==============================================
Candidate: Gary Deane
==============================================

Information
----------------------------

                                GARY DEANE


BACKGROUND

.    Reside in Ottawa; on the 'net for about a year.

.    Hold Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Education, Master of Library and
     Information Science (Administration) degrees.

.    Employed as Deputy Director, Nepean Public Library, responsible for
     Library administrative services and management of general operations.

.    Board experience ranges from that of community daycare, to Canadian
     Association of Public Libraries, to Saskatchewan Cablevision Cooperative
     (local licensed cable operator), others.

.    University teacher for six years in media/ comunications studies;
     freelance writer on same for print media, CBC radio network


A PERSPECTIVE ON FREENET(S)

I have always had a personal and professional commitment to the public library
as an essential public good. I have developed a similarly strong commitment
to the existence of freenets. Access and the relative equality of access to
information must continue to be a fundamental principle of any attempt at a
fair and democratic society.

I've heard it pronounced that freenets are the "public libraries of the future",
that the World Wide Web is the "library card of the 21st century". Arguable
perhaps, but who provides and in what manner may not be the critical issue.
The real issue is that there be some secure public and community-based
provision of information as people require to serve their needs as
individuals and citizens. Freenets are in the process of developing a
potentially critical role and pathway to help ensure this. However, if they
are to sustain this development and realize their potential, they will have to
evolve into both managed and entrepreneurial organizations. By
"entrepreneurial", I don't mean necessarily "for profit". I mean that they
absolutely clear as to their mission, as to who their "owners" and
"customers" are,  as to what services are to be provided, and as to the
best way to provide and improve those services, now and in the future.

In terms of the above, I think that the National Capital Freenet is at a
critical point in its own development. The NCF Board is going to have to
have to demonstrate vision and leadership in order to see  the hopes for
Freenet realized. If not, the NCF may end up being little more than the
equivalent  of an information " foodbank" of small utility than a truly
vital and valued community resource.




SOME OF THE ISSUES

1.   The Need For  Planning

     No organization the size of the NCF can operate without a strategic plan
     according to which policy and operational decisions can be made and managed
     with confidence and  consistency.  I don't  believe that the NCF to date
     has been able to identify sufficiently what it is and who it's there for
     and where it wants and needs to go. For example, is it to function largely
     as an enhanced BBS, as limited public forum, as an access  to community-
     -based information, as a low-rent internet provider? It may function
     as all of these things but to what extent and to what degree has got to
     be decided.  The NCF will have  to undertake an ongoing planning process
     that will continue to address fundamental issues of governance, mission,
     and direction. Once done, then the necessary management process has got to
     be in place.

2.   Who "owns" the NCF and who are its users?

     This follows from the above. One of the challenges with volunteer-based
     organizations such as the NCF is that there are so many good people working
     so damn hard to make it all  work that they each feel justified in claiming
     ownership for their efforts. As a result, interests become vested and the
     needs of the larger membership may be neglected or ignored. "Members" in
     this case include both providers and end-users (and end-users with 
     vastly differing expectations). How all these interests are reconciled
     and responded to  by the Board will help decide  on issues ranging from
     daily time limits, to how user interfaces are best structured, to what
     internet accesses can be provided, etc.  And it has to start with
     information. The user survey and needs assessment posted in the Fall
     hopefully yielded a lot of relevant data that the Board will look at
     carefully in order to help it plot the course for the NCF.

3.   Financing 

     It appears as though the NCF is slowly imploding under the pressure of too
     much demand. It is eating itself. With so much demand and, in effect,  no
     increase in supply, how does the NCF intend to sustain itself? Let's face
     it, the principle of "free" as it has been expounded may no longer be
     serving the purposes of the NCF.  An organization with a membership of
     over 35,000 and a pressing need for a major capital and operational
     expansion in order to serve that membership perhaps should not be
     relying primarily on ongoing community and corporate goodwill for its
     viability. Taxpayers of Ottawa pay around  forty dollars a year per
     capita to support their public library. Yes, it is considered a public
     good but it also coming to be seen increasingly as a value-added service
     that supports the economic life of the community, etc. Perhaps one day,
     the NCF will be seen likewise. However, in the meantime, recognizing its
     present value, it also may be time to recognize its worth and allow members
     to contribute a reasonable and set membership fee towards ownership. That
     is not to say that corporate development and other fundraising would no
     longer be necessary. Decide on what is needed, determine the cost of what
     is needed, and then move to fund it appropriately without ideological
     constraints on means.


WHAT I THINK I CAN BRING TO THE BOARD OF THE NCF

1.   First of all, I have board experience, both in being on boards and
     reporting to them. I understand the board and governance process and know
     what is required to be an effective board member. There is nothing better
     for an organization than a board that understands its job and does it and
     there is nothing worse than one which doesn't.

2.   I have a broad management and planning background, operational, financial,
     and to some extent, technical. However, my job as board member is not to
     attempt to micromanage the organization, only to be certain that the
     organization is being managed well and is responding to Board decision and
     direction on behalf of its members.

3.   My job involves having  to understand and respond to issues of public
     information management and provision in constantly changing technological
     environments. Much of what I set out to accomplish is to see the way
     through, attempting to assess how services can best be delivered to
     customers. My vision for the NCF is based on the conviction that it must be
     a member-driven organization. Toward that I would encourage such efforts as
     the formation of "user groups" that would be given the opportunity online
     or otherwise to bring forward issues and concerns for discussion, e.g.
     institutional and organizational information providers. If the NCF is
     supposed to be about community information, are the providers satisfied
     with their presence on the NCF (apart from new SIG activity, I don't see
     much going on with respect to providers).

4.   I am prepared to work hard on behalf of the NCF. It's something I believe
     in and certainly something worth working for.

Thanks very much for your interest and support. If you have any questions, I'll
try to respond to them as quickly as I can.

Gary Deane