[Gnso-sc-budget] Reduction of travel spend by $0.5m in GNSO policy development budget - what impact, if any, on the GNSO?

[Marika Konings]

Ayden, in relation to your question regarding reductions of staff travel (including the policy staff) please note that in line with Goran's blog post and the FY19 budget documents, significant savings are also foreseen in ICANN Org related expenses, including travel. For the policy team and GNSO team in particular, this means for example that we've proposed to cut our policy team strategic planning session and reduce staff support for intercessional meetings to prevent any reductions of staff travel to ICANN meetings as that would directly affect our policy/advice support to the community.



With regards to the recent LA policy team meeting, I can reassure you that as a result of the excellent negotiation skills on our team, we were able to secure the best rates at nearby LA hotels for the GNSO intersessional and for the policy annual strategic and training sessions. Such arrangements also allowed 6 policy staff to support the GNSO meetings without extra costs.


Best regards,


Marika

On 17 Feb 2018, at 15:32, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com<mailto:icann at ferdeline.com>> wrote:

Hi all,

I am reviewing the documents that Berry prepared in advance of our call for this Monday. I understand that Berry will walk us through them then, but I had one question now and just thought I'd flag it so we can hopefully get a response on Monday:

According to the comparative table, the Policy team's travel spend is being reduced by $500,000 in FY19. As best I can tell, that figure includes the CROP travel spend, so the reduction is just $300,000 over FY18. Under the header "GNSO Related Project Deltas from FY18," the project "FY18 Ongoing Policy - General Management Administration" is described as having a reduction of $300,000 in its travel spend. However, the description in table indicates, "Project will continue into FY19, but Prof. Svcs. resource reduction (appx. $500k)".

Can you please clarify, is there actually a reduction in staff travel?

If so, can you please advise what the reductions in staff travel would entail, and whether they would negatively impact your work? This is in line with the 'penny wise, pound foolish' principle I introduced into an email earlier today; I'd like to look carefully at any reductions in service to the GNSO. If this spend is unnecessary, let's slash it, but if it is ultimately going to harm the service which the GNSO and/or the Council receives, we need to know so that we can raise awareness on the Council and in our communities.

Perhaps some savings will be achieved through efficiencies and there will not be a degradation of service? For instance, by staying in the same type of hotel as ICANN accommodates community members? (From what I understand, the Policy team stayed at the Marina del Rey Hotel in January, while GNSO community members participating in the Council Strategic Planning Session stayed at the DoubleTree a week later. At least based on hotel rack rates, which I confirmed mid-January, the DoubleTree was half the price.)

Not trying to throw any stones here; not trying to be judge and jury -- just trying to understand where and how resources which support policy development and policy-related activities are being spent, and how any reductions could impact us (if at all). Thank you.

Kind regards,

Ayden


_______________________________________________
Gnso-sc-budget mailing list
Gnso-sc-budget at icann.org<mailto:Gnso-sc-budget at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-sc-budget
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-sc-budget/attachments/20180218/13e4caf8/attachment-0001.html>