See https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=71602968. Sebastien identified a number of important issues related to the reserve fund, following discussion with him, I have drafted the following short statement (also posted to the Wiki). As the PC closes on Thursday, and I believe it is essential that we make a strong statement, I would like to discuss this on the ALAC call in a few hours. Alan ---------------- The ALAC strongly supports having the Reserve Fund at the level of 12 months expenses, and higher if there is a practical way of achieving that without unduly impacting ICANN's ability to provide necessary services, ensure the current and ongoing security, stability and resiliency of the DNS, and adequately support its ACs and SOs. Since the Reserve Fund level is clearly tightly coupled to the level of ICANN operational expenses, any discussion of the reserve should have included a recent history and projection of ICANN operational expenses along with the employee/contractor levels and the Reserve Fund levels over the same period. At whatever level the Reserve Fund target is set, ICANN must publish a plan on how and when this will be achieved. Given that the proposed target level(s) are significantly above the current Reserve Fund level, and it is unrealistic to believe that we will sustain or exceed this year's return-to-reserve of $5m, ICANN should expeditiously investigate alternative methods of building the reserve to ensure ICANN's future stability. Sources such as the Auction Proceeds, the surplus from the last round of new gTLD, or a levy on any future new gTLD fees should be considered.
Hi Alan and Sebastien, Thank you for posting this comment and I look forward to the discussion. I too agree that the ALAC needs to strongly support having an adequate reserve fund, however, I think we should identify more than 2 sources for funds as the Auction proceeds is a one time possibility and the problems with the reserves need something that is a more concrete and longer term option. I would like to see more suggestions for sources of funding. I would also prefer that we switch around the order of the sources of possible funds to put Auction Proceeds as the last item and a levy on any future new GTLDs as the first item on the list. Also I was a bit confused by your statement in that Auction Proceeds is the surplus from the last round of gtlds but in this sentence it looks to be a different item. Best, Judith _________________________________________________________________________ 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 11/28/2017 2:26 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
See https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=71602968.
Sebastien identified a number of important issues related to the reserve fund, following discussion with him, I have drafted the following short statement (also posted to the Wiki). As the PC closes on Thursday, and I believe it is essential that we make a strong statement, I would like to discuss this on the ALAC call in a few hours.
Alan
----------------
The ALAC strongly supports having the Reserve Fund at the level of 12 months expenses, and higher if there is a practical way of achieving that without unduly impacting ICANN's ability to provide necessary services, ensure the current and ongoing security, stability and resiliency of the DNS, and adequately support its ACs and SOs.
Since the Reserve Fund level is clearly tightly coupled to the level of ICANN operational expenses, any discussion of the reserve should have included a recent history and projection of ICANN operational expenses along with the employee/contractor levels and the Reserve Fund levels over the same period.
At whatever level the Reserve Fund target is set, ICANN must publish a plan on how and when this will be achieved. Given that the proposed target level(s) are significantly above the current Reserve Fund level, and it is unrealistic to believe that we will sustain or exceed this year's return-to-reserve of $5m, ICANN should expeditiously investigate alternative methods of building the reserve to ensure ICANN's future stability. Sources such as the Auction Proceeds, the surplus from the last round of new gTLD, or a levy on any future new gTLD fees should be considered.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
Hi, First, I do agree with Alan and Sebatien it should be at least one year of opex. But also I understand the reserve fund will be used for extraordinary issues, not foreseen right now, and the actual opex is coming from regular incomes, and it seems it will be so at least for FY19 (and FY20). So the reserve can be replenished over an ammount of time. Sources for this replenishment, other than gTLD auctions, can be the actual interest paid to the different funds ICANN have, and a inclusion of certain ammounts in the budget. Lastly, a point not mentioned in the draft is the need for ICANN to be cautious with its expenses. The original fund covered a year of opex, and it was expected to decrease due to the IANA transtion, but in fact the ammount of depletion of the reserve is larger than the ammount shown for IANA transtion, so it seems it is covering not only extraordinary events (The IANA transition), but also regular costs. Altough the incomes seems to be flattening, the budget is increasing, that is particularly true with PTI and IANA budgets, where the actual draft increases the FY19 in almost 10% over FY18 Thanks Ricardo 2017-11-28 15:23 GMT-05:00 Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com>:
Hi Alan and Sebastien,
Thank you for posting this comment and I look forward to the discussion. I too agree that the ALAC needs to strongly support having an adequate reserve fund, however, I think we should identify more than 2 sources for funds as the Auction proceeds is a one time possibility and the problems with the reserves need something that is a more concrete and longer term option. I would like to see more suggestions for sources of funding. I would also prefer that we switch around the order of the sources of possible funds to put Auction Proceeds as the last item and a levy on any future new GTLDs as the first item on the list. Also I was a bit confused by your statement in that Auction Proceeds is the surplus from the last round of gtlds but in this sentence it looks to be a different item.
