[OSGeo-Conf] [Board] Request for seed funding for FOSS4G-NA 2019

Tue Sep 11 07:45:44 PDT 2018

Hey folks,

just checking in on this.

Jeff, do you have what you need to move forward?

-Guido

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 3:32 PM John Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, I thought I'd share my thoughts from the perspective of a regional
> FOSS4G organiser, for what it's worth. (FOSS4G SotM Oceania, coming up in
> November in Australia)
>
> For context: to save the trouble of setting up a financial entity of our
> own, we partnered with SSSI (an Australian spatial industry body). They
> didn't provide any seed funding - it wasn't necessary, as our other partner
> (Uni of Melbourne) is providing the venue. SSSI took 100% of the financial
> risk on the event, and in exchange we agreed to return 50% of any surplus,
> with some explicit targets. They have a seat on our organising committee
> for oversight, and their staff do the accounting and handle incoming &
> outgoing funds. It has worked very well for us, I can recommend it as a
> model for regional events.
>
> I think we'd probably have trouble with a commitment to return 85 or 90%
> of the surplus as unrestricted general funds, in exchange for a loan. 50%
> would be more palatable. (I'm assuming we're talking about returning from
> the surplus left *after* repayment of the seed funding.)
>
> We've had incredible support from partners, sponsors, and the community,
> and have been conservative with our budget, so we're expecting a decent
> surplus. We're looking forward to re-investing our share of this surplus
> back into another iteration of the event, and having control over that
> gives us confidence to take some risks and grow our impact. I think the key
> here is self-determination, autonomy, and empowerment. Losing control over
> the lion's share of the surplus would feel disempowering.
>
> On a practical level, unsure if OSGeo handling money for regional
> conferences is on the table. In our case, we need to manage funds in
> Australian dollars. It has been helpful to have quick turnaround on
> invoices & payments. Providing this kind of support in a local timezone &
> currency might be difficult for OSGeo.
>
> We love OSGeo and consider ourselves to be part of the family... looking
> forward to sharing all our lessons learned along the way!
>
> Cheers
> John
>
> On Sat, 8 Sep 2018 at 03:09, María Arias de Reyna <delawen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think we should ask less porcentage for smaller events. Money that
>> stays on the local communities can help them grow, so it's good to let them
>> keep some. I would go for 50% instead of 90%. In net numbers, we add global
>> shouldn't notice much difference, but for them it may mean being able to
>> host another event without seed money or not.
>>
>> El vie., 7 sept. 2018 18:59, Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com>
>> escribió:
>>
>>> We already have a “standard” agreement for seed funding a FOSS4G Global
>>> conference - an example (2016, Bonn) is at
>>> https://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/2016/financial_stuff/agreement_with_osgeo/
>>>
>>> In return for seed funding and a limited financial guarantee the
>>> conference agrees to remit 90% of any surplus to OSGeo. I think in the
>>> FOSS4G Cookbook we may have changed that to at least 85%. I don’t know if
>>> that would be acceptable to the NA team? We need to have a consistent
>>> policy for regional and global events seeking seed funding and/or a
>>> financial guarantee (any guarantee should be limited otherwise we could
>>> bankrupt OSGeo if something goes disastrously wrong).
>>>
>>> I think that a financial transparency clause should be added to the
>>> funding agreement going forward and also to the FOSS4G Cookbook (I’m not
>>> sure that we can make financial transparency mandatory if we are not
>>> providing seed funds or a guarantee but we can encourage it).
>>>
>>> Do we have a funding agreement with Bucharest?
>>> ______
>>> Steven
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6 Sep 2018, at 18:45, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I don't track the OSGeo budget or Treasurer reports very closely.
>>> I'd like to hear from the Treasurer pertaining to what amounts are
>>> available and keep in mind several events.  FOSS4G 2019 Bucharest is
>>> the next focus.  FOSS4G 2020 LOI and selection will start soon as well
>>> and there are potentially expenses that they may encounter early.  I'd
>>> also like to hear from the BLOC about 2019.  We have to be guided by
>>> what is financially possible which should be information that should
>>> come from the Treasurer and Board informed by the Conference
>>> Committee, FOSS4G 2019 BLOC, and FOSS4G2020 LOC.  The Board and
>>> Treasurer also get to determine the level of risk they want to assume
