[Osmf-talk] Funding of iD Development and Maintenance

[Simon Poole]

Hi Allan

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.

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.

Simon

Am 03.08.2020 um 17:53 schrieb Allan Mustard:
>
> My two manats' worth:
>
> 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. 
>
> 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).
>
> 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.
>
> 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. 
>
> apm
>
> On 8/3/2020 10:03 AM, Mikel Maron wrote:
>> 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
>> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Board/Minutes/2020-02#Treasurer.27s_report 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 https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Board/Minutes/2020-06#2020.2FRes30_Approve_official_accounts_for_2019 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 <simon at poole.ch> 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
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20200803/0ef1a384/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20200803/0ef1a384/attachment.sig>