Minutes: Steering Committee
From OasisNYC
←Older revision | Newer revision→
OASIS STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING
May 25, 2006 (prepared by Jane Sokolow)
Steve Romalewski and Jane Sokolow gave a review and update of the Wolf Keens report.
Steve announced and described his and OASIS's new academic home at the CUNY Graduate Center. OASIS is now being hosted by the Center for Urban Research. This arrangement allows for flexibility and opportunities for collaboration.
There was discussion of opportunities for collaboration and the effective promotion of both OASIS and the partner organizations. The collaborations continue to provide important connections and are relevant—both in nature and size.
It is important that these collaborations and the maintenance of the one-stop shopping website be enhanced and maintained. Also important to develop and improve connections between open space and other municipal issues.
Is OASIS still relevant, given new online mapping technologies and changing needs of communities? We think yes, because: the website itself provides depth of information not found in one place anywhere else, and perphaps more important the project is more than a website -- it is the collaborations, partnerships, and regular meetings among a diverse array groups and individuals.
Discussion of new features and social networking tools incorporated into the website (to help maintain relevancy of the website in face of changing technologies). These include:
- Del.icio.us tags which allow for saving and sharing previously created maps have been incorporated into the OASIS website.
- Integration of the Google Earth technology and search functions and the need for fluid connection between Google Earth and OASIS. The following connections have been integrated:
HEP Community Gardens Waterfront Access
Concept of transferability of OASIS-----OASIS D.C., New Haven
Important to document the impact and the changes.
Strategic Planning Recommendations
Governance and decision-making. A persistent and critical fundraising question is "How are you run?"
Wolf Keens recommends that the current structure be formalized.
Jack Eichenbaum asked is that meant that the current Strategic Planning Committee would be the Executive Committee.
The Steering Committee is an open process. Its main focus is content guidelines. The sub-committees are the “drivers” and drive the content.
There should be emphasis on the fluidity of the model. And that this is a “work in progress.”
All current committees would remain and two new committees: Executive Committee and Administrative Committee (see governance guidelines) would be added. The Executive Committee would have one representative from each of the other committees and would be responsible for final decisions with input from the Steering Committee and the sub committees. All committees are to develop and enhance participation.
The Administrative Committee is responsible for the Contacts list, writing proposals, reviewing and editing content and scheduling and running meetings.
The sub committees are responsible for connecting with members, defining needs and creating data agendas within each committee.
The Draft Chart was distributed and partners were asked to comment by calling one of the Strategic Planning Committee members. The chart was developed by Christy Spielman with input from the planning committee. The general comments at the meeting were focused on the overall theme of enduring relevance and importance of community driven data with an emphasis on open space.
Executive Committee representation should include a cross section of public, private, government (State, City etc.) representatives.
We don’t want to lose the entrepreneurship aspect of OASIS.
Important to reach out and have outreach to other groups, agencies and organizations from the Draft “Organizational” Chart.
The draft of “Content” guidelines was discussed. The EPA Harbor Estuary Program (HEP) content was used as an example.
What is the most effective way to distribute information?
Open data standards? Mapping source versus open repository—considering the incentive structure. The more open and centralized it is, the more incentives there are.
What to do about content guidelines if data doesn’t match? Can people build on top without official association with OASIS?
Platform driven approach: Aggregation of Information on one particular topic in same format.
OGC standards (downloadable data)
Issue of open space that is not fully understood as “public.” E.g. roads and water.
Matt Arnn comment: Want to make sure the staff is not overwhelmed.
Steve: Importance of collaboration especially inter agency collaboration?
Can FOIL or use legal options for acquiring data (public? data). “Make the pie larger.” The idea here would be have a legal partner to help get data that is produced with tax monies and is being with held from the public.
Jane: We can make more progress by forging relationships with agencies rather than using legal means.
Use of legal means constitutes a non-formalized status for the data.
The focus on open space is good. The more “neutral” we get the less effective we are.
(Jack asked for a list of today’s participants to be sent out to the group.)
Incentives for Participation
Need to include governance structure and guidelines on website in prominent place.
Need to publicize benefits of OASIS.
WIKI. Share information between partners.
PlanNYC.org/NYU Furman Center: Site for planning and developing projects and issues—open source system.
Greening for Breathing—SoBro.
Funding: Need for follow up meeting
Open Project: People can edit a common layer.
Should be collaboratively built and freely available. Ability to download for free and build upon data.
Open Planning Projects (GeoServer)
KML Support
Template license agreements are needed.
Names tags were suggested for next meeting.
