|
|
| (379 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | [[Executive_Committee |Back to Executive Committee Main Page]]
| + | === NOW: Program Committee working notes === |
| | | | |
| − | :[[Media: 2009_11_12_Executive_Committee_Minutes.doc |Draft Minutes for 11/12/2009]]
| + | Working Notes are on a Google DOC: [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1I_Mr_IXFUObJFizxgOVETFHai6vv5iE32kX8h_uGUso/edit?usp=sharing ESIP Program Committee Working Notes] |
| − | | |
| − | '''Executive Committee Minutes November 12, 2009'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | Present:
| |
| − | Tamara Ledley Steve Berrick Karl Benedict
| |
| − | Chris Lenhardt Patricia Huff Bruce Caron
| |
| − | Peter Fox James Frew
| |
| − | Carol Meyer Michael Goodman
| |
| − | Brian Rogan Margaret Mooney
| |
| − | | |
| − | The meeting began at 2:02 PM with a discussion of the Martha Maiden award. A quorum was achieved at 2:05 PM
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''1. Adoption of Minutes'''
| |
| − | A motion was made to adopt the minutes. It was seconded and approved.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''2. Copyright policy for website'''
| |
| − | Brian presented the draft copyright policy to the committee based on his research of the Creative Commons site. The report was received generally favorably with the following suggestions:
| |
| − | -Check the GNU compatability of the WIKI
| |
| − | -Send a copy to John Wilbanks of Creative Commons for suggestions
| |
| − | -Contributions to the website need to have more clarity. Karl Benedict offered to send some wording suggestions to incorporate into a new draft.
| |
| − | -It was noted that people who use our materials need to have correct attribution.
| |
| − | | |
| − | It was decided that this would be reworked and prepared to bring this to the floor at the winter meeting with the goal being to leave the December telecon with a document that can be given to the entire membership.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''3. ESIP Federation Business'''
| |
| − | • Partnership Election Update
| |
| − | We are in the last few days of the voting. This will bring us five new members to the meeting. We are beginning to look at the process of what we do with inactive members. Michael Goodman and the bylaws committee will look into this process.
| |
| − | • January Elections (Officers, Committees, Type Reps)
| |
| − | We are hoping to run an electronic election before the winter meeting. This would not include the type representatives which would be nominated and elected at the winter meeting.
| |
| − | There was a suggestion put forth of whether or not we whould we have a longer voting period. It is typical that the nominations tend to come in at the last minute so the length of time for nominations isn’t that important. The fourth of December will be the nomination deadline, which will give time for a longer voting period.
| |
| − | Everything is set up for nominations to be posted on the Wiki.
| |
| − | • Winter Meeting
| |
| − | The agenda has really taken shape in the last few weeks. The different tracks are well underway.
| |
| − | • GEO Plenary
| |
| − | We will have a presence at the GEO Plenary this coming week both in the presentations as well as having a booth.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''4. Policy for Committee and Working Groups Budget Reviews'''
| |
| − | The committee adopted a budget policy for committees and clusters back in September 2009. Bruce Caron, chair of the finance committee was invited to give a presentation.
| |
| − | | |
| − | There were some issues about budget requests for a project that would require a sustained funding beyond the lifetime of a one time event which prompted the discussion.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Rob Raskin spoke specifically on the Product and Services group budget request which was at the heart of the discussion.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The discussion centered around the following issues:
| |
| − | -Should long term funding be a standard?
| |
| − | -Should the Executive Committee give oversite or should it come through FUNding Friday.
| |
| − | -If a product is used federation wide, such as the testbed proposed and resides on the ESIP website should the maintenance be funded?
| |
| − | -The ficom issue was that the committee was being funded to do project work and that some of it was long term issue of the work. Is this the right process for this kind of work? There may be a conflict if it isn’t presented to the entire assembly since there may be others interested in the work.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Chris Lenhard observed that there were a lot of policy questions being raised in the discussion and that there was a need for outside advice on this issue.
| |
| − | According to Carol we are very much in line with what our funds may be used for in terms of work.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Products and Services, through Rob Raskin, agreed to hold off on their budget request until there is further clarification on the issue.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Conclusions'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | -The question before the committee now was whether or not it can consider the budget requests or should decisions be held off until there is more clarification.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | | |
| − | It was decided that this could not be finalized at this meeting. The document needs to be refined and then brought up again at the next telecon or to go before a larger body.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Carol agreed to work with Bruce and Rob to edit and clarify the document, and bring it back before the committee.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''5. Other'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | Bruce Caron was the lone nominee for the Martha Maiden Award. There was discussion that followed on whether the group was comfortable moving ahead or should there be a subcommittee?
