[council] Fwd: Message from Tripti Sinha to Former CCWG-AP Members

[Anne ICANN]

Thanks Paul.  This is a point that I missed in my preliminary comments.
Would CSG Leadership let me know whether to send this comment in response
to Tripti's email and to the CCWG - Auction Proceeds list?   This should be
done very soon if there is a CSG consensus on the important question Paul
is raising.

Thank you!
Anne

Anne Aikman-Scalese
GNSO Councilor
NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024
anneicanngnso at gmail.com


On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 1:19 PM Paul McGrady via council <
council at gnso.icann.org> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I have reservations about this.  While a narrowly tailored amendment to
> the Bylaws would have resulted in a carve out of the Accountability
> Mechanisms related solely to the grant program which would not be easily
> replicated for other programs and issues, instructing Staff to do this *in
> a contract* sets a very worrying precedent and opens the door for other
> future instances where Staff could be instructed to use contracts and/or
> the renewals of contracts to carve out the accountability mechanisms,
> making them a de facto nullity and undoing the work of the Accountability
> CCWG.
>
>
>
> I think the Council should ask the Board to hold on this and engage in a
> community dialogue prior to taking further action.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 6:24 AM Wendy Profit <wendy.profit at icann.org>
> wrote:
>
> *Sending on behalf of ICANN Board Chair, Tripti Sinha…*
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Former CCWG-AP Members, (in bcc)
>
>
>
> In follow up to the update email from Xavier Calvez, I am writing to you
> as Chair of the ICANN Board to update you on the Board’s discussions at its
> workshop during ICANN77. During this workshop, the ICANN Board discussed
> with ICANN org how to best implement Recommendation #7 of the Final
> Report.
>
>
>
> As a reminder, part of Recommendation #7 stated that ICANN’s existing
> accountability mechanisms – the Independent Review Process (IRP) or the
> Reconsideration Process – could not be used to challenge decisions made by
> the Independent Applications Assessment Panel on individual applications
> within the Grant Program. To allow this would add unnecessary complexity to
> the program. Additionally, the total available funding for the program
> could also be depleted by the cost of such challenges. The CCWG-AP (and the
> Board as well, as indicated in our June 2022 action on the CCWG-AP’s Final
> Report) assumed that the best way to restrict the use of ICANN’s
> accountability mechanisms in this way would be to amend the ICANN Bylaws to
> create a “carve-out.” This would therefore require a Fundamental Bylaws
> Amendment.
>
>
>
> After exploring this issue more in-depth, I am happy to share with you
> that the Board and ICANN org identified a path that both upholds the
> CCWG-AP’s recommendation that individual application decisions should not
> be challenged through ICANN’s accountability mechanisms, while also keeping
> ICANN’s accountability mechanisms unchanged within the Bylaws. The Board is
> planning to take action on this later this month; however, I wanted to
> provide you with a preview. The Board will direct ICANN org to use the
> contractual terms and conditions required to apply for the Grant Program to
> obtain applicant agreement that they cannot use ICANN’s accountability
> mechanisms to challenge any individual decision taken on their application
> within the ICANN Grant Program. This remains in line with the CCWG-AP’s
> recommendation regarding the accountability mechanisms as well as the
> intention to lower complexity and protect the total amount of proceeds
> available for applicants.
>
>
>
> When the CCWG-AP made Recommendation #7, it also provided guidance that
> providing limited opportunity for review of decisions within the Grant
> Program might also introduce complexity, and encouraged ICANN to not make
> such opportunities available. However, when considering the inability for
> applicants to use ICANN’s accountability mechanisms for individual
> decisions, the ICANN Board will also ask ICANN org to explore whether there
> are appropriate interim opportunities within the evaluation process for
> applicants to ask for a limited procedural review. The Board hopes this
> will enhance ICANN’s accountability to applicants, while following best
> practices within grant making programs.
>
> We are happy to have identified a path forward that preserves the
> CCWG-AP’s recommendation and enhances accountability to applicants and the
> wider Internet community. The Bylaws are important to us, and we are
> confident that we can keep up ICANN’s accountability, as set up, while at
> the same time limiting the ability to challenge for individual selection
> decisions.
>
>
>
> The Board is following ICANN org’s implementation closely and looks
> forward to seeing this program launch next year. Thank you again for your
> time and efforts that went into envisioning this exciting program. The
> establishment of the ICANN Grant Program is a testament to your commitment
> to the work of the CCWG-AP and is an excellent representation of the
> multistakeholder model in action.
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
>
>
> Tripti Sinha
>
> Chair, ICANN Board of Directors
>
>
>
> This email originated from outside the firm. Please use caution.
> _______________________________________________
> council mailing list
> council at gnso.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). 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.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20230724/69c62b5d/attachment.html>