<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>This addresses the concern. But I have a secondary question. <br>
</p>
<p>Is it necessary to say "The reason for this..."? Maybe start the
next sentence with "The Board decision in any review...". <br>
</p>
<p>Sam Lanfranco<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/20/2019 3:22 AM, Emily Barabas
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:44BC2655-4A30-441E-8A6D-744A4AE89B10@icann.org">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Alan, Erika, and everyone,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Would this proposed edit address the
concern you are raising?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">"The CCWG did agree that appropriate
measures must be taken that would exclude
<b>the use of</b> <s>applicants from using</s> ICANN
accountability measures such as IRP in relation to challenges
for individual applications. The reason for this
recommendation is that the Board decision in any review
context would be in relation to the overall program’s
disbursement of funds based on the recommendations of the
independent evaluation panel and not as a result of the
ICANN’s Board assessment of an individual application.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">(...)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">CCWG Recommendation #NEW: Applicants <b>and
other parties</b> should not have access to ICANN
accountability mechanisms such as IRP
<b>or other appeal mechanisms</b> to challenge a decision from
the independent evaluation panel to not approve their
application, but applicants not selected should receive
further details about where information can be found about the
next round of applications as well as any educational
materials that may be available to assist applicants.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Kind regards,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Emily<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Ccwg-auctionproceeds
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org"><ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org></a> on behalf
of Erika Mann <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:erika@erikamann.com"><erika@erikamann.com></a><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, 20 November 2019 at 07:14<br>
<b>To: </b>Alan Greenberg
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca"><alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca></a><br>
<b>Cc: </b><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org">"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"><ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org></a><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Auction
Proceeds Mechanism A - Internal Department at ICANN<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">You’re absolutely right. We already said we
would do this. <o:p>
</o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Erika <o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="AppleMailSignature">
<p class="MsoNormal">Sent from my iPhone<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
On Nov 19, 2019, at 8:50 PM, Alan Greenberg <<a
href="mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca"
moz-do-not-send="true">alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I agree that we should make a simple
statement that ICANN's accountability measures cannot be
used in relation to Auction Proceeds grant requests
(regardless of who might file them). This has nothing to
do with the approval of annual budgets. If the EC
decides that the tranch allocated in the budget is not
appropriate, it can still take action under its powers.
We are proposing nothing related to the powers of the EC
itself.<br>
<br>
I presume the Board will ultimately approve whatever it
approves contingent on the Fundamental Bylaw change
being approved by the EC. If the EC does not approve it,
we are back to square one (or somewhere, but do not have
an Auction Proceeds plan that is workable).<br>
<br>
If there are auction proceeds from further rounds, AND
the ICANN Board decides they go into te same post as we
have now, fine. If there are no auction proceeds or if
they are designated for something else. fine.<br>
<br>
Regarding Bylaws 25.4, note that the lead-in words are
"for avoidance of doubt". The earlier section of 25
explicitly call out the process which is led by the
Board. We have already approved a fundamental Bylaw
change and the process is understood (I speak as a
former member of the EC Administration).<br>
<br>
Alan<br>
<br>
At 19/11/2019 01:31 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote:<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Erika, Becky, et al,<br>
<br>
<b>Proposed Final Report and Consensus<br>
</b> <br>
I believe there was CCWG consensus regarding the need
for a Fundamental ByLaws change as to the
unavailability of Request for Reconsideration (RFR)
and Independent Review Panel (IRP) in relation to
<u>applicants</u> vis-Ã -vis the grant-making
process. Here, the CCWG makes a NEW recommendation on
page 23 of the Proposed Final report in relation to
remedies available to applicants for grants. This
recommendation does not cover the possibility of RFR
and IRP that might be filed by someone other than an
applicant and I believe that risk must be controlled
as well. (It’s possible persons other than
applicants could file an RFR or an IRP in relation to
ICANN’s handling of the grant-making process.) The
Proposed Final Report should likely also reflect that
this requires a Fundamental ByLaws change requiring
approval by 3/4 of the EC because public commenters
need to know this.<br>
<br>
In the limited tracking I have done prior to becoming
the voting rep for the CSG Chartering organization, I
don’t recall any specific discussions in relation to
a ByLaws amendment relative to the powers of the
Empowered Community established in the revisions to
the ByLaws made in 2016 as a result of the
Accountability Workstream 1 work. Did the CCWG
discuss these specific Empowered Community powers in
relation to the Budget relative to use of Auction
Proceeds? Should the CCWG clarify that we are not
recommending ByLaws changes in relation to EC powers?