>>> (i.e. how much liability beyond seed money vs reserve levels and
>>> anticipated income).
>>>
>>> Based on the premise of financial feasibility, I potentially support
>>> seed funding for FOSS4G-NA and think that it could be a good model to
>>> expand to regional conferences.  The international event is the first
>>> and second priority though.  Regional events would be lower priority.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 3:42 AM, Ian Turton <ijturton at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it would be nice to get an agreement to report (at least) the
>>> heads
>>> of the accounts back to OSGeo - so what was spent on each major category
>>> of
>>> expense (e.g. conf centre, food, promotion, speakers, etc) if we are
>>> putting
>>> seed funding in
>>>
>>>
>>> For using OSGeo money, I'd like to get more information than this.
>>> The last decade of the international FOSS4G event has shown that it
>>> can be done with remarkable transparency.  But yes, at a minimum, an
>>> outline of expenses and income and where the money goes.
>>>
>>> Ian
>>>
>>> On Thu, 6 Sep 2018 at 09:56, María Arias de Reyna <delawen at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Right now there is money to lend 20k. Not in the initial budget for
>>> this year, but the money is on the bank. So the decision would be if
>>> we want to prioritize this investment instead of others (existing or
>>> future). Remember this is the year when the main FOSS4G don't give any
>>> funding back. Which I don't think it will be a problem, as FOSS4GNA is
>>> important to our community and should be helped. But I wanted to say
>>> this explicit so it is clear that we are not just lending money
>>> blindly.
>>>
>>> I am happy to give seed funding to events, this is really something we
>>> can do and will make a difference to many LOCs. But, of course, we
>>> need to setup some requirements for this. Not saying that you don't
>>> fit on them, but it is something we should discuss, specially if we
>>> want to extend this seed funding to other events that request it. It
>>> won't be nice if some other regional event come and then we ask them
>>> more than we ask you :) Is this the first time a regional event ask
>>> for funding? I don't remember any previous one.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think it has been discussed a few times, I don't remember if it was
>>> ever done though.  We have some things to follow based on the
>>> international event.  Here is a draft that covers some of it,
>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#Finances  We also have a
>>> few years of agreements with LOCs to use as an example.  I took a
>>> quick look through SVN and found a few things,
>>> https://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/2016/financial_stuff/.  Maybe
>>> additional years are in the Board documents?  Searching the email list
>>> provides lots of results.  For instance,
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2016-March/003584.html
>>> (and the attachments).  And other year,
>>>
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2015-September/003196.html
>>> (links too).  Steven has provided a previous summary of some past
>>> years,
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/2015-September/003223.html
>>> (see link in that email).
>>>
>>> Insight from Michael Turner and Guido Stein, Till Adams and others
>>> might be useful here as they recently went through working this out
>>> for conferences that they ran.
>>>
>>> So, about requirements: what is the planning to return the money? Are
>>> you going to share the profit (if any) with OSGeo? I think it makes
>>> sense to ask for a returning percentage of the profit to have more
>>> money in the bank and be able to help more events. I understand some
>>> conferences will be even and have no profit, but those who have profit
>>> can help growing the community. Maybe a 30~50% of profit back to
>>> OSGeo? So at least half of it can be saved for future FOSS4GNA events.
>>>
>>>
>>> The agreement that is typically made for the international FOSS4G is
>>> typically much higher than 50% (closer to 90-100% but with some
>>> portion taken out to fund continuing local/specific events, or
>>> different percents at different dollar amounts.).  And it comes back
>>> as unrestricted general funds.
>>>
>>> Other thing I would request is that you share statistics and knowledge
>>> after the event. For example, if you experiment with new ways to
>>> attract people, did it work? Are demographics balanced? Was it more
>>> business, user, developer oriented? What did people enjoy more that
>>> can be reused for other events? Did something fail that could be
>>> organized on a better way? Did you have unexpected budget changes?
>>> What percentage of the budget did go to what (catering, venue,
