legalxml-sc — archive

RE: [legalxml-sc] 2006 spending plan

From: Roger Winters
To: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 18:10:00 -0000

MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->

legalxml-sc message

Subject: RE: [legalxml-sc] 2006 spending plan

From: "Winters, Roger" <[email protected]>
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:10:09 -0800

I agree that resources for 2006 do not appear to be sufficient to support Steering Committee reimbursement for attendance at a face-to-face meeting at the OASIS Symposium. I support Alternative 1 - which makes it unanimous (for all those who've weighed in).

It is true that those of us who work in public sector are not likely to have other sources to support attendance. My department understands they contribute the value of my time when I attend any meetings or programs even though they cannot support things like transportation, registrations, and lodging. Others who are Steering Committee members might not be able to afford to attend either. In general, if there were reimbursement of expenses, I favor making that available to all (understanding that some might have ample resources or other sources of funds that could be used instead).

We know the value of face-to-face meeting. The alternative of conference calls (even with Web tools added in) has been satisfactory, but not ideal. We can do better with them by preparing for them in advance, identifying the decisions needed (not just issues to discuss) and when and why, and conducting much of the discussion in advance through emailing or blogging or something. I don't mean to burden the Chair (who sets the agenda and leads the meeting) - I mean to burden us all with this work. WE ALL should be the sources of agenda items, issue identification/clarification, and explaining what decisions we think needed. Whether elected or appointed by our TCs, we need to be committed to attend to this business, to participate in the calls (making that a priority regular appointment in our schedules), to read and discuss in advance, to take assignments, etc.

During the past year, the content of our work in Court Filing TC has been very, very technical. I don't know whether that chased people away from LegalXML within OASIS or not. Some discussion of what participating in LegalXML TCs can and should mean for other OASIS members might help us boost the participation (and revenues) in our member section. Perhaps there are things to do to attract others to OASIS for LegalXML involvement. We need more revenue to provide better support to our TC work. When revenue is bountiful (if ever), then it might be appropriate to think of a reimbursed face-to-face - provided there's a business justification for it.

My 2-cents. Adjusted upward for inflation.

Roger

Roger Winters

Program and Project Manager

and

Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Coordinator

King County Department of Judicial Administration

516 -609 MS: KCC-JA-0609

V: (206) 296-7838 F: (206) 296-0906

[email protected]

From: John M. Greacen [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2005 10:36 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [legalxml-sc] 2006 spending plan

OASIS has asked for our 2006 spending plan by the first of December. I attach three alternative budgets. We need to resolve this matter immediately. I will be available most of the day on Monday (except noon to 1:00 pm Pacific) and Tuesday afternoon after 1:30 pm Pacific time if we need a conference call to discuss the alternatives. I will not be available the rest of the week, unless we are able to meet before 7:00 am or after 5:00 pm Pacific time.

Based on the most recent reports from OASIS, I project next year's available revenues at only $34,466.11. By contrast, we will spend almost $96,000 in 2005.

I have heard from eight of the ten Steering Committee members about their availability for, and expenses for attending, a Steering Committee face to face meeting in in May in conjunction with the annual OASIS symposium. Assuming that the two non-responding members (Debi and Rolly) will attend and will need reimbursement, the costs of such a meeting would be almost $10,000 - or one third of available resources. If we were to fund all of the four requests actually made, it would cost us $6340 or 20% of available resources. If we were to limit reimbursement to Robin and Roger - our public sector members who require reimbursement - we would spend $3340 on such a meeting - 10% of our available resources.

My personal view is that we should not plan to reimburse any Steering Committee expenses. Those of us who choose to attend the meeting should meet and include the other members by conference telephone call. That position is included in Alternative 1. Alternative 2 would fully fund a Steering Committee face to face. Alternative 3 would fund only the expenses of Robin and Roger.

All three alternatives include $5000 for TC travel (we spent $4800 in 2005), $2145 for bad debts (that is what we spent last year), and $5,000 for reserves or carry forward to 2007. The amounts available for consulting services in the three alternatives are $22,300, $12,400, and $19,000 respectively. We have a non-specific request for such services from the eContracts TC; the ECFTC may need a small amount of additional consulting time to revise ECF 3.0 to incorporate the lessons learned from test implementations. So, this area, in my view, is the area of greatest need within the Member Section.

I welcome your comments on the three alternatives, and other suggestions (e.g., suggested changes in the amount set aside for TC travel reimbursements or reserves).

John M. Greacen

Greacen Associates, LLC

HCR

505-289-2164

505-289-2163 (fax)

505-780-1450 (cell)