July 29, 2001
(Brent) OK, I will now call the meeting to order...Item one, Minutes of last meeting. Any comments or discussion?
(Nancy) None from Nancy and Shirley.
(Gerard) No no comments from me
(Jurian) none here
(Mary) None here
(Brent) Very well, they are considered ratified as correct.
(Brent) Item 2 Treasurers Quarterly report....Nancy.....
(Nancy) As was stated in the Agenda, funds are about the same as year start, as of the end of June.
(Nancy) However, we've had SINCE end of June expenses of 1. tiller pickup ($800 or so), web hosting last 6 months of the year ($355) and Wegner LLP Form 990 $692.
(Nancy) This has been offset this by contributions of about $355.
(Nancy) So, whereas expenses and contributions are not always equal, right now we've dropped below the funds available at the start of the year.
(Nancy) End of report.
(Brent) Thanks Nancy. Shall we discuss the Wegner Budget Increase?
(Jan) A short comment to the report: All receipts have been received by me and are verified to be correct and in accordance with the TT Board decisions.
(Nancy) Yes, when we employed Wegner, they gave us an estimate for quarterly bookkeeping, but stated that Form 990 was not included.
(Brent) Very good, Jan, thanks.
(Brent) Will this be a regular expense, Nancy?
(Nancy) The $150/quarter was more than enough, though the conference Jan and I had with them in January went over that, but the form 990 bill was $692.
(Nancy) This is the IRS paperwork, required because we pulled in more than $25,000 in 2000.
(Nancy) So, as we agreed, at the Board Meeting approving Wegner, $600/year and I must come back if it proved to be more, here I am, back.
(Nancy) End of explanation.
(Brent) So it could very well become a regular expense! Hopefully...
(Mary) I see no reason not to increase the budget by $1000. if it is needed and we have the funds.
(Mary) opps, not by $1000, up to $1000
(Jan) A few questions: Are there any other accountant firms in Baraboo & vicinity that would do this for less?
(Nancy) Well, I'm asking for an increase TO $1,000, to include annual 990 and quarterly bookkeeping.
(Jan) Or would you feel comfortable doing the 990 yourself, Nancy?
(Jan) In other words, are there any alternatives to this increase?
(Nancy) Jan, this is THE CPA firm in Baraboo or vicinity that will work with nonprofits. However, they are reputable, and Wisco registration, etc., IRS will give us less flack, I think, as well as donors, for having them.
(Brent) Morning Toni...we are in the middle of item 2...
(Nancy) They are also in Madison, which is where I'd have to go for another firm. I doubt another would be less expensive.
(Mary) This CPA has served us well in the past and Nancy is familiar with them and they with her. I see no reason to change.
(Nancy) Let me explain the Wisco Registration fiasco, as example.
(Nancy) When Brent was here, I was filing out the Wisco reg forms. I did some of this according to the 990, and some according to my Excel spreadsheet.
(Nancy) Then Wisco said my figures differed from the 990, so I resubmitted, using only the 990 figures.
(Nancy) I sent this to Brent, who signed and mailed to them.
(Nancy) Then I got a call from a lady there, who went over the figures once again, and we balanced them on the phone.
(Nancy) Now, Wisco is only concerned that fraudulent groups not run a nonprofit in their state. The IRS is more strict.
(Nancy) I think we'd do well, donor wise, to stay with Wegner, for the $700/yr.
(Nancy) Donors can meet with the CPA firm, etc., and be reassured.
(Nancy) End of response.
(Nancy) Shirley agrees with Mary.
(Jan) Thanks, I think we should stay with Wegner, and have them do the 990 as well. I therefore move we accept the increase to USD 1,000/year.
(Nancy) The Julia Dula Foundation is not a dead issue, you know, as I heard from Nicholas and he stated as much.
(Nancy) Last year they donated $25,000.
(Nancy) And, I heard from their lawyers aplenty re sending documentation to them.
(Mary) I second Jan's motion.
(Brent) We have a motion and second to increase the Wegner budget to 1000/year. Vote yes or no
(Nancy) Yes from both Nancy and Shirley.
(Jan) I would like to insert one comment re accounting if I may. Now or at the end of the meeting?
(Brent) Now is fine, Jan....
(Brent) The motion passes to increase the Wegner Budget
(Jan) In the received material from Nancy, there is transaction printout is still including all transactions from day 1, indicating that the books may not have been properly closed at the end of FY 2000
(Brent) Comments, Nancy?
