
to put this issue and suggestion on a future meeting agenda.
It was also noted that the Society had been approached by
several committees in Washington soliciting input on issues.
g.
Bylaws Update
Mr.
Woehlke updated the committee on the status of the bylaws
revision process, noting that the revisions were included
with the June issue of The Trusted Professional. He also
noted that the special members’ meeting to handle
the bylaw amendments had been called for July 21, 2003.
On Mr. Kearney’s suggestion, staff agreed to send
a membership-wide e-mail notifying them that the bylaws
amendment vote is under way.
h.
Strategic Planning Update
Mr.
Grumet gave an update on the Society’s strategic planning
initiative, including its effect on the Society’s
budgetary methods. |