[NCSG-PC] Topics for the Board discussion in Kobe

[Stephanie Perrin]

The whole point in focusing on travel was to do the sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.  The target is staff.... there appears to be no transparency and no accountability

On 2019-02-24 20:56, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
I'm sorry not to have commented sooner. I know it is not helpful when people chime in at the last minute. I am not sure about the comments on travel either. As a percentage of the organization's overall spend, community travel is about 2% of the budget - it is not particularly high. I do not know how much is spent on staff travel because these figures are not published. And while I agree there is waste in the community travel spend, I happen to think there is substantially more waste on internal staff travel, and that is something we have very little insight into. Look at how often Theresa Swinehart is traveling using public interest money, often at the last minute, at a minimum in business class, and staying in hotels that cost more per night than ICANN spends putting us up for a week, say, in Barcelona. We have already seen efforts, in Barcelona for instance, to place community members into subpar hotels in order to save a few dollars. I am concerned that there are efforts only to cut costs by targeting the community, and not to cut staff or board expenditure. I appreciate that your question actually is looking more broadly than at the community, but I think it is unlikely to be read that way, and could be used as ammunition by the CEO to further degrade the community travel experience. What I am curious about, however, is hearing more about how ICANN intends to achieve operational efficiencies in order to contribute several million dollars a year to the Reserve Fund. I haven't seen a plan for achieving this; has anyone else?

Thanks again for drafting this response,

Ayden


‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday, February 25, 2019 2:35 AM, Tatiana Tropina <tatiana.tropina at gmail.com><mailto:tatiana.tropina at gmail.com> wrote:

I share Rafik’s comment about travel. I wish there is some explanation as to where this is coming from and what’s the reason for this question?
Cheers.
Tanya

On Sun 24. Feb 2019 at 23:51, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com<mailto:rafik.dammak at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Stephanie,

Thanks for the draft.
As I read others comments, I don't see so much change in EPDP section. I think we need only to ask the board about not bypassing the process (agree that their letter was ill-thought in bad timing) and to not be influenced by other groups who might try to have 2 bites at the apple. I believe that would be more useful to ask and discuss than what is suggested (I am fine with the question #1 about the resourcing and adequate budgeting). EPDP is in a certain way a good respond to what board is talking since Barcelona about PDP effectiveness. I don't want that we give any hint that board should get involved in any kind of facilitation that question #2 or #3 might imply.
I am really puzzled about the question on travel and its intent. I don't think people get travel arrangement in last minute for fun but for basic reason: ICANN CT only book when visa are ready and that process takes time. things might change with the new timeline and earlier support from CT. I really believe we are sending the wrong message here and I would oppose it on its current form. At the end most of work is done between meetings and conference calls.

I would suggest instead that board improves its process in term of community consultation and exploring different approaches. the 1 hour session at ICANN meeting is too little. are the letters the right the medium for any kind of interaction? do we really want that board start kick off some initiative and so adding more burden on the community?

Best,

Rafik

Le lun. 25 févr. 2019 à 02:58, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca<mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>> a écrit :

Many thanks to Farzi and Kathy for their comments/edits.  I have added a few things to Kathy's version, and changed the wording slightly on the matter of the Chair of the EPDP to acknowledge Farzi's point about GNSO. I have not taken the travel thing out...Until somebody comes up with a better idea, I think it is still a good idea.  Travel is a big, discretionary spend. Leadership in the community has no control over irresponsible members who make last minute travel requests, and we don;t really see the controls in the staff budgets.   Perfectly open to better ideas, but we need an idea for the three parts of the comminity....this one hits all three.

cheers folks and thanks for the interest!

Steph

_______________________________________________
NCSG-PC mailing list
NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is<mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
_______________________________________________
NCSG-PC mailing list
NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is<mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc




_______________________________________________
NCSG-PC mailing list
NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is<mailto: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/20190225/0e74e6eb/attachment.htm>