Tabled Proposal - Contract with MCC for space, tools, classes, and 1 access card (now 2 proposals)

[S.M.P. Newstead]

Proposal 1:

Enter into a partnership with MCC to hold 2 electric guitar classes per semester for the fall 2019 and spring 2020 semesters.  Classes would be 7:30 am to 10:30 am and 4 pm to 7:20 pm two days each week, one class each day (Schedule to be verified before HYH).  MCC would provide tools that would be allowed for use for all users in the lab including multiple sanders, an upright bandsaw, many hand tools, a buffer for wood use only, and 2 air filters.  MCC would provide workbenches to help set up the wood shop as a more usable space that almost exactly matches Jareds plan.  MCC would provide 10 or 12 5'x18" (maybe 24") nice sturdy table/workbenches that would replace the 2 white board covered tables in the back by the laser making this a hands on classroom type area that can be collapsed down to almost nothing for large projects. MCC would pay a fee and contract to be negotiated with the Dean of instruction.  Current estimates would be for MCC to pay between $500 - $800 per semester.  HeatSync would also increase liability insurance to $3,000,000 or what can be negotiated within AZ law and MCC can agree to.

Proposal 2:

 Rino (the class instructor) would be provided card access.  

Please discuss this before the meeting on this forum so we can get all the pros and cons thought of and people can cast informed votes on the subject.  

[Reed]

Do we have updates?

[Ryan Mcdermott]

Just to do some math: 36 weeks in a school year, 2 classes a week is about 70 total days of use, twice per day, and 3 hours per use.  So 6 hours per day, and 70 total days is:

420 hours of heatsync rental, for a total gross revenue to heatsync of between 1000 and 1600 total.  Or right around $3/hr for use of the shop.

The arizona science center has a program where you can pay a day rate for use of their makerspace, and it is $15/day.  So for this course, it would be about 35 * $15, or about $525 per student who takes the class for use of a shop (this also seems approx. in line with what techshop was charging -- about $170/mo.)  Assuming there are 10 students per time group (or 20 students per day, and two semesters), that is 40 total people taking the class, or about $20,000 in total cost (if you did this at AZ science center and paid the retail, day use rate).  This would come out to about $47/hr.

So just for some comparisons: what MCC is offering sounds like approximately $3/hr.

What sounds like the market rate (from techshop, and AZ science center), is about $47/hr.

$3 is about 6% of $47.

(Please don't take this as either an endorsement, or opposition to this idea.  Also please correct this math if it is wrong.)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/heatsynclabs.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jeremy Flowers]

Regarding the amount per hour that the space would make from MCC, I was under the impression that on our end this is more about offering something to our community and testing out new relationships than profiting from the college?

Even if making money was our primary goal in this endeavor, it seems more practical to compare the MCC offer to the dollar amount that square footage is generating now, rather than to what it hypothetically would if we were actively competing with the science center for revenue.

I think the points against this proposal  (which, for context, I'm tentatively in favor of) are more along the lines of logistics for equipment storing/usage, lab accessibility, and whether or not we can actually hold up our end of the deal in the first place with regard to getting the wood shop ready. 

[Milton Williams]

This was tabled so that additional details could be worked out.  Could someone please share what details they want to know?  

[Jeremy Flowers]

Not sure how representative I am of everyone else but here are my questions:

1 - how sure are we that we're going to be able to get the necessary construction, insurance updates, etc all taken care of? Is that a burden we can handle?

2 - will the insurance cost more, and if so will it be a lot more? Will we be stuck with it if things don't work out with MCC? Will it benefit us in other ways to have it?

3 - what are the consequences for us in the contract if things go wrong and we can't follow through? What's a worst case scenario in terms of ways they can penalize us if the relationship were somehow to get to a place of vindictiveness?

4 - what happens if one of our people gets injured on one of their tools or vice versa? If one if their big things breaks are we going to be on the hook for paying with it?

I think issues like the class cleaning up after itself, coexisting with other people who need to use the wood shop during class hours, not stealing anything etc all can be handled in the event that they come up, since those concerns are relevant any time the lab is open. I'm inclined to trust a college professor (who has clearly worked hard to make this happen) to maintain appropriate expectations for his students, so my concerns run more along the lines of legal responsibility and logistics like that. 

By the way this is Vega, my gmail account has my government name on it ;)

[S.M.P. Newstead]

Yes, this proposal will not be tabled again. We will not spend all night on it again, maybe 30 minutes of directed discussion. Thanks for the arithmetic perspective, Ryan! 

