[OSGeo-Conf] Request for adaption of RfP documents

[adams at osgeo.org]

Dear CC!

Yesterday in the board meeting we discussed the issue on the cancelled
FOSS4G in 2020 again. One really important point is that we have to be
better prepared for similar issues in the future, especially in case,
that LOC's make a loss.

We thought about the following adaptions in the RfP documents:

- binding need to have an agreement between OSGeo and LOC's about how
potential losses (and surplus) will be handled and shared

- One of the identified problems is, that we do not have any control,
what LOC's do and what money they spend for what, once LOC's are
empowered. So, e.g. having a financial supervisor as consultant in every
LOC, that must be informed  when higher amounts of money will be spent
would be one option for this. In 2016 I had Steven as supervisor and it
was a great pleasure to have his experience on my side, so this also
helps LOC's, which normally are newbiews.

- changing the rules for the share of potential losses. E.g. in case,
that OSgeo is requested as fallback in case of a loss, OSGeo also gets
the majority of the surplus (I think it is like that, but maybe we need
to strenghthen this for the future).

- maybe we can also re-discuss whether it should be still possible not
to pass the majority of a surplus back to OSGeo in general. FOSS4G is
still the main source of income for OSGeo and we receive huge demands
for money every year.


As said, these are rough ideas for now, but we definitely need a change
of the RfP docs before the next RfP goes out.

How do we proceed here?

Till