0) Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 9:10 A.M by President Gerald Sokolski.

1) Approval of Minutes of the September, 2001 Meeting

By unanimous approval of the FAE Board of Trustees, the minutes of their meeting of September 10, 2001 were accepted subject to corrections that would be supplied by the trustees.

2) Review of CPE Coordinators Group Meeting of October 5, 2001

Mr. Sokolski asked Alan Schmelkin to review the discussion agenda from the CPE Coordinators Group meeting held in Albany on October 5, 2001. He referred to the meeting summary included in the agenda materials and discussed major subjects that were covered by the group. Since the CPE Coordinators’ discussion included whether or not meals should be served at seminars, Mr. Eassa questioned whether hotel rental costs would increase if meals were eliminated. In response to a question by Mr. Benjamin, Mr. Sokolski replied that the group was to provide input and feedback for consideration by the FAE board. Mr. Benjamin asked for clarification on the purpose of the CPE Coordinators meeting. Mr. Riley asked if there would ultimately be a written summary of the Coordinators’ meeting. Mr. Schmelkin replied yes.

The trustees held a general discussion on CPE competition including free programs provided by banks, insurance companies and brokerage houses. This also included medium sized CPA firms marketing their own in-house CPE programs to other practitioners.

Joanne Golden asked how FAE currently approaches firms for in-house programs suggesting that we try to get them to view FAE as their vendor of choice. She recommended that we stress using FAE will save a firm’s staff time and billable hours in creating a course versus buying this from FAE.

Mr. Schmelkin summarized final comments about his meeting with the CPE Coordinators explaining that those in attendance would be suggesting topics, course leaders, potential course authors and venues from their respective chapter areas. He also explained that the Coordinators reviewed the success of the California CPA Foundation since virtually all their seminars are self-produced versus being purchased from third party vendors.

3) Review of NYSSCPA Strategic Planning Task Force of October 9, 2001

Nancy Newman-Limata summarized the October 9, 2001 meeting of the Strategic Planning Task Force, which was held in Albany. She explained that a base line criterion examined by Task Force members was “Are we the sole provider?” for a number of services. Task Force members felt yes for the advocacy position advanced by the Society but no for being the sole provider of CPE. She mentioned that Louis Grumet asked the Task Force to approach prioritizing Society services as if we could only provide one service, and then expand this to a second and so on. She noted that in this discussion over 8,200 individuals members participated in last year’s FAE courses representing over 25% of the Society’s membership, and by far the highest usage of any Society service.

Mr. Sokolski reviewed the concept of providing some small, selected core courses that would be presented throughout the state on an advanced schedule basis. Anything beyond that would be specifically requested by representatives of a chapter. He explained that this was something that had been discussed in great detail by members of the Task Force.

4) Letter to members for feedback on CPE program

Mr. Sokolski referred the trustees to a draft of a letter included in the agenda materials, which would be sent to the entire membership requesting feedback on FAE’s CPE offerings. The trustees spent time discussing several changes to the document and agreed to furnish Alan Schmelkin any additional suggestions prior to the letter being distributed. They then discussed components of the marketing survey that was also included with the agenda materials. A number of edits recommended but the group was then informed that the survey had already been released with the Trusted Professional that had just been mailed to the entire membership.

5) Extension of POP sales window to December 31, 2001

The agenda materials contained a recommendation to extend the early bird discount for POP sales until December 31, 2001. The trustees agreed the suggestion and also decided to be more responsive to certain member comments about basic guidelines. A motion was made by Sharon Sabba Fierstein and seconded by Jo Ann Golden to extend the early bird discount window for POP sales until December 31, 2001, and to eliminate the need for the purchase of an individual POP PASS before the purchase of a firm POP PASS and to allow the thirty people who had already purchased these individual passes to convert them to firm passes at their option. The FAE trustees unanimously approved this.

6) Preparation of Draft of FAE Trustees’ Report and Recommendations to NYSSCPA Board of Directors

Trustees held a lengthy discussion on the strategic planning process and the input they want to provide to the Society’s Board of Directors. The fundamental issue that faces both organizations is whether to provide educational events that meet the members needs as a subsidized Society service like all the other or whether the education operation should be self-sustaining. During discussion, the FAE trustees learned that the Strategic Planning Task Force had not reached a conclusion on this issue with a number of members advocating each of the possible positions.

The trustees agreed that education is perhaps the most important service that we can offer our membership but that we should structure FAE operations to require as little subsidy as practical. Trustees felt that requiring earlier registration for events would help reduce cancellations and therefore result in more profitable sessions. There were several attempts at formulating a motion, which was advanced by Tom Riley to continue to subsidize FAE with a budgeted annual deficit but that the trustees wanted to make every effort to minimize this expense. Mr. Peare seconded this motion. The trustees then debated what would happen if FAE exceeded this budgeted deficit. Mr. Grumet pointed out that similar to other Society activities, the FAE Board would need to go to the Society’s Board of Directors to request additional funding for the expenses. Ms. Golden stressed that she believed education was a critical member service and therefore the Society should be willing to pay for it. However, she also proposed building a stronger FAE that attempts to break even. Ms. Newman-Limata pointed out that certain members of the Strategic Planning Task Force remarked that FAE education services could be obtained from other commercial providers in the market unlike membership participation in chapters and committees which were examples of Society specific functions.

Sharon Sabba Fierstein explained that members from smaller firms and industry companies that are interested in meeting New York state requirements can most easily obtain their education through the FAE, unlike those who are affiliated with large CPA firms or industries who have access to other, more expensive markets for education.

Mr. Sokolski called the question and the trustee voted eight in favor and one opposed to the motion.

Mr. Sokolski then asked for specific suggestions for inclusion in the report that will be submitted to the Society’s board. Mr. Riley felt that the location of FAE staff was really not an issue and should be part of headquarters operations wherever that was. Ms. Sabba Fierstein proposed that the FAE should consider investing in developing our own courses similar to California’s experiences. Mr. Riley suggested that outreach to firms should be an important aspect of FAE operations.

Mr. Sokolski summarized the discussion and talked about plans for the next meeting on November 27, 2001. At that time the trustees should finalize discussions on a report to the Board that would cover 1) implementation of changes to the POP program; 2) the concept of core courses offered throughout the state with additional programs scheduled at the request of chapters; 3) FAE’s New York City offerings for seminars and conferences; 4) the concept of a separate FAE entity; 5) a fund for development of FAE originated courses; 6) outreach to firms for in-house education.