RE: [bc-gnso] CSG charter and knock-on effects to BC charter

["Deutsch, Sarah B" <sarah.b.deutsch@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just to weigh in here, we have a deadline to work on our CSG Charter revisions. 
 It looks like we've tweaked the timing of the BC meeting in October to discuss 
the CSG Charter first thing in the morning with the CSG reps and any others who 
wish to attend.  This timing will make sure that those of you who don't want to 
be tortured by this discussion don't have to attend so early.  Of course, 
anyone who is interested is more than welcome to join.  Again, just to 
reiterate our discussion of this topic in Brussels, the CSG Charter should be a 
noncontroversial exercise.  It will be high level document leaving much of the 
actual policy decisionmaking to each Constituency.

Mikey is correct that the BC Charter was only supposed to be an interim 
document.  The same new GNSO Structural Improvements/Operating Procedures, 
which our Councilors voted in favor of now require us to update the BC Charter. 
 Mikey lists below an excellent summary of many of the issues that need to be 
addressed.  In addition, some of the other areas these procedures now require 
us to address include adding provisions about term limits, transparency, 
financial accountability and record keeping, voting remedies, etc.

This is not to say we need to scrap the current Charter we all worked so hard 
to create.  It will primarily be an exercise of updating and adding.  

Philip asks whether the BC has better things to do and whether some of the 
elected officers have "sufficient experience" to work on the BC Charter update. 
 I've only been the CSG rep for a short time, but I think we realize that we 
are all volunteers here. I personally have nearly 25 years working as an 
attorney on many legal issues that are much more complicated than a Charter 
update.  My recommendation is that since we are required to update our Charter 
anyway, it seems to make sense to take a shot at it now.  We can talk to other 
constituencies, ask questions of ICANN staff and make sure that this is an 
open, collaborative and cordial process.  Or we could wait and hope that next 
year's officers have "sufficient experience."   

Sarah



Sarah B. Deutsch 
Vice President & Associate General Counsel 
Verizon Communications 
Phone: 703-351-3044 
Fax: 703-351-3670 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-bc-gnso@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Mike O'Connor
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 8:39 AM
To: bc - GNSO list
Subject: Re: [bc-gnso] CSG charter and knock-on effects to BC charter


hi all,

i've read through our current charter just to remind myself of the major issues 
we were working on when we drafted it.  my sense when we passed it on up the 
chain was that it was an interim document that was going to get revised once we 
had a better feel for the CSG charter (one "layer" above us in the GNSO) and 
after we'd had some experience with its day-to-day implementation (the kinds of 
things that i bet Chris has on his list).

so i'll join the chorus that is saying that this review of our charter is a 
Good Thing, and that this is about the right time to do it.

here are some of the big issues that i recall (hastily constructed after a 
quick reading, i'm probably missing a few);

-- membership -- whether/how consultants and new-gTLD-applicants fit in our 
membership focus.  

-- disclosure -- whether consultants/lawyers/etc. needed to disclose their 
clients and the interests of those clients (we've got a new framework from the 
GNSO to incorporate into this one)

-- Credentials Committee -- processes for members to appeal if their 
application is denied, and processes for disciplining members  

-- GNSO Council representatives -- the "each constituency elects 2" structure 
was an interim thing awaiting decisions further up the food-chain

-- Executive Committee -- this charter created the Executive Committee and 
their roles out of thin air, so there well may be a number of tweaks that need 
to be applied based on experience

-- Finance and Policy Committees -- again, created from whole cloth.  
experience may be a good teacher here as well.

-- Policy-development process -- thresholds for adopting policy positions, 
process, etc.

-- role and supervision of the Secretariat -- this was substantially changed, 
again experience may be a good teacher

-- standards of behavior -- a very tough issue that may be informed by 
subsequent work of various players

-- the level of accountability, authority and responsibility that apply to (and 
between) Council reps, Excom members and the constituency -- this one clearly 
needs work and clarification

as i say, this is just the highlights through a foggy memory -- but i think 
it's a reasonable starting point for an "issues list" for discussion.  i'm not 
sure we need to revisit all of these, but i'm perfectly fine with the decision 
by our leadership to take a look at the charter now that we've had some 
experience with it.

mikey

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     http://www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)