[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes and action items from today's meeting

Thu Oct 5 17:28:36 UTC 2017

Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On Oct 5, 2017 4:41 PM, "Marika Konings" <marika.konings at icann.org> wrote:

*Notes - CCWG AP Meeting – 5 October 2017*

SO: Apologies for missing the call

*These high-level notes are designed to help the CCWG navigate through the
content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript
and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and
are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=4zHolvsBo6lsC2fsFnhbQd0l8fVzyqdj0t9oV6_NWjM&s=-vuUpZTVZXrpFcq3-nA--Ltl_ESCT71X4cBhx3axkEY&e=>.*

SO: This is yet to be populated at the time of writing this mail.

*3. Presentation from ICANN Finance & Legal on the different options that
have been discussed in relation to charter question #7 – should ICANN Org
have a role in the solicitation and evaluation of proposals (e.g. through
internal structure - new unit, within ICANN; externally - new built entity
that would only focus on this work; externally - working with already
existing entities)*

   - See slides distributed prior to the meeting.

SO: I did a check on list but can't seem to find the slides, ofcourse it's
possible I missed it and apologies for that.

Regards

   -
   - Hold questions until the end as some may be answered throughout the
   presentation.
   - Recall that a survey was conducted on this question but responses did
   not provide a clear path forward. As a result, this presentation was
   requested to help inform the CCWG deliberations.
   - Question #7: different options on ICANN's role in the solicitation and
   evaluation of proposals, and disbursement process.
   - Presentation provides overview of ICANN's resource impact under
   different scenarios: Internal to ICANN (new dept? new foundation?), Hybrid
   - ICANN and Outsourced (each distribute), fully outsourced - with
   oversight, fully outsourced - with no oversight.
   - Guiding principles across scenarios: ensuring mission is respected,
   ensuring fiduciary responsibility of ICANN Board and officers, ability to
   hold both distributor of funds and fund recipients accountable to ICANN
   community.
   - Scenarios - resource impact: where are resources used across the
   disbursement process? Is it different if it is internal to ICANN or
   external or a mix? Across all three first scenarios, ICANN would need to
   devote resources.
   - Comments & questions:
   - "Oversight" in option 2 or 3 should not mean '"Service Contract". That
   would bring many 501c-look-a-like (charity-) organisations in trouble and
   as such become disqualified to take a role in this process.
   - When you say ICANN resources to support those 4 lines, you mean a
   portion of the auction proceeds, or do you mean that ICANN is committed to
   devote resources for those key elements? Cost incurred by ICANN but borne
   by auction proceeds? Yes, correct, when reference is made to costs
   pertaining to the disbursement process, these would need to be borne and
   covered by the auction proceeds. Similar to how this was managed for the
   new gTLD program - costs of ICANN resources is carved out of ICANN's
   operations and budget and allocated to the new gTLD application program and
   covered by the applicant fees. Same approach would be taken here - evaluate
   % of resources dedicated to auction proceeds which would then be covered by
   auction proceeds funds. Cost would not be double counted.
   - Assumption that column four is there not because it is being advocated
   but to demonstrate that it is not viable? Yes, correct.
   - Consider having 5 rows instead of 4 as one part is currently missing
   namely review of technical outcomes of projects (ongoing monitoring &
   review of funded projects, outcomes). This would entail significant
   resources / expertise. This is currently covered in row 3 - disbursement
   process and monitoring.
   - In scenario 2 and 3, ICANN would need to involve external resources to
   facilitate oversight (e.g. accounting, audit). Mechanisms of oversight
   would entail a certain number of work that would likely duplicate the work
   of the provider. May need clearer descriptions to fully understand.
   - There's really not enough information available at this time to
   identify what arrangements/agreements would have to be in place between
   ICANN and an external distributor of funds.
   - What mechanisms would exist for recourse if following assessment /
   monitoring that funds were disbursed not meeting the original intent and
   not meeting the purposes? Ongoing monitoring may help in that regard.
   - Involvement of ICANN in different options is likely different.
   - Need to be careful to not go into an option that involves heavy
   spending. Most funds should go into projects not administration. Scenario 2
   and 3 - if there is a fundamental difference between those two options in
   set up costs?
   - Need to account for the timing issue. By introducing intermediaries we
   may be increasing the risk of something going bad or out of scope.
   - Would outsourcing increase the risk of affecting ICANN's tax status if
   things go bad? Need to ensure continued oversight to minimize this risk.
   Grant agreements would also cover this.
   - There is nothing that supports the idea that outsourcing will be more
   expensive. Outsourcing with an experienced organization may cost less in
   the long run and be more transparent.
   - Clarity of roles between ICANN and potential partners would reduce
   likelihood of overlap and duplication of costs.
   - In scenario 1 or 3 it may be easier as main bulk of work takes place
   by one player (ICANN or third party), while in scenario 2 it would be a
   mix. As WG narrows down and more clearly defines purposes and directions it
   will become easier to produce estimates, models and structures that will
   help qualify the costs.

*4. Continue deliberation on charter question #7 - Should ICANN oversee the
solicitation and evaluation of proposals, or delegate to or coordinate with
another entity, including, for example, a foundation created for this
purpose?*

   - CCWG may have better understanding now of the different scenarios.
   - Not rushing for any kind of decision at this point. Objective is to be
   able to identify preferred option to allow for further exploration of
   charter questions to determine whether or not that model turns out to be
   suitable or not
   - Consider running another survey asking the CCWG to rank the three
   options to determine whether or not there is a clear preference for a
   certain option. As noted, this is not a final choice, it is merely to see
   if it is possible to make a determination to which option to focus on in
   the next steps of the deliberations.
   - Need more information before launching the survey - hold on for now
   and discuss further at the next meeting.

*5. Update on open and interoperable Internet definition by small drafting
team*

   - DT is getting close and is expected to provide an update on the latest
   draft shortly.

6. Confirmation of CCWG meetings at ICANN60 (Thursday 2 November from 8.45
– 10.15 and 13.30 – 15.00)

*Action item #*1: CCWG members and participants to respond to the doodle
poll to indicate availability for this meeting (see
https://participate.icann.org/newgtlds-auction)

7. Confirmation of next steps & next meeting (Thursday 19 October at 14.00
UTC)

*Marika Konings*

*Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation
for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) *

*Email: marika.konings at icann.org <marika.konings at icann.org>  *

*Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO*

*Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses
<http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages
<http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>.
*

_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20171005/1cbb2ace/attachment.html>