# [DRAFT] Revised Minimum Local Chapter Criteria

## Rationale

Local Chapters (LCs) are *geographic* (national or regional) not-for-profit legal entities representing the OSM community/contributors and OSM data when dealing with local government, business, and media. There are no thematic local chapters at the moment.

**Why revise the minimum LC criteria?** The [LC FAQ](https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters/FAQ) reads: *Currently there are no set in stone criteria outside of the following: (see Minimum Criteria below)* and there has been confusion in OSM Community regarding rejections and delay of decisions on applications. Therefore, the OSMF has the obligation to set clear and transparent criteria to help potential LCs in their application as well as to aid in their decision-making and timelines.

### Summary of this Proposal

After presenting a brief overview of the current state of OSMF LCs, below is the summary of the proposal:
1. Use term: Eligibility Criteria instead of Minimum Criteria
2. Lay out Eligibility Criteria and required documents for submission
***major change***: inclusion of at least 2 more criteria
4. Communicate clear roles and timelines of the Applications Process
***major change***: mandate LCCWG to play a major role in reviewing applications and making recommendation to the board
5. Set Transparent and Impartial Evaluation Guidelines
***major change***: Evaluation sheet with means of verification
7. Build an inclusive and equitable Affiliation Model for OSMF - *Work In Progress (WIP) with LCCWG*
***major change***: shall include thematic/non-geographic categorical chapters and informal communities (e.g mapping/user groups who are not capable of registering as a non-profit org)
7. Clear and effective information in the Local Chapters page WIP (with LCCWG)
***major change***: revision of LC website page

### [Current] State of the OSMF Local Chapters

**Benefits of being a Local Chapter.** Local Chapters are legally recognised by the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF), and have the following rights:
- use of the OpenStreetMap marks,
- represent the Foundation in interactions with the governments and companies, and
- can have a representative on the OpenStreetMap Foundation's Advisory Board (AB).

**Applying as Local Chapter**

**A. Minimum Criteria**

Following are the three minimum criteria for a LC, as mentioned in the LC FAQs page:
1. Non-profit incorporated entity or part of larger organisation (as long as that does not have conflicting goals e.g. FOSSGIS Germany and Geolibres Argentina)
2. Open membership (mass and democratic)
3. Dedication to supporting the aims of the OpenStreetMap Foundation and the OpenStreetMap project.

**B. Process**
Below is the simplified Application Process:
1. Meet min. Criteria + submit [application documents](https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters/Application_documents) to [e-mail]
2. OSMF Secretary will initially review the application, making sure that all requirements are submitted and filled
3. OSMF Secretary will share wit the the OSM community and OSMF membership for consultation and review (~ 2-4 weeks)
4. The application will undergo Board deliberation and voting
- If passed, agreement will be signed
- If not passed, will send a letter with the decision and rationale

**C. Responsibilities of LC**
1. Conduct and lead activities to support the aims of the OpenStreetMap Foundation and the OpenStreetMap project.
2. Provide annual activity and financial reports to the OSMF
3. others....

## Proposal

The following are the recommendations:

### Use term: Eligibility Criteria instead of Minimum Criteria

Using the term Elibility Criteria, instead of Minimum Criteria, will set clearer communication to potential LCs on what are the requirements to apply and submit to be a LC as well as set expectation on how OSMF see how a community/group is suitable to be recognized by the Foundation.

