[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Draft rules of governance for Evergreen Software Foundation - for discussion

[Sharp, Chris]

Oh - I see that Kathy was the one to raise this point - thank you too, Kathy! :-) 

Chris Sharp 
PINES Program Manager 
Georgia Public Library Service 
1800 Century Place, Suite 150 
Atlanta, Georgia 30345 
(404) 235-7147 
csharp at georgialibraries.org 
http://pines.georgialibraries.org/ 




From: "Chris Sharp" <csharp at georgialibraries.org> 
To: "Evergreen Discussion Group" <open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 3:49:50 PM 
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Draft rules of governance for Evergreen Software Foundation - for discussion 


Amy, 


Thanks for pointing that out. I'll repeat here for the General list something that I posted in one of our Evergreen Governance discussions: 


" I won't speak for other consortia, but I can tell you that PINES is not really set up to work this way, with each of its member libraries having individual Evergreen Foundation memberships. "PINES" as a whole consists of its member libraries, who are represented by a governance body called the "PINES Executive Committee", which represents libraries by size of population served. The PINES Executive Committee speaks on behalf of the entire consortium and so would be in direct conflict of point (b). The PINES staff of GPLS facilitates the business of the Executive Committee and would bring development needs approved by the Executive Committee on behalf of the full consortium." 


So in PINES' case, we would need to be a single member since we speak with one voice. And GPLS is definitely not a vendor either. :-) 

Chris Sharp 
PINES Program Manager 
Georgia Public Library Service 
1800 Century Place, Suite 150 
Atlanta, Georgia 30345 
(404) 235-7147 
csharp at georgialibraries.org 
http://pines.georgialibraries.org/ 




From: "Amy Terlaga" <terlaga at biblio.org> 
To: open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org 
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 3:28:00 PM 
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Draft rules of governance for Evergreen Software Foundation - for discussion 




Kathy has a point and I’m sorry I missed the distinction caught up in the wording of 

(iv) library that is a member of an Evergreen consortium 



If you look at the make-up of the interim Evergreen Board, you will see that most of us fit into the category that ISN’T defined below. PINES, Bibliomation, Evergreen Indiana, SITKA, others …. The members on the Board are staff members of the consortium, NOT library staff members of an Evergreen consortium. 



And no, I don’t think that we should stick consortia in with the vendors. We’re a different animal. 



Amy 





Message: 1 

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:36:11 -0400 

From: "Kathy Lussier" <klussier at masslnc.org> 

Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** RE: Draft rules of governance 

for Evergreen Software Foundation - for discussion 

To: "'Evergreen Discussion Group'" 

<open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org> 

Message-ID: <8BF69E150576477CBBCAD969DC1A4F8E at CWCENTRAL.internal> 

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 



Hi all, 



What a great discussion on the draft rules! I have a question about Section 3.3. 



Part (d) states: 



For the purpose of broad representation on the Oversight Board, it is 

preferred that each of the following is represented on the board: 



(i) academic library 

(ii) public library 

(iii) independent library that is not part of a consortium 

(iv) library that is a member of an Evergreen consortium 

(v) library located outside of the United States 

(vi) state library 

(vii) vendor (entity or organization that provides Evergreen related services for a fee) 





Although "library that is a member of an Evergreen consortium" is included on the list, I notice that an Evergreen consortium is not on the list. As Galen mentioned in a previous e-mail, there are many consortia where members expect the central agency to represent them, and this would be the case for the consortia participating in our project. Looking further down the list, I see "(vi) state library" which I expect would have similar interests to consortia that are running Evergreen. Could (vi) be expanded to include consortia? Or was (iv) intended to cover either a library or a representative from the central agency? 



Thanks to those on the governance group for putting the work into creating this document! 



Kathy Lussier 



------------------------------------------------------------- 

Kathy Lussier 

Project Coordinator 

Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative 

(508) 756-0172 

(508) 755-3721 (fax) 

klussier at masslnc.org 

IM: kmlussier (AOL & Yahoo) 

Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier 





======================= 

Amy Terlaga 

Assistant Director, User Services 

Bibliomation 

32 Crest Road 

Middlebury , CT 06762 

(203)577-4070 x101 

http://www.biblio.org 


---- 


Bibliomation's Open Source blog: 


http://biblio-os.blogspot.com/ 





Join us on Facebook: 


http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=171935276419 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20101012/a6254ab9/attachment-0001.htm