Greetings,
I have updated the agenda for the future board meetings. I will normally chair the next two meetings, but I was bold and gave an outline of what the future meetings could also include ;-)
You will find the complete information here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_meetings Please add comments on the talk page if you wish
Below, I'll comment a bit longer on the next two agendas
IRC meeting in june
* review of the D&O (was not received in time at last board meeting) D&O ---> insurance * official (re)-creation of the ED evaluation committee and timeline currently, the committee include only JB and I. * approval of the Role of the treasurer (already drafted) it is more or less the description we posted here: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Treasurer * approval of the Role of the chair currently: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Description_of_board_members_jobs * approval of the Role of the secretary currently: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Description_of_board_members_jobs * discussion over adoption (or not) of a Board attendance policy (not drafted) It is one of my requests, but does not seem to get much support for now * first feedback from new treasurer Self explanatory * approval of new privacy policy (if available on time, otherwise -> july. Already mentionned in previous emails) * approval of budget (to be approved in june, whether at meeting or email) * feedback on the new pledge and attendance policy (see Mike email) new version was received 2 days ago
1 day at Wikimania (july 08) 1 day, probably on the 15th of july
* approval of Resolution:Minutes approval April 2008 * official acceptance of new board member * elections of new chair * official creation of the board nominating committee according to board restructuration incidently, I would love some feedback from you guys about this committee. If you feel someone should really be on it, to help identify our future appointed members, I'll listen carefully and suggest the name to the board. Please do not feel left out from this part of the process. You are more than welcome being involved in it. I hope we'll talk more of this in june. This should be an open discussion. * financial report (included email audit report from Stu) * ED report * comment on draft from the chapters re:governance issues Hopefully, chapters will have a first proposition for the elections by then. To be further discussed at may meeting in Netherlands * advisory board meeting feedback An advisory board meeting will take place the day before the board meeting. I do not know clearly yet what the agenda of this meeting is. * possibility of future sub-national entities as a different tier organizations to be discussed That's essentially a discussion around chapters, or near-chapters; US chapters etc... It may be an extended meeting (more participants than board proper)
Beyond these two dates, it is a bit the mystery :-)
My own suggestions would be that by summer 08, a business strategy should have been outlined by the staff, and I hope we'll get something presented, to approve.
Given that the fundraising people have not yet been hired, approving a fundraising strategy might be difficult. However, september will probably be the right time to start working on the annual online fundraising. So, I expect a strategy of some sort will have to be discussed and approved.
Fall will probably be dedicated to financial/audit considerations, after we receive the management letter of the audit company. Now that we have an accountant, a CFO, a treasurer, an audit firm and a newly composed audit committee, I hope that next year audit will be achieved rather "quickly".
Sue will celebrate (?) her first year with us in June and her first year as ED in november. Fall will be the time for assessing her job. And probably assessing most of the policies and procedures she has implemented in the past. I'd love it if some input comes from community members and volunteers as well. I mean... not necessarily the usual complaints that too much money is being spent on travel, but slightly more constructive criticism such as "what has the Foundation really done to support the Wikimedia projects ? ". Have any of you guys considered helping/pushing to get an annual report of some sort ?
Fall will be the time when the first Nomination Committee will provide a list of candidates for appointment to the board. So, I expect appointment will be part of fall agenda.
IF I were chair, I would suggest finding the time for a technical strategy point in fall/winter. Perhaps the community could feel that an interesting point to push. Perhaps the community would feel like providing tech wish lists to the staff, and nicely request a technical improvement timeline from the Foundation at some point in the future. Hmmm. Okay, I am not pushing too much here ?
Last, I would suggest that new year 2009 be opened by a brand new assessment of board performance, with individual assessment of each board member, and individual set of measurable goals for the year. Assessment which would not only help the general organization, but also help the board members to feel really used for what they are good for, AND be useful for board members and community to have a nice kick off for the future elections in summer 2009.
I provided VĂ©ronique a few days ago, with an estimate of board-only expenses. I planned 3 board meetings during the year (plus Wikimania). So, one meeting at Wikimania.
One meeting in october/november (ED assesment, selection of new members, audit/financial issues, fundraising strategy, review of policies and procedures).
One meeting around January (Technical strategy, welcome new members, start of board assessment, outreach strategy perhaps ?)
One meeting around April/May
Thank you for your attention. Feedback welcome.
Florence
- official creation of the board nominating committee according to board restructuration incidently, I would love some feedback from you guys about this
committee. If you feel someone should really be on it, to help identify our future appointed members, I'll listen carefully and suggest the name to the board. Please do not feel left out from this part of the process. You are more than welcome being involved in it. I hope we'll talk more of this in june. This should be an open discussion.
This probably depends on the functions of appointed members. If the functions are clear now, then it would be good to have members of the committee who can really evaluate the future board member credentials.
I assume the nominating committee is not about chapter-appointed seats?
Cheers Yaroslav
2008/5/11, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru:
- official creation of the board nominating committee according to board restructuration incidently, I would love some feedback from you guys about this
committee. If you feel someone should really be on it, to help identify our future appointed members, I'll listen carefully and suggest the name to the board. Please do not feel left out from this part of the process. You are more than welcome being involved in it. I hope we'll talk more of this in june. This should be an open discussion.
This probably depends on the functions of appointed members. If the functions are clear now, then it would be good to have members of the committee who can really evaluate the future board member credentials.
I assume the nominating committee is not about chapter-appointed seats?
Cheers
Yaroslav
"(E) Board-appointed Trustees. Beginning in January 2009, four Trustees will be appointed by the Board from a list of candidates selected by the Nominating Committee. The Nominating Committee shall be appointed by the full board and shall include as members (i) at least two Trustees selected during the prior July's community or chapter selection process, and (ii) the Executive Director. The Nominating Committee may consist of any number of members, including former Trustees and external experts." (from the resolution on the bylaw changes)
If you read the bylaws, the nominating committee is only about the board-appointed seats. The committee is made up of at least two board members which were appointed during prior july's chapter- or community selection procedure. This means that two of the seats in this committee will be for two of the following three: * (The person replacing) Florence * (The person(s) replacing) Domand and/or Michael Note that according to the bylaws (at least, if I interpret well and read really closely) Kat and Frieda are no option for these two seats.
Additional to these two seats any number of people can be appointed. These are mainly the seats Florence asks us to give input on I guess. I would at least suggest to appoint two people from the advisory committee and three people directly from the community in that committee. I could suggest a few names, but I have to realize that people appointed in that committee would be no longer a candidate in the following selection process...
Best regards,
Lodewijk
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 10:45 PM, effe iets anders effeietsanders@gmail.com wrote:
Additional to these two seats any number of people can be appointed. These are mainly the seats Florence asks us to give input on I guess. I would at least suggest to appoint two people from the advisory committee and three people directly from the community in that committee. I could suggest a few names, but I have to realize that people appointed in that committee would be no longer a candidate in the following selection process...
And what about electing those three Nomination Committee members?
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org