[NCSG-PC] Fw: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] [Ext] Re: Proposed agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting of 12 July at 14.00 UTC

[Stephanie Perrin]

I agree.

I have not been active on auction pro lately (rather like watching paint 
dry, and I had conflicts) but we need to get back-up for this CCWG.  
Julf and I have been active....need more help.

Stephanie

On 2018-07-12 06:09, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> I think these are good questions.
>
> Ayden
>
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On 12 July 2018 11:53 AM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My questions were perhaps not clear -- I thought it was understood 
>> that I had questions by raising issues,  but let me try again:
>>
>>
>> What is the basis that the consultant used to suggest that there is 
>> low cost and low start up time for Options 1 and 2?  This makes no 
>> sense to me -- managing segrated funds is of course not hard for 
>> ICANN finance, but this is simply NOT the real work of managing a 
>> grants making activity, or tracking and reporting on grants.
>>
>>
>> I would like to also hear more about how it would work to have each 
>> and every grant reported on the ICANN tax forms, and whether that 
>> increases the likelihood of iRS auditing ICANN.
>>
>>
>> I'd also like to understand whether the ICANN present not for profit 
>> status includes such functions, under California law.
>>
>>
>> Segregating staff; identifying how to create needed firewalls, and 
>> accountability mechanisms is not without cost but these were ignored 
>> in my view by the consultant.
>>
>>
>> "Firing /laying off staff" upon the conclusion of the disbursement of 
>> funds can be perhaps taken into account, but I am not sure how -- as 
>> ICANN has a pay scale/benefits plan that exceeds what is typical for 
>> grant making organizations, in my experience. So, deciding that ICANN 
>> will add staff to bring in expertise, have a time sheet approach to 
>> allocate some time from other staff, such as legal, financial, etc. 
>> is fairly complex. Would staff brought into ICANN to add grant making 
>> and management/evaluation have to be brought in as contract staff, 
>> with time specific contracts?
>>
>>
>> How will the IRS review ICANN's status, if the $100++M/or $230M is 
>> somehow now brought into ICANN's oversight?
>>
>>
>> What is the competency requirement of the Board of ICANN to engage in 
>> Grant making/grant review/etc.?
>>
>>
>> Will making oversight of the grant making/review require a change in 
>> the competency of Board members, and does this put the larger mission 
>> and core responsibilities at risk?  Just a comment that in my 
>> experience, Boards of grant making organizations are selected for a 
>> variety of skills, which may include experience in understanding the 
>> core mission but also brings in experience in the field of grant 
>> making/management/evaluation of outcomes.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The ICANN Board already speaks to how overworked they are and they 
>> are very committed.  BUT, there is a set of core responsibilities 
>> that the Board has, that does not include grant making.  Further, the 
>> Board does not have expertise in  grant review and grant making - How 
>> did the consultant determine that the Board of ICANN was 
>> 'qualified/competent" to engage in reviewing grants, and how did the 
>> consultant propose that the process would work for using existing 
>> staff, and Board members? What would the additional time for existing 
>> Board members be to take on internal review of grants/review/management?
>>
>>
>> How does the consultant perceive to curtail [and I mean curtail] the 
>> usual approach of the ICANN community to assume that they can 
>> "advocate" about decisions taken within ICANN processes?  This is not 
>> a conflict of interest issue but a comment that we have to understand 
>> that it is human nature to to seek to influence outcomes of who 
>> receives funding. The CCWG should focus on guidance for what kind of 
>> projects can receive funding, in my view, but create a process that 
>> is external and not subject to the internal advocacy that will 
>> naturally develop. This puts ICANN's integrity, and even perhaps 
>> creates repetitional risks.
>>
>>
>> I have more questions about an internal process, but let's start with 
>> those.
>>
>> Finally, I posted a question raised by a member of the CSG about the 
>> need to have grants reviewed for human rights implications. The 
>> consultant acknowledged the need to review all applications for IFAC 
>> [this is not a simple task] but did not address how an internal 
>> process within ICANN would fulfill this.
>>
>>
>> I also would like to hear the consultant's perspective about the need 
>> to review for human rights implications.
>>
>> If this is needed, I will have questions about how an internal 
>> process would address this requirement. And, frankly, I don't think 
>> having volunteers from the ICANN community will "pass" the red face 
>> test with the IRS.  But the retained consultant may have great 
>> answers to my questions.
>>
>>
>> Marilyn
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 12, 2018 4:08 AM
>> *To:* Marilyn Cade; ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Ext] Re: Proposed agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds 
>> CCWG meeting of 12 July at 14.00 UTC
>>
>> Thanks, Marilyn for your input. I looked back at the email you sent 
>> prior to ICANN62, but it seemed to raise some concerns not 
>> necessarily questions, but I may have missed them? If you could 
>> please resend the questions you have for Sarah, staff can pass these 
>> on together with the one below.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> Marika
>>
>>
>> *From: *Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>
>> *Date: *Thursday, July 12, 2018 at 10:01
>> *To: *Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>, 
>> "ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
>> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: Proposed agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG 
>> meeting of 12 July at 14.00 UTC
>>
>>
>> Dear colleagues
>>
>>
>> During the session that the CSG hosted with Xavier, during ICANN62, 
>> one of the attorneys raised a question with Xavier and myself 
>> regarding the need to review all grants for human rights 
>> implications. I haven't been able to properly research this, but 
>> wanted to raise it to staff to ask the retained consultant for more 
>> information. This would add significant review criteria to grant 
>> proposal reviews.
>>
>>
>> I am not sure that I have seen answers to the questions that I 
>> raised, but I am still reviewing the documents in the attachment.
>>
>>
>> Looking forward to our call.
>>
>>
>> Marilyn Cade
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> *From:*Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org> 
>> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings at icann.org>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 11, 2018 6:44 AM
>> *To:* ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>> *Subject:* [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Proposed agenda - new gTLD Auction 
>> Proceeds CCWG meeting of 12 July at 14.00 UTC
>>
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>>
>> Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming meeting of the 
>> new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG which is scheduled for Thursday 12 
>> July at 14.00 UTC.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> Marika
>>
>>
>> *Proposed Agenda – new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting – Thursday 
>> 12 July at 14.00 UTC*:
>>
>>
>>  1. Roll Call
>>  2. Welcome / SOI-DOI Updates
>>  3. Recap from CCWG62 related meetings and updates
>>  4. Review of proposed responses to charter questions(updated version
>>     to be shared by staff shortly)
>>  5. Final review of summary descriptions provided by Sarah Berg
>>     -ICANN Contracted Advisor on Strategic Development and
>>     Philanthropic Programs (see attached)
>>  6. Feedback on remaining steps and proposed timeline (see attached)
>>  7. Confirmation of next steps and next meeting (26 July 2018 at
>>     14.00 UTC)
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180712/90263527/attachment.htm>