[OSGeo-Discuss] Fwd: Board nomination: Jeff McKenna

Eli Adam eadam at co.lincoln.or.us
Wed Oct 18 17:34:31 PDT 2017 

Hi Vasile,



On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Vasile Craciunescu
<vasile at geo-spatial.org> wrote:
> Dear Eli,
>
> I appreciate your concerns related to OSGeo board elections. However, I have
> a few points to make. This year we had 2 CRO people, not just one. In your
> message on this topic you always make it sound like the CRO ended up in a
> conflict position and this is not entirely true. Actually, during the board

Correct, only Jeff in his role as CRO was a conflict of interest and
(in my opinion) violation of the procedure.  If you were not also a
CRO, then this truly would have been a governance crisis and lack any
shred of legitimacy.  It looks like you noted that you were a good
selection as your term runs for another year.  CROs used to always be
board members with another year remaining on their term thus making
nomination of the CRO impossible.

You've done a great job Vasile and none of your actions or work are
clouded by conflict of interest or violation of procedure.

> meeting when the CRO position was decided I was the one stepping up for this
> role. During that meeting Jeff was invited to manage this year Sol Katz
> award so he was also present. Next topic item was the CRO, the moment when
> Jeff offered his help for CRO, as he did in most of the previous years. The
> log is available at [1]. The board motion was to have two CRO for elections.
> And Jeff did an wonderful job during the new charter members nomination
> process. Then, Jeff stepped down immediately after his nomination for the
> board members elections. He never had access to the electronic voting system
> (that was setup a week later) and his access to cro at osgeo.org email was
> cutoff a few hours later. Personally I share your position that a CRO should
> not be in the situation to be nominated for a position in the elections that

One way to handle that would have been to not accept the nomination
since it did not follow procedure of where to send the nomination and
it was also a nomination of (one of) the CROs which is an additional
violation of procedure.  The Board also could have prevented this
possibility by not appointing a CRO who was able to accept a
nomination.

As you know, the CRO is a position of much work and responsibility and
also privy to lots of information that comes through to the CRO email
alias (you for instance know people who may have been nominated and
declined the nomination).  Being in that position in any portion of
the election process is more than enough to disqualify someone in my
opinion.

> he/she is managing. However, in this case, OSGeo had the position covered
> and the changes were done transparently. I know for a fact that Jeff din not
> think about a nomination when offered his help. It happen and he resign from
> his position to remove the conflict. At that moment I have asked Jorge for
> help for technical problems (not as co-CRO as this should require board
> acceptance and the time was short). All this elections discussions, starting
> with Jeff resignation, were performed through CRO email alias and I can make
> that public if any concerns regarding the impartiality/transparency of the
> elections are raised by you or by anyone else.
>
> Best,
> Vasile
> CRO 2017

In any case Vasile, you've done a great amount of work and continue to
do a good job.  It is clear that the Board sees this as a non-issue in
which case they've done their job.  We elect the Board to act (or not
act) on these issues and we have to live with the Board's actions (or
inactions).  In my opinion, it is not a legitimate election and such
loss of the rule of law in OSGeo could lead to trouble eventually.

Thanks for all your tireless work in this job.

Sorry to everyone on this list having to listen to yet another thread.
Hopefully we can return to our mostly productive work in the various
realms of OSGeo.

