[bylaws-coord] Next steps for Bylaws drafting

Mon May 23 18:13:27 UTC 2016

Dear All,
Pls advise the nature and participants of the information call as pointed
out by Theresa
"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"
Is it an open call in which CCWG PARTICIPANTS COULD ATTEND /PARTICIPATE
*Regards*
*Kavouss *

2016-05-23 19:46 GMT+02:00 Rosemary E. Fei <rfei at adlercolvin.com>:

> Yes, thanks, John and Theresa.  The more detailed timeline is helpful.  As
> Holly said, we have not been authorized to look at the comments, so we do
> not have much of a sense of their volume, scope, or depth, beyond what
> we’ve gathered from traffic on the emails lists.  We look forward to
> receiving more information on them soon.
>
>
>
> Rosemary
>
>
>
> *From:* bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
> bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Holly Gregory
> *Sent:* Monday, May 23, 2016 10:32 AM
> *To:* John Jeffrey
> *Cc:* bylaws-coord at icann.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: [bylaws-coord] Next steps for Bylaws drafting
>
>
>
> Thanks John for the clarification. Look forward to your list of items.
> FYI, We were directed not to review the comments but to rely on staff.
>
>
>
> Sent with Good (www.good.com)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* John Jeffrey
> *Sent:* Monday, May 23, 2016 12:16:37 PM
> *To:* Gregory, Holly
> *Cc:* Theresa Swinehart; Greg Shatan; bylaws-coord at icann.org
> *Subject:* Re: [bylaws-coord] Next steps for Bylaws drafting
>
> Thanks Holly,
>
>
>
> Good to get all our communications out on the table to ensure we are all
> working together.
>
>
>
> I assume that your teams are also assessing the comments. My understanding
> is that you were aware, we would be sharing with you all that we have right
> away, sorry if this was not communicated clearly in your dialogue with Sam
> on Saturday.
>
>
>
> Sam is intending to send you very shortly, a list of items where it is
> clear that we will need to work with Sidley/Adler to consider whether/how
> to make revisions to the Bylaws — let’s take our coordination off this
> list, to ensure we are all on the same page.
>
>
>
> 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 9:58 AM, Gregory, Holly <holly.gregory at sidley.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> We note that the summary of comments and the next draft appear to come out
> on the same day:
> “25 May - Staff sends out a summary of all comments and any proposed
> changes to the draft Bylaws to the community and ICANN Board.”
>
> We do not understand when Sidley and Adler will have the opportunity to
> review the comments and consider what we would recommend be amended in
> response (if anything) from a legal perspective, and interact with ICANN
> Legal on such points.
>
>
>
> *HOLLY* *GREGORY*
> Partner
>
> *Sidley Austin LLP*
> +1 212 839 5853
> holly.gregory at sidley.com
>
>
>
> *From:* bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org [
> mailto:bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org <bylaws-coord-bounces at icann.org>] *On
> Behalf Of *Theresa Swinehart
> *Sent:* Monday, May 23, 2016 12:53 PM
> *To:* John Jeffrey; Greg Shatan; bylaws-coord at icann.org
> *Subject:* 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
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_public-2Dcomments_draft-2Dnew-2Dbylaws-2D2016-2D04-2D21-2Den&d=CwMFaQ&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=1-1w8mU_eFprE2Nn9QnYf01XIV88MOwkXwHYEbF2Y_8&m=eltQnzx3lOC97tnYtJuOGXeSIB71ZMOYmo6y80jsxE8&s=zlhckgoydmT7buQ7L_Y6oCbdxGUuWeVbilD5jVm8GRE&e=>
> ):
>
>
>
> *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 ICANNAccountability
> (CCWG-Accountability) as provided to the ICANN Board on 10 March 2016 and
> transmitted to NTIA. (See Resolutions 2016.03.10.12-15
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources_board-2Dmaterial_resolutions-2D2016-2D03-2D10-2Den-232.b&d=CwMFaQ&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=1-1w8mU_eFprE2Nn9QnYf01XIV88MOwkXwHYEbF2Y_8&m=eltQnzx3lOC97tnYtJuOGXeSIB71ZMOYmo6y80jsxE8&s=ekgjMUZ9z_PHhYag0lFjhI0Tg1jNvqmGwfk_O8IWSx4&e=>
>  and 2016.03.10.16-19
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_resources_board-2Dmaterial_resolutions-2D2016-2D03-2D10-2Den-232.c&d=CwMFaQ&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=1-1w8mU_eFprE2Nn9QnYf01XIV88MOwkXwHYEbF2Y_8&m=eltQnzx3lOC97tnYtJuOGXeSIB71ZMOYmo6y80jsxE8&s=OGOAimQeZbThEDXLoHJ2x5aDHdAokDJGbGS6_Cq5_04&e=>
> )
>
>
>
> All the public comments can be found at:
> https://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-draft-new-bylaws-21apr16/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__forum.icann.org_lists_comments-2Ddraft-2Dnew-2Dbylaws-2D21apr16_&d=CwMFaQ&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=1-1w8mU_eFprE2Nn9QnYf01XIV88MOwkXwHYEbF2Y_8&m=eltQnzx3lOC97tnYtJuOGXeSIB71ZMOYmo6y80jsxE8&s=rppDpMfC847lHiw-QDGI3ve8JBn7vJ_z0tfqQyfvG0s&e=>
>
>
>
> 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 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
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bylaws-coord
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_bylaws-2Dcoord&d=CwMFaQ&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=1-1w8mU_eFprE2Nn9QnYf01XIV88MOwkXwHYEbF2Y_8&m=eltQnzx3lOC97tnYtJuOGXeSIB71ZMOYmo6y80jsxE8&s=UYszNEJcQXD1gIIT9-H3QvrnSOEnhqoRZRnLptDzDoM&e=>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bylaws-coord mailing list
> bylaws-coord at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bylaws-coord
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_listinfo_bylaws-2Dcoord&d=CwMFaQ&c=Od00qP2XTg0tXf_H69-T2w&r=1-1w8mU_eFprE2Nn9QnYf01XIV88MOwkXwHYEbF2Y_8&m=eltQnzx3lOC97tnYtJuOGXeSIB71ZMOYmo6y80jsxE8&s=UYszNEJcQXD1gIIT9-H3QvrnSOEnhqoRZRnLptDzDoM&e=>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
> This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is
> privileged or confidential.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any
> attachments and notify us
> immediately.
>
>
> ****************************************************************************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160523/387ee49f/attachment-0001.html>