And if we do, does that make individual grants subject
to EC powers (a result the CCWG does not want.)<br>
<br>
To be specific, it does not appear to me from the
Proposed Final Report that there has ever been a CCWG
Consensus Recommendation in relation to (a)
availability of RFR and IRP to persons other than
applicants for grants or (b) any effect on the EC
powers memorialized in 2016 in relation to the use of
Auction Proceeds funds. <br>
I sincerely hope we can clarify that the CCWG is not
recommending that the Empowered Community give up the
Accountability processes contained in the ByLaws in
relation to Budgeting of funds obtained via Auction
Proceeds. In my view as an active member of
Subsequent Procedures, this is a long term concern
since the Sub Pro WG is quite likely to confirm that
auctions will remain the mechanism of last resort in
string contention far into the future. While I
understand that “ability to Sunset†is important
in relation to the principle of not trying to
establish a long term principal endowment, it does
seem appropriate to consider that future new gTLD
rounds were always intended and are likely to proceed
at some point. Thus, future auctions are likely to
result in additional auction proceeds.<br>
<br>
Again, in order to be crystal clear on page 23 of the
Proposed Final Report, it would also be helpful if
Samantha could clarify how specific ByLaws amendments
can be proposed based on the CCWG recommendations.
The ByLaws seem to provide in Article 25 that this
cannot be “directly proposed†by the CCWG itself
so I assume that what the CCWG recommends would need
to then lead to a formulation by the Board of a
specific ByLaws amendment. See attached section
25.4.
<br>
<br>
Accordingly, in relation to the Proposed Final Report,
I believe that the Recommendation (NEW) on page 23
should be reworked to clarify the CCWG Recommendations
in relation to the needed ByLaws amendments.<br>
<b> <br>
Choice of Mechanism and Survey<br>
</b> <br>
Separately, in regard to the description of risk
management I will need to provide to the CSG, I am
trying to clarify whether it would be advisable (for
the Board, ICANN org, the Community, and the grant
recipients themselves) to structure as follows:<br>
<br>
(1) Fundamental ByLaws change to remove RFR and IRP
from (a) remedies for applicants for the funds (b)
remedies for anyone else who may have standing to file
against ICANN decisions about Budgeting re use of
funds inside the org and (b) ICANN decisions about how
much to allot to grant-making in “tranchesâ€.<br>
<br>
(2) Preserve EC Powers as they stand in the ByLaws in
relation to general Budgeting for both (a) the ICANN
org use of the Auction Proceeds funds and (b) ICANN
org budgeting of “tranches†for grant-making
purposes. EC powers as to the Budget process have a
much higher threshold for challenging ICANN’s
accountability than do RFR and IRP. A challenge is
not easily mounted and a forum must be convened, etc,
etc. But I don’t think anyone would want the EC
powers to apply to any individual grant. So it seems
we need to choose a structure that keeps the
“Budget†aspect of an overall line item for grants
within the EC Accountablity provisions but puts the
individual grant-making outside the EC Accountablity
powers. (Perhaps I am wrong that individual
grant-making could be subject to EC general powers if
Mechanism A is utilized and if so, please advise. I
just don’t think the CCWG actually has a Consensus
on recommending a ByLaws change in relation to the EC
accountability powers.)<br>
<br>
(3) To preserve the EC powers as to Budget, it would
seem “cleaner†to place the actual individual
grant-making processes outside ICANN org and have the
CCWG recommend and the EC acknowledge that specific
individual grants are not subject to the EC Budgeting
powers if <br>
(a) they are made by a pre-existing non-profit with
expertise in grant-making working under the guidelines
provided by the work of the CCWG and in accordance
with the Board’s oversight responsibilities and
fiduciary duties. (Mechanism B)<br>
(b) or they are made by an ICANN Foundation formed
with an independent Board of Directors similar to the
manner in which PTI was formed with ICANN as the sole
member of the corporation and thus well able to
conduct oversight and fiduciary responsibilities.