The main points of contention were: 

-Granting card access to someone through untraditional means

-Rino's absence over the last many months instead of getting to know people

-Lack of perceived benefits to HeatSync

-Perceived incompatibility with HeatSync's mission

-The amount of space being used

-The work involved in seeing this proposal through to completion

Please discuss these valid concerns here. 

There are four possible outcomes: 

Yes card access, yes partnership (proceeds as planned)

Yes card access, no partnership (unlikely, but then Rino can make his own space-occupying proposal)

No card access, yes partnership (would require a card-holding host for every class)

No card access, no partnership (things go on as before)

On Mon, Mar 25, 2019, 11:38 AM Milton Williams <milton.ja...@gmail.com> wrote:

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/heatsynclabs/ZcdRbWeZBxo/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.

[Rick Blake]

This sort of collaboration is not merely common, it is one of the stated goals of HeatSync. While most collaborative efforts have very little cost other than space and time, this one comes with some tangible costs and impacts, and those do need to be understood and agreed to. 

I hope we agree that this is a project that is well aligned with HeatSync goals and community involvement. It certainly seems so; making things, out of wood and metal (wood being a material not worked often but, as Milton's table project shows, has the potential for huge returns and improvements), electronics, musical instruments (and BeatSync is well represented, with a fabulous brass instrument being made this past week in our marginally functional metal shop, oh, what work will be done there again when it's 100%!), and with non-members who will not be left unimpressed by the capabilities available to them in this space when their school projects are done... I expect many of them to keep coming back, with new projects, ideas, and needs, to the great consternation of old farts like me, and so not merely deserving of my patience, but my acceptance and help... Change is hard.

This is a fabulous project! We need not, I hope, debate that too much further. Costs and potential problems are necessarily crucial to decide on. I think, if it is only a wash financially, it is still well worth approval, and I intend to vote in favor if no improper or damaging consequences are identified.

And even then, we should find a way and solve the problems. 

[Reed]

I agree it's in alignment with short-term goals and and long-term mission in spirit.

What I do not believe aligns with HeatSync pertains to Shaundra's point: "The work involved in seeing this proposal through to completion". There is asymmetry in this vote. If I vote yes, I am committing our community of volunteers to an unknown amount of work, and an unknown burden on the community. These are the details I was hoping to learn:

- What are the specific steps from now until the course begins? Is this workload measurable?

- How many HeatSync volunteers have committed to seeing those steps through? How much workload can each of them take on?

- How big is the deficit between those two?

- Similar questions for the burden on the community once the semester begins.

The difference between the current volunteer commitment and the commitment required will tell us whether we have this in the bag, or if we're out of our volunteer league. Or perhaps (most likely) we're in between those two, and we will have to ask our community to do more than they have thus-far committed to. This is the asymmetry. We are voting on what we would like to see, but we will (assumption until further inquest) end up telling others what they must do to hold up the bargain. This, to me, does not feel like HeatSync's current norms.

In my case, a yes vote would mean asking others to step up where I certainly cannot due to absence. I would ask everyone pushing this forward to consider if they are A) ready to tell our community they need to do more, or B) ready to pull the weight themselves in lieu of sufficient volunteers.

[S.M.P. Newstead]

The expectation for work would fall on the board and that is what we signed up for. 

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "HeatSync Labs" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/heatsynclabs/ZcdRbWeZBxo/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to heatsynclabs...@googlegroups.com.

[Stephanie Conner]

I'm not sure if this is anything to be concerned about and because I'm not sure how 501c3's work - 

I am assuming that the current way card access is granted is something that the board(an community) agreed upon at one point - does granting card access in a manner that isn't consistent with the current guidelines open the lab up to liability if we're not willing to continue granting access in this manner going forward?  (if we do it for one, are we required to do it for all)

Are there parameters outlined in the 501c3 that outline if the lab is able to be used in a "for profit" sense(for profit in the sense that we're essentially renting out space - and are we willing to do this with other organizations)?  I know that Girl Scouts has very limited options for fundraising due to the way their 501c3 is written - so I'm curious if the founding members had forethought for situations like this, or does the 501c3 need to be modified?

- at one point it was mentioned that a Champion be assigned to this project - has there been more thought/discussion/decisions made regarding this? If I remember correctly the reason a champion was suggested was because the current board (or maybe it was just active community members) didn't have the bandwidth or desire to take this one....has that changed?

