Strategic Planning Session 2019
Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward. The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is [here](https://community.icann.org/display/trvlconstit/ICANN+Face-to+Face+Meeting?p...). As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long. I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward. The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long. I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you. Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is [here [community.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...). As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows: 55,000 USD travel and hotel costs 8,000 USD Per diem 3,500 USD food and drinks 2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis) Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting. As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems? Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you. Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward. The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long. I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates? Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows:
55,000 USD travel and hotel costs
8,000 USD Per diem
3,500 USD food and drinks
2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis)
Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting.
As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems?
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you.
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is [here [community.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...). As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out. Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates? Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows: 55,000 USD travel and hotel costs 8,000 USD Per diem 3,500 USD food and drinks 2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis) Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting. As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems? Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you. Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward. The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long. I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap). As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid. Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates?
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows:
55,000 USD travel and hotel costs
8,000 USD Per diem
3,500 USD food and drinks
2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis)
Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting.
As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems?
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you.
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is [here [community.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...). As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
Ayden, the budget envelope for this meeting is set, so moving towards reimbursing actual costs, especially if that is expected to be higher than the per diem provided, does not sound like a solution for saving costs. It is however up to the Council to decide how cost savings can be made in order to stay within the budget envelope allocated for this meeting which may mean that certain things need to give, but this is hopefully outweighed by the importance given to this meeting by everyone. Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:37 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap). As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid. Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out. Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates? Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows: 55,000 USD travel and hotel costs 8,000 USD Per diem 3,500 USD food and drinks 2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis) Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting. As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems? Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you. Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward. The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long. I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
Did the Council set this budget, or did staff? I do not remember being consulted on whether $60,000 would be adequate. Anyway, I appreciate that your remark about scrapping the per diem was simply a provocative one, and yes I took the bait. I think it shows tremendous disrespect to the community that you would even suggest it. Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:48 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the budget envelope for this meeting is set, so moving towards reimbursing actual costs, especially if that is expected to be higher than the per diem provided, does not sound like a solution for saving costs. It is however up to the Council to decide how cost savings can be made in order to stay within the budget envelope allocated for this meeting which may mean that certain things need to give, but this is hopefully outweighed by the importance given to this meeting by everyone.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:37 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap).
As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid.
Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates?
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows:
55,000 USD travel and hotel costs
8,000 USD Per diem
3,500 USD food and drinks
2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis)
Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting.
As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems?
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you.
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is [here [community.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...). As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
Ayden, this is the amount that the Board has allocated in response to the ABR requests. The Council did ask for the same support as for the previous meeting, but in light of the reduced funds available for ABRs and considering the number of requests received, a decision was made by the Board to still grant funds for this meeting but a reduced amount. As you may have seen, I believe most if not all ABR requests that were granted did not receive everything they asked for, and many did not get anything at all. And no, the comment about the per diem was not intended to be a provocative one, but looking at the numbers and assuming that attendees need their hotel and a plane covered to get to the meeting, that looked like an area where potential savings could be made as most meals and transport where provided for attendees. But again, as said, it is up to the Council to consider this further and make a determination what is possible within the budget that has been allocated for this meeting. Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:51 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Did the Council set this budget, or did staff? I do not remember being consulted on whether $60,000 would be adequate. Anyway, I appreciate that your remark about scrapping the per diem was simply a provocative one, and yes I took the bait. I think it shows tremendous disrespect to the community that you would even suggest it. Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:48 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, the budget envelope for this meeting is set, so moving towards reimbursing actual costs, especially if that is expected to be higher than the per diem provided, does not sound like a solution for saving costs. It is however up to the Council to decide how cost savings can be made in order to stay within the budget envelope allocated for this meeting which may mean that certain things need to give, but this is hopefully outweighed by the importance given to this meeting by everyone. Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:37 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap). As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid. Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out. Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates? Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows: 55,000 USD travel and hotel costs 8,000 USD Per diem 3,500 USD food and drinks 2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis) Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting. As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems? Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you. Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward. The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long. I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
I think it is more likely that ICANN org provided the Board with estimates as to how much each ABR would cost, and the Board, trusting staff advice, adopted these recommendations. Or are you saying that staff requested $75,000 for the Strategic Planning Session, and then in it's special meeting on May 30th, the Board only allocated $60,000 for this activity? —Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 2:01 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, this is the amount that the Board has allocated in response to the ABR requests. The Council did ask for the same support as for the previous meeting, but in light of the reduced funds available for ABRs and considering the number of requests received, a decision was made by the Board to still grant funds for this meeting but a reduced amount. As you may have seen, I believe most if not all ABR requests that were granted did not receive everything they asked for, and many did not get anything at all. And no, the comment about the per diem was not intended to be a provocative one, but looking at the numbers and assuming that attendees need their hotel and a plane covered to get to the meeting, that looked like an area where potential savings could be made as most meals and transport where provided for attendees. But again, as said, it is up to the Council to consider this further and make a determination what is possible within the budget that has been allocated for this meeting.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:51 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Did the Council set this budget, or did staff? I do not remember being consulted on whether $60,000 would be adequate. Anyway, I appreciate that your remark about scrapping the per diem was simply a provocative one, and yes I took the bait. I think it shows tremendous disrespect to the community that you would even suggest it.
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:48 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the budget envelope for this meeting is set, so moving towards reimbursing actual costs, especially if that is expected to be higher than the per diem provided, does not sound like a solution for saving costs. It is however up to the Council to decide how cost savings can be made in order to stay within the budget envelope allocated for this meeting which may mean that certain things need to give, but this is hopefully outweighed by the importance given to this meeting by everyone.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:37 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap).
As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid.
Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates?
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows:
55,000 USD travel and hotel costs
8,000 USD Per diem
3,500 USD food and drinks
2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis)
Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting.
As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems?
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you.
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is [here [community.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...). As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
Attached is the Additional Budget Request that was approved by the Council back in January. Attached also is the ICANN Staff Travel and Expense Policy. I attach this because I note that the cost of travel for staff is substantially higher than the average community member for travel to events that are not public ICANN meetings, so if this is now to be charged to us when we have a lower budget to work with, this is unreasonable. The community did not assess this activity as costing $60,000. If staff thought it was possible for this level of support to be delivered for $60,000, that was a misjudgement on the part of ICANN org: "Full travel support (i.e., airfare and hotel) for 3 days for the GNSO Council (21 members + GNSO Liaison to the GAC) and support staff." —Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:51 AM, Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> wrote:
Did the Council set this budget, or did staff? I do not remember being consulted on whether $60,000 would be adequate. Anyway, I appreciate that your remark about scrapping the per diem was simply a provocative one, and yes I took the bait. I think it shows tremendous disrespect to the community that you would even suggest it.
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:48 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the budget envelope for this meeting is set, so moving towards reimbursing actual costs, especially if that is expected to be higher than the per diem provided, does not sound like a solution for saving costs. It is however up to the Council to decide how cost savings can be made in order to stay within the budget envelope allocated for this meeting which may mean that certain things need to give, but this is hopefully outweighed by the importance given to this meeting by everyone.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:37 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap).
As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid.
Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates?
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows:
55,000 USD travel and hotel costs
8,000 USD Per diem
3,500 USD food and drinks
2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis)
Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting.
As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems?
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you.