| |
| − | | |
| − | It was felt that it was best to at least do “due dilligence” so that the nomination appeared above board.
| |
| − | | |
| − | It was decided that in the next ten days there would be a decision through the committee after supporting materials are sent out.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Since this year there was only one nomination, it was felt that there needs to be a way to increase the nomination probably by setting the date much earlier in the year. Carol will update the wiki to allow for rollover nominations.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Meeting was motioned to adjourn by Michael Goodman and seconded by Steve Berrick. Meeting adjourned at 3:17 PM
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | :[[Media: 2009_12_10_Executive_Committee_Minutes.doc |Draft Minutes for 12/10/2009]] | |
| − | '''ExCom Minutes – December 10, 2009'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | Present
| |
| − | Carol Meyer Steve Berrick
| |
| − | Marilyn Kaminski Michael Goodman
| |
| − | Brian Rogan James Frew
| |
| − | Chris Lenhardt Rob Raskin
| |
| − | | |
| − | Meeting was called to order at 2:05 PM
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''1. Adoption of Minutes'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | There was no quorum so the minutes from the previous meeting could not be adopted.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | '''2. Update on copyright policy for website'''
| |
| − | Brian gave an update on the copyright policy.
| |
| − | • There is no compatability issue with GNU and the Creative Commons license will be fine.
| |
| − | • John Wilbanks did send a reply to a request to look over our policy. He felt that the full assembly needs to discuss it so that ESIP as a whole is comfortable with the policy. He felt the policy is fine as written.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | '''3. Update on Committee Budget Process'''
| |
| − | FY10 Committee/Working Group Budgets
| |
| − | There was a small group telecon of Rob Raskin, Bruce Caron, Chris Lenhardt and Carol Meyer that discussed the committee budget process.
| |
| − | • There was reluctance on the part of the FiCom to approve all aspects of the budget. Some of the issues that needed to be dealt with needed to be transparent
| |
| − | • There was also a question related to fairness since some budgets were significantly larger than others and seemed ambiguous in terms of what they were asking for, especially open ended projects.
| |
| − | Rob proposed that another group be formed that could answer these questions and would include the VP as chair and the type reps.
| |
| − | In the long run there might need to be an infrastructure committee particularly for long term budget requests.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | '''4. ESIP Federation Business'''
| |
| − | | |
| − |
| |
| − | '''Annual Meeting update'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | Michael reported on update for administrative positions. It is in good shape with just a couple of positions to finish. He will caucus with Carol to finish the process at AGU. At this point the administrative positions are all set, except for a couple of seconds, and are ready to be voted on.
| |
| − | Business Meeting
| |
| − | Carol gave an overview of the meeting. There is a plan to bring up more issues of substance to the group, including The copyright policy, a Report on the new working group that speaks to infrastructure requests related to budget and a report from Data Preservation on a statement of principles related to open data.
| |
| − | The question was raised as to how to deal with a lack of a quorum. Carol mentioned that there will be a lot more virtual capability than at previous meetings. . Chris mentioned that is is important to remind members to vote or to name a proxy.
| |
| − | Carol has invited Lawrence Friedl to speak on the importance of having a strong relationship with GEO. Stefan Falke will also talk about the evolution of the Air Quality group which has petitioned to be a community of practice for GEO
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Winter Meeting '''
| |
| − | | |
| − | We have passed the early bird deadline and we are at 108. We are expecting another 25 from EPA and we will fill the room to capacity. The hotel will work with us to accommodate the numbers.
| |
| − | The agenda is set, we are just waiting for a confirmation for a couple of our speakers. We have gotten two of our four panelists set for the federal panel
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''GEO Plenary Overview and GEO Call for Proposals'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | We had a very successful exhibit at the GEO plenary. We had an excellent location and we had a number of inquiries from interested individuals. The real win was the Air Quality being recognized as a community of practice. They organized a side session and had strong attendance.
| |
| − | The user interface committee issued a proposal and a few of our members participated. There is no money involved but the people running the committee are looking for specialists to support projects.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Engagement with ESRI'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | There was an opportunity during GEO to reconnect with ESRI. Carol was able to have a conversation with them and it seems as if ESRI will reconnect through the water cluster and it is expected that there will be several ESRI staff at the meeting.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | '''5. Other Business'''
| |
| − | Michael Goodman mentioned that he needed some seconds for some of the nominated officers. Several folks will send emails to finish the process.
| |
| − | Carol will need committee reports by December 28th.
| |
| − | | |
| − | There was a discussion as to whether or not Community Engagement and Commercial Development committees, which are currently inactive, should be disbanded.
