Difference between revisions of "Draft Excom Minutes"

Revision as of 10:14, March 13, 2010

Excom Notes – March 11, 2010

Present:

Carol Meyer
James Frew
Brian Rogan
Karl Benedict
Marilyn Kaminski
Chris Lenhardt
Margaret Mooney
Steve Kempler
Annette Schloss
Rob Raskin

Adoption of Minutes

Meeting called to order by President Frew at 2:06 PM. Marilyn Kaminski moved to adopt the meeting, seconded by Chris Lenhardt. Approved by acclimation.

ESIP Federation Contributions to GEO's Decision Support Project, Steve Kempler

Based on a discussion with Lawrence Friedl, Steve Kempler gave an overview of projects Lawrence is involved with as part of GEO

Lawrence is looking for advisors for GEO projects from the ESIP community. It is possible that there is funding for these if there is a match between the proposers and funding agencies.

This might be something that federation members might be interested in participating.

Carol felt that since many people hadn’t read through these proposals, that it might be worth creating an inventory of needed skills. If the work was done up front more people might become interested. Because of time constraints it isn’t clear many people would read through all of these proposals.

If this could be clarified, it would help the process which has deadlines.

The federation is supportive of this effort but it doesn’t seem clear what we are being asked to do for this effort.

There are ways that we might be able to work on this through some our existing groups.

The deadline for these proposals are May 1st.

It may be that we could use the skills inventory from our current database. The database is not complete and may not be ready for a couple of months.

It would be advisable to get more information from the proposers while the database is being populated.

Several clusters can work on this skills that can be forwarded on to Lawrence which can be a start for the database. There are several proposals that have been submitted by ESIP partners. ESIP definitely has a presence.

It is important to support this project while helping ourselves. We should try and populate as many of these proposals as possible.

Carol will follow up with Lawrence and invite him to the Products and Services telecon.

There was general agreement to continue the process and engage the federation into the GEO program.

Constitution and Bylaws Committee Update

The Constitution and Bylaws and Partnership committees have caucused and agreed that the C and B group will put together a proposal to remove the bylaw in which 100% agreement was needed. Without this, we can move forward and pare down the membership list to a active group.

It needs to be framed so it isn’t threatening to current membership. The Simpson provision would be removed first and then determine what other changes would be needed to remove partners from the rolls.

There have been a number of partners identified who are no long active due to grants no longer being funded or lost interest on their part. The federation has changed from it earlier roles and that one goal is to truly define what is a partner.

This needs to be ready for discussion at the summer meeting so that partners are aware of the changes.

It should be brought up at the business meeting so that there is time for discussion. There will be a document put together before the summer meeting that will be suitable for discussion. It will be in the form of bullets and suggestions but not a proposal.

There are a lot of issues and that it may open up a lot of other issues such as partnership types. There are a lot of changes that are currently percolating.

It might be worthwhile discussing it with John Townsend who was instrumental at foudning the original principles.

Summer Meeting Update

There have been a number of tracks put together, water, education, Products and Services, Data and, Energy and Climate.

There have been several invitations put out including one to Tom Karl. There have been no responses as of yet.

Creative Commons Policy Update

Brian gave a quick review of the work on the Copyright Policy. He has done some edits to it and it is ready to go for final review.

The executive committee is declared done. Put out the policy for review to the membership for 30 days. After this time period, it will be adopted by partnership.

Update on Education Budget NOAA is doing a one day climate stewards workshop on Tuesday, July 20. The budget will devote more monies towards teacher support but is still dollar neutral.

President Frew moved to adopt, Karl Benedict seconded. It passed by acclimation.

Other Business

There was no other business.

Margaret Mooney moved to adjourn, Karl Benedict seconded.  Meeting was adjourned at 2:57 PM