Lastly - I know that this partnership comes with tools/tables that MCC will need to make the class work - do we REALISTICALLY have the room to house these materials in a manner that will still allow them to be used safely?  (this may very well be a non-issue, I'm not entirely familiar with how the wood shop is going to be set up - but when I was in the lab on Sunday, there were some discussions regarding space and lack there of)

I also think that Vega brings up many valid concerns.  I know it was said that the board will shoulder the responsibilities/duties for getting the necessary stuff done in time for this to happen if it's voted in - but is that a realistic expectation?  

Stephanie

[Milton Williams]

Sorry for the novella.

I would recommend that we have a report by the treasurer if possible tonight. 

To Shawndras point about not talking about it too much at HYH tonight.  I believe that most of us know how we will vote.  Talking about it isn't going to change enough peoples vote either way.  I view this as an opportunity that the lab should consider, but may pass on.  I think we should try to put emotion aside and decide our vote objectively on is there more upside than challenges?  I don't think we should be angry about others votes or opinions (I am worried about this).  I respect you all as intelligent, clear thinking individuals (even annoyingly so at times ;) ), otherwise I would not be part of this community.  

I proposed this because I want this to happen, I could not in good conscience kill this opportunity on my own, and I was hoping that there was some HeatSync magic that could make it viable.  I personally think it is too much and have avoided saying so because I don't want to poison the HeatSync magic well.

Here are the questions I saw and my opinion:

From Vega:

1- how sure are we that we're going to be able to get the necessary construction, insurance updates, etc all taken care of? Is that a burden we can handle?

Construction is the biggest challenge.  This would force it.  The best way to get things done is have a deadline.  Insurance on reinspection is very nearly compliant and would likely be accepted without change.  

2 - will the insurance cost more, and if so will it be a lot more? Will we be stuck with it if things don't work out with MCC? Will it benefit us in other ways to have it?

See 1

3 - what are the consequences for us in the contract if things go wrong and we can't follow through? What's a worst case scenario in terms of ways they can penalize us if the relationship were somehow to get to a place of vindictiveness?

Contracts are contracts.  They have legal repercussions.  The board should not sign without our lawyer weighing in.  

4 - what happens if one of our people gets injured on one of their tools or vice versa? If one if their big things breaks are we going to be on the hook for paying with it?  

In the case of an injury, like a serious one, people lawyer up, everyone gets sued, insurance of everyone gets called on, Insurance lawyers up, we pay deductible, May be very expensive to insure after.  This is no different than the case we are in now in my mind, maybe better because there are multiple policies covering everyone.

From Reed

- What are the specific steps from now until the course begins? Is this workload measurable?

There is a large amount of work to make this happen.  It involves $, time, and lots of sweat.

- How many HeatSync volunteers have committed to seeing those steps through? How much workload can each of them take on? How big is the deficit between those two?

I don't have the answer.  I know that I have doubts because I know how hard I have worked on permits and fire sprinkles.  It is so hard to download all the information to another person that it likely means that someone else has to completely take over the permitting or I have to finish it alone, which I am dreading.

- Similar questions for the burden on the community once the semester begins.

This is less if we grant card access.  I don't think this is doable without it.  It is a ton of work to have a host for every single class.  what happens when the host is sick, late, or otherwise?  They have to cancel the class, wait, ??  I don't see that as acceptable.

- would ask everyone pushing this forward to consider if they are A) ready to tell our community they need to do more, or B) ready to pull the weight themselves in lieu of sufficient volunteers.  

When I ran for the board I told everyone not to vote for me because I would just make more work for the lab.  I have consistently made significantly more work for all of our volunteers and they have done amazing stuff.  Take a look at the building less than a year ago: https://photos.app.goo.gl/wsE9ABmDvkZtoJZo2

From Stephanie

I am assuming that the current way card access is granted is something that the board(an community) agreed upon at one point - does granting card access in a manner that isn't consistent with the current guidelines open the lab up to liability if we're not willing to continue granting access in this manner going forward?  (if we do it for one, are we required to do it for all)

No.  This changes nothing for card access.  Card access is not being bought, we are saying this is cool enough and we trust enough to give access.

Are there parameters outlined in the 501c3 that outline if the lab is able to be used in a "for profit" sense(for profit in the sense that we're essentially renting out space - and are we willing to do this with other organizations)?  I know that Girl Scouts has very limited options for fundraising due to the way their 501c3 is written - so I'm curious if the founding members had forethought for situations like this, or does the 501c3 need to be modified?

