[Board] [OSGeo-Conf] Getting the organization for 2014 settled

[Steven Feldman]

If you have a PCO, a commission paid sponsorship sales person and a company to enter into contractual relationships for a percentage of revenues you could be giving up $75k +

Does your budget allow for that? That's close to $100/delegate

I know that in 2013 I have been fortunate to have an amazingly committed team of volunteers who have put in a lot of personal time. Our outgoings and the surplus on the event will reflect their efforts

Steven 

On 27 Aug 2013, at 18:41, Paul Ramsey <pramsey at opengeo.org> wrote:

> I'm a bit confused, you have $30K in the budget for a professional
> conference organizer, they should be able to be the bank, and signer
> of contracts, with the possible exception of the venue, which could be
> handled as a one-off using Daniel or Jeff as the signer for OSGeo. Who
> is your professional organizing company?
> 
> P.
> 
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Darrell Fuhriman <darrell at garnix.org> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi, Board(s), we’d like to follow up to Daniel’s recent e-mail to the board
>> list.
>> 
>> I envision that one of first the tasks of this rep could be to work with you
>> to define the best fiscal scenario, and at the same time better document the
>> process and contractual relationship between OSGeo and the FOSS4G LOC
>> (and/or PCO). There is a good amount of experience from past years to work
>> from (see emails from Paul and Peter for instance), so it should be mostly a
>> matter of documenting an existing process, and then perhaps come up with a
>> template contract that would be used for this year and future years.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> We’ve been discussing this internally, and with Steve Swazee of SharedGeo
>> and David Bitner who worked on FOSS4G-NA 2013.
>> 
>> There are essentially two reasonable alternatives for handling this.
>> 
>> 1) Have OSGeo be the entity that signs contracts with facilities,
>> contractors, etc. With responsibilities and authority delegated as
>> appropriate to the LOC.
>> 2) Have a second organization be the contracting entity, with proceeds to be
>> returned to OSGeo.
>> 
>> As I understand it (1) has yet to be done. Also, given the state of the
>> OSGeo’s tax-exempt status, it’s possible that (1) will trigger a taxable
>> event, if the application for tax-exempt status does not go through, or is
>> delayed, or found to not be retroactive.
>> 
>> Option (2) is how FOSS4G-NA was handled, through Steve’s organization,
>> SharedGeo. SharedGeo still has funds from FOSS4G-NA, which are ear-marked
>> for OSGeo, but not yet transferred to OSGeo. Obviously that can still
>> trigger a taxable event, but at least leaves somewhere for the money to sit
>> until OSGeo’s tax-exempt status is worked out.
>> 
>> Long term, I think (1) is clearly the best option. Further, I think OSGeo
>> should have one person on staff, even if only part-time, to handle many of
>> these details in the future, or there should be an on-going contractual
>> relationship with an event management firm to do so.
>> 
>> If FOSS4G is going to be the primary source of revenue for OSGeo for the
>> foreseeable future, then it is foolish to not devote resources to making
>> sure that that revenue stream is reliable. If OSGeo fails to do so, there
>> *will* be a repeat of 2012. The current structure is simply too haphazard to
>> depend on.
>> 
>> And since now is as good a time as any, as I’ve said on the conference list,
>> but I will reiterate here in all caps for emphasis: ONE YEAR IS NOT ENOUGH
>> TIME TO ORGANIZE A CONFERENCE THIS SIZE. A paid staff person/organization
>> should be planning the conferences at least two, and ideally three years in
>> advance. We are very fortunate to be have been able to get the spaces we
>> need for 2014, and we should depend on planning, not luck for the future.
>> 
>> However, the long-term is not here yet, and we still have to deal with
>> contracts for FOSS4G 2014, and we need the board to decide whether to take
>> option (1) or option (2), and we need them to decide soon. If we’re going to
>> pull this off in 13 months, we need to be signing contracts now. (Well,
>> really, 12 months ago, but now is what we have.)
>> 
>> If the board feels that option (2) is the best option, then Steve Swazee of
>> SharedGeo has offered to operate FOSS4G 2014 under a similar tax and
>> organizational regime as they did for FOSS4G-NA 2013, however Steve feels
>> that the 3% of gross revenue SharedGeo received was ultimately inadequate
>> and has asked for 7% instead. Under our baseline budget estimates, that is
>> about $40,000 – for comparison, if we had to pay 30% taxes on profits under
>> our baseline budget that would be $29,000. Obviously that amount will vary
>> with the ultimate profitability of the conference.
>> 
>> I, personally, would like the see the board go with option (1) – and quickly
>> (as in immediately) assign a person to work the Portland LOC to hash out
>> which responsibilities go where, and then use that as a template for future
>> conferences.
>> 
>> But whichever option the board chooses, I cannot overemphasize the need to
>> make the decision and start to act as quickly as possible.
>> 
>> Darrell
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev