RE: Bylaw Amendments Related to Restructuring of the GNSO Council Version 2

["Chicoine, Caroline" <CChicoine@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

As someone that helped draft and negotiate the CSG charter, I share the
concerns raised by Philip Sheppard and Steve Metalitz in their comments
to the referenced proposed bylaw amendments.
 
In particular, the fact that the interim NCSG representative seating
solution is only reflected in the NCSG Charter and is not included in
the new by-laws is a recipe for disaster.  Given that the Board has
decided that it will fill these slots, it should be clearly stated in
the transition article of the by-laws.  Why ICANN would avoid clarity on
such a threshold issue is troublesome.
 
I also share the concern that any change in the manner that these slots
should be filled should be dependent upon a Board finding, after a 
transparent review, that the NCSG has pre-established objective criteria
for diversity and representativeness to ensure that it represents much
more than simply the existing NCUC. 
 
Finally, I share the concerns that as currently drafted, the bylaws
allow new constituencies to be proposed and approved that consist
significantly or predominantly of contracted parties, but mandate that
such new constituencies be placed in the non-contracted parties house.
As Mr. Metalitz points out, the fact that there is already pending at
least one application for a new constituency that meets this description
shows that this is not simply a hypothetical problem.  As the
elimination of the concept of weighted voting was critical to the
non-contracted parties house, the creation of language that creates an
immediate loophole is simply unacceptable.  At the very least, specific
safeguards must be put into place to prevent contracted parties from
taking over the non-contracted side of the new GNSO.
 
Respectfully submitted,
 
Caroline G. Chicoine
Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.
Former Names Council representative to the IPC, former IPC officer,
Chair of the IRT