RE: [nc-budget] NC meeting Feb 8

["Cochetti, Roger" <rogerc@netsol.com>]

Philip-

 

I think the real question here is whether we can get a meeting of the Budget Committee together before the next NC meeting.  Athena will try to pull this off.  If we cannot, the obvious alternative is to amend the Budget Committee's report during the Names Council meeting.

 

Roger 

-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Sheppard [mailto:philip.sheppard@aim.be]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 9:54 AM
To: DNSO budget
Subject: [nc-budget] NC meeting Feb 8

Roger et al,

 

1. Now that I am NC chair I would like to follow the example of Ken who remained an observer to the budget committee but not an active participant. As such I will intercede from time to time but exempt myself from Budget committee votes, proposals etc.

 

2. As you know the NC rejected (by abstentions) the budget committee proposal on the 2001 subs and will be revisiting the item on Feb 8.

"Item1: Budget Committee - revisiting the recommendation on 2001 budget and
     constituency contributions (Roger Cochetti) - 30 mins"
       

The NC seemed to have no problem with the proposed 2001 budget but indicated concern on the question of constituency subs.

 

Could I ask the budget committee to prepare three options for the NC to discuss.

Option 1: the previous proposal (= 2001 budget less voluntary shared by 7)

 

Option 2: a new proposal (=2001 budget less voluntary less surplus of subs 1999 and 2000 RECEIVED as at 31 Jan 2001 shared by 7).

 

Option 3: a new proposal (=2001 budget less voluntary less surplus of subs 1999 and 2000 REQUESTED shared by 7).

 

Please indicate the advantages/disadvantages of each option.

 

Philip.

 

 

 

Philip Sheppard
AIM - European Brands Association
9  av. des Gaulois  B-1040 Brussels
Tel +322 736 0305 Fax +322 734 6702