[CCWG-ACCT] member organization and single membership structure

[Greg Shatan]

Seun,

Can you point where this understanding and learning comes from? I don't
think any of this is correct, unless you are referring to a "council" where
each SO/AC is a statutory member of the corporation. This is not the case
in the "single member model," where there is only one statutory member.

Greg

On Thursday, July 9, 2015, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:

> I understand the powers would be bestowed on the council individuals and
> not their source position;
>
> For instance one of the option is to populate the community council with
> leaders of SO/AC, which IMO would be the cheapest route in this model so
> they would be occupying a virtual seat and exercise those powers when
> required. It would also allow the various SO/AC internet accountability
> mechanisms apply to council including removal of members.
>
> However, I then learnt that the council cannot be formed by SO/AC leader
> positions but rather to the occupants of that position. This would mean
> having to rewrite the bylaw/document forming the council often since
> leaders of those positions are dynamic and could change at anytime. Will be
> good to know if that is no longer the case
>
> Regards
> Sent from Google nexus 4
> kindly excuse brevity and typos.
> On 7 Jul 2015 2:56 pm, "Roelof Meijer" <Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Roelof.Meijer at sidn.nl');>> wrote:
>
>>   Interesting, we’re back on the subject of a single member structure.
>> It was written off before
>>
>>  Cheers,
>>
>>  Roelof
>>
>>   From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org');>>
>> on behalf of Roelof Meijer <roelof.meijer at sidn.nl
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','roelof.meijer at sidn.nl');>>
>> Date: woensdag 22 april 2015 15:56
>> To: "avri at acm.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','avri at acm.org');>" <
>> avri at acm.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','avri at acm.org');>>, "
>> accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','accountability-cross-community at icann.org');>"
>> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','accountability-cross-community at icann.org');>
>> >
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] member organization and single membership
>> structure
>>
>>    Hi Avri,
>>
>>   The sole membership construction, is a possibility described in the
>> legal document in several places: the comments by the legal experts on the
>> PCCWG mechanism template (page 64) and the Community Council mechanism
>> template (page 69). I sent several emails about it to the WP1 list,
>> suggesting to look in the possibility as indeed it would not necessitate
>> every SO and AC to become a legal entity. And, as you do, suggesting: "make
>> the „Community Council” the sole member of ICANN (and thus a formal legal
>> entity), consisting of either the SO and AC chairs or SO/AC elected
>> representatives” (from an email of 14 April).
>>
>>  And I would think it would enable the SO’s and AC’s themselves to
>> continue appointing directors, as they do now. But that’s just guessing,
>> based on the fact that the SO’s and AC’s themselves would not change status
>>
>>  Best,
>>
>>  Roelof
>>
>>   From: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','avri at acm.org');>>
>> Organization: Technicalities
>> Reply-To: "avri at acm.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','avri at acm.org');>" <
>> avri at acm.org <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','avri at acm.org');>>
>> Date: woensdag 22 april 2015 15:09
>> To: "accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','accountability-cross-community at icann.org');>"
>> <accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','accountability-cross-community at icann.org');>
>> >
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] member organization and single membership
>> structure
>>
>>  Hi,
>>
>> On 22-Apr-15 08:26, Roelof Meijer wrote:
>>
>> 2)
>> What I find quite frustrating is that I have raised the point of the
>> possibility (or not) of a single membership structure – an option mentioned
>> by Sidley and Adler & Colving in their legal advice – several times by now
>> without getting any substantial reaction. I am not aware that any serious
>> effort to investigate this has led to a formal write-off.
>>
>>
>> In some way that might lessen the complexity of making most SOAC an
>> individual legal entity.
>>
>> How would it work?  Would we continue to appoint Directors just as we do
>> now?
>>
>> Or would there need to be some sort of Members Council that took actions,
>> working simliarly to the the executive board or community council idea?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>   [image: Avast logo] <http://www.avast.com/>
>>
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> www.avast.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org');>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org <javascript:;>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150709/6903b4a5/attachment.html>