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 <https://maps.google.com/?q=3001+Veazey+Terrace+NW,+Washington+DC+20008&entry...> 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 11/28/2017 2:26 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
See https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=71602968.
Sebastien identified a number of important issues related to the reserve fund, following discussion with him, I have drafted the following short statement (also posted to the Wiki). As the PC closes on Thursday, and I believe it is essential that we make a strong statement, I would like to discuss this on the ALAC call in a few hours.
Alan
----------------
The ALAC strongly supports having the Reserve Fund at the level of 12 months expenses, and higher if there is a practical way of achieving that without unduly impacting ICANN's ability to provide necessary services, ensure the current and ongoing security, stability and resiliency of the DNS, and adequately support its ACs and SOs.
Since the Reserve Fund level is clearly tightly coupled to the level of ICANN operational expenses, any discussion of the reserve should have included a recent history and projection of ICANN operational expenses along with the employee/contractor levels and the Reserve Fund levels over the same period.
At whatever level the Reserve Fund target is set, ICANN must publish a plan on how and when this will be achieved. Given that the proposed target level(s) are significantly above the current Reserve Fund level, and it is unrealistic to believe that we will sustain or exceed this year's return-to-reserve of $5m, ICANN should expeditiously investigate alternative methods of building the reserve to ensure ICANN's future stability. Sources such as the Auction Proceeds, the surplus from the last round of new gTLD, or a levy on any future new gTLD fees should be considered.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
Thanks Judith. I look forward to the discussion. I note that ongoing sources of funding for the reserve is not major issue. Once it is topped up, we are not likely to see any major increases in the ICANN budget in the near future, and what there may be is decreases. But to the exten that the annual budget does go up, the operational budget should be able to fund a return-to-reserve (RTR) to keep the reserve at a reasonable level (just a swe did a $5m RTR this year). In terms of the order, a use of Auction funds is ***FAR*** more likely than the other two! The remaining funds from the last round, currently at about $100m, currently is held in reserve pending potential costs (such as litigation). It is not at all related to the Auction Proceeds. Alan At 28/11/2017 03:23 PM, Judith Hellerstein wrote:
Hi Alan and Sebastien,
Thank you for posting this comment and I look forward to the discussion. I too agree that the ALAC needs to strongly support having an adequate reserve fund, however, I think we should identify more than 2 sources for funds as the Auction proceeds is a one time possibility and the problems with the reserves need something that is a more concrete and longer term option. I would like to see more suggestions for sources of funding. I would also prefer that we switch around the order of the sources of possible funds to put Auction Proceeds as the last item and a levy on any future new GTLDs as the first item on the list. Also I was a bit confused by your statement in that Auction Proceeds is the surplus from the last round of gtlds but in this sentence it looks to be a different item.
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ 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 11/28/2017 2:26 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
See https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=71602968.
Sebastien identified a number of important issues related to the reserve fund, following discussion with him, I have drafted the following short statement (also posted to the Wiki). As the PC closes on Thursday, and I believe it is essential that we make a strong statement, I would like to discuss this on the ALAC call in a few hours.
Alan
----------------
The ALAC strongly supports having the Reserve Fund at the level of 12 months expenses, and higher if there is a practical way of achieving that without unduly impacting ICANN's ability to provide necessary services, ensure the current and ongoing security, stability and resiliency of the DNS, and adequately support its ACs and SOs.
Since the Reserve Fund level is clearly tightly coupled to the level of ICANN operational expenses, any discussion of the reserve should have included a recent history and projection of ICANN operational expenses along with the employee/contractor levels and the Reserve Fund levels over the same period.