| |
| − | Rob suggested that this should be part of a larger conversation about the reconfiguring of the federation at the business meeting. This was met with approval by the committee and will become part of the business meeting agenda.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Meeting was adjourned at 2:54 PM
| |
| − | | |
| − | :[[Media: 2009_11_12_Executive_Committee_Minutes.doc |Draft Minutes for 11/12/2009]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Excom Meeting – January 14, 2009'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | Present:
| |
| − | | |
| − | Carol Meyer Marilyn Kaminski
| |
| − | Brian Rogan Rahul Ramachadran
| |
| − | Steve Berrick Margaret Mooney
| |
| − | James Frew Chris Lenhardt
| |
| − | Rob Raskin Michael Goodman
| |
| − | Patricia Huff Chuck Hutchinson
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''1. Adoption of Minutes'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | The meeting was called to order at 2:03 PM.
| |
| − | There were two sets of minutes that needed to be approved.
| |
| − | Chris raised a point about the November meetings. It would be needing a tweak to clarify. The fix was made.
| |
| − | Chris made a motion to adopt and Marilyn seconded. There were no objections and they were adopted by acclamation.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''2. Committe Budget Adoption'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | Carol Meyer reported that the Executive Committee in principle approved the committee budgets as they were drafted but were not officially adopted pending resolution on the infrastructure policy question. There currently are two committees that are eager to move forward on their work plans. It was recommended by Carol that the budgets be voted on today so that committees could move forward with their workplans.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Margaret Mooney began by describing the education budget request. Monies already in the budget can be used for funding events such as the SACNAS program attended by Tamara Ledley. President Frew put forward a motion that the budget amount be approved and that the budget be rewritten to reflect the new use of the funds.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Michael Goodman put forward a motion to accept the request, Marilyn Kaminski seconded. It was approved by acclamation.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Rahul Ramachandran described the IT&I budget that was submitted by Karl Benedict, the previous chair of the committee.
| |
| − | It was felt that the proposal was good but that required more clarity as to how the monies requested would be spent before it could be approved.
| |
| − | | |
| − | There were no representatives from AQ so Carol Meyer gave the overview. One stipulation that the Executive Committee placed on the budget was a requirement to find matching funds for the interoperability workshop is being proposed. Since that time Gary Foley of EPA has matched the $20K that is needed. There was some concern that the amount they were asking for was higher than the norm but there is recognition that the AQ Working Group has been a bright spot for the ESIP Federation.
| |
| − | | |
| − | A larger conversation ensued over how conference costs, travel etc. were allocated, especially for speakers.
| |
| − | It was felt that there should be some sort of codification of how it is determined as to what fees were waived and for whom.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Rob Raskin moved to adopt, Marilyn Kaminski seconded. The budget was adopted by acclamation.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | '''3. Winter Meeting Debrief'''
| |
| − | It was agreed that the Winter meeting was a successful meeting. On the last day there were still over 100 people in attendance which is not historically what has happened. Content has a lot to do with how strong attendance is on the last day. There was a definite interest in the joint wrap up session, which was not as well organized as it could have been. At the DC meeting, attendance is boosted by the large number of local attendees.
| |
| − | | |
| − | *There was a sense that the joint session could have had a stronger focus. There had been themes in the past but this is first meeting that a theme had been well developed.
| |
| − | *The question was raised on whether or not it be worth doing proceedings or other ways to document the work being done, possibly an analysis of the meeting's outcomes.
| |
| − | *It was felt that having a post meeting documentation of what happened and an analysis of how effective it was to meet the pre meeting objectives.
| |
| − | *A suggestion was made that Carol and Brian put together a meeting planning template that will help outline goals, objectives and outcomes for each meeting.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The problem of making a quorum was addressed. There is a plan by the Constitution and Bylaws Committee that the governance plan be looked at very closely. It was felt that there will be a need for a bylaws change in time for the summer meeting in order to resolve this problem.
| |
| − | | |
| − | *Carol suggested that it might be worth looking at the strategic plan and look a little deeper as this issue is addressed.
| |
| − | *Rob Raskin brought up the idea that it may be that the organizations may no longer exist or that we no longer meet their needs.
| |
| − | *It was determined that this issue needs to be brought up as an excom item for discussion.
| |
| − | | |
| − | There was a concern about the poster session space. Most of the issue seemed to resolve around space and the historically high number of poster and demos which were presented.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''4. Other Business'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | There was no other business to be discussed. Steve Berrick motioned to adjourn, Marilyn Kaminski seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 2:54 PM
| |
