You're best to ask Martin if you're after a TfL update regarding the cycle data.

In true wedding invitation style:

The OSMUK Directors
request the pleasure of your company
at the AGM and Annual Gathering
Saturday, the twenty-ninth of June
two thousand and nineteen
at one o'clock in the afternoon

Newspeak House, 133 Bethnal Green Road, London

Reception (ad-hoc beer and curry) to follow

RSVP https://www.eventbrite.com/e/openstreetmap-uk-annual-gathering-tickets-62262798707

I'm hoping to attend, just need to sort out trains first. Last train with connections north of Preston leaves Euston at 19:34, but hopefully this will be OK...

Trains seem a bit odd on that day, some not running and others taking longer than usual hence they miss usual connections

Officially we will be wrapped up by then, and probably time to get food and drink too. Should be OK.

Have just spotted that this event is missing from http://weeklyosm.eu/archives/12177

Not sure why it is missing from WeeklyOSM. I thought they took their list from the wiki calendar. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Current_events

Why you should vote at the AGM against raising the membership fee for corporate members:

Note: I was a lone dissenting vote on the Board so I am opposing this motion at the AGM despite it being proposed by the Board.
1. If we need to raise membership fees then it should be because our costs are rising faster than our income. I don't see this need currently.
2. Or it could be because we have a major new initiative which needs funding. We don't have one currently.
3. Or it could be that we are going to use the increase in membership fees to increase the benefits to members. I don't see any planned increase in benefits.
3. It discriminates against one class of member, moreover one that doesn't have a vote. At the very least I would expect the constituency affected to have been consulted beforehand. If membership fees should go up, then they should go up for everyone.
4. Any increase should be proportionate to the requirement: a doubling in one year is way too much. It will act as a disincentive: corporate members are likely to use a business case interrogation of "What doubling of benefit do I see for the doubling of my costs?" and draw the necessary conclusion
5. This class of corporate member - small companies and startups - is generally without deep pockets, with little room for discretionary expenditure.
6. We should be celebrating our founding corporate members not punishing them.
7. If we want to double our income from corporate members then the board should be tasked with doubling the number of these members.
8. We pride ourselves on being open:
I believe low membership fees are an important component of this: expensive=exclusive
Extensive prior discussion is another vital component: I believe there has been too little to involve the membership in formulating this proposition.
I urge you to vote AGAINST at the AGM and if you can't attend then cast a proxy vote AGAINST

I thank Brian for giving his voice to the vote on raising corporate membership fees, I encourage other members to also do the same if they have something to add. This helps limit need for discussion time at the AGM which can easily become circular and feel like a waste of time, the pre-AGM discussion also helps proxy voters decide.

I would like to add the following points:
- There had been discussion that £50 was low for corporate members joining an association, but this was too close to the previous AGM for a motion to be prepared/proposed.
- I voted for this motion, so that it could be proposed for the upcoming AGM and a decision be made, which I strongly wanted to happen. I am undecided how I will vote for the motion (for or against).
- Any existing corporate memberships will remain, until their annual renewal date when they will be subject to the latest price (£100 if the motion passes).
- £50 to £100 is a 100% price increase. We can't guarantee there won't be any further increases, but I would not expect it to happen again for at least several years if ever.
- Regardless of the outcome, I think I would vote against an increase in future years because it gets unfair on corporate members loyalty to us and their budgeting. Brian did make some good arguments for an increase.

Why you should vote FOR the increase of the Corporate membership fee:

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Brian. I will set out my personal view as to why I think the members should support the resolution:

• The first two years have focused on getting OSM UK up and running and during that period we have been quite tight with the purse strings. I feel that we should loosen the purse string in the third year especially in support of volunteer mappers.
• We now have more budget available but some has come from jobs that we pick up when nobody from the Talent Directory takes them. Ideally this wouldn't happen as we want the Talent Directory to pick up more and more work. As such we need to look to our members for the continued funding of OSM UK.
• The corporate members I have spoken too they are looking for extra ways to support the OSM community - they want to be doing more.
• The initial rate of £50 is very low. If we were to properly value the admin time of the Directors (e.g. at the same hourly rate as the OSMF's admin assistant) then the amount left after "Cost of Sales" would be very small - probably even negative in some cases.
• I see this as a re-setting of the fee to a value it perhaps should have been in the first place. I certainly don't see this as a repeatable increase every year.
• We are signing up new corporate members (we have 3 more to add to our website in the next few days).
• A review of the records on Companies House for our current corporate members highlights that an increase to £100 should not be problematic. In comparison to other costs it is very small.
• I am not convinced that companies join because they want something in return. The message I receive from the companies I have spoken to is that they want to give back.
• As far as I recall, none of the companies I have spoken to have asked about voting. I am also our representative on the OSMF Advisory Board, which is part of the offering to OSMF Corporate Members. The activity in that group is very low (almost none), suggesting that corporate members aren't out to actively influence or vote.
• Indeed those companies that do want something from us without paying already have plenty of good options (e.g. in the case of when we pass work to the Talent Directory, when we answer queries free of charge as doing so supports our aims, and when we write case studies).
• Finally, it is worth noting that the vast majority of our corporate members have many months before their renewal is due. Plenty of time for them and us to budget accordingly.

So in summary, (1) companies want to be helping our more than the currently are, (2) it would be great to release the purse strings more in the next year, and (3) whilst we can do this using our current funds we do need to ensure that we have healthy future funds to maintain it especially as we want more work to be directed to the Talent Directory. As such I will be voting in favour of the resolution.