[OSGeo Oceania] Budget for FY 2021/2022

Thu Apr 1 23:37:40 PDT 2021

Hey Ed

And to others, I haven't quite weighed in on the comments included in
emails yet.

On Good Mojo, there has been just over $400 distributed through John
Bryant's initiatives. There was a women's breakfast and something coded as
a 'grant' for the Perth hub, some kind of travel grant?

So yes, it's not quite accurate to say we spent $0. Profit and loss is
included for this FY below.

Cheers,

[image: image.png]

On Fri, 2 Apr 2021 at 16:14, Edoardo Neerhut <eneerhut at gmail.com> wrote:

> @Alex Leith <alexgleith at gmail.com> can we get confirmation that the Good
> Mojo spend was actually $0. I agree that we should spend it how it was
> intended, as doing otherwise undermines our ability to collect
> interest/issue specific funds in future.
>
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2021 at 23:57, John Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> *Re: Good Mojo* - when the board decides how to spend this fund, be
>> conscious this money was collected from community contributors with the
>> understanding it would be used to support
>> diversity/accessibility/sustainability initiatives related to the
>> conference. See the 2018 [1] and 2019 [2] conference websites to see how
>> this was communicated to contributors at the time. I'm sure there's leeway
>> to re-interpret how the funds can be used (eg. outside of the conference)
>> but I believe it should be done very carefully, and communicated clearly to
>> respect the contributors. I'm not sure microgrants would be an effective
>> way to spend this money, without revising the microgrant guidelines to more
>> specifically address diversity/accessibility/sustainability.
>>
>> *Re: conference* - I understand conference planning isn't very far along
>> yet, but I urge OSGeo Oceania to take an active role in any sponsorship
>> drive that might take place this year, and get started as early as
>> possible. It makes more sense to me that sponsor relationships would be
>> developed and nurtured over years, rather than handing them off to an LOC
>> to start anew each year. Re: financial risk, a strong sponsorship drive
>> seems to me the clearest path to mitigating that risk.
>>
>> *Re: a deficit of $25k* - if it means the 2018 & 2019 conference surplus
>> funds are finally re-invested in the community, I'm all for it. My opinion
>> is that the money is there to be spent, and if it's not replenished, so be
>> it. This conference/organisation started without a cent to its name and
>> made a big impact regardless. Community engagement is far more valuable
>> than money sitting in the bank!
>>
>> [1] https://2018.foss4g-oceania.org/attend/good-mojo-program.html
>> [2] https://2019.foss4g-oceania.org/sponsor
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 at 11:55, Greg Lauer <gregory.lauer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Following on from the comments received so far...
>>>
>>> *Conference*
>>>
>>> We have not yet received a budget from the Conference Committee so it it
>>> is difficult to allocate a budget. I suspect we just carried over the
>>> proposed budget from last year. I am in agreement with JB's comments that
>>> there is opportunity to gain sponsorship etc. but at this time this is not
>>> in place. We do need an alternative source(s) of revenue. Sponsorship
>>> is one, grants are another. All involve significant amount of effort on an
>>> ongoing basis to continually engage with prospective entities. My
>>> personal opinion is that we illustrate the worst case scenario,
>>> allowing a certain degree of flexibility. Although the last conference
>>> nearly broke even, every conference is a financial risk to OSGeo Oceania
>>> and I feel feel the budget needs to reflect that. With the complications of
>>> Covid I feel we still need to take a cautious approach for 21/22. Would
>>> welcome further discussion on this as it is a major budget item.
>>>
>>> *Good Mojo*
>>>
>>> As I understand it (Alex feel free to chip in) we have ~$8000 'tagged'
>>> as for Good Mojo. I am not sure why we have tagged it $0, but I suspect
>>> that has to do with that Good Mojo Funds have been used to fund various
>>> activities that fall under other budget activities (for example Women's
>>> Breakfasts) So to be clear it is not missing. Maybe there is a better
>>> way to illustrate this within the budget? We have budgeted for Outreach
>>> and community support. Maybe make available some Good Mojo funds to
>>> this or Microgrants etc.
>>>
>>> *Microgrants*
>>>
>>> Eli presented an update to the Board and if I understand correctly we
>>> have 2 grants approved out of 7 applications (with 2 declined and 3
>>> awaiting more information). Great to see the momentum growing. Yes early
>>> days but agree that budget should be revised for this. Maybe the best
>>> way to manage this is for the Microgrant Committee to submit a budget
>>> request? Then this can be considered as part of the budget.
>>>
>>> *SIGs*
>>>
>>> We have proposed a budget allocation of $2,500 to each SIG. (This is
>>> indicated in the 21/22 tab). As per Martin's comments I feel we should
>>> provide 'seed' funding to the SIG's on an annual basis, until such time
>>> that they are self-sufficient. The SIG's have been set up in such a way
>>> that any spending is transparent and can be wholly managed by the SIG
>>> committee. I would like us moving away from the Board having to authorise
>>> minor expenditure for SIG's and have them manage directly. By making
>>> available a pool of money to the SIG's the committees can mange in what
>>> ever way they see fit.
>>>
>>> I feel the key issue for OSGeo Members is that we are predicting a
>>> deficit of up to $25,000 in 21/22 and are we happy to support that? We
>>> budgeted a similar deficit in 20/21 and it looks like an actual deficit of
>>> $6,000.
>>>
>>> Please keep the comments and thoughts rolling in!
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>> On 3/27/2021 4:14:13 AM, Edoardo Neerhut <eneerhut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks for fantastic feedback.
>>>
>>> *Conference*
>>> I had similar thoughts on the conference to you John. From memory we
>>> agreed to keep tabs on how conference plans develop over the next month or
>>> so and incorporate that into conference expectations.
>>>
>>> *Good Mojo*
>>> Keen to hear from Alex here. I have been shamefully ignorant to the Good
>>> Mojo fund of late.
>>>
>>> *Microgrants*
>>> I think it's reasonable to increase this given it will be the second