<br>
<br>
I appreciate any observations other CCWG members may
have that will help bring me up to speed.<br>
<br>
Thank you,<br>
Anne<br>
<br>
<a name="_GoBack" moz-do-not-send="true"><b>Anne E.
Aikman-Scalese</b></a><b><br>
</b>Of Counsel<br>
520.629.4428 office<br>
520.879.4725 fax<br>
<a href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">AAikman@lrrc.com</a><br>
_____________________________<br>
<img style="width:1.1979in;height:.4791in"
id="_x0000_i1033"
src="cid:7.1.0.9.2.20191119143355.008f7ce0@mcgill.ca.2"
alt="[]" moz-do-not-send="true" width="115"
height="46" border="0"><br>
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP<br>
One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000<br>
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611<br>
<a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lrrc.com_&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=mBQzlSaM6eYCHFBU-v48zs-QSrjHB0aWmHuE4X4drzI&m=XxnVUaLqSI0HlkmEw_HfoncDqXXav9sWTQy7VEOAlv0&s=v-nEZBakFYOUhwJ-NngTOox1WJmFvQneT2iGPQ3lRck&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">lrrc.com [lrrc.com]</a><br>
<img style="width:1.25in;height:.4062in"
id="_x0000_i1032"
src="cid:7.1.0.9.2.20191119143355.008f7ce0@mcgill.ca.3"
alt="[]" moz-do-not-send="true" width="120"
height="39" border="0"><br>
Because what matters<br>
to you, matters to us.™<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<b>From:</b> Erika Mann <<a
href="mailto:erika@erikamann.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">erika@erikamann.com</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, November 19, 2019 7:52 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Becky Burr <<a
href="mailto:becky.burr@board.icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">becky.burr@board.icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a
href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">AAikman@lrrc.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Auction
Proceeds Mechanism A - Internal Department at ICANN<br>
<br>
<b>[EXTERNAL]<o:p></o:p></b></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><b>
<hr width="100%" size="0" align="center">
</b></div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Becky - That’s what we agreed
upon but in the light of Anne’s points raised, we
should evaluate whether our judgement will not be
contestable.
<br>
Erika <br>
Sent from my iPhone<br>
<br>
On Nov 19, 2019, at 3:33 PM, Becky Burr <<a
href="mailto:becky.burr@board.icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"> becky.burr@board.icann.org</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Anne,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">I think
Sam is saying that Mechanisms A, B, and C would ALL
require a fundamental bylaws change to eliminate the
availability of IRP and Reconsideration with respect
to individual grant awards. I think we had strong
consensus that decisions on individual grants should
not be appealable using Reconsideration and IRP, and
that a bylaws change should be pursued. Inasmuch as
the EC agreed to a fundamental bylaws change in
Montreal, it seems all members have established the
necessary processes. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Please
correct me if I am wrong, Sam.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Becky<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">On Mon,
Nov 18, 2019 at 5:20 PM Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a
href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">AAikman@lrrc.com</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Thank
you Samantha. I want to make sure I understand the
implications for Accountability mechanisms and ByLaws
amendments when presenting the options to the CSG. As
an initial matter, could you please clarify one
question as to Article 25.4 OTHER AMENDMENTS.
“Neither the EC, the Decisional Participants, the
Supporting Organizations, the Advisory Committees nor
any other entity or person shall have the power to
directly propose amendments to these Bylawsâ€. In
this regard, I gather that the CCWG recommends and
then the Board itself will specifically propose a
Fundamental ByLaws amendment in relation to Auction
Proceeds. Is that your understanding?
