GNSO Council, Two more questions (some echoed by multiple people) have come up on the travel support thread that I'd like to address: 1) Couldn't we just amend the approach and provide financial support for all counselors to travel to the Mexico City meeting, both providing more actual support, and avoiding some of the implementation issues with the current process? It is certainly true that the amount of money budgeted for travel support when compared to the ICANN budget is not large, and even if an amended approach would be applied to ccNSO and ASO (all subjects of this travel support procedure), the total budget impact would not be significant. However, it is important to recognize that the initial travel support recommendation came from balancing input of many, some saying all should be supported, and some saying no incremental travel support should be provided, and others commenting that additional stakeholders should be supported (e.g. the GAC). As with all budget expenditures, it is not only the amount but the prior agreement to spend the money that is important. Clearly, this will be reviewed along with the entire travel approach for next year, beginning with a workshop in Mexico City. 2) Why require an ICANN travel agent? There are several reasons for this: - Ensures that there is a consistent application of travel guidelines across all participants (equitable treatment); avoids staff oversight of the appropriateness of particular fares people might obtain (something no one wants). - Requires no cash outlay or expense tracking by those who are traveling - Increases ICANN's buying power (we recently got some discounts from United for example), inuring back to community benefit. - Provides for consolidated reporting of travel booked and actually taken There have been cases where ICANN booking was just not practical (for example, with tickets purchased in Cambodia). So, when impractical, staff has supported the use of outside agents. I track the GNSO email list, and know some of you personally. It is very clear that the GNSO councilors work very hard, and make a significant contribution to the ICANN community and the Internet community as a whole. In some sense, it would be easiest from a staff perspective to "just say yes" to comments made on the list (though there is the possibility of generating further debate from others currently quiet on the subject). Particularly with regards to these kind of issues, I think that you all expect and demand ICANN staff to ensure as much as possible that budgets (and the strategic decisions behind them) are followed, and that expenditures are being carefully managed and being made transparent. Again, email only goes so far in these kind of discussions, and I'd be happy to join a call with the travel committee or the entire council if that would help. Also, we will be scheduling a public session at the ICANN Mexico City meeting to receive input on and discuss the travel guidelines and their implementation, and get your thoughts about any changes that might be needed for the next fiscal year. Should you have questions about the implementation of the travel guidelines for Mexico City, please contact Kevin Wilson, who as I've noted earlier, will be involved in getting this feedback, and with your input, evolving the procedure for FY10. Best, Doug -- Doug Brent Chief Operating Officer ICANN Voice: +1 310.301.3871 Mobile: +1 650.996.4447 Fax: +1 310.823.8649