RE: [nc-budget] DNSO costs - agenda item Wed 21 Nov
As
most of you recall, I have been one who favors independent financing of the DNSO
because I believe that removes any possible connection between the DNSO and its
funding source that might influence the ability for the DNSO to make fully
independent policy recommendations. Philosophically, my opinions have not
changed on this issue. At the same time, if others feel strongly about
pursuing ICANN funding, then I think that we should request sufficient funding
to cover not only the information management (Secretariat) and the technical
services support functions but also enough to fund a full-time policy
development position.
First
of all, I believe that $75,000 per year is not enough to cover basic
expenses. By themselves, the to-be-contracted information management and
technical services will cost $60,000 per year excluding any travel,
telecommunications and other miscellaneous costs not included in the
$60,000. As a first step, we as the budget committee should estimate
what our full 2002 budget will look like and make sure that we provide a
more accurate figure than $75,000. We should include such expenses as
in-person meeting costs, web-casting of in-person meetings,
etc.
With
regard to policy development area, this is an area in my opinion that the NC has
totally neglected. The ICANN Bylaws clearly define the NC's responsibility
to be that of consensus management, but almost no effort has been made to
develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that the consensus
development processes happen in an objective, measurable and defensible
manner. Many people are understandably very critical of the
ineffectiveness of the consensus process within the DNSO and want to come up
with alternative ways to be able to make it easier to reach consensus, but very
few have been willing to commit the financial or labor resources to put a clear
and workable foundation in place to truly allow the NC to manage the consensus
process in a nonpolitical and non-arbitrary way.
VGRS
offered $100,000 in matching funds to support a full-time policy development
position, but the voluntary fund-raising effort is going nowhere fast.
There is no evidence that this effort will succeed. Whether ICANN
structure stays as it is today or changes in the future, there absolutely must
be some consensus development policies and procedures put in place to provide
the guidance needed for the entire community with regard to how the process
should work and also to ensure that NC can objectively fulfill its consensus
management role.
Consequently, if we decide to recommend ICANN funding
of the DNSO, then I recommend that we include at least $150,000 on top of the
the funds needed to cover the basic budget.
Chuck
|