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">It seems
a bit unlikely that the EC will want to give up its
powers in relation to the Budgeting process as regards
the use of Auction Proceeds for (a) use for
grant-making purposes (regardless of the mechanism
chosen) OR (b) internal use by ICANN Org in its own
budget. (Perhaps that is why there is a bullet point
in Board comment relative to the cost of complying
with Accountability mechanisms. However, this cost is
identified in that Board comment that now appears on
page 10 of the Proposed Final Draft as a cost
associated ONLY with Mechanism A. The other
mechanisms are listed in the Board input as requiring
the further development of independent Accountability
mechanisms so that is a bit confusing.) However,
overall Budgeting is of course different from the
making of individual grants per se. I think we
definitely need to protect individual grants from
being revoked by the EC.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Fundamental
ByLaws Changes<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">It
appears that eliminating Request for Reconsideration
(RFR) and Independent Review Panel (IRP)
Accountability mechanisms would be a Fundamental
ByLaws change requiring 3/4 approval from the
Empowered Community members (some of whom may not have
implemented EC processes yet?) Can you confirm this?
(Article 25).<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Mechanism
B<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">In
Mechanism B, ICANN works with an outside contractor
already set up for non-profit grant-making. In that
case, it would seem that although overall Budget
allocation and tranches may still be subject to
Empowered Community processes, individual grants made
by the pre-existing expert non-profit would not
necessarily be subject to being revoked through an EC
process. In other words, working with a qualified
expert grant-making organization could reduce risk,
including the risk to recipients of grants. (EC
processes could theoretically be used to affect or
influence the choice of the independent expert
non-profit organization and the amount being allocated
in any “trancheâ€.)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Mechanism
C<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Re
Mechanism C, when PTI was formed, the structure chosen
was ICANN as sole member of a California non-profit
public benefit corporation (Article 16.2). I believe
actions by the PTI Board of Directors remain subject
to Empowered Community accountability processes, but
not to RFR and IRP, but am not sure. Can you
confirm? If this is the case, could another
California non-profit public benefit corporation be
set up in the same manner for purposes of grant-making
pursuant to Mechanism C? (I am also wondering if
outside legal resources were used to set up PTI or if
this was done in-house.) In other words, could
another CA non-profit formed pursuant to Mechanism C
be exempted from RFR and IRP, but NOT be exempted from
other EC accountability mechanisms, in the same manner
as the PTI formation was handled?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Many
thanks for your patience with respect to questions
which may already have been addressed in prior
deliberations of the CCWG.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Anne<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">From:
Samantha Eisner <<a
href="mailto:Samantha.Eisner@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true"> Samantha.Eisner@icann.org</a>>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Sent:
Monday, November 18, 2019 1:13 PM<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">To:
Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a
href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">AAikman@lrrc.com</a>>;
<a href="mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Subject:
Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Auction Proceeds Mechanism
A - Internal Department at ICANN<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">[EXTERNAL]<o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr width="100%" size="0" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">One
other note - to your final question of "Has legal
advice been provided as to whether the formation of an
independent foundation might avoid the need to amend
the ICANN ByLaws with respect to IRP, RFR, and
Empowered Community provisions?​"
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">From
the legal perspective, we considered the interplay of
the Bylaws/accountability processes with the different
mechanisms and our conclusion is that, absent a Bylaws
change to exclude individual grant actions from the
IRP/Reconsideration processes, there still remains a
risk of the use of ICANN accountability processes
whether the grant disbursements are completed through
Mechanisms A, B or C. With that, the need to address
the scope of the accountability mechanisms through
Bylaws changes exists across all three mechanisms.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">____<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">Samantha
Eisner<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">Deputy
General Counsel, ICANN<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">12025
Waterfront Drive, Suite 300<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">Los
Angeles, California 90094<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">USA<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Direct
Dial: +1 310 578 8631<o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr width="100%" size="0" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">From:
Samantha Eisner<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Sent:
Monday, November 18, 2019 11:07 AM<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">To:
Aikman-Scalese, Anne; <a
href="mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">
ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Subject:
Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Auction Proceeds Mechanism
A - Internal Department at ICANN
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">Thanks
Anne. For clarity as we look internally at the
potential Bylaws changes that could be needed, when
you are considering the potential for a Bylaws change
to confirm that the EC's power "does not apply to such
grant-making​", are there particular reserved powers
that the EC holds to which you are referring? However
the mechanism is formed (funding a supporting
foundation through tranches or having an internal
disbursement mechanism), there might be a need to
consider the EC's ability to reject a budget/plan on
the basis of ICANN fulfilling the program based on the
CCWG's recommendations. Are there other powers that
you are also seeing as impacted?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">____<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">Samantha
