[Eg-oversight-board] Fwd: 2015 Conference

[Rogan Hamby]

It sounds good to me.  I think there should be a rep from the current
conference as there may be recent information that should carry over.


On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org>wrote:

>  Hi all,
>
> I didn't receive any feedback on this next month, so I'm just going to
> throw out a suggested makeup for a site selection committee.
>
> - 1 rep from each of the past three conferences. I know Amy is willing to
> help if we want a rep from this year's planning team to be included in that
> count of three, but if you all think it's better to just have people who
> have been through the entire conference process, then we're willing to step
> back and hand it over to people from the 2011-2013 teams
> - 1 rep from the Board
> - 2 at-large members from the community
> - 1 vendor rep
>
> Does this sound reasonable to everyone? Does anyone have another idea?
>
>
>  If so, I can put out a call for at-large members and a vendor rep to the
> general list and then also contact people from previous planning teams (I
> think most are on this list.) If we get more volunteers than we need, I'm
> thinking the fairest way to handle it is to take those who volunteer first.
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Also, I do want to discuss item 2 in my previous e-mail (using the
> conference as a money maker versus keeping it as affordable as possible).
> Galen, if we don't get much discussion on the list, can we add it to the
> agenda for the next meeting?
>
> Kathy
>
>
>
> Kathy Lussier
> Project Coordinator
> Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative(508) 343-0128klussier at masslnc.org
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------  Subject: 2015 Conference  Date: Thu,
> 26 Sep 2013 16:45:17 -0400  From: Kathy Lussier <klussier at masslnc.org><klussier at masslnc.org>  To:
> Evergreen Oversight Board <eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org><eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org>
>
>  Hi all,
>
> There were a couple of questions I wanted to raise regarding the 2015
> conference at today's meeting.
>
>
> 1. I think it would be good to start the site selection process now. As
> one of the current conference organizers, I would say it is highly
> beneficial to get as much lead time as possible. The contract
> negotiations took longer than expected, and my preference is to have a
> contract in place by the April before the next year's conference. We
> started the site selection process later last year, but I believe there
> have been some years when the call for site proposals went out in August.
>
> Last year, I think the site selection committee was quickly put together
> with representatives from previous conferences as well as some EOB
> members. I was speaking with another member of the community who thought
> the process should be more open, and I tend to agree. Perhaps we could
> identify a makeup for the committee that would include past conference
> organizers, a member of the oversight board, some at-large community
> members, and a vendor (to represent the interest of potential
> exhibitors/sponsors).
>
> I could work on putting out a call for volunteers, but think we should
> decide on committee makeup before that step happens.
>
> 2. At various times, I've heard the suggestion that the community may
> want to use the conference as a way to actively raise funds for the
> project. I most recently heard the idea in April when Amy and I were
> already presenting a conference budget. I thought it might be a good
> idea to have this discussion before the site selection process so that
> expectations are clear for any sites that are considering a proposal.
>
> When planning this conference, Amy and I have striven to keep
> registration and hotel costs as affordable as possible (not the easiest
> thing to do in Boston) because making the conference accessible to lots
> of people helps build the community and get people excited about their
> participation in the project. On the other hand, in terms of raising
> funds for the project, I understand that it might be easier  for people
> to get their institutions to reimburse a conference registration fee
> than to donate funds to a project.
>
> I personally lean towards the affordability side of the question, but
> would like open up discussion in case there are other opinions out there.
>
> Thanks!
> Kathy
>
> --
> Kathy Lussier
> Project Coordinator
> Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative(508) 343-0128klussier at masslnc.org
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eg-oversight-board mailing list
> eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/eg-oversight-board/attachments/20131029/41fdbe5b/attachment.html>