[CCWG-ACCT] Comments on the Supplemental

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Fri Feb 19 22:08:12 UTC 2016

My comments on the Supplemental Proposal

Core Proposal, top of page 21; Annex 2, page 13: 
My recollection was that the threshold reduction 
was to be allowed only in case (1) and that in 
case (2), four would still be required (requiring 
unanimity of the remaining four to remove the 
Board). I am moderately sure that although (2) 
was suggested by Becky, it was never agreed to by 
the Board or the CCWG as a whole.

Core proposal, page 30, item 3: Typo - For THE avoidance

Core proposal, page 30, item 3; Annex 5, page 10, 
item 3: This was supposed to also cover contract 
renewal where the clauses in question were 
unchanged from the previous contract. The current 
wording says until "the expiration date" implying renewals are not covered.

Core proposal, page 48: Perhaps nitpicking, but 
presumably the Bylaw should read "at least 60%" 
since precisely 60% is not what was envisioned.

Annex 04, paragraph 120: I note that the requests 
from the ALAC to soften the term "ensure" have 
not been acted upon. No rules can "ensure"- they 
can only be designed to meet the objective and 
cannot prevent circumstances that might alter the 
outcome.  The ALAC suggested the wording "SOs, 
ACs, and the Nominating Committee will develop 
processes designed to replace Interim Board members within 120 days."

Annex 09: There are several references to the RT 
selection being made by the Chairs of the 
"participating" SOs and ACs. Two issues: 1) I 
don't recall any discussion limiting the 
selectors to other than the full 7 AC/SOs. 
Presuming a limitation was formally decided upon, 
where is "participating" defined? Is it the 
"Decisional Participants" in the empowered 
community? If so, that defined term should be 
used. Or some other definition provided.

Annex 09, page 5: I have pointed out many times 
that based on prior review teams, the size of 21 
is inflated. There is *NO* justification for 
claiming it is "based on composition of prior 
Review Teams". Prior review teams averaged 11.8 
AC/SO members and never exceeded 13.


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list