(Jan) At the meeting with Wegner, we agreed to close the books at FY 2000 end, so that 2001 would be a clean year.
(Nancy) Jan, I'll look into that. I think Wegner is closing the books, did so, however.
(Nancy) I look for the transaction list, so I'm reassured they posted what I gave them, etc.
(Nancy) I think the bookkeeper is just printing it out that way, but I will check!
(Jan) Nancy, please do. I think it would be much better if we could have each year separated, starting with 2001, since this wasn't done earlier.
(Brent) Good point, Jan. You could just let us know next meeting on this Nancy.
(Nancy) Wegner mentioned wanting to close the books for 2000, for the 990, so I'm sure this was done, but will verify.
(Brent) And since I just mailed the paperwork back to them the beginning of the week, this may take a little while.
(Jan) Thanks. Please follow up on this, Nancy. (We can sort this out off-line via e-mail.)
(Nancy) Brent, that was the Wisco reg, and we're resolved OK :-)
(Nancy) They received the paperwork and called me last Friday, and we're OK.
(Brent) Good Nancy, I'm glad they got it worked out. If we are finished with this, on to Item 3 Booklet Review. Comments?
(Mary) I know that you all want to be supportive of the booklet Nancy, Shirley and I have done. But please be forthright in your comments as we are not running a popularity contest here. This product will be going out to the public and is a reflection of the commitment we have all made.
(Gerard) At this moment I don't have comments, I looked trough it and it looks good to me.
(Jurian) Overall it looks good, but the pictures are pretty bad quality, I hope that can somehow be changed?
(Jan) The booklet is an excellent piece of work, I consider the current version a beta release, that may need to be refined in a number of areas like front & back cover paper, binding type, paper quality etc.
(Mary) You know, Nancy's masters look good when I get them and then when they are copied they get muddied and I can't get them sharp again.
(Nancy) Jurian, you should have seen it before we stuck to just those diagrams that have good contrast. Not likely to get better, unless the cost of production goes up a lot!
(Jan) Some of the sections will need some rework, others are fine. I like the progression and the sorting of the topics.
(Brent) I think it is professional and straightforward. A good synopsis of the larger website. As people receive and review it, I'm sure the suggestions will come in from folks that are not as close to the material as we are.
(Nancy) Jurian, can you not make out the diagrams, the meaning, etc?
(Mary) Jan, please be specific on the rework.
(Jurian) On most pics you can, sure, but IF it is somehow possible, then it would be nice :)
(Jurian) I'm not saying they're unusable!
(Jan) Mary, this always goes with all copiers ("muddying"). Somtimes one must print each copy to get the right quality, which makes it a lot more difficult and costly to produce.
(Nancy) We removed all the photos of herbs and bugs and the like, as just too muddy and not really the focus of the booklet.
(Brent) Mary, can you increase the resolution of the printer in the software dialog box? That might help with the muddyness.
(Nancy) If they want to know what herbs look like, they should be getting books on herbs, etc.
(Nancy) Re bugs, everyone knows what a grasshopper looks like, etc!
(Jurian) like, the pic on page 92 is perfect, but the pic of the car on the next page, well, I can't quite make out what those things on the back of the car are supposed to be, so the picture doesn't really add anything to the information there, I think.
(Mary) Brent. I have tried everything I can think of to sharpen it...no luck.
(Nancy) So we stuck to the diagrams, like the windmill from a lawnmower, as examples.
(Brent) True, Nancy, this is to be a supplement to other books available.
(Mary) But, overall you all think it is the end product we were hoping to produce?
(Jan) Mary, the back binder seems one or two sizes too large for the booklet and is 1/2 shorter than the page. The front & back should if possible be thicker and maybe coated in some way. The printing is starting to go from my copy.
(Nancy) Page 92 is the woodgas photo from Olli in Finland, and this is as good as it's going to get. We have no other examples of wood gas. I guess we could remove it altogether, this is the only choice.
(Nancy) This image is also as a link from the Veggie TOPIC in Energy on the web, so you can compare.
(Mary) Jan. Yes, the binding machine does not let me adjust the page and then the plastic binding is cut off on each book. I hope to refine the punching process to eliminate that space.
(Nancy) Shirley says maybe we could put an arrow on the photo, or a description under the photo. Would that help?
