ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[nc-budget]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[nc-budget] NC budget 2002 IMPORTANT FOR NC JAN


Philip-

Thanks for the quick feedback on this.  By now, ICANN management has formally circulated its year-end, 2001 accounting for the DNSO and while I gather that their formal DNSO financial accounts differ slightly from the informal ones that you circulated yesterday, they are common on a few key points:  Their December estimates of Registrar Constituency overpayments are now revised upwards in light of their receipt of additional payments from individual registrars and their accounting of the cash balance at year-end is revised upward (from the $41,000 estimate that we have been using) due to lower-than expected spending and some additional revenues.  ICANN's report can be found at:

http://www.icann.org/dnso/dnso-finances-31dec01.htm

While it is clear that we do not have time to modify the Budget Committee's report in time for today's meeting, we can easily amend it (or anyone can propose that it be amended) from the floor during the Council meeting. 
 
On the amount proposed for a re-payment to an agent of the Registrar Constituency, for example, I intend to propose an amendment to the Committee's report increasing the amount to the exact, final amount of the Constituency's 2001 overpayment.
 
On the second item that you raise, whether we should retain around $60,000 in reserves as we go into 2002 (instead of what the Budget Committee had previously projected as around $30,000), the ICANN management report adds an important clarification.  In it, you will now note that ICANN management  --as the custodian of our funds and the legal entity that will assume our contractual obligations to our suppliers--  now clarifies that it will require that we retain a cash reserve of around $60,000.  They obviously have an obligation to protect themselves against any shortfall in DNSO fund-raising, so they are in my view within their rights to impose reasonable limits on us if we wish to rely on their no-charge services to us.
 
Assuming that we accept their requirement for a $60,000 cash reserve, it would no be possible to address your proposal that we allocate some of the 2001 year-end surplus towards 2002 DNSO operating expenses.
 
Roger 
 
Chair
Names Council Budget Committee
 
 
 
Roger J. Cochetti
Senior Vice President & Chief Policy Officer
VeriSign
rcochetti@verisign.com
202-973-6600
-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Sheppard [mailto:philip.sheppard@aim.be]
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 8:18 AM
To: nc-budget@dnso.org
Cc: 'DNSO Secretariat'
Subject: [nc-budget] NC budget 2002 IMPORTANT FOR NC JAN
Importance: High

Budget Committee,
Important change to proposed NC fees 2002
 
1.  2002 fees
Please find attached two Excel files. These have been prepared by Glen, Elisabeth and Diane at ICANN and are an update on the budget figures we discussed at the last Budget Committee.
 
The good news is that allowing for all 2001 costs there is a carry over of $57,533. This is too much to leave as reserves. I am reluctant to ask the NC to agree to the 2002 fees we discussed when we have a surplus of this size. (And if all back fees are paid we will have even more).
 
I suggest that Roger propose to the NC the following (See Excel file for detail).
Budget 2002 $97,966 (agreed by Budget Committee including 10% contingency)
Less 2001 surplus $57,333 (includes maximum surplus payment to Registrars)
Plus 2002 reserve $30,000
Balance to finance = $ 70,633
Fee call (7) $10,100 per constituency (rounded up).
 
2. Registrars surplus
Dianne's latest advise is that the Registrar's overpaid $14986.14 (and not $12,736.14). The fee proposal above assumes the conservative case that the overpay is $14986.14. I propose that we do not ask the NC to approve at the Jan 17 meeting but that the figure is first clarified between the Budget Committee/Registrars/Diane and the NC asked to approve at its Feb meeting.
(If we end up with another $2000 in the bank, well and good but this need not stop us agreeing on fees on Jan 17).
Philip


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>