Hi Evin,

After discussions with Maureen, we have finished the draft and incorporated other people's comments.  There have been no further comments on the draft and because we need to finalize and submit it tomorrow let's put this as the final draft. I have copied the current draft from the wiki to this email,   Please post it to the wiki as the final draft so we can submit on time.

Best,

Judith

The ALAC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the initial report on the gTLD Auction Proceeds.  ALAC participants have been following this issue closely and have discussed these issues internally prior to the issuance of this report.  We discussed each of these mechanisms among the participants and member of this working group and came up with the following

Recommendation 1: After many discussions among ALAC members we remain divided about the best mechanism to choose.  An earlier poll identified that At-Large members/participants were divided in their views of a preferred mechanism between Mechanism A and Mechanism B, specifically what might be possible for ICANN under Mechanism B. We understand that Mechanism A might be the easier option in terms of efficiency and convenience, but are concerned that it may not be the best option for end-users hence our discussion and thoughts about improving on this mechanism. We are concerned about transparency issues and whether, under Mechanism A, distributing the funds from within their normal operations maybe outside of ICANN's mandate and in conflict with ICANN bylaws. Another concern was that ICANN.Org could have more ease of access to the funds to cater for its growing responsibilities relating to, for example, additional money for the reserve fund, or for GDPR and RSS and this could be construed as a conflict of interest. At the same time, some members/participants of At-Large had doubts about the possible choice of an external organisation that might be prepared and able to carry out all the functions that ICANN could not do as a not-for-profit (Mechanism B), as well as using the funds to establish an ICANN Foundation with the main concerns relating to the cost of setting up and difficulties of closing it at the end of the project (Mechanism C). Many of these concerns diminish if another entity has control over the funds and/or selection of the fund recipients. 

If Mechanism B is chosen, ALAC would hope the external organization will publish a conflict of Interest Policy that clearly addresses all the elements of the funding process, follow proper procedures on accountability and transparency, and be in accordance to its obligations with ICANN.

Recommendation 2: The ALAC is supportive of recommendation 2 as it is written as the recommendation itself speaks to the guidelines from the preamble which members and participants spent many hours writing and discussion.

Recommendation 3: The ALAC is supportive of this recommendation as it describes how accountable the process will be. We are in support of creating an accountable and transparent fund allocation mechanism that would include all the safeguards described in the response to charter question 2.

Recommendation 4: The ALAC agrees with the CCWG Auction Proceeds report in Recommendation #4 that states that robust conflict of interest provisions must be developed and put in place, regardless of which mechanism is ultimately selected. We are strong believers in this recommendation as it is one of the reasons that concern us with the possible choice of Mechanism A in Recommendation 1.

Recommendation 5: Because these funds were originally set up for philanthropic purposes, the ALAC believes strongly that At-Large ALSes and individual At-Large members should be able to apply for funds provided they follow the established process for all applicants.  Projects that facilitate capacity building in the regions and that assists the work of At-Large members should be encouraged and supported. ICANN Org, Registries and Registrars, and AC/SO should not be able to apply.

The proceeds from past auctions were meant to be used for capacity building activities that enhance ICANN’s mission and core principles and are consistent with an “open and interoperable Internet”. The concept of “open and interoperable Internet” can be described from many angles: technological, business, political, social and cultural and may have different meanings in different communities. Projects are expected to advance work related to open access, future-oriented developments, innovation and open standards, for the benefit of the Internet community.

ALAC does not think that additional funds besides those that the ICANN Board has mentioned should be taken out of the Auction Proceeds fund as this goes against the ideas that led to the creation of the fund and this Cross Community Working Group.

Recommendations 6 & 7: The ALAC is in support of recommendations 6 & 7 and the correct mechanism and procedures for establishing the size of the Tranches and how many years.  We are in favor to allocate money according to the time of the project. So if we have a collection of projects that will not take a long time to complete they should go in one tranche while other projects that would take longer can go in a different tranche.

Recommendation 8: The ALAC is a strong supporter and believer of this recommendation as we believe that capacity building, especially for underserved populations, is at the heart of what these funds were set aside for.

We are also in support of Recommendations 9 & 10 which follow proper procedures on accountability and transparency which we feel need to be at the core of all discussions.

Recommendation #9: As a standard element of program operations, an internal review of the mechanism should take place at regular intervals to identify areas for improvement and allow for minor adjustments in program management and operations.

Recommendation #10: Focuses on the metrics of evaluating how successful the program has been and these metrics are extremely important for all to ensure that regardless of the mechanism chosen the program has effectively met its identified goals and that the allocation of funds had or is having the intended impact.

_________________________________________________________________________
Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO
Hellerstein & Associates
3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008
Phone: (202) 362-5139  Skype ID: judithhellerstein
Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517
E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com   Website: www.jhellerstein.com
Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/
Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide

On 11/26/2018 2:54 PM, Evin Erdogdu wrote:

Dear Judith and Maureen,

 

Kind reminder that the draft has been posted to the wiki, and call for comments issued. We have time to finalize before submission within the next 24 hours – please let me know if any adjustments are to be made to the statement currently on the wiki: https://community.icann.org/x/_wq8BQ.

 

Thank you,

Evin

 

From: Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org>
Date: Friday, November 23, 2018 at 3:04 PM
To: Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com>, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com>, Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi <Hadia@tra.gov.eg>
Cc: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>, Evin Erdogdu <evin.erdogdu@icann.org>
Subject: ACTION/JH/MH/HE - Call for Comments - by 26 Nov: Initial Report of the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross-Community Working Group

 

Dear Judith, Maureen and Hadia:

 

Kind reminder of the call for comments issued below. I have noted Judith’s draft on the wiki, and requested the deadline for comments be 26 Nov so that we have time to finalize on 27 Nov.

 

Thank you all,

Evin

 

From: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org>
Date: Friday, November 23, 2018 at 3:02 PM
To: "alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org" <alac-announce@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, CPWG <cpwg@icann.org>
Cc: ICANN At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org>, Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com>, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com>, Hadia Abdelsalam Mokhtar EL miniawi <Hadia@tra.gov.eg>
Subject: Call for Comments - by 26 Nov: Initial Report of the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross-Community Working Group

 

Dear All,

 

Please note a draft ALAC statement on Initial Report of the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Cross-Community Working Group is ready for your review.

 

The draft, as well as pertinent resources that provide background to this statement, can be found in its wiki workspace here: https://community.icann.org/x/_wq8BQ. The At-Large website page for the Statement is here: https://atlarge.icann.org/advice_statements/12681. All At-Large members are welcome to comment on this draft by 26 November 2018 23:59 UTC.

 

Please take a moment to review this draft and if you have input, please submit it in the wiki workspace using the comment function. You will need to log in to the wiki to use the comment function. If you don’t have a login or have other issue using the wiki, kindly contact staff@atlarge.icann.org.

 

Kind Regards,

 

ICANN Policy Staff in support of the At-Large Community

Website: atlarge.icann.org 

Facebook: facebook.com/icannatlarge

Twitter: @ICANNAtLarge