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is [here [community.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...). As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
Ayden, Note that according to travel support guidelines, when a supported traveler attend two events, hotel and per diem are appropriated proportionately, but flight is only counted towards the longer event. I don't know if the NCPH Inter-sessional or the GNSO Council planning session was the longest, but only one of those got the flight cost, and it could have been the NCPH one. So the starting costs could be reasonably higher than 2018, since we won't share costs of policy staff travel with their own activity that Marika described, or the NCPH Councillors travel with the inter-sessional. We might have to do a travel cost exercise considering the location of councillors and staff to determine a good location to do the session; meeting space for a group like ours is not that expensive and we may find Washington DC, London or Buenos Aires to have lower total project cost. Or not... Rubens
On 31 May 2018, at 20:51, Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> wrote:
Did the Council set this budget, or did staff? I do not remember being consulted on whether $60,000 would be adequate. Anyway, I appreciate that your remark about scrapping the per diem was simply a provocative one, and yes I took the bait. I think it shows tremendous disrespect to the community that you would even suggest it.
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:48 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the budget envelope for this meeting is set, so moving towards reimbursing actual costs, especially if that is expected to be higher than the per diem provided, does not sound like a solution for saving costs. It is however up to the Council to decide how cost savings can be made in order to stay within the budget envelope allocated for this meeting which may mean that certain things need to give, but this is hopefully outweighed by the importance given to this meeting by everyone.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:37 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap).
As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid.
Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates?
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows:
55,000 USD travel and hotel costs
8,000 USD Per diem
3,500 USD food and drinks
2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis)
Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting.
As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems?
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you.
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
Ayden I’d oppose moving from per diem to reimbursement as it would increase the overall cost. The budget has been allocated and we need to be smart about how we use it in order to maximise it. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Friday 1 June 2018 at 00:38 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap). As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid. Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out. Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates? Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows: 55,000 USD travel and hotel costs 8,000 USD Per diem 3,500 USD food and drinks 2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis) Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting. As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems? Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you. Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward. The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long. I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
+1 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Michele Neylon - Blacknight Sent: Friday, June 1, 2018 12:26 PM To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com>; Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Strategic Planning Session 2019 Ayden I’d oppose moving from per diem to reimbursement as it would increase the overall cost. The budget has been allocated and we need to be smart about how we use it in order to maximise it. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Date: Friday 1 June 2018 at 00:38 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap). As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid. Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> wrote: Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out. Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com<mailto:haforrestesq@gmail.com>>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates? Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> wrote: Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows: 55,000 USD travel and hotel costs 8,000 USD Per diem 3,500 USD food and drinks 2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis) Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting. As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems? Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com<mailto:haforrestesq@gmail.com>>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you. Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>> wrote: Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com<mailto:icann@ferdeline.com>> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com<mailto:haforrestesq@gmail.com>> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward. The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long. I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com<mailto:haforrestesq@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
I agree, and I was not seriously suggesting that we move to a reimbursement model, though if it happened, I think it would soon become apparent that community members do incur costs as a result of participating in ICANN-organised meetings. I know that I lose money as a result of my ICANN participation, and I do not think I am alone here. I continue to find it offensive that the suggestion would even be put forward that this small per diem would be removed. This really highlights to me how little ICANN staff know about the sacrifices that community members make to participate at ICANN. I knew that other departments at ICANN did not understand, but until yesterday, I did think the policy team understood. So very telling. Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:25 PM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> wrote:
Ayden
I’d oppose moving from per diem to reimbursement as it would increase the overall cost.
The budget has been allocated and we need to be smart about how we use it in order to maximise it.
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Friday 1 June 2018 at 00:38 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap).
As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid.
Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates?
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows:
55,000 USD travel and hotel costs
8,000 USD Per diem
3,500 USD food and drinks
2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis)
Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting.
As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems?
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you.
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is [here [community.icann.org]](https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...). As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
Thanks Ayden and all for your comments, questions and points here on the SPS budget approval. We have kept track of all the questions raised, and I suggest that we come back to this after ICANN62. I very much appreciate Marika's detailed replies which came in over my nighttime, as I know that she and her team are swamped right now in prepping for Panama and supporting our efforts on next steps. I suggest we come back to the points raised as soon as we have a bit more breathing space after Panama is behind us. Best wishes, Heather On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 8:33 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> wrote:
I agree, and I was not seriously suggesting that we move to a reimbursement model, though if it happened, I think it would soon become apparent that community members do incur costs as a result of participating in ICANN-organised meetings. I know that I lose money as a result of my ICANN participation, and I do not think I am alone here. I continue to find it offensive that the suggestion would even be put forward that this small per diem would be removed. This really highlights to me how little ICANN staff know about the sacrifices that community members make to participate at ICANN. I knew that other departments at ICANN did not understand, but until yesterday, I did think the policy team understood. So very telling.
