[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] WG: [council] SCI update and motion

[<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Marika,

following a related E-Mail exchange on the council list no opposition has been 
raised against proceeding with option 1.

Please arrange for the necessary administration of a 21 public comment period 
for both documents.



Thanks and best regards
Wolf-Ulrich



________________________________
Von: Stéphane Van Gelder [mailto:stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2012 18:26
An: William Drake
Cc: Knoben, Wolf-Ulrich; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: Re: [council] SCI update and motion

Thanks Bill for responding.

Wolf, if you do not see any opposition to this by COB tomorrow, Friday July 6, 
please proceed with option 1.

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France
----------------
Registry Relations and Strategy Director
Group NBT

Le 5 juil. 2012 à 07:25, William Drake a écrit :

Not me

BD

On Jul 4, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:

Thanks Wolf. Please thank the SCI for this work.

I would suggest we adopt the first procedure, with the SCI putting out for 
public comment and only coming to the Council once this has been done and it 
has incorporated any comments received in the way it sees fit.

Does anyone oppose this?

Stéphane Van Gelder
Directeur Général / General manager
INDOM Group NBT France
----------------
Registry Relations and Strategy Director
Group NBT

Le 4 juil. 2012 à 15:46, <KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>> a 
écrit :

Dear Councilors,

As discussed during the SCI update to the GNSO Council in Prague, the SCI has 
now approved the proposed procedure for a consent agenda as well as an updated 
version of the voting matrix which incorporates the new voting thresholds 
resulting from the recently approved revised GNSO PDP. Both these documents are 
intended to modify the GNSO Operating Procedures. The SCI hereby submits these 
documents for your consideration, approval and sending out for public comment 
period of 21 days. A respective motion is attached if needed.

As also discussed during the Prague meeting, the SCI would like to obtain 
clarification from the GNSO Council on how to handle public input on these 
proposed changes in future. ICANN Staff has indicated that according to the 
ICANN Bylaws at a minimum a public comment period of 21 days should be 
conducted on any changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. From the SCI's 
perspective, there are two possible options the GNSO Council may want to 
consider:

 1.  The SCI puts out the proposed changes out for public comment, following 
which the SCI reviews the public comments received and updates the proposed 
changes, if deemed appropriate. The updated proposed changes, in addition to 
the report of public comments received are then submitted to the GNSO Council 
for consideration.
 2.  The SCI submits the proposed changes to the GNSO Council, following which 
the GNSO Council opens a public comment forum on the proposed changes. Once the 
public comment forum closes, the GNSO Council decides how to address any 
comments received, which may include referring the comments back to the SCI for 
consideration and possible updates to the proposed changes.


>From the SCI's perspective, its members are happy to follow either procedure 
>(or alternative the GNSO Council may want to propose), so that it is clear 
>what the required steps are for any future proposed changes to the GNSO 
>Operating Procedures the SCI may propose.
With best regards,


Wolf-Ulrich Knoben


<GNSO Council Voting_Consensus.doc><Consent Agenda - Consensus.doc><Motion on 
the opening of a public comment forum - 4 July 2012.doc>