[ALAC] Auction proceeds survey

Holly Raiche h.raiche at internode.on.net
Mon May 7 01:51:11 UTC 2018

First - thank you Vanda with sharing this with ALAC. I hope this discussion can migrate somewhere beyond just this email so that everyone can easily find and comment on it.

Now, to be devil’s advocate.  Why is the group seeking comment on how the funds are managed rather than how they are allocated.  It seems to me that the most important question is how the funds will be spent - and heaven knows ALAC has already contributed to this discussion.  Some of the suggestions over time have been that the funds should support applications from underserved areas, and/or help fund community (better defined) applications.  We also had concerns about some of the funds being used to reduce ICANN debt. But all that was about allocation - not the mechanism of allocation itself.

So I am really less concerned with the allocation METHOD, and more concerned with the beneficiaries of the allocation.

That said, I will comment on the options.

Option One: I am a bit concerned with yet another Department within ICANN.  They are - we are told - cutting back on expenditure. Creating a new Department will be heading the other way.
Option 2: I particularly do not favour Option 2 because it assumes that the money may be spent on charitable purposes.  If the decision is to assist underserved areas, the focus will be very different to ‘charitable purposes;
Option 3 & 4: I’d prefer something like a Foundation - so that the funds really are separate, and so would be happier with Options 3 or 4. I would prefer Option 4,  but with the condition that if it is to evaluate proposals (good idea) then it must have multistakeholder membership and not simply be a creature of ICANN Org.  

Hope that helps


On 7 May 2018, at 8:19 am, Vanda Scartezini <vanda at scartezini.org> wrote:

> Dear Alan, other  ALAC friends
>  In the Auction proceeds CCWG we are asked to respond to a survey.
> Since from the responses from this survey the proposals for the report will be more defined, we were encouraged to get some feedback from the group we are acting with, in this case ALAC, and share our ideas and get your feedbacks if possible
> There are several questions but in my view some will define others and I would like to hear from you, your thoughts
>  For me the relevant question is related to the model
> Please take a look at https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/CCWG+Charter
> To understand the question.
>  All financial resource shall be granted to projects under the mission of ICANN and only for that.
> Sorry we have to finalize the survey till Miercoles May 9 , so if you can give feedback during Monday 7and Tuesday8 I really appreciate.
> Here the options for the most relevant question in my opinion I would like to have some inputs before respond the survey: which will be the best option, think about process, cost, efficiency…
> The working group has come up with 4 different possible mechanisms that could be considered:
> A New ICANN Proceeds Allocation Department is created as part of ICANN, the organisation (ICANN Org)- This department would be part of ICANN Org and take full responsibility for solicitation and evaluation of proposals, and disbursement process.
> New ICANN Proceeds Allocation Department Created as part of ICANN Org which would work in collaboration with an existing charitable organization(s) Responsibilities for solicitation and evaluation of proposals, and disbursement process would be split between the newly created department and the existing charitable organization(s).
> A new structure would be created (e.g. ICANN foundation) - A new structure would be created separate of ICANN Org which would be responsible for solicitation and evaluation of proposals, and disbursement process
> An established entity/entities (e.g. foundation or fund) are used (ICANN would organize the oversight of processes to ensure mission and fiduciary duties are met) - An stablished entity / entities (e.g. foundation or fund) would be responsible for solicitation and evaluation of proposals, and disbursement process.
> Thank you
> Vanda Scartezini
> Polo Consultores Associados
> Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004
> 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
> Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253
> Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 
> Sorry for any typos. 
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20180507/bbe23879/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ALAC mailing list