[bylaws-coord] Next steps for Bylaws drafting

Mon May 23 16:30:26 UTC 2016

Greg,  

Thanks for your note and for your points on where we are this week. The email that Bruce forwarded was a summary of some of the actions (not all) anticipated this week, excerpted out of a much longer discussion of the final stages of the process; that we have all been working toward.  We didn’t attempt to set out all the assessments that would be going on by staff, by Sidley, by Adler, by the Bylaws coordination group and others who have been so dedicated to this process throughout, like yourself and the group that you represent in this process.

As we are well aware it was expected that this would be a period with very short deadlines in which to provide meaningful analysis of the public comments.  Staff’s summary and assessment will be forwarded to the community as soon as we have completed it. This summary/assessment can be reviewed by the Bylaws Coordination Group (along with Sidley and Adler), and a determination can be made if additional work is needed beyond that. We agree that a call with the Bylaws Coordination Group would be useful this week.

Let’s be certain though, that no one is proposing that we skip over the comments, not take them seriously or not provide bylaws responsive to those comments or with sufficient analysis to allow their approval based upon the community’s proposals and any new issues raised within those comments. 

From what we have seen in the comments, Staff’s assessment so far (but we will look to Sidley, Adler, to help assess also) is that -- many of the comments are in line with the proposals or are capable of being resolved in this current stage of the process. Some of the comments are seeking variance to the proposals, and some of the comments are stressing the importance of WS2 items.

Some of the comments provided specific recommended line edits, and those must be carefully considered, to see if the changes are required to enhance the implementation of the proposals or understanding of the Bylaws, or if the language posted for public comments sufficiently meets the intent of the proposals.

Accordingly, let’s not give up on the long proposed tight deadlines at this point. Together, let us see if we can get this done, with all due consideration by those necessary to ensure that we are acting consistent with our promises to the community and to the Commerce to deliver these Bylaws fully reflecting the community’s inputs and request for empowerment and change.

John 

John Jeffrey
General Counsel & Secretary, ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, California  90094-2536
direct dial - +1.310.301.5834
mobile - +1.310.404.6001
JJ at ICANN.org <mailto:JJ at ICANN.org>
> On May 23, 2016, at 7:23 AM, Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> This raises critical questions and serious concerns, which I've put inline.  The use of the passive voice in this is quite astounding -- in a number of critical spots, you can't tell who is supposed to be doing what.  That makes it quite impossible to understand the process.  The timing (or lack of time for any meaningful work or response by anyone but Staff and Board) is deeply troubling.
> 
> Is this just the Board's review of the comments? Is the community being written out of the process from this point forward? If so, just say so, so that we can react accordingly.  Answers that fail to address these issues, failures to respond, and answers that obscure the role of the parties in this process are harmful, not helpful.
> 
> I have been a defender of this process and this timeline in a variety of contexts, but I am losing faith. 
> 
> I would strongly suggest that a review of the comments and a decision on amendments by the Bylaws Coordination Group should be a step in this process. If that requires another week (or more), so be it.
> 
> The irony that the community may have no way to hold this process accountable to the community is overwhelming.
> 
> I'm extremely concerned with where we are in this process -- which was supposed to represent the community's voice in proposing revisions to the Bylaws.
> 
> Greg
> 
> 
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au>> wrote:
> Hello All,
> 
> Here is my current understanding of the process steps towards the Board meeting on 27 May to consider the new bylaws:
> 
> 25 May - Staff sends out a summary of all comments and any proposed changes [GSS: PROPOSED BY WHOM? WILL THIS INCLUDE EVERY CHANGE PROPOSED IN ALL THE COMMENTS, OR JUST COMMENTS CHOSEN BY SOME BODY? IF ONLY CHOSEN COMMENTS, WHO'S DOING THE CHOOSING? HOW WILL THIS WORK PLAN DEAL WITH COMMENTS THAT DID NOT PROPOSE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE TO IMPLEMENT CONCERNS/CHANGES FROM THOSE COMMENTS?] to the draft Bylaws to the community and ICANN Board, 48 hours before the Board's vote.
> 
> [WHAT IS THE COMMUNITY SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THIS SUMMARY IN 48 HOURS? WILL THE BYLAWS COORDINATION GROUP OR ANY OTHER SPECIFIC COMMUNITY GROUP HAVE A ROLE IN RESPONDING TO AND/OR APPROVING PROPOSED CHANGES?]
> 
>         Sidley and Adler law firms have already suggested proposed changes to the draft bylaws based on the CCWG on Accountability      public comments.   ICANN staff are now compiling a summary of all the public comments, and then that can be reviewed [BY WHOM?] with       respect to possible amendments [WHO WILL DECIDE WHICH COMMENTS GET TURNED INTO POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS? WHO WILL TURN COMMENTS INTO POSSIBLE AMENDMENTS?] to the draft bylaws.
> 
> 
> 26 May at  21:00 UTC - Board will hold an information call to review comments received since the Board's meeting in Amsterdam, and consider any suggested [SUGGESTED BY WHOM?] changes to the draft bylaws
> 
> 
> 27 May at 13:00 UTC  - Board will hold a formal meeting to vote on the Bylaws.
> 
> 
> If there are any outstanding issues identified [BY WHOM?] from the summary of comments and proposed changes to the draft bylaws provided on 25 May, then the Bylaws Coordination Group will be convened [BY WHOM?] to get guidance.
> 
> I will separately send this to the CCWG on Accountability mailing list.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bylaws-coord mailing list
> bylaws-coord at icann.org <mailto:bylaws-coord at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bylaws-coord <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bylaws-coord>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bylaws-coord mailing list
> bylaws-coord at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bylaws-coord

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/bylaws-coord/attachments/20160523/96145ccb/attachment-0001.html>