At whatever level the Reserve Fund target is set, ICANN must publish a plan on how and when this will be achieved. Given that the proposed target level(s) are significantly above the current Reserve Fund level, and it is unrealistic to believe that we will sustain or exceed this year's return-to-reserve of $5m, ICANN should expeditiously investigate alternative methods of building the reserve to ensure ICANN's future stability. Sources such as the Auction Proceeds, the surplus from the last round of new gTLD, or a levy on any future new gTLD fees should be considered.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
Colleagues, my understanding of the "reserve fund" is deeply connected with risks. Because by meaning it is echoed to "unexpected trouble". Healthy organization should not have any "we don't know why we need reserve, but lets have it" environment. If we consider risks to be covered by reserve fund, first we need to have a clear and understandable list of risks. Such as (only as example): - asteroid hits the HQ of ICANN and we need to reallocate office to backup location; - Mr.Trump assigns the governmental order to make ICANN state-driven organization; - N.Korea rocket hits Verisign technical facility and we need to move primary root to other technical facility; - ICANN gets deadly legal liability and spends all money for lawyers to keep operations running; - Godaddy go bankrupt and ICANN need money to deal with millions of registrants; - Russia, China, Brazil and India launches alternative root and ICANN needs financial instruments to fix it on global fora. The size of reserve fund (and formula to keep it running) depends on type and probability of the risk. Many of us went through this exercise while dealing with "business continuity" question in new gTLD application. I don't think the process of defining the reserve fund is much different. For instance, technical risks to PTI must be separated from operational/legal/business risks, etc. Yours, --andrei PS> Last Adobe connect was terrible 2017-11-28 23:23 GMT+03:00 Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com>:
Hi Alan and Sebastien,
Thank you for posting this comment and I look forward to the discussion. I too agree that the ALAC needs to strongly support having an adequate reserve fund, however, I think we should identify more than 2 sources for funds as the Auction proceeds is a one time possibility and the problems with the reserves need something that is a more concrete and longer term option. I would like to see more suggestions for sources of funding. I would also prefer that we switch around the order of the sources of possible funds to put Auction Proceeds as the last item and a levy on any future new GTLDs as the first item on the list. Also I was a bit confused by your statement in that Auction Proceeds is the surplus from the last round of gtlds but in this sentence it looks to be a different item.
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 <https://maps.google.com/?q=3001+Veazey+Terrace+NW,+Washington+DC+20008&entry...> 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 11/28/2017 2:26 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
See https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=71602968.
Sebastien identified a number of important issues related to the reserve fund, following discussion with him, I have drafted the following short statement (also posted to the Wiki). As the PC closes on Thursday, and I believe it is essential that we make a strong statement, I would like to discuss this on the ALAC call in a few hours.
Alan
----------------
The ALAC strongly supports having the Reserve Fund at the level of 12 months expenses, and higher if there is a practical way of achieving that without unduly impacting ICANN's ability to provide necessary services, ensure the current and ongoing security, stability and resiliency of the DNS, and adequately support its ACs and SOs.
Since the Reserve Fund level is clearly tightly coupled to the level of ICANN operational expenses, any discussion of the reserve should have included a recent history and projection of ICANN operational expenses along with the employee/contractor levels and the Reserve Fund levels over the same period.
At whatever level the Reserve Fund target is set, ICANN must publish a plan on how and when this will be achieved. Given that the proposed target level(s) are significantly above the current Reserve Fund level, and it is unrealistic to believe that we will sustain or exceed this year's return-to-reserve of $5m, ICANN should expeditiously investigate alternative methods of building the reserve to ensure ICANN's future stability. Sources such as the Auction Proceeds, the surplus from the last round of new gTLD, or a levy on any future new gTLD fees should be considered.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET
Hello, The document identifies the following items Risks covered Self insurance against a rainy day, Proxy for wind-down costs, Maintenance and/or replacement of assets, Pay-off of committed liabilities, Funding of future projects identified in the Strategic Plan. SeB
Le 29 nov. 2017 à 03:48, Andrei Kolesnikov <andrei@rol.ru> a écrit :
Colleagues, my understanding of the "reserve fund" is deeply connected with risks. Because by meaning it is echoed to "unexpected trouble". Healthy organization should not have any "we don't know why we need reserve, but lets have it" environment. If we consider risks to be covered by reserve fund, first we need to have a clear and understandable list of risks. Such as (only as example): - asteroid hits the HQ of ICANN and we need to reallocate office to backup location; - Mr.Trump assigns the governmental order to make ICANN state-driven organization; - N.Korea rocket hits Verisign technical facility and we need to move primary root to other technical facility; - ICANN gets deadly legal liability and spends all money for lawyers to keep operations running; - Godaddy go bankrupt and ICANN need money to deal with millions of registrants; - Russia, China, Brazil and India launches alternative root and ICANN needs financial instruments to fix it on global fora.
