[CCWG-ACCT] Inputs requested - Budget of the IANA Stewardship Transition
Mathieu Weill
mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
Mon Feb 8 10:49:10 UTC 2016
Sébastien, Greg,
Thanks for raising this point. It is well noted and I concur that building
consensus indeed requires face to face discussions.
Best
Mathieu
De : Greg Shatan [mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com]
Envoyé : dimanche 7 février 2016 02:05
À : Sébastien Bachollet
Cc : Mathieu Weill; CCWG-Accountability
Objet : Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Inputs requested - Budget of the IANA Stewardship
Transition
I agree with Sebastien regarding F2Fs. Obviously, the spending should not
be cavalier, but the F2Fs have been very fruitful and important tools in
both WG's processes.
I would be wary of hard caps on legal spending, unless the firms agree to
provide all the work needed within that cap. Legal fee structures and cost
containment have moved beyond crude tools such as hard caps over the last
several years, through the use of Alternative Fee Arrangements (AFAs).
There are various types of AFAs that law firms will consider in order to
manage costs and expectations while delivering needed services.
I will reiterate one further point based on my experience. A key tool in
managing outside counsel is timely and substantial review of the monthly
legal bills, in order to see who is billing for what, how projects are being
staffed, etc. Bills provide great insight, and anyone who thinks they are
managing lawyers and legal spend without looking at the bills is missing a
standard tool.
Greg
On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Sébastien Bachollet
<sebastien at bachollet.com> wrote:
Dear Mathieu,
Thanks for sharing this information.
I have no problem with your approach providing that at the end we are able
to work as efficiently in WS2 than in WS1.
If we don’t want to be in a situation where to be equally treated all the
items must have been done in WS1.
Specifically we can’t be constrain in a global organization not to have f2F
meetings for such important project (WS2 on accountability).
I don’t support P13 in the PPT the following:
• In order to contain costs, the BFC recommends no further F2F
meetings for WS2 after Marrakech.
All the best
SeB
Skills are useful but diversity is essential.
Sébastien Bachollet
+33 6 07 66 89 33 <tel:%2B33%206%2007%2066%2089%2033>
Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/
Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien at bachollet.com>
De : <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Mathieu
Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
Date : vendredi 5 février 2016 10:15
À : 'CCWG-Accountability' <accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Objet : [CCWG-ACCT] Inputs requested - Budget of the IANA Stewardship
Transition
Dear colleagues,
This note to report that the co chairs were invited to participate to a
Board Finance Committee meeting to discuss the costs of the IANA Stewardship
Transition project (overall, not only our group). You can find the notes
from the call attached.
A follow up meeting is planned for Tuesday, February 9th. The purpose of the
call is the following (quoting the invite):
The Board Chair and members of the Board Finance Committee (BFC) would like
to request a call with the Chairs of the SO/AC Chartering Organizations and
CCWG/CWG co-chairs to seek their help and collaboration on how to address
key concerns regarding the escalating costs of the current phase of work of
the USG IANA Stewardship Transition and Accountability WS1 (thereafter
referred to in this document as THE PROJECT) as well as Implementation work
as specified in the CWG Proposal.
In advance of this call, we would like to hear your feedbacks regarding our
proposed contribution to this matter.
We believe we could recognize :
- the value of the advice we are receiving from our two legal firms, which
is instrumental to our progress
- the appreciation from our group of the support we are getting from staff
- the legitimate concerns from the Board regarding the impact of the project
costs on Icann's financial reserves
- the massive effort undertaken by Icann to support the IANA Stewardship
Transition process
- that there are limited costs that can be attributed to the groups (groups
are not responsible for lobbying costs; personnel costs for example), and
even some of those costs directly linked to the group are out of the control
of the groups ( how many public comments received (costs to analyze them
etc)).
We would also suggest to keep our current processes in place as they are
until Marrakech, while renewing our group's commitment to act in a
financially responsible manner.
We could also offer to include in our Marrakech deliberations a discussion
to present to the Board a request for additional funding, to support Bylaw
Drafting and Implementation of WS1 on the one side, and to support WS2 on
the other side. This type of request is consistent with our Charter, which
states :
In addition to the advisors selected by the PEG, the CCWG-Accountability may
also identify additional advisors or experts to contribute to its
deliberations in a similar manner as the Advisors selected by the PEG.
Should additional costs be involved in obtaining input from additional
advisors or experts, prior approval must be obtained from ICANN. Such a
request for approval should at a minimum include the rationale for selecting
additional advisors or experts as well as expected costs.
We believe it would also be reasonable if approval of such funds were to be
provided in Tranches, so that at the end of each period of, for example, 3
months, our group would have to report on progress and, when appropriate,
renew its request or present a new one.
Thank you for sharing your views on list on this. We look forward to your
contributions.
Thomas, Leon & Mathieu
Co-chairs
_______________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160208/67fe803c/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community
mailing list