Best regards, Eli

>
>
> [1] http://irclogs.geoapt.com/osgeo/%23osgeo.2017-04-12.log
>
>
>
> On 10/18/17 10:15 PM, Eli Adam wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Eli the board did not deliberate, you can see the board email list. I
>>> have
>>> been glad for individual such as yourself caring, speaking up, and
>>> hopefully
>>> attending the next board meeting.
>>>
>>
>> I thought that this issue might have been of enough concern for the
>> Board to deliberate it.  Indeed, I thought that Venka's earlier
>> comment was an indication that that might happen.
>>
>>
>>> I think we have all learned a lot this election period, and cannot thank
>>> the
>>> cro enough for keeping up.
>>>
>>
>> CRO is a very large and difficult job.  Yes, great thanks to the CROs.
>>
>>> I trust the next board meeting will provide an update from the cro and an
>>> opportunity for discussion. The board is in a strange situation during
>>> elections, handing over control of the process to the CRO, and with 1/2
>>> the
>>> participants at the end of their term. If you track the most recent board
>>> meetings several items have been deferred to the next board, so I
>>> understand
>>> the board not feeling able to deliberate in the middle of elections.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, the Board appoints the CRO(s) to run the elections for them.
>> While the Board can defer some things to future Boards (especially
>> future looking things), the Board is responsible for anything that
>> arises while they are on duty.
>>
>>> It is also important to trust the CRO to act in good faith on behalf of
>>> our
>>> organization. I did speak up when I was concerned that member list had
>>> not
>>> been updated and would interfere in the CRO performing their task - but
>>> that
>>> was it.
>>>
>>
>> I largely believe that once a task is delegated, that person has the
>> latitude to act.  In this case, I would have thought it was worth
>> deliberation and consultation with the CRO on how they want to run
>> elections that don't go exactly following the process.
>>
>>> This is a hard lesson to learn, when to deliberate and when to encourage.
>>> Many of the deliberations about foss4g affordability were left until the
>>> Boston F2F meeting, to avoid distracting from the excellent work being
>>> done
>>> by the BLOC. If if well intentioned, deliberating during the course of an
>>> activity can distract contributors and bring out feelings of "why
>>> bother". I
>>> think this was the bickering referenced during the candidates debate
>>> yesterday.
>>>
>>> Finally as a candidate in this election I could not see a clear way to
>>> deliberate the current election that would not be viewed as a personal
>>> attack, or dismissed as campaigning.
>>>
>>
>> This seems rather straight forward.  For the Board to deliberate this
>> manner fairly, directors like you who are running for reelection would
>> be obligated to show up for quorum and abstain from discussion and
>> voting.  The issue would be decided by the portion of the Board with
>> their term running until 2018 and those who are not running for
>> reelection.  But yes, I do see how you personally would be hampered
>> from really engaging this topic.
>>
>> Best regards, Eli
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> On 18 October 2017 at 10:23, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Jorge Sanz <jsanz at osgeo.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> HI Eli,
>>>>>
>>>>> If I recall correctly, we answered you that Jeff immediately resigned
>>>>> from
>>>>> his position as CRO and he has not been involved at all in any Board
>>>>> elections CRO activity so everything is correctly handled except (and
>>>>> we
>>>>> apologized for that) the lack of a Trac ticket for the alias change.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Jorge.  I know those are the events that happened, however, I
>>>> never saw the Board deliberate and consider whether that is acceptable
>>>> or not.  In my opinion, it is not, however I'm not on the Board, nor
>>>> is one Director's opinion a position of the Board.  In the absence of
>>>> any Board action on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>>> I was left to conclude "that this issue is of no concern to the
>>>> Board."
>>>>
>>>> Has the Board deliberated or considered this?  Did they take a position?
>>>>
>>>> The reason to have a process and follow it even when you maybe don't
>>>> "need" it, is so that you also follow the process when you *do* need
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 18 October 2017 at 18:07, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Venka, all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Venka,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan
>>>>>>> <raghavan at media.osaka-cu.ac.jp> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Eli,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> First of all, thanks to Jorge for volunteering to be co-CRO
>>>>>>>> and fixing the CRO alias promptly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, thanks Jorge.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regarding your other comment reproduced below;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>>>>>>> their last meeting,
>>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> of no concern to the Board.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The question of review this topic at the 2017-10-05 board meeting
>>>>>>>> did
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> arise
>>>>>>>> as the nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-08.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for fixing my mistake, I misunderstood the dates and thought
>>>>>>> that nomination for our ex-co-CRO was filed on 2017-10-01.  Sorry to
>>>>>>> suggest that it was of no concern to the Board when it is actually
>>>>>>> unknown.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It appears that voting has now started and I don't see any Board
>>>>>> threads on the legitimacy of the CRO accepting a nomination,
>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/2017-October/thread.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would like to assure you that I share your concern about the
>>>>>>>> proper
>>>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Great, I hope that the Board follows the proper process.  I'll stop
>>>>>>> making noise and allow the proper process to work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should I now conclude that this issue is of no concern to the Board?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Venka
