Difference between revisions of "FOSS4G 2014 Bid Process Board Voting"

Latest revision as of 11:32, 31 July 2013

The OSGeo Conference Committee votes for the 2014 hosting resulted in a tie. A re-vote did not change the outcome. The following is the process used to solve the tie breaker, through a vote by the OSGeo Board.

Board Vote

Voting for where to host the global FOSS4G event is very important, and each Board member must take this responsibility seriously. This means of course reviewing each proposal and budget closely, and reviewing the excellent Q/A already done by the Conf Comm (http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/OSGeo-Conference-Committee-f3721662.html).

Proposal Documents

available at http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/proposals/2014/

Board members should also review the 2014 RFP (http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/rfp/2014/), specifically the "Evaluation Criteria" section, on page 9. (as the Conf Comm did, the OSGeo Board must also vote according to the Evaluation Criteria as specified in the RFP)

Abstension

~~Mark Lucas, as a Board member and also a member of the DC local committee, will not be allowed to vote~~
Mark Lucas, while noting he has no financial conflict of interest as described by OSGeo bylaws, has volunteered to abstain in order to address concerns raised by others.

Vote Process

We should keep the same voting process as the Conf Comm: please send your city selection to ~~Paul~~ Bart as CRO privately.

Vote Deadline

Votes should be sent to ~~Paul~~ Bart bartvde[at]osgis.nl by end of ~~next Monday, the 29th~~ this Friday, Aug 2nd.

Tie Breaker

In the case of a tie, the President's vote should count as 1.5 votes.

Vote Results

Individual votes will not be made public afterwards, only the winner will be announced.

Board Q/A

Can occur openly on the Board mailing list.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 The OSGeo Conference Committee votes for the 2014 hosting resulted in a tie.  A re-vote did not change the outcome.  The following is the process used to solve the tie breaker, through a vote by the OSGeo Board.
-Board Vote
+== Board Vote ==
-***********
 Voting for where to host the global FOSS4G event is very important, and
-I hope each Board member takes this responsibility seriously.  This
+each Board member must take this responsibility seriously.  This
 means of course reviewing each proposal and budget closely, and
 reviewing the excellent Q/A already done by the Conf Comm
 (http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/OSGeo-Conference-Committee-f3721662.html).
-Thanks Cameron for getting the ball rolling with suggestions.
+=== Proposal Documents ===
-Proposal Documents
+* available at http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/proposals/2014/
-------------------
-Paul: would you mind updating http://www.osgeo.org/conference/rfp so we
+* Board members should also review the 2014 RFP (http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/rfp/2014/), specifically the "Evaluation Criteria" section, on page 9.  (as the Conf Comm did, the OSGeo Board must also vote according to the Evaluation Criteria as specified in the RFP)
-can all quickly access the docs?
-I also see the proposals in svn at:
+=== Abstension ===
-http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/proposals/2014/
-Board members should also review the 2014 RFP
+* <strike>Mark Lucas, as a Board member and also a member of the DC local committee, will not be allowed to vote</strike>
-(http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/rfp/2014/), specifically the
+* Mark Lucas, while noting he has no financial conflict of interest as described by OSGeo bylaws, has volunteered to abstain in order to address concerns raised by others.
-"Evaluation Criteria" section, on page 9.  (as the Conf Comm did, the
-OSGeo Board must also vote according to the Evaluation Criteria as
-specified in the RFP)
-Abstension
+=== Vote Process ===
-----------
-I don't believe any of the OSGeo Board members are involved in either of
+We should keep the same voting process as the Conf Comm: please send your
-the Portland or DC bids; but please identify yourself if so.
+city selection to <strike>Paul</strike> Bart as CRO privately.
-Vote Process
+=== Vote Deadline ===
-------------
-We should keep the same voting process as the Conf Comm: we send our
+Votes should be sent to <strike>Paul</strike> Bart bartvde[at]osgis.nl by end of <strike>next Monday, the 29th</strike> this '''Friday, Aug 2nd'''.
-city selection to Paul as CRO privately.
-Vote Deadline
+=== Tie Breaker ===
--------------
-I agree with Cameron on giving a week for voting.  Let's actually say
+In the case of a tie, the President's vote should count as 1.5 votes.
-votes should be sent to Paul by end of next Monday, the 29th.
-Tie Breaker
+=== Vote Results ===
------------
-We have 9 Board members, so we should be ok.  But in the case of a tie,
+Individual votes will not be made public afterwards, only the winner will be announced.
-I agree that the President's vote should count as 1.5 votes.
-Board Q/A
+=== Board Q/A ===
----------
-Paul would you ask the bidding teams to follow communications on the
+Can occur openly on the Board mailing list.
-Board list this week?  (I really want to avoid cross-posting questions
-on multiple mailing lists)  I see no need for any offline discussions,
-let's do this openly on the Board list.
 [[Category:FOSS4G]]
 [[Category:FOSS4G2014]]