Eisner<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">Deputy
General Counsel, ICANN<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">12025
Waterfront Drive, Suite 300<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">Los
Angeles, California 90094<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">USA<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Direct
Dial: +1 310 578 8631<o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr width="100%" size="0" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">From:
Ccwg-auctionproceeds <<a
href="mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">
ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org</a>> on
behalf of Aikman-Scalese, Anne <<a
href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">AAikman@lrrc.com</a>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Sent:
Friday, November 15, 2019 4:41 PM<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">To: <a
href="mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">
ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Subject:
[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Auction Proceeds Mechanism A -
Internal Department at ICANN
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><image001.gif><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">On the
topics of “Accountability†and “Best
Practicesâ€, has anyone looked at whether the
grant-making function placed inside an internal
department of ICANN would be subject to review under
the Empowered Community Accountablity rules? On page
10 of the current draft, there is a bullet point
called “On-going costs only in Mechanism A –
Management and support of ICANN’s accountabiliity<a
name="m_-2246356919555067946__GoBack"
moz-do-not-send="true"></a> mechanisms triggered by
the grant distribution activity (if any.)†<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">In terms
of risk assessment, I really can’t see the
grant-making process being subject to the Empowered
Community accountability procedures. On the other
hand, I don’t know that the EC will readily accept
amending the ByLaws for purposes of getting the
grant-making outside the EC process. This is
especially true in that all the Accountability work
was done in CCWGs in two lengthy work-streams. I
apologize if this was previously discussed by the CCWG
– doing my best to catch up.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">< <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">If we
think that the ByLaws would need to be amended not
only to remove the availability of the Request for
Reconsideration (RFR) and the Independent Review Panel
(IRP), but also to be amended to state that the power
given to the Empowered Community does not apply to
such grant-making, then we should say so in the
Proposed Final Report.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Has
legal advice been provided as to whether the formation
of an independent foundation might avoid the need to
amend the ICANN ByLaws with respect to IRP, RFR, and
Empowered Community provisions?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Thank
you,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Anne<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><image002.png><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Anne E.
Aikman-Scalese<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Of
Counsel<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">520.629.4428
office<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">520.879.4725
fax<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><a
href="mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">AAikman@lrrc.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">_____________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><image003.png><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Lewis
Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">One
South Church Avenue, Suite 2000<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Tucson,
Arizona 85701-1611<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lrrc.com_&d=DwMF-g&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=w1jlqVWntmqtI5dedIDLQ6uBxH_Jh-uBee_4imohzko&m=DB8yNqLg_VqhhcXk1GxpNXumrdQT6mErx0DIjhck6KM&s=SBsm27n-ReSszAO1_7uGCSHeddEWktj0EgGVJh1tdgc&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">lrrc.com [lrrc.com]</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><image004.jpg><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Because
what matters<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">to you,
matters to us.™<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr width="100%" size="0" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">This
message and any attachments are intended only for the
use of the individual or entity to which they are
addressed. If the reader of this message or an
attachment is not the intended recipient or the
employee or agent responsible for delivering the
message or attachment to the intended recipient you
are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message or any
attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to the sender. The information
transmitted in this message and any attachments may be
privileged, is intended only for the personal and
confidential use of the intended recipients, and is
covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal"
style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr width="100%" size="0" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">This
message and any attachments are intended only for the
use of the individual or entity to which they are
addressed. If the reader of this message or an
attachment is not the intended recipient or the
employee or agent responsible for delivering the
message or attachment to the intended recipient you
are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message or any
attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately by replying to the sender. The information
transmitted in this message and any attachments may be
privileged, is intended only for the personal and
confidential use of the intended recipients, and is
covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Ccwg-auctionproceeds
mailing list<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><a
href="mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">By
submitting your personal data, you consent to the
processing of your personal data for purposes of
subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the
ICANN Privacy Policy (<a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=mBQzlSaM6eYCHFBU-v48zs-QSrjHB0aWmHuE4X4drzI&m=XxnVUaLqSI0HlkmEw_HfoncDqXXav9sWTQy7VEOAlv0&s=aKjpbiMx1MFKlixXbWWp2BFYksr9QyH8p6x_ws8mCz4&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=mBQzlSaM6eYCHFBU-v48zs-QSrjHB0aWmHuE4X4drzI&m=XxnVUaLqSI0HlkmEw_HfoncDqXXav9sWTQy7VEOAlv0&s=ED9Nhd1ynmpsq3umbyk4MaFKV0Ub6QkGVeoB8TYlCCY&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]</a>).