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 [[Executive_Committee |Back to Executive Committee Main Page]]
-====Excom Meeting – February 11, 2010====
+'''Excom Notes – March 11, 2010'''
-Participants: Karl Benedict, James Frew, Michael Goodman, Patricia Huff, Marilyn Kaminski, Chris Lenhardt, Rob Raskin, Annette Schloss, Carol Meyer, Brian Rogan
+Present:
+*Carol Meyer
+*James Frew
+*Brian Rogan
+*Karl Benedict
+*Marilyn Kaminski
+*Chris Lenhardt
+*Margaret Mooney
+*Steve Kempler
+*Annette Schloss
+*Rob Raskin
-The meeting was called to order at 2:04 PM.
-. '''Adoption of Minutes'''
-The minutes were adopted by acclamation
+'''Adoption of Minutes'''
-. '''Website Copyright Policy - next steps'''
+Meeting called to order by President Frew at 2:06 PM.   Marilyn Kaminski moved to adopt the meeting, seconded by Chris Lenhardt.  Approved by acclimation.
+'''ESIP Federation Contributions to GEO's Decision Support Project, Steve Kempler'''
-Brian discussed the changes made to the copyright policy statement after feedback from the meeting.  Chris Lenhardt asked if other open source copyrights were looked at such as Berkeley open documentation.  This wasn’t clear from the meeting notes, so any changes were based on the overall discussion.  The consensus was that the idea is to try and take what Brian has written and make it a commonly accepted copyright framework.
-Brian will “wordsmith” the policy to make it more neutral, after which it will be posted on the wiki so it can be worked on by the Executive Committee as a group.  It will be in wiki text so that it can be edited before the next meeting.
+Based on a discussion with Lawrence Friedl, Steve Kempler gave an overview of projects Lawrence  is involved with as part of GEO
+Lawrence is looking for advisors for GEO projects from the ESIP community.  It is possible that there is funding for these if there is a match between the proposers and funding agencies.
+This might be something that federation members might be interested in participating.
+Carol felt that since many people hadn’t read through these proposals, that it might be worth creating an inventory of needed skills.  If the work was done up front more people might become interested.   Because of time constraints it isn’t clear many people would read through all of these proposals.
+If this could be clarified, it would help the process which has deadlines.
+The federation is supportive of this effort but it doesn’t seem clear what we are being asked to do for this effort.
+There are ways that we might be able to work on this through some our existing groups.
-. '''IT&I Budget Review'''
+The deadline for these proposals are May 1st.
-Karl Benedict presented the revised budget justification for Rahul Ramachandran, who was unable to call into the telecon.
+It may be that we could use the skills inventory from our current database.  The database is not complete and may not be ready for a couple of months.
-* The requested funds would be used as an outreach tool to demonstrate inoperability standards from ESIP Federation partners and to showcase case studies of the value of such implementations.
-* The package would be targeted at people in the ESIP Federation and would also an outreach product that could be used for presentations for agency partners.
-* The package would consist of powerpoints, handouts, etc. that would be downloadable for anyone to use.
-* The primary focus of the packet is educational.
-The point was raised that should there be a review of the draft material prior to its distribution. The IT&I Committee was asked to create a template so that providers can capture the correct information when describing their products for this outreach tool. After limited discussion, the Executive Committee approved the IT&I Committee's funding request.
+It would be advisable to get more information from the proposers while the database is being populated.
-. ''' Outstanding C&B/Partnership Issues'''
+Several clusters can work on this skills that can be forwarded on to Lawrence which can be a start for the database. There are several proposals that have been submitted by ESIP partners.   ESIP definitely has a presence.
-Michael Goodman presented the rationale for why the Constitution and Bylaws (C&B) and Partnership Committees need to examine existing governance documents.  For the past few years, the ESIP Federation has had difficulty establishing a quorum for its in-person business meetings.  It was suggested that the C&B work with the Partnership C to examine avenues to improve the ESIP Federation's ability to govern.
+It is important to support this project while helping ourselves.  We should try and populate as many of these proposals as possible.
-It was asked if there a way to purge people from the rolls.  There are currently about 70 active members but there are also issues with Voting Representatives not being designated or attending.  One idea put forward would be to charge a modest amount of money for dues, which would be credited towards registration.  This would solidify partnership and would also be an incentive to attend the meeting.
+Carol will follow up with Lawrence and invite him to the Products and Services telecon.
-Working together, the C&B and Partnership Committees will look at options for moving ahead.  The Assembly would have to vote on any changes recommended.
+There was general agreement to continue the process and engage the federation into the GEO program.
-Carol Meyer suggested that there may be additional issues identified by the strategic plan that should be examined by the C&B Committee.  Michael Goodman and Annette Schloss will have a brief telecon before bringing it to the two committees jointly. The consensus was to deal first with the inactive member problem before tackling anything else.
