[Steering Committee] A Change Proposal

[Jason Lee]

OK, fellas.  Proof-reading time.  I'd like to send this out today or  
tomorrow, so please give me feedback as soon as possible.  Thanks!


=====

One of the things we in the JUG leadership have always tried to stress  
is that this is *our* group.  While there may be a few of us making  
the decisions, all are welcome to come to the meeting and help us make  
those decisions, even taking over leadership if so desired.  That  
being the case, we try to operate the JUG with complete  
transparently.  To that end, I'd like to take some time to discuss the  
state of things concerning our group.

As you may recall, late last year, we incorporated the JUG, which,  
among other things, has allowed us to open and maintain a bank  
account.  As a result of that move and the resulting, if meager,  
account balance, we have been able to entertain larger, more long-term  
arrangements.  One such arrangement, which we're still in the process  
of finalizing, is a multi-month agreement with the Oklahoma City  
Coworking Collaborative, or CoCo.  As many of you have seen, Derrick  
and his team have built a fantastic facility in downtown Oklahoma City  
that solves a number of issues for us, the most pressing of which has  
been space.  At several of our last meetings at the University of  
Phoenix, we were standing room only.  To ameliorate that issue there  
would have doubled our costs.  The CoCo gives us much more room, at  
only a modest increase in costs.  The CoCo also provides for the  
recording and hosting of meeting videos, as well as a more central  
location, which helps out those on the south side of the city.

For those reasons, we feel such a partnership with the CoCo is a boon  
to the JUG.  At the same time, we are able to help out Derrick and  
crew who have been very active and supportive of not only the JUG, but  
several other user groups in the area.  The catch is that such an  
agreement requires an upfront payment for the facilities rental, which  
is a normal and not unreasonable arrangement.  What that means is that  
the lion's share of our current funds are now committed to this  
partnership, leaving us with only a small sum left.  Seeing this small  
amount, the SC discussed Tuesday what we should do to make sure that  
we can continue to operate.  While it is true that in the past we've  
gone month to month in our funding, given the volatility in the market  
and the loss of one of our sponsors, we feel that it would be prudent  
to take steps to insure that we're not spending money we may not get  
in the future.

Having said all of that, we came up with a number of options for the  
membership to discuss, select, etc.  Aside from the facilities rental,  
we have two other regular expenses, door prizes and food.  With food  
being the larger of the two, our proposals focused on that.  They are:

1) We no longer provide lunch, and expect each attendee to bring his  
lunch.
2) We continue to provide lunch, but require that each attendee pay a  
flat fee for lunch, say, $5.
3) We move to a paid membership model, wherein members would continue  
to get a "free" meal at each meeting but non-members would be required  
to pay for the meal at each meeting.
4) Someone in the group donates the food. Or, alternately, the  
entrepreneurial might find a nice business opportunity here.
5) Continue business as usual and then suspend operations should  
funding dry up.

There are likely other options.  If one comes to mind, please feel  
free to propose it.  We decided that, given the time frame, nothing  
will change for the June meeting, but, starting with the July meeting,  
one of these proposals (or, perhaps, one suggested by the general  
membership) will be implemented, so if you have a strong feeling one  
way or another, now is the time to make your voice heard.  The  
decision on which option to adopt will likely be made at next month's  
Steering Committee meeting, so if you've been thinking about coming,  
now is the time.  That's the best way to get involved in the decision- 
making process for the JUG.

Our hope, of course, is the economy begins to swing back up and that  
our awesome local sponsors will still be in the position to partner  
with us.  While there may be signs showing that that will happen in  
the near term, we felt it best not to do "deficit spending" and  
implement a strategy to insure the continued operations of the JUG.   
All of us on the SC feel that we get value from the JUG, hoping, of  
course, that everyone else feels the same, so it is in the best  
interest of all involved that the JUG continue to meet.  It is our  
hope that this proposal will do just that.

Thanks for taking the time to read this giant missive.  Your feedback  
is greatly welcome.

Jason Lee, SCJP
Senior Java Developer, Sun Microsystems
Mojarra and Mojarra Scales Dev Team
https://mojarra.dev.java.net
https://scales.dev.java.net
http://blogs.steeplesoft.com