(Jurian) Yeah, I think it would.
(Brent) My photo isn't too bad....and it's on page 94.
(Jurian) Describe what those things on the back are
(Jurian) Its not really bad, but you can't really see what those things are, on the back of the car.
(Jan) Nancy, I just looked at those same pictures, and I agree with Shirley's proposal.
(Nancy) Shirley says "I think we should put the book on thicker paper, and that would perhaps help the binding process."
(Nancy) Someone else also proposed laminating the covers. All this increases the cost, etc.
(Jan) As a general comment, I think all TT references should be removed and put as a general reference in the back. Same with all book references, remove them from each topic and gather them at the end of the booklet as "further reading".
(Roger) That's an excellent idea, Jan.
(Mary) Thicker paper would help I think but it will also add to the cost.
(Brent) I don't know...I like the book references at each topic. Quicker for the reader to reference.
(Nancy) Jan, you mean more info could be gotten from TT topics x, y, z? Just point to the web site itself.
(Mary) I like the TT references right where they are. If someone is only interested in shelters, they don't have to search the back for the references.
(Brent) Yes...it is supposed to be a quick reference guide....
(Jan) Nancy, no, this booklet will mostly be used by people that have no access to the Internet, or in situations where the Internet is not (or no longer) available.
(Nancy) We would gain space, by the single reference to TT web topics, also. When we do the rework, periodically, there will be a sentence here and there, so gaining back space would be an advantage. Else the booklet will just creep larger and larger, etc.
(Nancy) Shirley says "I'm opposed to removing the book references to the various topics!"
(Mary) Let it creep.....we anticipated that.
(Nancy) We seem to have an even split on opinions here ...
(Mary) I think the way Shirley has done the references flows well through the book. A continuity of thought.
(Jurian) well, the references are nice, but are they really useful? Like, when reading about alternative fuels, it is quite obvious you'd look in the sections 'alternatives' on the website, isn't it?
(Jan) My reason for wanting to move the book references as to get a comprehensive list of relevant books in one place.
(Brent) We could add a bibliography page in the back and have both.....
(Gerard) Well maybe for some but not for all ... I think Jurian ..
(Nancy) Shirley says "The only reason I don't want any references separated from their specific topics is that the booklet is merely a pointer, a signpost to point folks in the right direction, if they have their references right there, they know exactly where to go".
(Mary) We must remember not everyone has access to the website.
(Gerard) That's right Mary
(Jurian) well, I have no problem with them where they are, nor would I mind having them in the back, or both, but I do think they're often just pointing out the obvious..
(Nancy) Shirley says "The problem is that, there would be very little useful information, that could be put into the space that we would gain, and it isn't worth it to remove the references."
(Mary) That is because you are a smart person. Not everyone can see the obvious.(-:
(Jurian) Thanks :p
(Jurian) But remember Murpheys law! "Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will use it"
(Jan) On book references, they could be both places. Book references may even be of use post-PS, if your community has a library, or if a shortwave BBS has the book online.
(Brent) Plus, in some sections, there are multiple references instead of only one or two. This helps to direct a person to all applicable areas.
(Nancy) We're still evenly split here. Maybe I can do up a end-of-book Biblio and web reference, and see how the Board likes this, as compared to the existing layout? Next meeting, etc.
(Brent) Good idea, Nancy...
(Jurian) like I said, I don't mind them being where they are! :)
(Jan) I am more in doubt about the TT pointers, as in many cases, this booklet may be the better of the two.
(Brent) So Jan, what do you want to do about the TT pointers?
(Jan) I am uncertain if the TT pointers are needed at all (sorry if it was much work, Shirley) except for a general reference at the end.
(Brent) Because some folks with the booklet won't have access to the internet?
(Brent) I'm just trying to clarify....
(Nancy) We do refer to the actual URL on only one page. This is so that if/when the URL changes to be www.troubledtimes.com or some such, .org, etc. and the UNIX servers get online, we can change in only one place.
(Nancy) So, perhaps just a couple sentences to outline that there is an Energy section, a Food section, etc. and pointing to the hub page where it's obvious where to go, would suffice.
(Jan) Nncy, that's right
(Jurian) Yeah, a general pointer to the hub page would suffice, I think
(Nancy) Jan's point is well taken, in that if they have access to the web, they're going to go into TT and be there awhile.