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/12/2017 1:58 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Eli,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I did it yesterday without having a ticket involved. My bad sorry.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I confirm that the CRO alias is now sending emails only to Vasile
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Jorge Sanz
>>>>>>>> https://jorgesanz.net
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my phone, excuse my brevity and typos
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> El 11 oct. 2017 18:36, "Eli Adam" <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> escribió:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Fenoy Gerald
>>>>>>>> <gerald.fenoy at geolabs.fr>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear Eli,
>>>>>>>> as you may have notice, Jeff has stepped down from his position of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> co-CRO when accepting the Nicolas’ nomination [1].
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I didn't find that thread while scanning through the archive.
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> for pointing it out to me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeff was involved in the charter member election process as co-CRO
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> he is no more so, I guess, there is no issue for the board election.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Was the cro at osgeo.org email alias updated?  I didn't notice a ticket
>>>>>>>> for that.  I'm impressed that there is so little concern about the
>>>>>>>> proper process.  The Board did not appear to review this topic at
>>>>>>>> their last meeting,
>>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05, so perhaps it
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> of no concern to the Board.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-October/036449.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gérald Fenoy
>>>>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Le 11 oct. 2017 à 16:04, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nicolas,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:48 PM, nicolas bozon
>>>>>>>> <nicolas.bozon at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is my honor to nominate Jeff McKenna for the OSGeo Board of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Directors
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> election.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think that you can nominate the CRO, nor can the CRO accept
>>>>>>>> your nomination,
>>>>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Chief_Returning_Officer.
>>>>>>>> In some past years the CRO was a sitting Board member with a year
>>>>>>>> remaining on their term thus avoiding this situation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Most of you knows Jeff's energy and passion for everything OSGeo,
>>>>>>>> and i
>>>>>>>> would probably be mistaken trying to summarize his countless
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> contributions
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> over the years, at every level of our Foundation. His leadership and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> long
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> involvement in the OSGeo and FOSS4G communities made him the Winner
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Solz Katz Award in 2016, and i cannot add more. For those of you who
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> really not know Jeff yet, the User:Jeff_McKenna wiki page is a good
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> read
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> before you vote.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeff already served three times at the board and has a deep
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> understanding of
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> both the director role and the current OSGeo strategic plan.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Experienced
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> with OSGeo governance and bylaws, Jeff also knows a lot about
>>>>>>>> projects
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> people. He is always ready to help build locally and to represent
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> globally.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jeff is a great communicator and enthusiastic community leader, and
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>> believe he will be an excellent OSGeo director again. Please let us
>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>> welcome Jeff back at the Board!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nicolas Bozon
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Jeff McKenna agreed to be nominated and i decided to send the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> nomination
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> directly to the Discuss list with cc to CRO, so it avoids Jeff to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> confirm to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> himself that he accepts the nomination. The Board Nominations page
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> need to be updated, could you please Vasile ? Sorry for shortening
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> nomination process in this special case.
>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The point is not to avoid Jeff confirming to himself that he accepts
>>>>>>>> the nomination, it is to avoid the CRO running an election and
>>>>>>>> counting votes when they are also standing for election. It is
>>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>> the Board's (and CRO's) responsibility to ensure that this situation
>>>>>>>> doesn't occur.  The Board should not appoint CROs who might accept a
>>>>>>>> nomination and people who might accept a nomination should not
>>>>>>>> accept
>>>>>>>> appointment as CRO.  Maybe we should return to the tradition of the
>>>>>>>> CRO being a sitting Board member with a year remaining on their
>>>>>>>> term.
>>>>>>>> CRO is a difficult job and much credit to those who do it.  Also,
>>>>>>>> someone (other than me) should be paying attention to the basic
>>>>>>>> process and raise these issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jorge Sanz
>>>>> http://www.osgeo.org
>>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Vasile Crăciunescu
> geo-spatial.org: An elegant place for sharing geoKnowledge & geoData
> http://www.geo-spatial.org
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/geo-spatial

More information about the Discuss mailing list