### Lay out Eligibility Criteria and required documents for submission

In addition to the three criteria already set, the following are proposed to be added as an eligibility:

- Membership of the organization should be representative of the geographic area the org is operating
- The organisation can show that they have been actively contributing to OSM mapping and community building activities

Below is the proposed required documents:
- [Form](https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters/Application_documents) to fill out
- Bylaws
- Incorporation/Association
- Membership structure / Voting Rights
- Not For Profit Registration (either formal or by statue)
- Other documentation that can support the application e.g. Board minutes, Annual General Meeting of members, etc

***For discussion: Do we add here what is eligible/acceptable for OSMF on how LCs operate / make money i.e. commercial activities? If yes, how does that look like?
-LCCWG discussion / Arnalie: Might have been a misundertanding on term -fundraising vs commercial activity. Assume good faith that fundmaking measures of LC/communities in their local context are aimed to support community and map building activites. We don't tell mappers what to map or how to use the map data, so should we tell LC how to operate/make money?
-[LCCWG survey on paid work](https://hackmd.io/Fimtuh0oSlWPs2mjRXqJZw): Participating LCCWG doesn't have strong opinions but recommended to share best practices among LCs and to facilitate volunteering (opt to do paid work as complexity grows- OSGeo Oceania)
-Thoughts?(please write name+opinion)***
ooo CraigAllan: Here is an attempt at the firewall we discussed ooo
* Raising funds to further the operations of the LC is fully accceptable and encouraged. All funds raised by donations or by the efforts of members must be placed in a general fund and used only for the collective purposes of the LC.
* LC members are volunteers. No member of the LC may be paid in money, gifts, goods or valued opportunities in compensation for their labour.
~> This means that multiple existing local chapters would be excluded, as quite often the administrative support is member of the LC (and rightly so if they choose to)
* External parties may be contracted to supply paid services or products to the LC, but such suppliers shall be held at arms length.
* Any LC member who accepts paid work from the LC may have no part in any related decision or debate preceding the appointment. The member shall resign from the LC prior to appointment and shall be treated as an external party until 6 months after the work is both concluded and paid for.
* No corporate donor, supplier or employee of a donor or supplier may have any part in guiding, managing or controlling the activities of the LC.
* Any member with a strong connection to a corporate donor or supplier shall publicly declare a conflict of interest and should not participate in LC decisions related to that connection.

ooo Firewall ends ooo

The whole discussion came up last year when we have seen an application from a candidate organisation in Africa where
- it was unclear if there was any permanent activitiy outside the capital's university of the group
- the candidate organisation did fund its work on collecting data outside OpenStreetMap for the government, with a vague promise it might later be contributed to OpenStreetMap, and probably paid salaries for that work

So a different suggestion: The local chapter must not have in its structures (in particular bylaws, membership structure, and funding) any incentive to withhold data from OpenStreetMap or withhold people from becoming members of the global OpenStreetMap community. Joining from any part and demography of the country must be easy, and fees, bylays, joining and leaving procedures must be accordingly.

--Roland

### Communicate clear roles and timelines of the Applications Process

In addition to the current process, we need to clearly communicate roles and timelines for applying as an LC. Major revisions as follows:

- revise text / formatting of the process in the LC page (see below for proposed format)
- Mandate LCCWG to review LC application, conduct community consultation and make recommendations to the OSMF Board
- It is recommended to mandate LCCWG to do the review and recommendation as the LCCWG is consists of various local chapters and local community members ensuring equal opportunity in reviewing as well as LCCWG has a mandate to facilitate communities in OSM.
- OSMF Board to vote informed by LCCWG recommendations and findings
- Note: OSMF Board members can however, make their own research regarding the chapter applicant to support their decision.
- Adapt (and improve) [[DRAFT] Handbook for Becoming a Local Chapter](https://hackmd.io/4NfuVm7tSKi3HIB3FKFrNQ) (included in the LCCWG Agenda)

Below is a proposed text / format :

