California District Proposal, Rev 2

[Michael Corsetto]

Originally Posted by Big Ideas

1) Has FIRST made any comment in an official/non capacity to these 2 proposal threads? Rick Sick is the only FIRST person that has contributed. But, as a Senior Mentor he is still on the volunteer side.

The comment I have received from CA RD's is A) to not use the California FIRST Logo and B) a general reminder that this is not an official proposal. I'm hoping the conversation can progress further. Side note: Senior Mentors receive a stipend (I believe).

Originally Posted by Big Ideas

2) Is it a "California" proposal for a particular reason? East to define? Political? Easy for the legal aspects?

I appreciate the willingness to treat Nor Cal and So Cal as needing their own considerations. Do we NEED to carry the 2 areas forward together? Is it better to discuss the areas actions separately? For timing? Workload? Necessity? Personally I think that the combined discussion is best and I would love action to be taken together but I would not want the best solutions to fail because of any artificial requirements imposed but not needed.

I think CA could roll out together or separately. It will depend on more than just one proposal to determine that direction. It is important to, at a baseline, recognize that splitting state into two DCMPs will be key to make DCMP affordable for the most CA teams. Beyond that, I think roll-out timing, going together or separate, etc, is more of a "cross that bridge when we get there" sort of topic.

Originally Posted by Big Ideas

3) We need to strengthen the section regarding requests to and discussion from CA FIRST staff. At some point we actually have to deal with FIRST; expanding the discussion outside of the volunteer community. FIRST depends VERY heavily on its volunteer base. This discussion is an opportunity to help FIRST support our community better. And in turn, we can support the students better.

As mentioned before, a few volunteers are working to get some open communication channels with CA FIRST staff. This has been more difficult than I had hoped, but will keep trying.

Originally Posted by Big Ideas

4) I am actually a BIT uncomfortable using the FIRST logo on the proposal. Because, this is the work of volunteers that have no corporate standing in FIRST. I would be happy with a contributors list showing every single team that has entered the discussion as an exotension to the authors list currently on the front cover.

I will remove the logo, thanks for expressing the concern. I would rather not track/tally all the discussion contributors, that list is over 200 people long at this point (which is a great thing!) The individuals listed currently went above and beyond to support me as I drafted the first and second revisions.

Originally Posted by Big Ideas

5) I think we need to strengthen the section on Volunteer needs. Thanks for adding the spreadsheet of volunteers and roles. It was great that we have already identified Volunteer recruitment/development/coordination as a major need that requires considerable work from the volunteer community as well as FIRST. Its nice to see that action is already happening in this regard. Thanks Joe Petito for putting Inspector development into Off Season Event plans. I will be working on similar development for San Diego events.

Do you have any recommendations for improving the section? PM me if you have specific additions you'd like to see, or post here.

Originally Posted by Big Ideas

If I struck some interest (or a nerve) please add your thoughts. --Steve

No nerves struck, thanks for posting!

-Mike