(Nancy) In fact, if they have access, they might not even be ordering the booklet, except that they anticipate the Internet being GONE!
(Nancy) I think it would clean the book up a lot, though indicating books to get might be OK section by section.
(Jurian) well, a lot of people still prefer printed material over web pages!
(Jan) I also think the booklet will be read much like any other book initially, and may later become a source of reference. And as you point out Nancy, this booklet could very well be saved off for post-PS use when the net is down
(Nancy) Shirley says "Nancy has just read to me what she has put on page ii concerning the Hub. I do agree that no other mention need to made of the TT web site throughout the booklet."
(Nancy) Shirley says, "For now, I wish the references to stay, until the next reworking session".
(Jan) Anyhow, this is not an important point, so I'm easy with whatever is decided.
(Nancy) Let me work up a couple different approaches, on the web for review, and we can revisit!
(Jan) I think the more important issues are in fact paper quality etc.
(Nancy) To date, there has only been the one request, from some guy in Canada, so we are not cranking them out quite yet.
(Brent) Shirley's right, it doesn't have be be reworked NOW. This is just a discussion for improvements and changes later. There is nothing wrong with the booklet that demands immediate attention.
(Nancy) I think that this was a very good review!
(Mary) Nancy, Brent had a request for a booklet yesterday.
(Nancy) Koodoos to Shirley who dealt with a lot of subjects she has NO experience with whatsoever, to fomulate a summary of them!
(Jurian) Yeah, very well done! :-)
(Mary) The girl is a bloomin miracle!!! :-)
(Brent) Mary - I haven't received your email yet with attachment.
(Nancy) As I mentioned before, Ron and I envisioned a TEAM of experts in each area doing this summary!
(Mary) Brent...well, we think it was a request.
(Jurian) Heh, sadly, what we envision isn't always how it is :/
(Nancy) Shirley says "I could not have done it without outside help!" and you can take this anyway you want.
(Brent) Yes, you ladies have done amazing work!
(Jan) As I said initially, the booklet is an excellent piece of work. Our comments and viewpoints will only make it better.
(Jan) That should have been "even better".
(Mary) Jan, your comments and viewpoints are what we were searching for.
(Brent) Very true, Jan! Shall we move on to Item 4....Ongoing Projects. Roger would you lead us off?
(Nancy) Were we going to address the charge factor? Are we going to go with free, unless a group request, as the page states? Shall we wait to see how much demand we get, and how our funding is, before changing that?
(Roger) Well, what would you like for me to say? The tiller and other items were transported okay and under budget.
(Brent) Yes, we should discuss that. There is quite a price difference in local and overseas shipping.
(Brent) Sorry Roger....
(Mary) May I suggest we allocate a $ amount for the first X number of books and then see where we are in a couple of months.
(Roger) [No problem]
(Brent) What would you suggest, Mary, as an amount?
(Mary) I think I still have $20+ or so left. Lets use that up in postage and then see what happens.
(Brent) OK with the rest of the board? This doesn't really need a vote....
(Nancy) I move we allocate $100 for postage, or even $500.
(Brent) oops..... :-)
(Nancy) If we get a sudden demand, we'll be doing an e-mail votecall else!
(Mary) Nancy, I don't think we need to do that amount yet.
(Roger) I second Nancy's motion to allocate $100 for postage.
(Nancy) $500 for a postage pool, so Mary can just move along, using this as a Petty Cash fund where she gets money $100 at a time ahead of time, and we revisit when we've got more info in the future.
(Roger) I second that.
(Brent) Alright, let's vote on that....We have a motion for $500 postage pool. All in favor vote yes, opposed, no.
(Mary) $100 is a lot of postage money. I vote no.
(Nancy) Nancy and Shirley both say yes.
(Mary) That's over 50 books! in the US
(Brent) This is only a pool, Mary....$100 at a time when needed.
(Brent) Vote: yes
(Mary) Then I abstain.
(Gerard) I vote a yes too
(Jan) (I think you may be amazed by the demand when people start to understand something is going to happen...)
(Nancy) During this time, you gather statistics as to where we post and the like. Next time revisited, we will have the DATA.
(Gerard) Indeed Jan
(Mary) OK. ...for now
(Nancy) We have it out there as a PDF, so if they have access, they are likely taking it that way. But I do anticipate demand will SUDDENLY bloom, etc.
