[council] End of the Shadow Council
Avri Doria
avri at acm.org
Sat Oct 24 22:36:06 UTC 2009
Hi,
Seems a good topic for this morning's closed meeting.
I am not read to take a unilateral action on this but would like to
hear from the other council members - new and old.
a.
On 25 Oct 2009, at 05:42, Mike Rodenbaugh wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> I write again regarding the so-called “Observers” at face-to-face
> GNSO Council meetings.
>
> Of course, I fully support that our face-to-face meetings are
> generally always open to true observers, both those present and
> located remotely. And I fully support that all of our meetings are
> generally fully recorded and transcribed. Indeed I think they
> should be translated, and that our conference calls be opened in
> real time to the public, with non-speaking access. I fully support
> that our email list is open and archived. All of this allows the
> public to see how the Council operates in practically real-time, and
> to experience the information and debate first-hand. Council must
> have flexibility to close its sessions and/or communicate privately,
> when it deems necessary for any stated and agreed reason. But I
> believe that has never happened to date, and of course the default
> must be open meetings and open communications.
>
> However, the growing trend is for GNSO “Observers” to participate in
> the Council’s weekend face-to-face meetings on equal footing with
> Councilors, Liasons and Staff. A small and growing group of
> privileged observers, none of whom are elected or appointed to
> represent anyone but themselves and/or their specific organizations,
> are increasingly taking an inordinate amount of Council and Staff
> time. In effect, they are a “Shadow Council” that follows the
> Council from meeting to meeting, taking advantage of a privilege
> they ought not have. This must stop, effective immediately.
>
> It is not scalable as the community of interested observers grows
> and diversifies. It is not fair in any way:
>
> n Not fair to Councilors and Liasons who offer great personal
> sacrifice to travel long distances away from their lives,
> volunteering an overly full weekend in advance of a lengthy five-day
> meeting.
>
> n Not fair to the constituents who elected or appointed the
> Councilors and Liasons, expecting that they (and only they) would
> serve as those constituents’ representatives on Council.
>
> n Not fair to the general public whose only opportunities for input
> to Council are via the Constituencies, Working Groups or public
> comment periods. Particularly not fair to the general public that
> does not speak English, or who cannot attend the sessions, as they
> have no equal ability to participate vis a vis the “Shadow Council”.
>
> n Not fair to the Staff nor the Council as a whole, whose only
> opportunity to communicate face-to-face is during these meetings.
>
> The GNSO Council is a representative body. The representative
> Councilors and designated Liaisons must be allowed to do their jobs,
> which absolutely requires face-to-face interaction with Staff and
> with each other -- without constant ‘clarifying questions’, ‘points
> of order’, comments or questions from the public. To my
> knowledge, no other SO, nor the GAC nor the Board – nor any other
> council, committee or board anywhere in the world -- ever allow such
> privilege to observers. Such points should be raised through
> Council representatives, or during any or all of the many
> opportunities for public comment into the Council processes. Indeed
> this is the reason-for-being of the Constituencies themselves, of
> Working Groups, of public comment periods in general, and of the
> public comment periods allowed at the Council’s face-to-face
> meetings (which can also be used in our weekend sessions, if time
> allows).
>
> Therefore, beginning with the newTLD session today, I request that
> observers be disallowed equal access to the Council table and
> microphones, just as they are disallowed such access at our larger
> public meetings and in our conference calls. The material presented
> by Staff in the session today will doubtless be repeated during a
> public session later in the week, which is a perfect opportunity for
> anyone to ask their questions or make their points directly to the
> Staff, without wasting tremendously valuable and scarce face-to-face
> Council/Staff time. As we have seen, too many people are abusing
> the privilege of open access to raise points that they then raise
> again and again at every opportunity throughout the ICANN meeting,
> and/or to communicate their particular, non-representative
> interests. They are abusing a privilege that they should not have
> in the first place, because it is not fair.
>
> Does anyone have an argument as to why the current privilege should
> be allowed to continue? Is anyone aware of any other council, board
> or committee, anywhere in the world, that allows such a privilege to
> observers?
>
> Otherwise, I hope the privilege will be discontinued immediately,
> and request Avri to confirm via reply to this list. If not, my next
> effort to stop this will be an Ombudsman complaint, on behalf of the
> entire community, so that this practice is investigated by a neutral
> party and discussed formally at the Council and/or Board level(s).
> I also request that the relevant OSC team discuss this and recommend
> appropriate provisions in our Council Rules of Procedure to ensure
> that nobody is given undue and disruptive access to Council,
> Liaisons and Staff during our meetings.
>
> Each and every member of the community – other than the “Shadow
> Councilors” and their specific organizations -- suffer from the
> continuation of this unwarranted and unseemly privilege that offered
> to just a few, at the expense of the many.
>
> Sincerely,
> Mike
>
> Mike Rodenbaugh
> RODENBAUGH LAW
> 548 Market Street
> San Francisco, CA 94104
> (415) 738-8087
> http://rodenbaugh.com
>
More information about the council
mailing list