[Comments-fy18-budget-08mar17] [Ext] RySG follow-up on FY18 funding of Document Development & Drafting Pilot Program

Tue Apr 25 17:07:27 UTC 2017

Understood, Xavier. Please feel free to publicize this exchange for future reference by the ICANN community.

Best, P

Please excuse typos, as this was sent from my iPad.

> On Apr 25, 2017, at 12:38 PM, Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez at icann.org> wrote:
> 
> Dear Paul,
> 
> The BFC has received the email below and thanks the RySG for it. I am responding to this email in my capacity of ICANN CFO at the request of the BFC. I confirm that the BFC discussed this communication from the RySG, in the form of the email sent by you below, during its meeting held on 6 April.
> 
> For your understanding, the position of the BFC on this communication is that it is not part of its duties to receive and consider direct stakeholder or public input into any specific part of the budget, including advocacy for the relevance of any action and its funding. More specifically, the BFC also does not make any decision relative to the merits of requests submitted as part of the “SO/AC additional budget requests process”, one of which includes the activity described below, but provides oversight to the budget process and review/recommendation on the total annual budget.
> 
> The ICANN Organization thoroughly considered the request submitted by the RySG which has been addressed in the recommended responses to this and all other such requests that the ICANN Organization has made and submitted for the Board to approve. The Board has approved such recommendations during its session on 19 April 2017 (see attached). I believe the approved decision relative to this specific request, represents a compromise position that allows further benefits of this activity to be obtained.
> 
> Input and comment relative to any part of the Operating Plan and Budget, such as the one provided below by the RySG, is a fundamental expression of public participation and input into ICANN’s multistakeholder model. Such input and comment are very welcomed, and the BFC trusts it was provided by the RySG as part of the rationale of the service/funding request submitted so that it could be fully considered, and notes that it was also submitted as a public comment on the FY18 Operating Plan and Budget, which is considered entirely appropriate.
> 
> We would like to publish this response from ICANN as we believe its content would be useful to others who provide input and comment on the Operating Plan and Budget.
> 
> Becky or I would be happy to address any question or comment that the RySG may have on the above, so please feel free to contact anyone of us.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Xavier
> 
> Xavier Calvez
> ICANN – CFO
> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
> Los Angeles, CA 90094
> Phone:   310-301-5838
> Mobile:  805-312-0052
> Fax:        310-957-2348
> 
> 
> From: Paul Diaz <pdiaz at pir.org>
> Date: Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 7:41 AM
> To: Asha a Hemrajani <asha.hemrajani at board.icann.org>, "ron.dasilva at board.icann.org" <ron.dasilva at board.icann.org>, "becky.burr at board.icann.org" <becky.burr at board.icann.org>, Cherine Chalaby <cherine.chalaby at board.icann.org>, Kummer Markus <markus.kummer at board.icann.org>, George Sadowsky <george.sadowsky at board.icann.org>, "lousewies.vanderlaan at board.icann.org" <lousewies.vanderlaan at board.icann.org>
> Cc: Xavier Calvez <xavier.calvez at icann.org>
> Subject: [Ext] RySG follow-up on FY18 funding of Document Development & Drafting Pilot Program
> 
> Dear members of the ICANN Board Finance Committee,
> 
> On behalf of the gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG), I am writing you member to follow-up on my public comment<http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-fy18-budget-08mar17/2017-March/000001.html> asking that ICANN reconsider its current position on the Document Development and Drafting Pilot Program (the Program). It is our understanding that staff currently does not recommend that the Program be renewed in the FY18 Budget. As we articulated in our FY18 Community Request application (attached), the RySG believes that the pilot Program was a clear success and deserves further funding in FY18.
> 
> It’s regrettable that only a few ICANN constituent groups availed themselves of the pilot Program. The RySG’s experience was superb, and should serve as a “proof of concept” that justifies continuing the Program in FY18. Our Document Development and Drafting Research Assistant, Wim Degezelle, made a significant contribution in his role of drafting comments to complex public comments. His ability to research a topic, communicate with those in the RySG who may have knowledge of the issues/topics at hand, and then prepare and present salient observations and suggested comments has been of incredible benefit to the RySG. Wim’s role facilitated participation by RySG members who don’t use English as their first language, and better enabled engagement by smaller (or new) registry operators who have limited bandwidth, resources and/or knowledge that restrict their participation in issues that may have a direct impact on their operations. In fact, we saw a notable increase in participation by volunteers to partner (or even take a lead role) in developing and/or contributing to critical issues requiring formal comments by the RySG.
> 
> We would argue that the ICANN community also benefitted from the pilot Program since the RySG’s public comments were made available to anyone who may be impacted by a particular issue, thus contributing to the multi-stakeholder model. As such, the community benefited from the Program since it achieved its goals (e.g. globalizing ICANN, advancing organizational, technological and operational excellence, promoting ICANN’s role and multi-stakeholder approach, and advancing a global public interest framework) – which in part also mirror ICANN’s own mission.
> 
> The RySG appreciates that there are many competing demands for ICANN’s relatively limited resources. We strongly believe, however, that the Program deserves funding in FY18. It has delivered results by providing demonstrable outputs of benefit to the RySG and the rest of the community. In fact, other constituent groups are aware of the RySG’s excellent experience with the Program and planned to seek their own Assistant in FY18. Not including the Program in FY18 risks undermining ICANN’s own goals which mirror the Program’s. That clearly is not in anyone’s interests.
> 
> Best, P
> 
> Paul Diaz
> Chairman, Registries Stakeholder Group
> Mobile:+1 703.973.1667 | Skype: pdiaz at pir.org<mailto:pdiaz at pir.org>
> <FY18 SO_AC Additional Budget Requests Decisions.eml>