<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16809" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>My apologies for the delay in submitting some
comments. My personal comments are below. I will provide any
additional comments from the RyC later, if any.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>I should qualify my comments by pointing out the RyC's
position has consistently been that travel funding should be provided within
budget limitations for those who are active participants, not just Councilors,
who otherwise would not be able to participate in-person. That said, I
recognize that the majority of the Council has a different view about that and
hence, in response to the majority view, I submit my personal
comments.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>There are two general themes behind my suggested edits: 1)
Travel funding should not be restricted to Councilor, a view that I believe is
consistent with the DT's position; 2) recommendations for travel funding beyond
Sydney should be worded in a way that is consistent with the new bicameral model
and therefore should focus on stakeholder groups, not
constituencies.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Chuck</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Olga
Cavalli<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, March 17, 2009 9:51 PM<BR><B>To:</B> GNSO
Council<BR><B>Cc:</B> Olga Cavalli; Glen de Saint Géry<BR><B>Subject:</B>
[council] Comments in relation with GNSO travel funding and
policy<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>Hi,<BR><BR>The Travel Drafting Team met with ICANN Staff in México
( Kevin Wilson, Doug Brent and Stacy Hoffberg).<BR><BR>What we agreed during
the meeting was that GNSO would prepare a document with those ideas and
requirements that GNSO has in relation with travel funding and travel policy.
They expressed that this information could be very useful for them.<BR><BR>The
drafted text is included in this email for your revision.<BR><BR>Your comments
are welcome, then we will submit it to the ICANN staff members that were
present in the meeting.<BR><BR>Best
regards<BR><BR>Olga<BR><BR><BR><BR><U><B>Comments about GNSO Travel funding
and travel policy</B></U><BR>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>All GNSO council members should be founded to attend ICANN
meetings.<SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>[Gomes, Chuck] Minor edit: change 'founded'
to 'funded'. I would also suggest that this be changed to something
like the following: "Travel funding should be provided for GNSO participants
sufficient to cover full travel costs for the total number of GNSO
Council members." I believe the rewording provides more flexibility for
Stakeholder Groups to allocate travel funds to SG participants whether they be
Councilors or WG members or others who are active in GNSO activities and this
is consistent with other recommendations below.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>All council members volunteer their time and the GNSO
amount of work is a lot.<SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>[Gomes, Chuck] Note that it is not just
Councilors who volunteer their time. And others besides Councilors
volunteer significant time (e.g., WG chairs, WG members, etc.), so I would
change 'council members'
to 'GNSO participants'. </FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>The amount of work in GNSO is highly increasing due to the
GNSO restructuring and the different steering committees and working groups
that council member´s participate in.<SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>[Gomes, Chuck] Again, I would change
'council members'
to 'GNSO participants'. </FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P>GNSO must undergo restructuring and this enormous task is unbudgeted and no
additional resource is allocated for this purpose. Hence, extended
travel funding especially in this period<BR>is required. If there is
additional work, then there is a need for additional funding
resources.<BR></P>
<DIV class=im>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>The workload of the GNSO is, at least in these times,
enormous and it would be unrealistic for the structures to work by volunteers
being stretched beyond limits especially without travel support. This support
may include WG and DT members as the Constituencies may nominate.</SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>It could be good if constituencies receive the travel
funds and they distribute these funds among their members with
flexibility.<SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>[Gomes, Chuck] Looking forward, I think we should change
'constituencies' to 'stakeholder groups'. </FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>The budgeted amount for GNSO should be monetized and
divided equally between Constituencies (possibly SGs if there is a
proliferation of Constituencies).<SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>[Gomes, Chuck] The way this is worded,
it result in a stakeholder group with lots of constituencies getting most of
the funds while those with few constituencies receiving few funds.
In other words, it would be possible for a bunch of small constituencies to
receive more travel funding than a large constituency that may represent many
more stakeholders than the group of small constituencies. I suspect that
that was not the intent, so I suggest changing 'Constituencies' to
'stakeholder groups'. </FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>Constituency allocation should be transparent but at the
discretion of the Constituency.<SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>[Gomes, Chuck] I would change 'Constituency'
in both cases to 'stakeholder group'. </FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>If in one Financial Year a Constituency does not utilize
and saves its allocation, that allocation should be reserved and rolled over
into travel reserves for the next FY in addition to the budget allocation for
the next.<SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>[Gomes, Chuck] I would change 'Constituency' to
'stakeholder group'.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>A growth in the active participation of ALL GNSO
Councilors in ICANN meetings may enhance the face to face work of GNSO making
it more efficient and also it may also benefit the work on teleconference
meetings.<SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>[Gomes, Chuck] I suggest changing '<FONT face="Times New Roman"
color=#000000 size=3>ALL GNSO Councilors in ICANN meetings</FONT>' to '<FONT
face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>ALL GNSO Councilors </FONT>and
other GNSO participants <FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>in
ICANN meetings </FONT>and other GNSO in-person activities'.
</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>It may also benefit the participation by a broader
spectrum of the GNSO community. </SPAN></P></DIV>Travel funding should not
impact registrar or registry fees.
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>According to the proposed budget documents, ICANN expects
revenues that will be $13 million "in excess" of ICANN's budget for FY10.<SPAN
class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>[Gomes, Chuck
] Does this ignore contributions to a reserve fund? If so, maybe
it should be reconsidered or reworded. </FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>A rough estimate of the extra cost of funding all
councilors' funding for next year is $200K.<SPAN
class=257054621-26032009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>[Gomes,
Chuck] I would change '<FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#000000
size=3>all councilors' funding</FONT>' to 'funding for the equivalent of
all Councilors'.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>It could be useful to know a detailed breakdown of the
GNSO <SPAN>travel</SPAN> support budget.</SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=EN-US>Also it could help knowing the <SPAN>travel</SPAN> support
provided to the GNSO today and the monetary amount of <SPAN>travel</SPAN>
support for ALL GNSO Councilors.<SPAN class=257054621-26032009><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>[Gomes, Chuck] I suggest replacing
'<FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>ALL GNSO Councilors</FONT>'
with 'the equivalent of all GNSO
Councilors'.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>