FOSS4G 2014 Bid Process Board Voting
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 I hope each Board member takes 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
Paul: would you mind updating http://www.osgeo.org/conference/rfp so we can all quickly access the docs?
I also see the proposals in svn 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
I don't believe any of the OSGeo Board members are involved in either of the Portland or DC bids; but please identify yourself if so.
Vote Process
We should keep the same voting process as the Conf Comm: we send our city selection to Paul as CRO privately.
Vote Deadline
I agree with Cameron on giving a week for voting. Let's actually say votes should be sent to Paul by end of next Monday, the 29th.
Tie Breaker
We have 9 Board members, so we should be ok. But in the case of a tie, I agree that the President's vote should count as 1.5 votes.
Board Q/A
Paul would you ask the bidding teams to follow communications on the 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.