We are ok here.  we are focussed on education and business incubation/development.  This is very in our mission.

- at one point it was mentioned that a Champion be assigned to this project - has there been more thought/discussion/decisions made regarding this? If I remember correctly the reason a champion was suggested was because the current board (or maybe it was just active community members) didn't have the bandwidth or desire to take this one....has that changed?

I think this is the only solution, personally.

Lastly - I know that this partnership comes with tools/tables that MCC will need to make the class work - do we REALISTICALLY have the room to house these materials in a manner that will still allow them to be used safely?  (this may very well be a non-issue, I'm not entirely familiar with how the wood shop is going to be set up - but when I was in the lab on Sunday, there were some discussions regarding space and lack there of)

We would have to remove the white board covered workbenches, but other than that I believe we could make it work.

I also think that Vega brings up many valid concerns.  I know it was said that the board will shoulder the responsibilities/duties for getting the necessary stuff done in time for this to happen if it's voted in - but is that a realistic expectation?  

No.  This would need its own champion.  The board are all doing close to their limit.  This all falling to them is a recipe for their complete burnout.

[Stephanie Conner]

Milton - 

Thank you for the novella ;).  One last question:  Do we have someone willing to Champion this? 

Stephanie

[Reed]

Stephanie,

At the last meeting, (my understanding was) Greg volunteered as champion. Shawndra volunteered to take the proposal for Milton who wasn't sure he could be present for the following HYH (tonight). Mel also volunteered to help gather information to clarify confusions.

[Ryan Mcdermott]

I'm actually not sure how I intend to vote on this.  Could somebody explain what the pros are?

[S.M.P. Newstead]

Ryan, a lot of people are where you are: confused about the potential benefits and very reasonably concerned about lots of hard work without adequate returns. 

I'd say the benefits are mostly intangible. Dean Voss has already stated that MCC is actually losing money on this. Our financial returns, as you calculated, are minimal as well.

The real value, at least to me, is having a partnership with the school, whereby students can work on projects at our space that they might not have otherwise been able to do. This could later extend to engineering, chemistry, biology, electronics, art and various trades such as welding. 

We'd have an influx of STEAM-oriented students who all might potentially become members. 

We could re-establish the maker club of MCC, or even a HSL club, and actually have a vote on their senate. I used to be the MCC student body vice president and senate chair and we regularly voted on things that were thousands of dollars. Put less delicately, they let children play with that kind of money because it was "small" to them. I also appointed independent senators who were not affiliated with any group on campus. We could "recommend" some independent senators to increase our voting power, as well as partner with affiliated clubs such as engineering, mathematics, art, and so on. 

MCC does not have a maker space and I am sad for their lack of opportunity. Why should ASU get everything? 

While a lot of people don't like conformity in principle, me included, partnering with an institution of higher education would lend more legitimacy to our organization. I don't think it's fair that we should have to prove our worth, but that is what it's like in the modern world. People care about that paper that says you're qualified for something. DIYers still don't have the proper respect and this might help catapult our work into the legitimate world of peer review, publication and maybe job opportunities. 

We'd suddenly become eligible for lots of grants pertaining to minority groups, low-income individuals, community education and who-knows-what through the school. 

MCC honors program has mandatory volunteer hours to be filled, which could be used at our space, benefitting both parties. 

MCC students and instructors could teach classes, workshops and events which would bring 30% to the house every time. College students in particular, notoriously lacking money, tutor regularly and would jump at the opportunity to have a built-in clientele. 

We'd have more people around who could help other people with advanced projects. It would be a union of our innovative, DIY creativity and the "normal" world's traditional learning. 

MCC, being a lower-division school (freshman and sophomore), have a certain type of class that is basically upper-division, called special projects. A student basically goes out into the "world" and works on a single project for an entire semester. When I went to MCC, I synthesized L-DOPA and I had my own student lab, ample grant funding, full creative control doing my own research (not working for some professor), and any help I could imagine. It's like a mini-master's thesis and they could do it at our space. The special projects are often canceled because of a lack of venue. 

I could go on and on, but everyone is right; this is a gamble and a big change. We could change our direction, decide we don't like it, and get rid of it, or it could open the door to being eligible for contests, competitions, scholarships, grants, labor, prestige, research, publication and so much more. I will be voting yes on this proposal. However, I will respect all votes and honor our community's wishes no matter which way we go tonight. See you tonight, Ryan! 

Shaundra