<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1251">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi Allan</p>
<p>My point in asking for some kind of slightly more formal
financial documentation is that on the one hand at some point the
OSMF is going to be committing itself to paying certain things,
and will not simply be able to renege on those commitments, and on
the other hand you need to be able to measure where you are
relative to both the funding and the spend on those commitments.</p>
<p>Just from a practical pov funding for all these different things
will not be there upfront, latest in the second year, but will
trickle in over time, and the OSMF will need to get a handle on
how things are progressing.<br>
</p>
<p>Simon<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 03.08.2020 um 17:53 schrieb Allan
Mustard:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:38b73a5e-72d3-64cd-dae7-52bc2b1ecdb2@mustard.net">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1251">
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">My two manats' worth:</font></p>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">In addition to what
Mikel has outlined, the Board has examined the question of why
the Foundation effectively outsources support of key software
to private third parties, which in the view of some community
members gives those third parties ultimate control of the
software. There have been calls for the Foundation to begin
funding key software, such as iD. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">Now, there are
basically three ways forward. Two are status quo ante, the
first being outsourcing key software support to a third party
(e.g., Mapbox's and Critigen's previous support of iD, now
ended, or Facebook's ongoing support of RapiD), the second
being the 100% volunteer do-ocracy approach. The third
approach is for the Foundation to solicit donations from a
variety of sources (corporations using our data, philanthropic
organizations, other donors) and using those funds to support
software development. The advantage of such an approach is
that no single outside entity has full control of a particular
software project. This last approach places more control of
software development in the hands of the Board and through it
the community, but comes with certain drawbacks (the Board is
not structured well for such a management function, which is
why we want to resurrect the Engineering Working Group, and we
do not yet have a formal fundraising structure in place). <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">The worst case
scenario is that if no funding were to be forthcoming from any
source, and no third-parties supported software, OSM would
revert to the 100% volunteer do-ocracy model, which has the
drawback of long time frames for completion of projects since
volunteers work in their spare time. This is do-able but
probably not optimal for "key" or "core" infrastructure. It
remains, however, a possible path forward if that is what the
community wants.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">All of the above is
why the Board resolved to ask for community feedback on the
proposal. This Board does not claim to have all the answers,
and solicits community ideas and thoughts in search of a
solution. <br>
</font></p>
<p><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">apm</font></p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/3/2020 10:03 AM, Mikel Maron
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1378835108.7794134.1596463415435@mail.yahoo.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Here's some information on the financial planning, and the factors the Board has been considering.
The most recent treasurer's report with reported numbers was February and had OSMF with holdings of 613K EUR
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Board/Minutes/2020-02#Treasurer.27s_report" moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Board/Minutes/2020-02#Treasurer.27s_report</a> I just checked accounts as of today, and OSMF is at 636K EUR in cash
Support for nominatim, potlatch, osm2pgsql would come from existing funds, and totals 22.5K EUR
For the SSRE and iD roles, we don't have final figures but are looking at approximately 250K EUR for a year for both. The plan is to fundraise for these roles, rather than draw from existing funds.
So overall the impact on 2020-2021 accounts in not major.
We're soon starting more thorough planning, budgeting and funding plans for years beyond the next one. To early to say much about how this will look, and how things develop with our current plans will be an important part of the assessment. Suffice to say, a top line intention is to not start drawing down our savings but to keep funds in reserve, and to make plans and secure funding that makes this all sustainable.
-Mikel
For 2019, we approved the accounts in June <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Board/Minutes/2020-06#2020.2FRes30_Approve_official_accounts_for_2019" moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Board/Minutes/2020-06#2020.2FRes30_Approve_official_accounts_for_2019</a> and those are linked from the minutes
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
On Sunday, August 2, 2020, 12:06:43 PM EDT, Simon Poole <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:simon@poole.ch" moz-do-not-send="true"><simon@poole.ch></a> wrote:
Mikel
Seriously, could we please get a budget including this and the other
expenses we haven't had in previous years (that is microgrants, software
development and anything else) and forecasted income? And including how
much the OSMF wants to reserve for disaster recovery and how many years
of operations should be supported at the current level if funding dries up.
Making up things as you go along is fine and dandy, but there is a bit
of fiscal responsibility involved in this whole thing and as far as I
can tell, right now the OSMF wouldn't even notice a derailing.
Simon
PS: seems as if the 2019 tax filing (which should have happened by now)
is missing from the OSMF website, I kind of remember it being there
earlier this year, so maybe it has got lost some how.
_______________________________________________
osmf-talk mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org" moz-do-not-send="true">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>