...
- Note added to agenda: Violeta Ilik has resigned from the Leadership Group and Steering Group - she has been removed from the lists
- DuraSpace Code of Conduct at https://duraspace.org/about/policies/code-of-conduct (Julia, 10 minutes)
- Everyone is encouraged to review these
- EuroCRIS meeting update (Anna, 10 minutes)
- EuroCRIS meeting was held in Germany
- About 100 people attended
- Meeting about mapping CERIF to VIVO
- CERIF model is used by many European universities for their CRISes
- Looking to refactor the CERIF ontology model and divide it by our current VIVO model - using portions of CERIF that match up with what VIVO covers
- Will work with the ontology group
- Once this structure is decided, will work for estimated 9 months to 1 year, will map this new model to VIVO and this will allow for use of the same mapped ontology between these two systems
- MOU between EUROCRIS and VIVO -- Michele is working on a draft
- Discussions about VIVO
- Russian project to implement open science metric indicators
- A technical university in Germany is going to use PURE, but will also use VIVO to showcase their information
- VIVO came up in several other discussions during the meeting as well
- Changing research evaluation methods is a trending topic in Europe
- VIVO conference planning (Julia, 5 minutes)
- Will schedule a special meeting to brainstorm possibilities for this conference
- Julia will send out a doodle poll - all are welcome to join the conversation
- Proposal to clarify voting processes (Julia and everyone, 20 minutes)
- Votes over the last 2 weeks have been confusing
- Propose formal process for voting for future
- Someone proposes a vote
- Someone seconds it
- Language is finalized in the meeting (how? written form in the minutes of the meeting?)
- Discussion about this - what seemed to be the consensus by end of the meeting is recorded below
- Voting options will be: yes, no, abstain, and there will be a 2nd question with an open text box for comments
- Written proposal will be done during meetings via chat and in meeting minutes prior to the vote; or sent out to the group following the meeting with a timeline allowing for feedback on the proposal and re-sharing of proposal prior to voting
- Regarding implementing this new voting process: Recommendation to set a check-in date of 90 days to see if the new voting process is working
- Regarding Meeting discussions and Robert’s Rule of order: We should publish the section of Robert’s Rules that is appropriate. Motion for a vote is agreed to in the meeting, seconded in the meeting, discussed in the meeting. Set a time for when the vote will be finished. Votes will take place outside of the meeting via online form. Need to establish a quorum or if not the vote can’t be made or held. Expectation: assume that this process stands, but set the expectation that a change might be made after the ITAV (it takes a village) sessions conclude.
- Question - do we ever want a vote to be held in a meeting if a quorum is achieved? Do we ‘always’ want to have the vote afterwards to allow for folks that are missing to have their voice heard?
- Comment: We may have to try a few things and see how things evolve - including comments
- A comment Comment that changing from the earlier process of: anyone can veto, to: all we need is a simple majority, really sways this process from consensus-based to simple majority where half the group could disagree and a vote could still pass. Keeping comments in the voting form are a way to show we still in general support a consensus agreement.
- Julia will send out proposed voting changes via email, and this doesn’t seem like something we need to vote on ⇒ everyone at the meeting agreed on the overall process, however everyone can contribute feedback via email response to Julia’s written changes to the voting process
- (NEW) Budget extension for January – July, 2020 (Julia and Hannah, 5 minutes)
- Headline: this is something we will need to vote on
- Need to approve an extension of the budget to take us through June 30th of 2020
- Finance taskforce - Hannah, Julia, Terrie - discussed VIVO priorities
- Goals are to stabilize budget and grow membership
- Working with current framework and extending that out through the end of the year
- Changes in the proposal that will be sent out are to promote sustainability of VIVO
- Conference revenue is included
- Main change compared to prior budget = moved some funds out of travel to help rebuild preserves; maintained enough in travel to address strategic priorities to grow membership
- Identified other places to change the budget framework for next fiscal year that would require more discussion
- Waiting for a little more feedback and then will share something next week with everyone
- Had been discussing voting to approve the budget extension. The vote will be sent out by email following the email with the budget extension proposal and email discussion.
- Motion by Mike:
- “The LG votes to approve the budget submitted by the finance committee.”
- Seconded by: Rob
- Review of recent vote (Julia, 5-10 minutes)
- Regarding the vote sent out with 2 questions:
- Should the Emeritus Project Director serve on the VIVO Leadership Group until June 30, 2020?
- Should the Emeritus Project Director be a voting member of the VIVO Leadership Group until June 30, 2020?
- The vote was majority Yes
- Discussion at this LG meeting voiced approval for this outcome.
- Meeting adjourned