(Brent) Mary - as Nancy said, this way when you need postage, we won't have to have an emergency vote call to get you the money. You just get it from Nancy when the need arises.
(Mary) I would have just used my own money and asked to be reimbursed.
(Mary) People.. I have to leave. I will return if I can.
(Brent) OK, Thanks Mary.
(Nancy) Thank you, Mary, for all your hard work and your basic personality! STO!
(Jurian) Ok, cya later!
(Gerard) Okay bye Mary
(Brent) OK, now back to Item 4. Roger any other comments?
(Roger) A nearly two acre rectangular area has been selected for development into a large seed garden. Up to 57,000 sq feet of planting space will be available in this area!
(Roger) We intend to grow mostly low maintenance varieties here, like beans and corn and others.
(Roger) Space is available (obviously) for herbs as well as the developing low-light testing.
(Nancy) In that a bunch of us could hardly keep up with the acre of loaned land here, I think this is very ambitious!
(Nancy) Even pumpkins, which take care of themselves, took a lot of work harvesting and drying the seed.
(Roger) It will be quite a challenge for us.
(Roger) The fall harvest will be intense.
(Nancy) Having the tiller in use, and a low-light lab starting up, is WONDERFUL!
(Roger) Yes, definitely.
(Nancy) Hopefully, there will be more hands, offering help.
(Roger) At the moment work is being done to make arrangements to break the land initially with a tractor and plow.
(Roger) The tiller will do the job, but only after mowing the field to about 8 inches height.
(Roger) There will be more use for the tiller once the native grasses and wildflowers are knocked back a bit.
(Roger) The tiller might be able to make headway without mowing if the area is first treated with Roundup.
(Brent) And you have the worm bed materials! That's a big project in itself. I imagine you won't do anything with worms till maybe winter?
(Roger) This is still a touchy issue, even with me, but the logic is sound and will certainly reduce the battle against the native plants next season.
(Nancy) We used Roundup and Miracle Grow, as the concept is that we are trying to grow as much SEED as possible, not prove a concept.
(Nancy) Roger mentioned using worm bed liquid fertilizer in the low-light lab.
(Brent) I can see Toni shuddering at the mention of Roundup... :-)
(Roger) Yeah, the worm beds are stacked and waiting for a place. I am thinking of setting up one here in my garage and then a couple at my dad's. The rest will find a place in the shop or the basement of the land donor.
(Nancy) I found here that my beds need to be fed 3" thick cow or rabbit or pig manure every 3 months, as they eat it down utterly!
(Nancy) I'm sure when we collect the fertilizer, it will be very good!
(Brent) Sounds like a good plan, Roger. Spreading the worm beds around even gets others involved with the project, generating interest! I like it.
(Roger) The big difficulty with solar sterilization, etc. is the time needed for effectiveness. We just don't have the time to wait out the weed seed.
(Nancy) Roger, go for it! My opinion.
(Roger) There are opportunistic weeds that will come up, even after a Roundup treatment.
(Nancy) Roger, don't apologize for killing the weeds and being the MOST effective seed grower you can be in this last year!
(Roger) The huge startup expense is the fence that is needed to keep the donor's horse (and soon their cattle) out of garden.
(Brent) Yes, let's move on to your funding request of supplies...
(Roger) I tried to delineate them as best as possible. I think I should just answer any questions that you may have, rather than explain each and every item...
(Brent) Good idea...any questions?
(Brent) It's very self explanitory......
(Nancy) I move we approve Roger's list for supplies.
(Nancy) Shirley seconds.
(Roger) The original plan (from last meeting) was for a shed to shelter the tiller. That is no longer needed as the new area is near the house and barn.
(Roger) This list of supplies (save for the fence) would have remained in either case.
(Nancy) Yes! We have saved the funding for a shed, and Roger came in under budget on the tiller moving trip.
(Brent) A Motion has been made to approve Rogers Supply Funding. Vote yes or no.
(Brent) Vote: yes
(Nancy) Shirley and Nancy both vote yes.
(Roger) Thanks, all.
(Brent) The motion passes...good job Roger!
(Roger) Well, let's hope for good rains and light winds next year and I'll do my best to spread the word (the seed).
(Brent) I hope you get some volunteers to help in your area Roger! Nancy, would you discuss Carbon Arc and the Video Clips?
(Nancy) I have nothing more to add on the next two items, the Carbon Arc lamps for the lab and the video editing offer from my husband, outside of what the Agenda states.
