[OSGeo-Conf] Need to define rules for %age of backflow of FOSS4G surplus

Thu Jan 2 11:35:57 PST 2020

Eli/Steven:

Question from the sidelines, do you know when the idea of funds going to
the LOC started? As a bystander I thought the idea was to help found local
OSGeo chapters but I am not sure if that happen in each case?
--
Jody Garnett

On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 at 07:14, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:

> If we’re revising, stepped amounts make more sense to me, 50/50 split of
> the first $30,000, 90 OSGeo / 10 LOC there after.  OSGeo already has a host
> of great programs and ways to spend the money.  It also is the reason that
> FOSS4G happens.  (It also is how OSGeo exists).
>
> I’m all in favor of LOCs getting some portion of the proceeds (that’s why
> I like an aggressive initial percent), but think of what is a good amount
> for a LOC to tuck away for the future and then think of typical returns.
>
> Best regards, Eli
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 4:20 AM Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Till
>>
>> IMO: The RfP is published each year, it sets out OSGeo’s expectations for
>> LOCs to bid. I think it is binding but it would do no harm to strengthen
>> that with some more formal language when we revise the RfP document later
>> this year.
>>
>> ______
>> Steven
>>
>> Unusual maps in strange places -  mappery.org
>>
>> Subscribe to my weekly “Maps in the Wild <http://eepurl.com/dKStT-/>”
>> newsletter
>>
>> On 2 Jan 2020, at 11:54, Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Steven,
>>
>> thanks, I missed to read the RfP carefully ;-)
>>
>> Is it enough to have this only in the RfP docs?
>>
>> Till
>>
>>
>> Am 02.01.20 um 12:39 schrieb Steven Feldman:
>>
>> In the RfP document it says (my italics):
>>
>> "Funding by OSGeo and distribution of surplus
>>
>>    1.
>>       1.
>>
>>       It is expected that all FOSS4G events will be budgeted and
>>       operated to deliver a surplus over costs. *Part of the surplus
>>       will be donated to OSGeo.*
>>
>>    Seed Funding
>>
>>    OSGeo can offer seed funding (an advance to cover start-up expenses
>>    and deposits before revenues are received) and an additional guarantee to
>>    cover losses (up to an agreed limit) in the event of unexpected events
>>    (subject to approval of budgets and regular financial updates to an OSGeo
>>    board representative).
>>
>>    If OSGeo provides seed funding and guarantees, it is expected that in
>>    the region of 85% of any surplus generated will be donated to OSGeo (a
>>    lower percentage will be considered for events hosted in Lower or Middle
>>    Income economies). OSGeo will provide a financial supervisor who must be
>>    consulted on all major financial decisions. For more information see 
>>    https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook#Finances
>>
>>    *If a LOC does not require seed funding or guarantees from OSGeo,
>>    they will be expected to donate at least 50% of the surplus after costs to
>>    OSGeo.*
>>
>>    Travel Grant
>>
>>    OSGeo will provide a grant of $10,000 minimum towards a Travel Grant
>>    Programme (see
>>    https://www.osgeo.org/initiatives/foss4g-travel-grant-program/ ),
>>    the LOC are expected to raise at least an equivalent amount of funding
>>    through sponsorship, donations at registration or other means.
>>
>>    Video
>>
>>    OSGeo may provide loan funding towards the cost of recording the
>>    conference proceedings. If there is surplus from the conference, OSGeo
>>    requires this funding to be repaid in full to OSGeo before any calculation
>>    and distribution of the conference surplus."
>>
>>    ______
>>    Steven
>>
>>    Unusual maps in strange places -  mappery.org
>>
>>    Subscribe to my weekly “Maps in the Wild <http://eepurl.com/dKStT-/>”
>>    newsletter
>>
>>
>>    On 2 Jan 2020, at 09:05, Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de> wrote:
>>
>>    Dear conference committee,
>>
>>    you know, that surplus of FOSS4G's is one of the major source of
>>    income
>>    of OSGeo. The upcoming two events are good examples, that we need a
>>    binding and general rule about "what happens with a potential surplus
>>    of
>>    a FOSS4G": Calgary did not claim for seed money and explained to
>>    transfer back "at least 50%", Buenes Aires recently requested for seed
>>    money and mentioned a transfer back of 30% in their bid (Steven asked
>>    about that during the RfP).
>>
>>    On our last board meeting, we discussed the request from Buenes Aires
>>    regarding seed money. I know, there is a general rule, that says, that
>>    if a LOC of a FOSS4G requests for seed money, that we as an
>>    organisation
>>    expect, that at least 85% of the potential surplus goes back to OSGeo.
>>    This rule is AFAIK written in the "FOSS4G cookbook" but in the WIKI
>>    still marked as "draft" [1].
>>
>>    So, in my eyes, we need to approve this rule and make it binding for
>>    future bids. Also, there is no rule about the surplus going back to
>>    OSGeo, if teams do *not* request for seed money. I think we should
>>    need
>>    to define a rule here also.
>>
>>
>>    Any thoughts?
>>
>>    Till
>>
>>
>>
>>    [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php?title=FOSS4G_Handbook#Finances
>>
>>    _______________________________________________
>>    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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20200102/7249a1db/attachment.html>