RE: [gnso-travel-dt] Chair Travel Funding

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I first thought it would be good to get a sense from the Travel DT members 
because you guys have been working with this issue.  A lot of concerns have 
been raised on this list so I am not sure it makes sense to take it to the 
Council.  Do others think differently?

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 3:26 AM
> To: Gomes, Chuck
> Cc: Tim Ruiz; gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Chair Travel Funding
> 
> Chuck,
> 
> What about letting the Council as a whole know what you have 
> been invited to do? I'm sure no-one would have a problem with 
> you going as Chair, but I agree with Tim that the Council 
> should be informed prior to you going.
> 
> Stéphane
> 
> Le 16 mars 2010 à 22:23, Gomes, Chuck a écrit :
> 
> > 
> > Thanks for the feedback Tim.  Note my response to your 
> question below.
> > 
> > Chuck
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
> >> [mailto:owner-gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 2:15 PM
> >> To: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: RE: [gnso-travel-dt] Chair Travel Funding
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Specifically regarding travel funding for this, I personally don't 
> >> think it is appropriate. Given the RrSG views on travel funding in 
> >> general, that would likely be the SG's position.
> >> 
> >> Beyond the travel funding issue, is it appropriate for the 
> Chair to 
> >> accept engagements representing the Council without 
> Council approval? 
> >> I would think at the least, the Council should be informed 
> as to what 
> >> the topic of discussion is and what the Chair intends to 
> say/present 
> >> to be sure it is in line overall with the Council views/opinions.
> > 
> > Chuck: You make a good point.  Even though I was invited 
> because I was 
> > Council Chair, it would not be appropriate for me to 
> participate as a 
> > representative of the Council without Council approval and I should 
> > not represent positions of the Council except those that 
> were approved 
> > as such.  I never intended to do otherwise but it is 
> important to make 
> > that clear.  My intent would be to attempt serve as an information 
> > resource about the GNSO that might be useful to the Russia IGF.
> > 
> >> 
> >> Tim
> >> 
> >> -------- Original Message --------
> >> Subject: RE: [gnso-travel-dt] Chair Travel Funding
> >> From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Date: Mon, March 15, 2010 5:51 pm
> >> To: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>, <gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> 
> >> 
> >> To my knowledge, the answer to both questions may be "no".
> >> 
> >> Chuck
> >> 
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: owner-gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
> >>> [mailto:owner-gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> >>> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 5:57 PM
> >>> To: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> >>> Subject: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Chair Travel Funding
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> Hi,
> >>> 
> >>> My questions: 
> >>> 
> >>> - has the GNSO ever gained funding for anyone to travel for
> >> anything
> >>> other than an ICANN meeting?
> >>> 
> >>> - is there any budgeted source of funding from which this
> >> could come?
> >>> 
> >>> a.
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> On 15 Mar 2010, at 17:18, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> Olga
> >>>> 
> >>>> I want to request guidance from the GNSO Travel DT
> >>> regarding a special travel funding issue before bringing 
> it to the 
> >>> Council.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I have been invited to participate in the Russia IGF in my
> >>> capacity as GNSO Council Chair. It is scheduled for May
> >> 13-14. Because
> >>> I will be doing this not as a representative of VeriSign,
> >> there is not
> >>> a reasonable business case to request VeriSign to fund my
> >> travel, so I
> >>> would like to get feedback from the members of the Travel DT with 
> >>> regard to this.
> >>>> 
> >>>> First of all, let me say that I have never used ICANN
> >>> provided travel funding to attend ICANN meetings and I do
> >> not plan to
> >>> do that for any of the scheduled ICANN in-person meeting 
> scheduled 
> >>> this year. The reasons for this are: 1) I do not want there
> >> to be even
> >>> a perception of conflict at those meetings when I wear my 
> multiple 
> >>> hats of Council Chair, RySG representative and VeriSign 
> >>> representative; 2) the RySG consistently took a position that it 
> >>> opposed ICANN travel funding except in cases of demonstrated need.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Second, let me say that I understand that the Travel
> >>> Funding practice to date has been for ICANN sponsored
> >> events and that
> >>> the Russia IGF is not in that category. So one of the
> >> problems would
> >>> be the possibility of setting precedents for other travel 
> needs in 
> >>> similar situations. For example, Other countries or geographical 
> >>> regions also hold their own IGF meetings, so what would
> >> happen if I am
> >>> invited to those as well, to represent the GNSO? I think 
> this is a 
> >>> legitimate concern. All I can say is that I was first
> >> contacted about
> >>> the Russia IGF over six months in advance of the meeting 
> and I have 
> >>> not been invited to any other country/regional IGF meetings
> >> for 2010
> >>> or after. Clearly, if ICANN funding is considered for this,
> >> it would
> >>> need to be done with the limitation that travel funds are 
> available 
> >>> and that this instance would be a one-time consideration;
> >> any similar
> >>> requests in my role as chair would have to be vetted
> >> independently and
> >>> would have to have similar advance !
> >>> notice like was given with the Russia IGF.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I also recognize that ICANN has had to trim expenses and I
> >>> would not want to negatively impact the ability of any GNSO
> >> members to
> >>> receive travel funding to the Brussels meeting as a result of my 
> >>> request.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Any thoughts that any members of the Travel DT, including
> >>> negative ones, would be appreciated. I promised both
> >> Theresa Swinehart
> >>> and Kevin Wilson that I would get back to them on this but have 
> >>> waiting raising it because of the huge number of issues
> >> that we have
> >>> been dealing with in the GNSO.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Chuck
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> 
>