(Roger) There will be help, when needed.
(Nancy) One is a hope, that I requested help from Mike and he posted to the tt-forum, and the other an offer.
(Nancy) I'm mulling over what to do about the Carbon Arc, but perhaps someone will come forward, that's my hunch.
(Nancy) If my husband sends a computer for editing, I'll learn to use it!
(Nancy) End of report.
(Brent) I hope he does... a video editing machine would be great.
(Brent) Someone will come forward on the carbon arc. We'll just keep the idea alive on the lists!
(Gerard) Indeed, will be good to have such a machine
(Brent) OK then, moving on to item 5 Shirley's Radio antenna
(Nancy) Shirley reports that $575.25 is the USD equivalent for the $850 Canadian as of last Friday.
(Brent) Wow, that seems like an excellent price for the description of the antenna she wants. Comments?
(Nancy) I gather from Jan's comments that only he and Shirley have their Morse Code licenses!
(Roger) Will Jan and Shirley be able to communicate with this antenna?
(Nancy) I move we fund Shirley's antenna, so she can participate on the tt-radio practice sessions and we have a SECOND antenna site for the network we are trying to encourage.
(Jan) Shirley told me some time back that she had a 12WPM (or was it 15WPM) license, but was not currently practicing.
(Jurian) I second Nancy's motion
(Jan) Nor did she have a rig at the time. Does she have an HF radio now?
(Nancy) Shirley says "This antenna operates on all bands except local 2 and 4 meter bands".
(Nancy) Shirley says "Yes, Jan and I could communicate!"
(Nancy) However, without this antenna, Shirley cannot do anything with her radio.
(Roger) Brent, there was a second...
(Nancy) Shirley says "In fact, I picked this antenna with Jan specifically in mind!"
(Brent) Who would have the second site, Jan?
(Roger) I thought so!
(Jan) Brent, ???
(Nancy) Shirely says "I have a TS570, which is an HF rig. I just got it from the CNIB (Canadian National Institute for the Blind)".
(Nancy) Shirley says "It is on a lease-to-own basis, $375/year, for 7 years".
(Brent) Well, we have a motion to fund Shirley's antenna, but also a second site.
(Jan) Shirley, this is awesome. I better get a decent antenna at my site soon!
(Nancy) Shirley says "I used part of my booklet award for completion money for the first payment".
(Roger) Brent, not a second site, a second to the motion.
(Roger) Jan seconded the motion...
(Brent) Roger, Nancy included the second site option....
(Jan) Brent, there will be no requests to fund the antenna at my site, at least not at this time. I have an Icom 756 HF rig and a 30m multi-band antenna at my post-PS site. I will need to get a larger tower later this autumn, though
(Roger) Yea, but Jan seconded the motion.
(Roger) The second site Nancy mentioned was Shirley's site.
(Nancy) Brent, Shirley's antenna will BECOME the second site to have an antenna, Jan being the first.
(Brent) OK, Jan...Then lets vote! All in favor of Shirley's funding of the antenna vote yes, opposed, no.
(Jan) Some confusion here it seems. If needed, I second the motion for Shirley's antenna
(Brent) Vote: yes
(Nancy) Nancy votes Yes, Shirley abstains.
(Brent) Gerard, is Toni still with us, or a ghost connection?
(Brent) We need her vote...
-) [Toni] PING
(Jurian) Should be here
(Jurian) Connection is still alive
(Nancy) If Roger votes, then we have 6, right?
(Nancy) Jan, Brent, Jurian, Roger, Nancy, Gerard = 6!
(Brent) True, I was just trying to include all present.......the motion carries. Congratulations Shirley!
(Jurian) Yes, congratulations :-)
(Nancy) Shirley says "Thank you all".
(Jan) Congrats, Shirley!
(Brent) This is a great step forward for the shortwave development!
(Jurian) Yeah :-)
(Roger) This is excellent, indeed.
(Brent) Thats all the agenda items...do I have a motion to adjourn?
(Nancy) I move we adjourn :-)
(Jurian) I second the motion
(Roger) Nancy, I need an advance of part of those funds for the startup.
(Nancy) Will do, Roger. I'll send a $500 check, OK?
(Roger) That will do fine. It will purchase the fence and the Roundup, etc.
(Brent) Very well. The meeting is adjourned. Thanks everyone!