[CCWG-ACCT] Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for CCWG ACCT F2F Day 2 Session 4 | 24 March

Tue Mar 24 21:04:54 UTC 2015

Dear all, 

The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CCWG ACCT Face to Face DAY 2 Session 4 on 23 March will be available here:  https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52893818 <https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52893818%20>  

These high-level notes were prepared to help you navigate through content of the call and do not substitute in any way the transcript.

Action Items:  none noted

Notes

CCWG Istanbul Meeting - 23-24 March 2015

NOTES:  Day 2 Session 4

About next steps

Important for our group

For the CWG which has dependencies from work.

For community and Board which has expectations.

Are we ready for public comment April 6

* Methodology: is known

* Definitions and Scoping: from the problem statement

* Inventory of existing mechanisms

* Input gathered on community empowerment mechanisms

* Contentions / contingency:

* Contingency list and the stress test Extremely good progress, though dependent on our mechanisms, but thus is an agile set up and ready for his stage

* Accountability mechanisms: provide clarity on WS2 items and how these will be addressed.

* Implementation plan and timeline. 

Accountability architecture.  Which can be graphically represented.  the Work of WP2.  The golden bylaw.  The independent review, which is a key outcome.  

Community empowerment mechanisms

AoC review and writing the appropriate/necessary features to the bylaws.

Are we ready at a higher level for public comment, with entering into specific recommendations for text changes, eg. bylaws language.

Suggestion: focus on mechanisms and structures.  Not asserting the that the Community empowerment mechanisms are the complete list.  A discussion needed on what we are defining as WS1 and what WS2

Comment that the timeline will be pushed out and not the only call for public comment.  How do we represent the community, which would be incorporated in community empowerment.

Concern at the complexity of the issues proposed: what needs to be done, and what ensures that the rest of the mechanisms can be implemented later.

Might check what needs to be done through stress tests, if one mechanism is missing how does that affect our contingencies and mitigation.

Things that have to be done before the IANA services contract ends, rather than things that must be done to enable the transition.  Look at stress tests and keep as narrow as possible.

Will CCWG send a message particularly to CWG if it looks to be backing off from some powers, when the CWG has been asking for clarity of what the CCWG will propose.   These are enablers for the CWG's work 

Don't move to WS2 because of complexity, but recognize that more time is needed if more time is needed.

The CCWG charter's definition of WS1 includes the notion of committed to if the implementation of mechanism is too complex.

Agreement from the group to go for public comment with the list in section 7, i.e. Description of overall accountability architecture

Recommendations :

1.  Revised mission, commitments & core values

2.  "Golden" / entrenched Bylaws

3.  Independent Review Panel enhancements

4.  Community empowerment :

  € a)  Challenge Budget / strategy

  € b)  Challenge Bylaw change

  € c)  Approve  Golden / entrenched Bylaw change

  € d)  Dismissal of the Board

5.  AoC reviews transcribed into the Bylaws 

Legal input will feed into each proposal.  If there are legal constraints, but not a specific section

Public comment:  Questions on the recommendations, with free text comment for each item.   Use the public comment review tool, facilitating the analysis of comments to make the analysis available as soon possible after comment closes.

Or, asking generic questions to highlight the underlying assumptions we are making.  Questions simple but not simplistic, need to get a sense from the answers of the tradeoffs we are facing. 

Questions asking if we are on the right track

Questions asking to choose between options (A or B).  A narrative section explaining what we are doing to ensure more informed answers.

Our proposals are a package, they need to presented together  And the questions need to be structured together reflecting the context of the whole package.

Timeline: 

April 6 for 30 days.

Complex issue to finalize is the community mechanism.  Need time, even if not group consensus but a series of scenario, how much time?

Time to discuss with Wp1

How should it look and how to consolidate the discussion of the past two days and decide where there is consensus.  Is there value in going for public comment without legal advice?  Consider meetings of CCWG on 7 and 14 April, to allow public comment

Delivery of legal advice, initial advice by 27 March. Which will be followed by iterations.  Second firm to provide initial advice next week, with final advice in 2-3 weeks.  Which would push acceptance by the chartering organizations very late.

Legal advice before public comment, suggested that the group  move forward with proposals in anticipation of the legal advice. Prioritize legal advice and option.

The public comment document will be translated, as priority.

CWG lessons - don't let the deadline force you to send half-backed comment. And get feedback as quickly as possible.  Take the general principles, the same for each mechanisms. 

Legal advice may dictate what is possible.  Seeking public comment on the proposed mechanisms, and legal advice on the comments received may be the way forward. 

Note ICANN document publication guidelines,  to be made available 15 days before an ICANN meeting.

How long will the bylaw revision process take within the Board?

Changes will need to public comment.  Assume relatively easy to draft, if assume legal and CCWG recommendations line up.  Bylaws revisions may wait until after the NTIA decision, until NTIA has indicated that those changes satisfy it's concerns.

An implementation plan:  NTIA approval is T0, and implementation is rolled out sequentially.

Key decision recommendations for WS1 by 20 April.  Goal turn around for a second comment by the time of ICANN#53 Buenos Aires.  A scenario not requiring an additional face to face meeting.

If there is disagreement with the final recommendations then there would be a consensus call, as specified in the charter, with an opportunity for minority views to accompany the proposal.

Items for consideration of WS2 - add to the table of contents of the report, with the group to discuss.

Concern, lack of detail may give CWG the opportunity to say that they can't act until they hear from CCWG.  CCWG has agreed there will be a Board spill, the CCWG delay is in the detail of how to implement that .

Announcement can note CCWG will have  proposal discussed by SO and AC and will have a public comment before sending to the chartering organizations.  20 April is out, but will agree and publish a definitive date. 

Co-chair statement: it will include information about the package, the timeline as discussed,  Other elements? 

We know elements will be there, but not exactly what they will look like.

Thank you colleagues.

END

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150324/002abd90/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150324/002abd90/image001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5035 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150324/002abd90/smime.p7s>