[bylaws-coord] Next steps for Bylaws drafting

Mon May 23 20:17:06 UTC 2016

Dear Colleagues,

Thank you Bruce, Theresa and John for these clarifications.

The cochairs and rapporteurs for the CCWG discussed the bylaws finalization 
process on our coordination call today, following up on our previous 
discussions and questions to this group.

First, we believe the provision of a redline version of the Bylaws is 
critical for good decision making. This redline should be provided 
sufficiently in advance of any meeting to discuss the changes.

Then, we suggest that there is a straightforward way to give this bylaws 
coordination group a role in finalizing the bylaws.  This would be to change 
the Board informational call scheduled for 21 UTC on Thursday 26 May into a 
meeting of this Bylaws Coordination group along with all the members of the 
ICANN Board.

Then this group and Board together can talk through and agree how to deal 
with proposed amendments in an informal but open and community-driven way.

We welcome your thoughts on this suggestion. We cannot think of another way 
to guarantee appropriate community input while preserving the tight 
timeframes.

Mathieu, Thomas, Leon

CCWG-Accountability co-chairs

De : bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org [mailto:bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org] 
De la part de Theresa Swinehart
Envoyé : lundi 23 mai 2016 18:53
À : John Jeffrey; Greg Shatan; bylaws-coord at icann.org
Objet : Re: [bylaws-coord] Next steps for Bylaws drafting

All,

I echo what John has laid out on the seriousness with which all the public 
comments will be considered, where we are in the process, and approach to 
this next important next phase of finalizing the draft bylaws everyone’s 
been working so hard on.

As we work together in this next phase, and strive to achieve the “timeline” 
identified already in Marrakech when we all met, a few additional items:

As posted on 21 April, the purpose of the public comments (see: 
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/draft-new-bylaws-2016-04-21-en):

Purpose: This Public Comment period seeks community input on the Draft New 
ICANN Bylaws developed to reflect the recommendations contained in the 
proposals by the IANA Stewardship Transition Coordination Group (ICG) and 
Cross Community Working Group on Enhancing ICANN Accountability 
(CCWG-Accountability) as provided to the ICANN Board on 10 March 2016 and 
transmitted to NTIA. (See Resolutions 
<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-03-10-en#2.b> 
2016.03.10.12-15 and 
<https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-03-10-en#2.c> 
2016.03.10.16-19)

All the public comments can be found at: 
https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-draft-new-bylaws-21apr16/

As a reminder, please find below the overview of the next steps:

21 May – public comment period closed

21-26 May – Preparation of public comment analysis/reaction

25 May - Staff sends out a summary of all comments and any proposed changes 
to the draft Bylaws to the community and ICANN Board

26 May – Possible Bylaws Coordination Group call if needed (TBC)

26 May at 21:00 UTC - Board will hold an information call to review comments 
received and consider any suggested changes to the draft bylaws

27 May at 13:00 UTC  - Board will hold a formal meeting to vote on the 
Bylaws.

Should we proceed in scheduling a bylaws coordination call?

Look forward to working together in this next phase,

Kind regards,

Theresa

From: <bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of John Jeffrey 
<john.jeffrey at icann.org>
Date: Monday, May 23, 2016 6:30 PM
To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>
Cc: "bylaws-coord at icann.org" <bylaws-coord at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [bylaws-coord] Next steps for Bylaws drafting

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

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> 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 COMMUNITYGROUP 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
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/20160523/5fb463d8/attachment-0001.html>