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:25 PM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight < michele@blacknight.com> wrote:
Ayden
I’d oppose moving from per diem to reimbursement as it would increase the overall cost.
The budget has been allocated and we need to be smart about how we use it in order to maximise it.
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
*From: *council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> *Reply-To: *Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> *Date: *Friday 1 June 2018 at 00:38 *To: *Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> *Cc: *GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap).
As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid.
Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out.
Best regards,
Marika
*From: *Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> *Reply-To: *Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> *Date: *Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 *To: *Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> *Cc: *Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List < council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates?
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows:
55,000 USD travel and hotel costs
8,000 USD Per diem
3,500 USD food and drinks
2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis)
Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting.
As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems?
Best regards,
Marika
*From: *Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> *Reply-To: *Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> *Date: *Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 *To: *Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> *Cc: *Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List < council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *[Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you.
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
*From: *council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> *Reply-To: *Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> *Date: *Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 *To: *Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> *Cc: *GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
+1 ----------------- Arsène Tungali, about.me/ArseneTungali +243 993810967 GPG: 523644A0 Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo Sent from my iPhone (excuse typos)
On Jun 1, 2018, at 1:11 PM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Ayden and all for your comments, questions and points here on the SPS budget approval. We have kept track of all the questions raised, and I suggest that we come back to this after ICANN62. I very much appreciate Marika's detailed replies which came in over my nighttime, as I know that she and her team are swamped right now in prepping for Panama and supporting our efforts on next steps. I suggest we come back to the points raised as soon as we have a bit more breathing space after Panama is behind us.
Best wishes,
Heather
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 8:33 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> wrote: I agree, and I was not seriously suggesting that we move to a reimbursement model, though if it happened, I think it would soon become apparent that community members do incur costs as a result of participating in ICANN-organised meetings. I know that I lose money as a result of my ICANN participation, and I do not think I am alone here. I continue to find it offensive that the suggestion would even be put forward that this small per diem would be removed. This really highlights to me how little ICANN staff know about the sacrifices that community members make to participate at ICANN. I knew that other departments at ICANN did not understand, but until yesterday, I did think the policy team understood. So very telling.
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:25 PM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> wrote:
Ayden
I’d oppose moving from per diem to reimbursement as it would increase the overall cost.
The budget has been allocated and we need to be smart about how we use it in order to maximise it.
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Friday 1 June 2018 at 00:38 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap).
As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid.
Best wishes,
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out.
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates?
Best wishes, Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows:
55,000 USD travel and hotel costs
8,000 USD Per diem
3,500 USD food and drinks
2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis)
Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting.
As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems?
Best regards,
Marika
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you.
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote:
Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found.
Best regards,
Marika
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward.
The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org]. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long.
