[NCSG-PC] NCSG Comment on ICANN Budget

[Edward Morris]

Hi Rafik,
 
I’d like to thank those who stepped in to contribute to the budget comment. I sadly disagree with the tone and much of the content of the document. I do not endorse it.
 
There was no way for me to edit the document without completely deleting much of what had previously been written there. I just didn’t feel that was an appropriate thing to do.
 
Rather I have completed and submitted to the Comments Forum a Personal Comment, which I am attaching to this post. I welcome those who have stepped up to do the NCSG comment to consider what I had to say, borrow from my post, or disregard it completely.
 
My objection to the NCSG comment as written consists of the following objections:
 
1. I believe it is too negative and accusatory and fails to recognize the hard work done by Finance and the unique nature of the first year of the Empowered Community.
 
I have major problems with the process, and have expressed them in my Comment, along with suggested ways of improving cooperation and community input. However, I don’t believe any slights were deliberate or intentional. I believe the Community, including myself, erred in placing so many hard deadlines on Finance as part of the budget process in the new Bylaws. This is a year of adaptation but generalized critical comments without specific proposed solutions serve no purpose. And that is what much of the proposed NCSG comment consists of.
 
2.  I find the objections to ALAC expenditures to appear as a stand alone attack on the AC. There are a number of areas of expenditure that many of us would find questionable. Why focus only on these in the absence of criticism of other questionable expenses?
 
3. I don’t find staff retreats to be among the most pressing fiscal matters. After all, as a supplemental request components of the NCSG asked for their own retreats and the GNSO Council was actually  granted one. Should we not first oppose these retreats or is there a reason staff retreats are so onerous?
 
4. As noted in my personal comment, my biggest concern involves the lack of funding priority for core policy activities. I have focused on one unfunded proposal – that of $100,000 for external PDP support – and would encourage the NCSG to consider adopting this view.
 
Although I can not endorse the comment, out of respect for the work done on the document I will not oppose it. I will abstain and hope my comments above as well as those in my personal comment will be considered by the PC.
 
Regrettably, I have some domestic responsibilities to attend to this evening that must take priority over my volunteer activities here. Consider my abstention to be a permament one and feel free to borrow from, or ignore, my offerings on this matter.
 
Best,
 
Ed Morris 
  
  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170428/9b04601f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: budget comment.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 59158 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170428/9b04601f/attachment.pdf>