On Jul 10, 2017, at 6:37 PM, Galen Charlton <[email protected]> wrote:
> Back in January the Fiscal Continuity IG released our report > describing some options for establishing a more permanent fiscal > arrangement for Code4Lib activities, particularly the annual > conference. [0] When it comes to “fiscal continuity”, the silence has been deafening. Let’s discuss. Code4Lib has existed for more than ten years. Our mailing list has approximately 3,500 subscribers. The majority seem to be from the United States. We host an annual meeting which has grown to accommodate about 400 people. According to the wiki, there are about about 18 local/regional groups hosting their own meetings. And we support a journal which comes out at least a few times year. All of these things are signs of real community. Almost by definition, communities are risk adverse. If they weren’t, then they would most likely cease to exist. Our community is no exception, and because we have grown over the years, it is time to assess what we do in order to minimize risk, specifically when it comes to the annual meeting. The Fiscal Continuity Interest Group members [1] have investigated the issues regarding risk, and we have articulated a few solutions: * do nothing * incorporate ourselves * partner with a hosting institution The first option — do nothing — means we continue on the path we have already trodden. It means we have no real bank account of our own, we have no real way to sign contracts, and every year we hope some good soul of an institution takes on the fiscal responsibility (risk) when it comes to the annual meeting. The second option — incorporate ourselves — means the creation of a legal entity, most likely in the form of a non-profit corporation (code4lib.org). Such an option has up front costs (which we can apparently afford), on going costs (which we can apparently afford), the articulation of bylaws (which are rather boiler plate), and the creation of a more formal governing body (which would be new to us). The third option — partner with a hosting institution — means we would fold ourselves under the umbrella of some other legal entity, and this other legal entity would shoulder some of the legal & fiscal risk at an annual financial cost (which we can probably afford).† As a member of the Group but without speaking for the Group, my personal preferences are listed here, in priority order: 1. incorporate ourselves - I advocate the creation of a formal code4lib.org community. We can financially afford such an option. We will be able to sign contracts. We will be able to have our own bank account. And most importantly, I believe it will provide the means for our community to grow in ways we have yet to envision. 2. do nothing - Personally, I’m not too concerned about regularly identifying an annual meeting host. In my gut I feel someone will always step up to the plate. Moreover, I sincerely believe things like the local/regional groups (“franchises”) will continue to facilitate smaller, more immediate opportunities for professional development & networking. This option is easy. 3. partner with a hosting institution - While this may seem to be a "middle of the road" sort of choice, I believe it is really a stop gap measure which does not provide enough autonomy. Because of our size and maturity, it is probably time to do something differently. What do you think we ought to do? † - This sentence mixes way too many metaphors! [0] report - https://wiki.code4lib.org/FCIG_Report [1] Group members - https://wiki.code4lib.org/Fiscal_Continuity#Members — Eric Lease Morgan, Digital Initiatives Librarian Hesburgh Libraries University of Notre Dame Notre Dame, IN 46556 [email protected] 574/631-8604