I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
Ayden I’d remind you that several of the staff we all interact with on a regular basis were previously members of the “community”. As for “sacrifice” and “cost” – I’m not sure what point you are trying to make. Most of us who engage with ICANN on a regular basis do so by choice and that choice involves us making personal sacrifices and incurring a range of costs. Regards Michele Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Friday 1 June 2018 at 11:33 To: Michele Neylon <michele@blacknight.com> Cc: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Strategic Planning Session 2019 I agree, and I was not seriously suggesting that we move to a reimbursement model, though if it happened, I think it would soon become apparent that community members do incur costs as a result of participating in ICANN-organised meetings. I know that I lose money as a result of my ICANN participation, and I do not think I am alone here. I continue to find it offensive that the suggestion would even be put forward that this small per diem would be removed. This really highlights to me how little ICANN staff know about the sacrifices that community members make to participate at ICANN. I knew that other departments at ICANN did not understand, but until yesterday, I did think the policy team understood. So very telling. Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:25 PM, Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com> wrote: Ayden I’d oppose moving from per diem to reimbursement as it would increase the overall cost. The budget has been allocated and we need to be smart about how we use it in order to maximise it. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Friday 1 June 2018 at 00:38 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] [Ext] Re: Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thank you, Marika; I would personally prefer that the travel report for the Council's Strategic Planning Session and the NCPH Intersessional be separated into two, with appropriate costings divided, so that we have a fuller understanding of the cost of each forum. They are, after all, different forums with different delegates (albeit some overlap). As for the suggestion of removing the per diem, we could instead have a discussion around reimbursing actual costs incurred by delegates -- for those meals not covered during the day, for ground transport between the hotel and airport, for currency conversion fees, for dry cleaning, and for travel insurance. But this might be harder for ICANN to budget for, an administrative burden to process, and may even end up exceeding the cost of the per diem that is currently paid. Best wishes, Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:25 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Actual expenses incurred – I am not a 100% sure how the allocation for delegates that attended both meetings was done, but I can find out. Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 17:23 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks for the swift reply, Marika. Are these actual expenses incurred, or was this simply the budget allocation for FY18? And do the travel costs here encompass 100% of the airfare for delegates who also participated in the NCPH intersessional, or only 50% of that cost, for said delegates? Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 1:15 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, the breakdown of expenses was roughly as follows: 55,000 USD travel and hotel costs 8,000 USD Per diem 3,500 USD food and drinks 2,000 USD miscellaneous expenses (e.g. materials for the meeting, drinks / snacks for the office reception, taxis) Note that there was no air fare associated with staff attendance as that was covered as part of the policy team strategic planning session the week before. As that meeting is no longer planned in next year’s budget due to savings, those expenses may need to be added, assuming you expect staff support for the meeting. As food, drinks and transport where provided for most of the meeting, one potential area for savings could be not providing per diems? Best regards, Marika From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 16:56 To: Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> Cc: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>, GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Can we get a breakdown on what the $75,000 was spent on please? Was that all spent on travel, or is there anything else bundled into this figure? With some more granularity we might be able to identify those areas where some efficiencies can be achieved. Thank you. Ayden Férdeline ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 1 June 2018 12:49 AM, Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org> wrote: Ayden, please note that the reduction that the Council is asked to make compared to this year’s SPS is 15,000 USD. As you may see from the approval language, for this year’s edition, 75,000 USD was approved versus 60,000 USD for next year’s SPS. This may mean that in addition to reducing the meeting by one day other savings may need to be found. Best regards, Marika From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Date: Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 01:50 To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks very much Heather, that sounds a sensible path forward. The travel report outlining the cost of our Strategic Planning Session in January is here [community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...>. As we can see, the cost was largely down to flights; comparatively, hotel expenses were very minimal (and the per diem for each traveller even smaller than I had realised). Given this, it really is a pity that $5,000 could not be found to keep our session at three days long. I appreciate that most requests for community support were scaled back, but they were scaled back to meet an artificially small Additional Budgetary Request envelope (0.002% of the overall budget), an amount that was set and limited by ICANN staff (personnel costs are 59% of the overall budget). The community had developed these requests in a bottom-up manner based upon demonstrated need. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 8:30 AM, Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
Thanks Heather Did we already agree on dates, or was that left open? I suspect there will be several changes in faces on Council before the end of the year, as several of us are either up for re-election or are term limited. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Date: Thursday 31 May 2018 at 07:31 To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
Thanks Heather. Although “separate from” the public meeting, I still think it could be before/after one to minimise travel time (and flight cost), especially so for the Policy Forum where the meeting itself is so much shorter. Marie From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Michele Neylon - Blacknight Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 11:07 AM To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>; GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks Heather Did we already agree on dates, or was that left open? I suspect there will be several changes in faces on Council before the end of the year, as several of us are either up for re-election or are term limited. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com<mailto:haforrestesq@gmail.com>> Date: Thursday 31 May 2018 at 07:31 To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