>>> financial year of microgrants. This could be one we asterix and review
>>> monthly before we finalise the budget and allocate a final figure. It'd be
>>> great to see how current funds are used over the next couple of months.
>>>
>>> *SIGs*
>>> If new SIGs emerge, couldn't they be covered with the funds Outreach and
>>> Community support? That's what happened this financial year, and then the
>>> SIGs can get dedicated funding once they're established.
>>>
>>> On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 at 22:14, Martin Tomko <tomkom at unimelb.edu.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree here with John,
>>>>
>>>> I think we can be more optimistic than in the catastrophic plans we had
>>>> mid last year, although I agree that being cautious is good.
>>>>
>>>> I would also like to see a further expansion of the local outreach and
>>>> community support/SIGs and potentially supporting transaltion of local
>>>> academic OS innovations to the OS ecosystem ,as we have canvased over a
>>>> year ago with John ( but then COVID hit and we could not take off). I do
>>>> not see space for this, including any potential support for SIGs (I
>>>> understand they should be self-financing in the longer term, but there may
>>>> be need for some start up funds for new ones) – working groups are, as we
>>>> know, a different story ( Communication and Finance and Membership).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you all for the great job in planning ahead, great to see the
>>>> community keeping momentum ( and apologies for radio silence for a while)!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Martin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From: *Oceania <oceania-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of John
>>>> Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com>
>>>> *Date: *Friday, 26 March 2021 at 3:57 pm
>>>> *To: *Oceania community <oceania at lists.osgeo.org>
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [OSGeo Oceania] Budget for FY 2021/2022
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the opportunity to contribute to budget planning. I have a
>>>> few comments/questions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *1. Conference*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The proposed budget includes an AUD $5000 loss for the conference,
>>>> which doesn't align with past experience. Even last year, when plans were
>>>> derailed mid-year and we had to create a new plan on the fly, we still
>>>> turned a small profit overall [1], despite minimal focus on sponsorship.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> FOSS4G 2021 (global) will be fully online, and they're running a
>>>> relatively successful sponsorship drive. If we are running another hybrid
>>>> conference, it feels like there's potential to find sponsorship. Last
>>>> year's event was the largest in-person event we've ever organised, in terms
>>>> of overall attendance, and with that experience behind us, I think there's
>>>> a significant value proposition for sponsors. Since conference revenue has
>>>> been the predominant source of income for OO, I feel this is a sensible
>>>> place to focus. The assumption there won't be any significant income feels
>>>> like a self-fulfilling prophecy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *2. Good Mojo*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A question about Good Mojo expenditure: why reduce it to zero? I guess
>>>> there's still ~$8k in the Good Mojo fund since the 2020-2021 budget has 0
>>>> under actual. I suggest this should be used, the people and orgs that
>>>> contributed to it in 2018 and 2019 would probably like to see their
>>>> contributions put to use. If there is an in-person event then maybe
>>>> reviving the Travel Grant Program would make sense. Hubs could be enabled
>>>> to have a local impact using these funds.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *3. Microgrants*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Last, re: Microgrants, I feel $2k won't be enough. There has been a lot
>>>> of interest in the first few weeks of the program. $2k will only fund ~8
>>>> grants over the whole year. I suspect we could increase this to $6k, which
>>>> would average 2 grants per month.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/174P83K_AnDHrH-HbsJmAdXQfrdbTR9ElVcHtxQ1lrWw/edit#gid=1331367998
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 at 20:56, Greg Lauer <gregory.lauer at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The OSGeo Oceania Finance committee met earlier this week, and one of
>>>> the items discussed is preparing a budget for FY 21/22. Once we have done
>>>> this we will forward it to the OSGeo Oceania Board to approve. We plan to
>>>> present to the Board at the April meeting in approx. 4 weeks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We would welcome input and discussion from OSGeo Oceania members and
>>>> community around the budget. You can review 20/21 and the proposed 21/22
>>>> budget at
>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1cbd3Rt5R688qrZ3eTCHxpRZ8HbII358_1UARf3m5qBs/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Too much? Too little? What should we be spending money on? Potential
>>>> income sources?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The key issue is that it is unlikely we will have any significant
>>>> income for FY 21/22 as the Conference Working group is planning another
>>>> hybrid virtual conference. We would hope this would not be the case in FY
>>>> 22/23.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We are looking forward to your input
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Many thanks,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Greg, Alex, Dionne and Ed
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Oceania mailing list
>>>> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Oceania mailing list
>>>> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Oceania mailing list
>>> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Oceania mailing list
>>> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Oceania mailing list
>> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
>>
>

-- 
Alex Leith
m: 0419189050
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/oceania/attachments/20210402/7d7b1a67/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 103953 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/oceania/attachments/20210402/7d7b1a67/attachment.png>