[council] Travel funds needed for Sydney
- To: GNSO Council <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] Travel funds needed for Sydney
- From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:33:46 -0300
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=i8Eee4is8xKnLHAj79US1g69T5qi5cJWV+aQa+jW67s=; b=RktWwt+DNZJ1MJfdiZhngGUUd+cyluMkKUhiPrqBHIDSk7Wryl0CA3CjVxKGLD/WEk JJekmkphkwb44W59SFuKXW3KmeLeebfNCjlXxr5/sdTaNy/cp0d4Uyv+8ykDiTzO93S6 BX0KyX9SAXP7iaWwxTYzFByvbIrNRavfkA1Tw=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; b=SutIMpvp/C2oyVa3I3UsRDcxCdkEHk2SVg/+ZGLgKebylQbO1PKBFQUK0qocaArwYE JLXqituiwhHXbDuAcRR+C3YUGPtldPybmfmoD0BAPf/Rgbmv/iktu8dn1WwCG1fC+Ylg AP5LY/vEeWT9KOADxq5yMUF3FEjOIvtK64wF8=
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,
as background information for our next confrence call in relation with travel funds needed for Sydney, these are the answers recieved from constituencies:
- ISPCP needs support for three reps and supports the use of DNSO
residue funds.
- NCUC intends to use its remaining slot and would need additional
funding to ensure fuller non-commercial participation in Sydney. They support the use of residual
DNSO funds.
- IPC intends to use the 3.5 travel supported slots, and may wish to
have additional support to facilitate presentations and discussion on the
IRT output. They
support the use of residual DNSO funds.
- BC requires travel support for all three reps. They use of DNSO
residue funds.
- RyC requests full travel funding for one person to attend and
participate in the ICANN Sydney meetings in June 2009. For the funding
associated with the remaining three slots allocated to the RyC for the current
fiscal year, the RyC recommends any FY09 travel funds allocated to the RyC left
over at the end of June be rolled over to FY10 for use by the RyC for future
travel needs for GNSO activities. Regarding
the use of DNSO funds still remaining on ICANN books, the RyC believes that a
good use of those funds for the benefit of the whole community in the long term
would be to use them for improving the capacity for remote participation in an
effective manner and thereby minimizes the heavy dependence on in-person
participation. We believe that this would scale much better and be a much
more fiscally responsible approach over the longer term than continuing to try
to subsidize travel expenses for what likely will be a growing need of GNSO
participants in the future.
In relation with this feedback I have updated our table for travel funds:
Updated table of travel funds for
GNSO Council
|
|
Total Available
|
Remaining for
|
Requested for Sydney
|
Remaining
|
|
Constituencies
|
Per Year
|
Sydney
|
|
|
|
NCUC
|
5
|
1
|
0,5+0,5=1
|
0
|
|
ISPC
|
5
|
1
|
2,5
|
-1,5
|
|
RyC
|
5
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
|
BC
|
5
|
1
|
3
|
-2
|
|
RrC
|
5
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
|
IPC
|
5
|
3.5
|
-
|
-
|
|
Total
|
30
|
12.5
|
9,5
|
-3,5 + 3
|
The previous version of the table was:
Updated table of travel funds for
GNSO Council
|
|
Cairo
|
Mexico City
|
Total per
|
Total Available
|
Remaining for
|
|
Constituencies
|
Meeting
|
Meeting
|
Constituency
|
Per Year
|
Sydney
|
|
NCUC
|
2
|
2
|
4
|
5
|
1
|
|
ISPC
|
1
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
1
|
|
RyC
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
5
|
4
|
|
BC
|
3
|
1
|
4
|
5
|
1
|
|
RrC
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
5
|
2
|
|
IPC
|
0.5
|
1
|
1.5
|
5
|
3.5
|
|
Total
|
8.5
|
9
|
17.5
|
30
|
12.5
|
Regards to all.
Olga