Thanks for your comment, Marie- I just thought I'd quickly note that I think, from next year, that the Policy Forums may be extending in length by one day to five days (unless I am mistaken) to allow for outreach. In addition, the Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group has historically used the days prior to the Policy Forum for our own internal capacity building. We did this last year in Johannesburg over two days (largely funded by an external donor), and we are doing that next month in Panama City, adding a day to the meeting, so this does extend the length of the meeting for us. I am not sure if other parts of the community do this too. I know that when the CCWG was in full swing it had a day zero event, and I think some Review Teams might too. If we add the Strategic Planning Session to the end of the five-day Policy Forum (already six or seven days for members of the NCSG), I have a suspicion our productivity will be on the decline, both from exhaustion and from reflecting on the battles that have taken place earlier in the week and which remain in our minds. I can only speak for myself here, but I would find it much easier to get away for a three day meeting (Strategic Planning Session) and a five day meeting (Policy Forum) than I would for a single, eight or nine day-long meeting. I have a suspicion I am not alone with this preference. Finally, as we have new Council members appointed at the end of the Annual General Meeting in October, having the Strategic Planning Session take place in the new year -- a good month before our first 'real' Council meeting -- makes for a very helpful induction. Or at least that was my feeling, as a new member of the Council who joined only recently. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 12:08 PM, Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo@aim.be> wrote:
Thanks Heather.
Although “separate from” the public meeting, I still think it could be before/after one to minimise travel time (and flight cost), especially so for the Policy Forum where the meeting itself is so much shorter.
Marie
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Michele Neylon - Blacknight Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 11:07 AM To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>; GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks Heather
Did we already agree on dates, or was that left open?
I suspect there will be several changes in faces on Council before the end of the year, as several of us are either up for re-election or are term limited.
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Date: Thursday 31 May 2018 at 07:31 To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
Thanks Ayden, and fully understood. I still have a preference for minimising travel time/jetlag/cost but am happy to fall in with the majority. M From: Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 3:32 PM To: Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo@aim.be> Cc: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele@blacknight.com>; Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>; GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks for your comment, Marie- I just thought I'd quickly note that I think, from next year, that the Policy Forums may be extending in length by one day to five days (unless I am mistaken) to allow for outreach. In addition, the Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group has historically used the days prior to the Policy Forum for our own internal capacity building. We did this last year in Johannesburg over two days (largely funded by an external donor), and we are doing that next month in Panama City, adding a day to the meeting, so this does extend the length of the meeting for us. I am not sure if other parts of the community do this too. I know that when the CCWG was in full swing it had a day zero event, and I think some Review Teams might too. If we add the Strategic Planning Session to the end of the five-day Policy Forum (already six or seven days for members of the NCSG), I have a suspicion our productivity will be on the decline, both from exhaustion and from reflecting on the battles that have taken place earlier in the week and which remain in our minds. I can only speak for myself here, but I would find it much easier to get away for a three day meeting (Strategic Planning Session) and a five day meeting (Policy Forum) than I would for a single, eight or nine day-long meeting. I have a suspicion I am not alone with this preference. Finally, as we have new Council members appointed at the end of the Annual General Meeting in October, having the Strategic Planning Session take place in the new year -- a good month before our first 'real' Council meeting -- makes for a very helpful induction. Or at least that was my feeling, as a new member of the Council who joined only recently. Best wishes, Ayden ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On 31 May 2018 12:08 PM, Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo@aim.be<mailto:marie.pattullo@aim.be>> wrote: Thanks Heather. Although “separate from” the public meeting, I still think it could be before/after one to minimise travel time (and flight cost), especially so for the Policy Forum where the meeting itself is so much shorter. Marie From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> On Behalf Of Michele Neylon - Blacknight Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 11:07 AM To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com<mailto:haforrestesq@gmail.com>>; GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Thanks Heather Did we already agree on dates, or was that left open? I suspect there will be several changes in faces on Council before the end of the year, as several of us are either up for re-election or are term limited. Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ http://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>> on behalf of Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com<mailto:haforrestesq@gmail.com>> Date: Thursday 31 May 2018 at 07:31 To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org<mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019 Dear Council colleagues, I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular. I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process. We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona. Best wishes, Heather
+1 ----------------- Arsène Tungali, about.me/ArseneTungali +243 993810967 GPG: 523644A0 Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo Sent from my iPhone (excuse typos)
On May 31, 2018, at 3:32 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann@ferdeline.com> wrote:
Thanks for your comment, Marie-
I just thought I'd quickly note that I think, from next year, that the Policy Forums may be extending in length by one day to five days (unless I am mistaken) to allow for outreach.