>>> communications,...)? In summary, any info that can help us organize
>>> better events. I understand there are details we can't disclose, but
>>> anything that can be shared, please, share it.
>>>
>>> And, of course, as sometimes people go to FOSS4G and they don't know
>>> what OSGeo is, I would request that OSGeo has a special place in the
>>> conference. Not only a booth, but also that it should be explicitly
>>> mentioned and explained in (at least) opening and closing. This can
>>> help us growing the community and keep them engaged the whole year,
>>> not only for one conference.
>>>
>>> Did I miss something important?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 10:34 AM Cameron Shorter
>>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Jeffrey, Jody,
>>>
>>> I'd suggest looping in the OSGeo Conference committee
>>> (conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org) on wider FOSS4G-NA topics such as
>>> these, as
>>> hopefully there should be useful opinions and support from within the
>>> community.
>>>
>>>
>>> Good idea Cameron.  Much of this work has been done for the
>>> international event.  Coming up with something for regional events
>>> would take some more work but is possible and logical.
>>>
>>> (You'd get supportive feedback from me in the first instance).
>>>
>>> Cheers and good luck, Cameron
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/09/2018 4:13 AM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>> The total venue cost is $40k total with no requirements to commit to a
>>> hotel block at catering. They require a 1/2 deposit so $20k would be
>>> better.
>>> Not sure if that much budget would be available?
>>>
>>> Happy to discuss at the IRC meeting.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:09 Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Jeff,
>>>
>>> We can of course amend our budget to help (kind of thought we had until
>>> next year but opportunity waits for no one).
>>>
>>> 10k seems ... a bit low. Your venue must indeed be inexpensive.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:59 AM Jeffrey Johnson <ortelius at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Jeff and Rob,
>>>
>>> Our San Diego Local Organizing Committee would like to request seed
>>> funds for FOSS4G-NA 2019 which we are organizing for mid-april next
>>> year. The past few years have seen this event organized by
>>> LocationTech and with a professional conference organizer, and while
>>> we will strive to put on a really great event, we are going to try to
>>> be budget conscious and run a more grass roots event. We have a great
>>>
>>>
>>> This sounds like a great event!  How grass roots are you thinking?
>>> Will there be a PCO?  In a practical matter, who will write checks or
>>> sign contracts?  (there are different ways to do this, OSGeo, PCO,
>>> LOC, companies, etc).
>>>
>>> location on Mission Bay in SD that imposes very few restrictions on
>>> what we can and cant do, giving us alot of freedom to do things a bit
>>> differently than they have been done before.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is really good.  Onerous venue contracts make things much more
>>> difficult.  Congrats!
>>>
>>>
>>> We are shooting for an overall budget of $150k-200k and expecting 500+
>>> people. I'm not quite sure the level of seed funding provided in the
>>> past for these types of regional events, but we would like to ask for
>>> $10k if possible.
>>>
>>>
>>> The international FOSS4G events which have gotten seed funding have
>>> gone through a rigorous process of of review including detailed budget
>>> review.  Do you have more information or details on your budget and
>>> whole organizing plan?  I guess this is my main question, do you have
>>> more information and details?  That would answer who is signing
>>> contracts, writing checks, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do let me/us know if you have any questions/concerns that can be
>>> answered and hope to see some of you in April next year.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think that seed funding will probably be possible (pending the
>>> Treasurer and Board have funds in addition to the international events
>>> and want the risk).  Trailblazing seed funding for regional events
>>> will require some amount of work.  You're both familiar with that.
>>> There is a lot of existing material for guidance from the
>>> international event.
>>>
>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jeff & Rob (SDLOC Co-chairs)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cameron Shorter
>>> Technology Demystifier
>>> Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
>>>
>>> M +61 (0) 419 142 254 <+61%20419%20142%20254>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ian Turton
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20180911/f3ff2255/attachment-0001.html>