[CCWG-ACCT] Inputs requested - Budget of the IANA Stewardship Transition

Sébastien Bachollet sebastien at bachollet.com
Sat Feb 6 18:00:19 UTC 2016

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 don¹t want to be in a situation where to be equally treated all the
items must have been done in WS1.

Specifically we can¹t be constrain in a global organization not to have f2F
meetings for such important project (WS2 on accountability).
I don¹t 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
Skills are useful but diversity is essential.

Sébastien Bachollet
+33 6 07 66 89 33
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

> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160206/046cf81d/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list