In addition, the Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group has historically used the days prior to the Policy Forum for our own internal capacity building. We did this last year in Johannesburg over two days (largely funded by an external donor), and we are doing that next month in Panama City, adding a day to the meeting, so this does extend the length of the meeting for us. I am not sure if other parts of the community do this too. I know that when the CCWG was in full swing it had a day zero event, and I think some Review Teams might too.
If we add the Strategic Planning Session to the end of the five-day Policy Forum (already six or seven days for members of the NCSG), I have a suspicion our productivity will be on the decline, both from exhaustion and from reflecting on the battles that have taken place earlier in the week and which remain in our minds.
I can only speak for myself here, but I would find it much easier to get away for a three day meeting (Strategic Planning Session) and a five day meeting (Policy Forum) than I would for a single, eight or nine day-long meeting. I have a suspicion I am not alone with this preference.
Finally, as we have new Council members appointed at the end of the Annual General Meeting in October, having the Strategic Planning Session take place in the new year -- a good month before our first 'real' Council meeting -- makes for a very helpful induction. Or at least that was my feeling, as a new member of the Council who joined only recently.
Best wishes,
Ayden
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 31 May 2018 12:08 PM, Marie Pattullo <marie.pattullo@aim.be> wrote:
Thanks Heather.
Although “separate from” the public meeting, I still think it could be before/after one to minimise travel time (and flight cost), especially so for the Policy Forum where the meeting itself is so much shorter.
Marie
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> On Behalf Of Michele Neylon - Blacknight Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 11:07 AM To: Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com>; GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Thanks Heather
Did we already agree on dates, or was that left open?
I suspect there will be several changes in faces on Council before the end of the year, as several of us are either up for re-election or are term limited.
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845
From: council <council-bounces@gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Heather Forrest <haforrestesq@gmail.com> Date: Thursday 31 May 2018 at 07:31 To: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: [council] Strategic Planning Session 2019
Dear Council colleagues,
I write with some welcome good news, for the GNSO generally and next year's GNSO Council in particular.
I have just received notice that our Additional Budget Request for holding a Strategic Planning Session in 2019 has been approved. You may recall that the request built in flexibility as to a 2 or 3 day schedule, in view of the FY19 budget and the 2018 SPS schedule (taking into account that the day we had on Bylaws review was a one-off). From our request, I understand that ICANN org has recommended that the Board approve a full 2-day face-to-face meeting of the Council, to be held separately from an ICANN Public Meeting. I also understand that the ABR process was highly competitive, with 55 applications received, and that most requests were scaled back to some degree. I personally believe we've done well here to get the 2 full days, and I'm confident that the next Council leadership team and Council can make good use of this to continue the professionalisation and learning process.
We have too much on our collective plates right now to begin planning, but I would suggest that Rafik, Donna and I give some preliminary thought to the logistics as our term ends, to hand over to the 2018-19 Council when it is seated in Barcelona.
Best wishes,
Heather
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
participants (7)
-
Arsène Tungali -
Ayden Férdeline -
Heather Forrest -
Marie Pattullo -
Marika Konings -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
Rubens Kuhl