The size of reserve fund (and formula to keep it running) depends on type and probability of the risk. Many of us went through this exercise while dealing with "business continuity" question in new gTLD application. I don't think the process of defining the reserve fund is much different. For instance, technical risks to PTI must be separated from operational/legal/business risks, etc.
Yours, --andrei PS> Last Adobe connect was terrible
2017-11-28 23:23 GMT+03:00 Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com>>: Hi Alan and Sebastien,
Thank you for posting this comment and I look forward to the discussion. I too agree that the ALAC needs to strongly support having an adequate reserve fund, however, I think we should identify more than 2 sources for funds as the Auction proceeds is a one time possibility and the problems with the reserves need something that is a more concrete and longer term option. I would like to see more suggestions for sources of funding. I would also prefer that we switch around the order of the sources of possible funds to put Auction Proceeds as the last item and a levy on any future new GTLDs as the first item on the list. Also I was a bit confused by your statement in that Auction Proceeds is the surplus from the last round of gtlds but in this sentence it looks to be a different item.
Best,
Judith
_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 <https://maps.google.com/?q=3001+Veazey+Terrace+NW,+Washington+DC+20008&entry...> Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com <mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com> Website: www.jhellerstein.com <http://www.jhellerstein.com/> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide
On 11/28/2017 2:26 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: See https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=71602968 <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=71602968>.
Sebastien identified a number of important issues related to the reserve fund, following discussion with him, I have drafted the following short statement (also posted to the Wiki). As the PC closes on Thursday, and I believe it is essential that we make a strong statement, I would like to discuss this on the ALAC call in a few hours.
Alan
----------------
The ALAC strongly supports having the Reserve Fund at the level of 12 months expenses, and higher if there is a practical way of achieving that without unduly impacting ICANN's ability to provide necessary services, ensure the current and ongoing security, stability and resiliency of the DNS, and adequately support its ACs and SOs.
Since the Reserve Fund level is clearly tightly coupled to the level of ICANN operational expenses, any discussion of the reserve should have included a recent history and projection of ICANN operational expenses along with the employee/contractor levels and the Reserve Fund levels over the same period.
At whatever level the Reserve Fund target is set, ICANN must publish a plan on how and when this will be achieved. Given that the proposed target level(s) are significantly above the current Reserve Fund level, and it is unrealistic to believe that we will sustain or exceed this year's return-to-reserve of $5m, ICANN should expeditiously investigate alternative methods of building the reserve to ensure ICANN's future stability. Sources such as the Auction Proceeds, the surplus from the last round of new gTLD, or a levy on any future new gTLD fees should be considered.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac>
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org <http://www.atlarge.icann.org/> ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...>
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac>
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org <http://www.atlarge.icann.org/> ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...>
-- Andrey Kolesnikov RIPN.NET <http://ripn.net/>
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)
I agree that there needs to be more transparency with regards to the proposed use of the reserve fund. If we were going to add a particular purpose for additional funds to help ICANN do their work, I would recommend some of the high priority or prerequisite recommendations of the CCTRT report - especially those that suggest support for outreach and the new gtld application process for the Global South. Maureen On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
See https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=71602968.
Sebastien identified a number of important issues related to the reserve fund, following discussion with him, I have drafted the following short statement (also posted to the Wiki). As the PC closes on Thursday, and I believe it is essential that we make a strong statement, I would like to discuss this on the ALAC call in a few hours.
Alan
----------------
The ALAC strongly supports having the Reserve Fund at the level of 12 months expenses, and higher if there is a practical way of achieving that without unduly impacting ICANN's ability to provide necessary services, ensure the current and ongoing security, stability and resiliency of the DNS, and adequately support its ACs and SOs.
Since the Reserve Fund level is clearly tightly coupled to the level of ICANN operational expenses, any discussion of the reserve should have included a recent history and projection of ICANN operational expenses along with the employee/contractor levels and the Reserve Fund levels over the same period.
At whatever level the Reserve Fund target is set, ICANN must publish a plan on how and when this will be achieved. Given that the proposed target level(s) are significantly above the current Reserve Fund level, and it is unrealistic to believe that we will sustain or exceed this year's return-to-reserve of $5m, ICANN should expeditiously investigate alternative methods of building the reserve to ensure ICANN's future stability. Sources such as the Auction Proceeds, the surplus from the last round of new gTLD, or a levy on any future new gTLD fees should be considered.
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
participants (6)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Andrei Kolesnikov -
Judith Hellerstein -
Maureen Hilyard -
Ricardo Holmquist -
Sebicann Bachollet