+'''Constitution and Bylaws Committee Update'''
-. '''International Partner Recruitment'''
+The Constitution and Bylaws and Partnership committees have caucused and agreed that the C and B group will put together a proposal to remove the bylaw in which 100% agreement was needed.  Without this, we can move forward and pare down the membership list to a active group.
-As the ESIP Federation participates more in international venues (AGU, ISRSE, GEO), the question has been raised whether the Federation should actively recruit international partners. Such an inquiry was received by Rob Raskin, who represented the ESIP Federation at an Eco-Informatics meeting sponsored by EPA. The Europeans in attendance were interested in joining the ESIP Federation but were concerned that it is too focused on domestic US activities.
+It needs to be framed so it isn’t threatening to current membership.   The Simpson provision would be removed first and then determine what other changes would be needed to remove partners from the rolls.
-The ESIP Federation would face a number of challenges if it were to support international membership. The infrastructure for it scommunications (web meetings, video conferencing, telecons) would have to be enhanced.  Would it make more sense to seed a European ESIP-like organization?  The Executive Committee consensus was that it continues to welcome international participation and outreach in international venues.  The Executive Committee believes it should solve its existing partnership problems before actively recruiting intenrational participation.  In the end, the Executive Committee consensus suggested that the ESIP Federation should continue to do outreach in international venues as a way to promote the organization.  If international memberships result from that, then it's a bonus.  Instead, the focus should be on promoting the ESIP Federation, what it does and the work of its partners in these venues.
+There have been a number of partners identified who are no long active due to grants no longer being funded or lost interest on their part.  The federation has changed from it earlier roles and that one goal is to truly define what is a partner.
-The Committee discussion potential paths forward, including a possible partnership with other organizations (e.g. ESA). The Air Quality Working Group (by virtue of its GEO activities) increasingly has international participation.
+This needs to be ready for discussion at the summer meeting so that partners are aware of the changes.
-The Executive Committee suggested that its website and outreach materials be reviewed to ensure that they are more global in nature.  Any future development of materials should follow this same principle.
+It should be brought up at the business meeting so that there is time for discussion.   There will be a document put together before the summer meeting that will be suitable for discussion.   It will be in the form of bullets and suggestions but not a proposal.
-. '''Summer Meeting'''
+There are a lot of issues and that it may open up a lot of other issues such as partnership types.  There are a lot of changes that are currently percolating.
-Carol gave a short synopsis of progress to date.
+It might be worthwhile discussing it with John Townsend who was instrumental at foudning the original principles.
-*The Visioneers have met twice and is putting together the template for the meeting.
-*The Visioneers asked the Executive Committee to bless the proposed theme of “Energy and Climate”. This was passed by acclamation.
-*The Visioneers also would like the Executive Committee to identify locations for future summer meetings for the next three years.  A request will be sent to esip-all asking for summer meeting hosts.
-*The Visioneers are soliciting speaker names.  These suggestions should go through Carol.
-*There is a need to create a meeting template in order to help with pre and post meeting objectives.
-The next visioneers meeting is on Monday, February 15. During the last call, representatives from the University of Tennessee and Northrop Grumman were present.
-. '''Short Course for Data Stewardship - Update'''
+'''Summer Meeting Update'''
-The conversation is continuing with NOAA for conducting a Data Stewardship short course in June 2011.   Scott Hausman (NOAA/NCDC) has been named the point person and a plan is being formulated on how to move forward.
+There have been a number of tracks put together, water, education, Products and Services, Data and, Energy and Climate.
-. '''Other Business'''
+There have been several invitations put out including one to Tom Karl.  There have been no responses as of yet.
-NOAA has announced that it's forming a new climate service.  It was suggested that we invite a speaker to talk about this at the summer meeting.
-The meeting adjourned at 3:12 PM.
+ Creative Commons Policy Update
+Brian gave a quick review of the work on the Copyright Policy.   He has done some edits to it and it is ready to go for final review.
+The executive committee is declared done.  Put out the policy for review to the  membership for 30 days.   After this time period, it will be adopted by partnership.
+Update on Education Budget
+NOAA is doing a one day  climate stewards workshop on Tuesday, July 20.    The budget will devote more monies towards teacher support but is still dollar neutral.
+President Frew moved to adopt, Karl Benedict seconded.  It passed by acclimation.
+'''Other Business'''
+There was no other business.
+ Margaret Mooney moved to adjourn, Karl Benedict seconded.  Meeting was adjourned at 2:57 PM