[CCWG-ACCT] Contribution on Transparency Reforms for CCWG / Budget veto/ Financial reporting

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

Nigel,

There is the representation made by the several counsels retained that 
under California Corporations Code, member(s) creates a governance issue 
we're not prepared to address, either in the finite time available for a 
transition, or the infinite time available to come up with "membership" 
that isn't a clandestine status bump (note the pun) for the GNSO, ALAC, 
and perhaps one or more other AC (SSAC and RSSAC self-excluding) or SO, 
and solves the intractable problem we were unable to solve in 2002 -- 
what is general membership?

Could you at least, for the purposes of discussion, assume that the 
stated concern is a real concern and not a convenient fiction?

Eric

On 10/29/15 11:25 AM, Nigel Roberts wrote:
> If the proposed new "designator" accountability model is to have the 
> same credibility as the Membership model originally proposed by the 
> CCWG, it must have no less power in relation to financial transparency 
> than members would have statutorily.
>
> (Otherwise, the reasons for the perceived strong objection from ICANN 
> to a membership model probably becomes crystal clear . . . )
>
>
> Nigel Roberts
>
> On 29/10/15 18:13, Phil Buckingham wrote:
>> Hi Bruce, Fellow Board Members, Fadi, Co Chairs,
>>
>> As a fellow CFO, I think Xavier, under Fadi's leadership, has made 
>> huge strides in ICANN's financial reporting and its underlying 
>> financial processes.
>> However I agree with you,Bruce that there is still a long long way to 
>> go.
>>
>> Dare I mention $60M gTLD auction proceeds and the $89.3 M "remaining 
>> balance" re new GTLDs  as per the FY16 Operating Plan & Budget. Added 
>> to the fact, actual new gTLD registrations are 50% below budget .
>> This concerns me enormously , particularly regarding the budget veto 
>> issue.
>> Following the subgroup meeting in Dublin (that included Cherine, 
>> Asha, Xavier, Jonathan Z, Ray  and myself ) Xavier has been tasked 
>> with building up the non discretionary / discretionary budgetary  
>> expenditure escalation  ladder re the budget veto. This is a hugely 
>> complex task.
>> Could we take this offline to discuss for me, working at ICANN, to 
>> shadow / work with Xavier as an independent on behalf of the CCWG 
>> Accountability.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Phil
>>
>> Phil Buckingham
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org 
>> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf 
>> Of Bruce Tonkin
>> Sent: 29 October 2015 12:17
>> To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Contribution on Transparency Reforms for CCWG
>>
>> Hello Greg,
>>
>>>>   6333.  The accounting books and records and minutes of proceedings
>> of the members and the board and committees of the board shall be 
>> open to inspection upon the written demand on the corporation of any 
>> member at any reasonable time, for a purpose reasonably related to 
>> such person's interests as a member.
>>
>> The minutes are basically published today.    The only minutes 
>> apparently that are not posted are compensation committee minutes – 
>> but even then we could at least note the items discussed without 
>> necessarily disclosing some personal information.
>>
>> With regard to financials– we are already moving towards the same 
>> standards as publicly listed companies in the USA.   We now provide 
>> quarterly financial reporting, and a quarterly call where the 
>> community can question the CEO and the CFO on the income and 
>> expenditure.   It would not be normal to provide people with access 
>> to the raw accounting system (in this case Great Plains) – which 
>> would include information on payments to all staff etc.
>>
>> We do use an external auditor to validate our financials and 
>> processes once per year.
>>
>> If there is a community  concern about a particular financial matter 
>> (e.g concern about whether procurement policies were being followed) 
>> – then I think it would be more appropriate if the single legal 
>> entity that represents the community powers has the right to appoint 
>> an external auditor to validate any particular process or numbers and 
>> report back to the community.      Audit firms have the appropriate 
>> skills to analyse financial accounting records and also have 
>> appropriate procedures in place for confidentiality.
>>
>> I think we should be focussing on improving the processes we already 
>> have.   I advocated moving to quarterly financial reporting, and I 
>> have certainly been a strong advocate of making things as public as 
>> possible, and welcome suggestions for improving our processes.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bruce Tonkin
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list 
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>