Recommendation for viz: include a flowchart

| Action | Who | Remarks |
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Submit Application to [e-mail] and cc: [e-mail] | Community Applicant | Meet elibility criteria and submit [required information and documents](https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters/Application_documents); Channel: email|
| Creation of Gitlab ticket and application page on the OSMF website | Dorothea | Time: at most 3 working days after application is received|
| Requirements review | LCCWG | Review Eligibility Criteria and submitted documents; conduct and community/OSMF membership consultation if necessary; Time: ~ 1-2months |
| Recommendation to the Board | LCCWG | Time ~ 1-2months; Channel: Email / gitlab |
| Board vote | OSMF Secretary | Can be a circular; Time: ~1-2months; Channel: Loomio or board meeting |
| Communication of Results | OSMF Secretary | Time: ~ 1month; Channel: Email |
| If approved, sign Agreement; If not approved, provide in writing full reasons for the refusal to the applicant. Invite the applicant to remedy the identified problems and to re-apply once ready. LCCWG may choose to support the resolution of problems (or not). | OSMF Board | (Agreement template)[https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters/Template_agreement]; Time ~ 1-2months; Channel: Email |
| Update wikis | Dorothea | Time ~1-2weeks after results|
| Ask about Advisory Board (AB) Representative | OSMF Secretary/Dorothea | Time: within 1 month after the agreement is signed; Channel: Email |
| Add new AB representative to AB mailing list, wikis and Archive signed LC agreement | Dorothea | Time ~1-2weeks|

Minimum Total time: 2 months
Maximum Total time: 6 months

**For discussion: Do we need community/OSMF membership consultation on LC application?
-Arnalie: Trust LCCWG (as they are representative of LC and local communities) to make the review and recommendation; however, they can conduct community consultation if necessary/need community feedback
-Mateusz: yes - there could be issues hard to catch, so there should be at least consultation (though it is fine to not follow all raised arguments/demands)
-Thoughts?(please write name+opinion)
-Craig: Yes, Community consultation is a good idea. It is democratic and transparent - which is an important value of OSMF. Plus community members are outside the internal politics and pressures of the LCCWG and the Board and may feel free to raise issues that insiders don't.
-Sarah: there always should be a consultation with the community in the geographic area in question. Application for an LC implies that such a community exists and they are the only ones who can fully judge if the organisation that applies is representative.

### Set Transparent and Impartial Evaluation Guidelines

To guide application reviewers (LCCWG and/or OSMF board), improve transparency and avoid bias, the [[Draft] Evaluation Guidelines](https://hackmd.io/Yr6BnDV6SUiSo0A0qd33Fg) is proposed. This will be linked in the LC Application page.

***For discussion: Do we assume good faith as long as the chapter is legally registered as non-profit to their country or does their non-profit status (and how they operate/make money) need to abide by the UK laws (or where OSMF is incorporated)?
-Arnalie: Abiding by UK laws should be balanced with the local context
-Thoughts?(please write name+opinion)***
Craig: The LC is not a structure of the OSMF and is not bound by UK laws (except for OSM UK of course). We should respect the independent local law of every other country and acept that each LC will be non-profit as determined by law within their area.

### Build an inclusive and equitable Affiliation Model for OSMF [WIP with LCCWG]

There might be cases when application to become a non-profit in a certain country is onerous or the effort/cost to become one outweighs the benefits of being a LC / operating as a registered org, or that there are no non-profit model in their country; therefore, OSMF has to improve Affiliation Models in OSM.

[[DRAFT] Proposed Affiliation Models](https://hackmd.io/J7YZuE2YSGmyvTRtzBRpfg)

**Important:** Discuss with LCCWG as they have mandate : [Improving the Local Chapters affiliation scheme](https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters_and_Communities_Working_Group)

### Clear and effective information in the Local Chapters page
With all these recommendations, here is the [revised Local Chapters Page text](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PRNQABn0BbUp-2hLf27HY-MXh7gfDnx_H6DDOIynv1o/edit).

**Important:** Discuss with LCCWG

## Links
- Local Chapters https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters
- Local Chapters FAQ https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters/FAQ
- Local Chapters and Communities Working Group https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Local_Chapters_and_Communities_Working_Group
- DRAFT Handbook for Becoming a Local Chapter https://hackmd.io/4NfuVm7tSKi3HIB3FKFrNQ