Daniel Dardailler danield at w3.org
Wed Oct 24 16:32:46 UTC 2018

If the board decides to take funding off the Auction benefits pot, 
that's their right (and maybe obligation I gather) but I think they 
should at least explain why the ~100M set aside for potential legal 
costs wrt new gTLD was not used instead.

 From the beginning the Auction benefits were labelled as "not for ICANN 
budget" and replenishing a reserve is clearly a budgetary action, so I'm 
interested in understanding which constraints on the 100M legal 
provision mentioned above has been evaluated as stronger that something 
as clear as the "not for ICANN budget" attached to the Auctions.

I'm not trying to revert this ICANN's board decision, I just want to be 
able to explain the decision made to outsiders.


On 2018-10-24 13:20, Erika Mann wrote:
> *Dear CCWG AP colleagues - *
> *Cherine Chalaby asked for a meeting this morning, October 24, to 
> inform me
> as CCWG AP Co-Chair about a resolution the Board will pass tomorrow
> morning, October 25, concerning the replenishment of the Reserve Fund.
> Maarten Botterman attended the meeting and Chris Disspain was present 
> for a
> short period at the beginning of the meeting.*
> *To replenish the Reserve Fund, the Board resolution will request a
> contribution from ICANN ORG on an annual basis (8 years), total $32
> Million, and an immediate contribution from Auction Proceed, total $36
> Million. These two amounts seen together would replenish the Reserve 
> Fund
> (in 8 years) to the agreed height. *
> *Cherine was interested in informing us ahead of the decision and I
> mentioned, that we were expecting such a move and, as far as this is
> concerned, we're not surprised to see the Board passing this resolution
> tomorrow and that we do appreciate his approach in informing us ahead 
> of
> passing the resolution. *
> Reminder:* The* '*Document for Public comment – Replenishment Strategy 
> for
> the ICANN Reserve Fund' (open date, March 6th, 2018/closed April 25th,
> 2018) mentioned the following about the replenishment of the fund in
> relation to the topics mentioned above: *
> *https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-reserve-fund-replenishment-strategy-06mar18-en.pdf
> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-reserve-fund-replenishment-strategy-06mar18-en.pdf>*
> *§ Contribution from ICANN Org: Future adopted budgets could be made to
> provide a contribution to the Reserve Fund on an annual basis. This 
> would
> require ICANN Org to plan each fiscal year for expenses to be lower 
> than
> funding by an amount explicitly designated for the purpose of 
> replenishing
> the Reserve Fund. Given ICANN’s funding constraints, contributions from
> ICANN org to the Reserve Fund replenishment result from a reduced
> allocation of ICANN’s resources to its on-going activities, in order to
> produce a surplus that is allocated to the Reserve Fund. Such 
> allocation is
> and needs to continue being the subject of community engagement and 
> input. *
> *§ Auction Proceeds: ICANN currently has US$ 104 million collected from
> auctions that were held as the mechanism of last resort to resolve 
> string
> contention in the new gTLD program (including investment returns). This
> amount excludes US$ 132 million relating to the auction of the .WEB 
> string
> net of auction fees *
> *Kind regards, *
> *Erika *
> *Barcelona, October 24, 2018*
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds

More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list