[gnso-travel-dt] Draft document and next steps

["Olga Cavalli" <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,
I have recieved contributions from Greg and Tim for our draft document.
Following this message you can find a text I prepared with both
contributions, also you can find the comments after our meeting with Doug
Brent.

My suggestions for next steps are:

- Work on the final text of the "principle" document , we can make this
online trough the list or in a conference call.
- Request feedback from DB in relation with possible flexibility for funds
allocation.
- Define a group within GNSO so  ICANN staff can have a permanent contact to
provide input about  travel issues, in both phases (until June and after). I
want to volunteer myself for be part of this group. Perhaps our drafting
team could remain as a group for this purpose.

Your comments are welcome.
Best regards
Olga


*Drafted text with Greg and Tim Contributions:*

*GNSO PRINCIPLES FOR ALLOCATION OF TRAVEL SUPPORT FUNDS FOR ICANN MEETING*

Allocation and Control:

The total GNSO Travel support budget (less the amount allotted to the NCAs
and GNSO Council chair) should be divided to the extent possible on an equal
basis among the GNSO constituencies.

The use of travel support funds is for travel to ICANN meetings, including
regional, inter-sessional, and face-to-face working group meetings.

The use of travel support funds is to be solely determined by each
constituency independently as it sees fit to most effectively progress the
work of the GNSO.

The GNSO Council has no role in deciding how these funds are allocated
to individuals.

Transparency and Reporting:

The names of all who receive travel support must be made known publicly.
What is covered for each (e.g. air fare, accommodations, per diem – not the
dollar amounts) must also be made public.

Everyone who is supported must make known (e.g. in a report) publicly the
dates of travel, accommodations (which hotel) and meetings attended and/or
work accomplished. Note: This should take less than a page to describe.



 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


2008/11/5 Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> Hi,
> In this message I am including notes from the meeting we held yesterday and
> some general comments fom us.
>
> The proposed next steps could be:
>
> - Prepare our document with principles, as established before in our calls,
> then we can provide this imput to ICANN staff.
>
> - FInd a date and time for our next conference call.
>
> Any suggestions for week of next call? Then Glen can help us with a doodle
> to find day and time.
>
> Please remember to send text in order to feed our "principles draft
> document". Greg already did.
>
> Regards to all
> Olga
>
>
>
>
>
> *Meeting with Doug Brent and Liz Gaster
> Tuesday Nov 3rd, 208
> Cairo*
>
> Council members present in the meeting: Robin, Zahid, Olga
>
>
> *Notes taken during the meeting:*
>
> Stakeholder groups will allocate council seats in GNSO after restructuring.
>
> GNSO must define how to allocate travel funds from today until June.
>
> Funds may go to other participants not only councelors.
>
> This assignment will be defined by GNSO.
>
> Flexibility and partial founding for using funds could be possible, Doug
> will try to find a way to solve this demand.
>
> The problem with partial funding is that in ICANN there is fiduciary
> control that makes it difficult.
>
> DB will contact ICANN CFO to find an intermediate solution for the partial
> funding and flexibility issue.
>
> DB said it could be very useful for him and other staff members that GNSO
> may set up a group that provides input about this travel issues, in both
> phases (until June and after).
>
> DB expressed that this group should also define a set of principles in
> order to help them with the definition of the travel support policy.
>
> DB would like to have in 3 or 4 week GNSO input about the use of travel
> funds.
>
> *General Comments from us*
>
> Funds should be divided equally between existing constituencies (after
> subtracting NCA travel) between now and June 09.
>
> We could propose that founds should be divided between constituencies or
> stakeholder groups as may become clearer closer to June 09 once the
> restructuring of the houses is firmed up and allow discussions in Mexico
> feed into the policy.
>
> We should continue to work towards a longer-term policy.
>
> We stress to staff that we REALLY need to find a way for flexibility and
> that legal fiduciary duties really do not require the DEGREE of rigidity
> that we have seen in the past.  There can be some middle ground and we hope
> to find it.
>
>
>
>