You can visit the Mailman link above to change your
membership status or configuration, including
unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation),
and so on.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">Ccwg-auctionproceeds
mailing list<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><a
href="mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"
style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt">By
submitting your personal data, you consent to the
processing of your personal data for purposes of
subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the
ICANN Privacy Policy (<a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=mBQzlSaM6eYCHFBU-v48zs-QSrjHB0aWmHuE4X4drzI&m=XxnVUaLqSI0HlkmEw_HfoncDqXXav9sWTQy7VEOAlv0&s=aKjpbiMx1MFKlixXbWWp2BFYksr9QyH8p6x_ws8mCz4&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=mBQzlSaM6eYCHFBU-v48zs-QSrjHB0aWmHuE4X4drzI&m=XxnVUaLqSI0HlkmEw_HfoncDqXXav9sWTQy7VEOAlv0&s=ED9Nhd1ynmpsq3umbyk4MaFKV0Ub6QkGVeoB8TYlCCY&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]</a>).
You can visit the Mailman link above to change your
membership status or configuration, including
unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation),
and so on.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center">
<hr width="100%" size="0" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:gray"><br>
This message and any attachments are intended only
for the use of the individual or entity to which
they are addressed. If the reader of this message or
an attachment is not the intended recipient or the
employee or agent responsible for delivering the
message or attachment to the intended recipient you
are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message or any
attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify
us immediately by replying to the sender. The
information transmitted in this message and any
attachments may be privileged, is intended only for
the personal and confidential use of the intended
recipients, and is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.
<br>
</span><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org"
moz-do-not-send="true">Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a><br>
<a
href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the
processing of your personal data for purposes of
subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the
ICANN Privacy Policy (<a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_policy&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=mBQzlSaM6eYCHFBU-v48zs-QSrjHB0aWmHuE4X4drzI&m=XxnVUaLqSI0HlkmEw_HfoncDqXXav9sWTQy7VEOAlv0&s=aKjpbiMx1MFKlixXbWWp2BFYksr9QyH8p6x_ws8mCz4&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy [icann.org]</a>)
and the website Terms of Service (<a
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_privacy_tos&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=mBQzlSaM6eYCHFBU-v48zs-QSrjHB0aWmHuE4X4drzI&m=XxnVUaLqSI0HlkmEw_HfoncDqXXav9sWTQy7VEOAlv0&s=ED9Nhd1ynmpsq3umbyk4MaFKV0Ub6QkGVeoB8TYlCCY&e="
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos [icann.org]</a>).
You can visit the Mailman link above to change your
membership status or configuration, including
unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation),
and so on.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org">Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds</a>
_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy">https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy</a>) and the website Terms of Service (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos">https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos</a>). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
------------------------------------------------
"It is a disgrace to be rich and honored in an
unjust state" -Confucius
邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也
------------------------------------------------
Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus), Econ, York U., CANADA
email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sam@lanfranco.net">sam@lanfranco.net</a> Skype: slanfranco
blog: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://samlanfranco.blogspot.com">https://samlanfranco.blogspot.com</a>
Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852</pre>
</body>
</html>