[gnso-travel-dt] Public comment period

[Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,
should we include all/some/part of our latest comments for GNSO travel funds
request in the public comments space?

This the agreed text among our drafting team:

*Comments about GNSO Travel funding and travel policy
*
All GNSO council members should be founded to attend ICANN meetings.

All council members volunteer their time and the GNSO amount of work is a
lot.

The amount of work in GNSO is highly increasing due to the
GNSOrestructuring and the different steering committees and working
groups that
council member´s participate in.

GNSO must undergo restructuring and this enormous task is unbudgeted and no
additional resource is allocated for this purpose.  Hence, extended
travelfunding especially in this period
is required. If there is additional work, then there is a need for
additional funding resources.
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.

It could be good if constituencies receive the travel funds and they
distribute these funds among their members with flexibility.

The budgeted amount for GNSO should be monetized and divided equally between
Constituencies (possibly SGs if there is a proliferation of Constituencies).

Constituency allocation should be transparent but at the discretion of the
Constituency.

If in one Financial Year a Constituency does not utilize and saves its
allocation, that allocation should be reserved and rolled over into
travelreserves for the next FY in addition to the budget allocation
for the next.

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.

It may also benefit the participation by a broader spectrum of the
GNSOcommunity.

 Travel funding should not impact registrar or registry fees.

According to the proposed budget documents, ICANN expects revenues that will
be $13 million "in excess" of ICANN's budget for FY10.

A rough estimate of the extra cost of funding all councilors' funding for
next year is $200K.

It could be useful to know a detailed breakdown of the GNSO travel support
budget.

Also it could help knowing the travel support provided to the GNSO today and
the monetary amount of travel support for ALL GNSO Councilors.


Regards
Olga