RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION ITEMS: OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team 08 May Meeting

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Victoria,
 
Thanks for explaining.  I don't think we are really differening much if
at all.  All I was saying is that our work should specifically relate to
Board implementation recommendations for GNSO improvements related to
constituency (and SG) operations.  If they don't, I believe they are out
of scope for our tasks.  Aren't you saying the same thing below?
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: Victoria McEvedy [mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 4:42 AM
        To: Gomes, Chuck; sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx; Olga Cavalli; Michael
Young
        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION ITEMS: OSC-Constituency
Operations Work Team 08 May Meeting
        
        

        Chuck -my point was really just that we are tasked with making
recommendations on participation and operating procedures for all
constituencies. 

         

        This is a fair mandate and I find it very difficult to imagine
what could be excluded from the scope of our work. The Constituency
Charters deal with participation and operating procedures-and not much
else.   

         

        In so far as we need then to refer back to a BGC recommendation
-then that at the third para on p.45 should be sufficient " The GNSO
constituencies, along with the Council and staff, should develop
operating principles that will form the basis for consistent
participation rules and operating procedures for all constituencies....
" I refer to our discussion on this in our meeting of April 24th.

         

        As to the authority issues -we are in a working group model and
so operate by consensus. While members are all entitled to their own
opinions -as a group we need to agree on facts and a reference can be a
good starting point.    

         

        best, 

         

        Victoria McEvedy

        Principal 

        McEvedys

        Solicitors and Attorneys 

         

         

        96 Westbourne Park Road 

        London 

        W2 5PL

         

        T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122

        F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721

        M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169 

         

        www.mcevedy.eu  

        Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972

        This email and its attachments are confidential and intended for
the exclusive use of the addressee(s).  This email and its attachments
may also be legally privileged. If you have received this in error,
please let us know by reply immediately and destroy the email and its
attachments without reading, copying or forwarding the contents.

        This email does not create a solicitor-client relationship and
no retainer is created by this email communication. 

         

        From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: 11 May 2009 22:40
        To: Victoria McEvedy; sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx; Olga Cavalli;
Michael Young
        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION ITEMS: OSC-Constituency
Operations Work Team 08 May Meeting

         

        Thanks for clarifying Victoria.

         

        So you think we should comment on elements of charters that have
nothing to do with our charter, in other words nothing to do with the
Board recommendations we are supposed to focus on?  I must be
misunderstanding something here.

         

        BTW, do we each need to base our opinions on some authority?

         

        Chuck

                 

________________________________

                From: Victoria McEvedy [mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx] 
                Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 5:30 PM
                To: Gomes, Chuck; sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx; Olga Cavalli;
Michael Young
                Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
                Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION ITEMS:
OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team 08 May Meeting

                Just the last one!

                 

                 

                Victoria McEvedy

                Principal 

                McEvedys

                Solicitors and Attorneys 

                

                 

                96 Westbourne Park Road 

                London 

                W2 5PL

                 

                T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122

                F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721

                M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169 

                 

                www.mcevedy.eu  

                Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority #465972

                This email and its attachments are confidential and
intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s).  This email and its
attachments may also be legally privileged. If you have received this in
error, please let us know by reply immediately and destroy the email and
its attachments without reading, copying or forwarding the contents.

                This email does not create a solicitor-client
relationship and no retainer is created by this email communication. 

                 

                From: Gomes, Chuck [mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
                Sent: 11 May 2009 22:13
                To: Victoria McEvedy; sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx; Olga
Cavalli; Michael Young
                Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
                Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION ITEMS:
OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team 08 May Meeting

                 

                Wouldn't agree with what Victoria?  I made several
points.  Are you disagreeing with all of them?

                 

                Chuck

                         

________________________________

                        From: Victoria McEvedy
[mailto:victoria@xxxxxxxxxx] 
                        Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 3:36 PM
                        To: Gomes, Chuck; sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx; Olga
Cavalli; Michael Young
                        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
                        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION ITEMS:
OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team 08 May Meeting

                        I wouldn't agree with that myself Chuck-what's
your authority?  

                         

                         

                        Victoria McEvedy

                        Principal 

                        McEvedys

                        Solicitors and Attorneys 

                        

                         

                        96 Westbourne Park Road 

                        London 

                        W2 5PL

                         

                        T:    +44 (0) 207 243 6122

                        F:    +44 (0) 207 022 1721

                        M:   +44 (0) 7990 625 169 

                         

                        www.mcevedy.eu  

                        Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority
#465972

                        This email and its attachments are confidential
and intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s).  This email and
its attachments may also be legally privileged. If you have received
this in error, please let us know by reply immediately and destroy the
email and its attachments without reading, copying or forwarding the
contents.

                        This email does not create a solicitor-client
relationship and no retainer is created by this email communication. 

                         

                        From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
                        Sent: 11 May 2009 20:26
                        To: sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx; Olga Cavalli; Michael
Young
                        Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team; jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
                        Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION ITEMS:
OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team 08 May Meeting

                         

                        My compliments SS and some good work.  I think
you have identified some areas where we can develop some recommendations
that could be applied across all constituencies and SGs.  The key will
be to do that for those areas that relate clearly to a specific Board
recommendation, keeping in mind that it is not our task to analyze
charters but rather we are reviewing charters simply as a means of
developing implementation recommendations for Board GNSO improvement
recommendations.

                         

                        For example, a possible implementation
recommendation could be something like this: All constituencies and/or
stakeholder groups should have well defined procedures for any member to
raise issues and for developing issues into policy statements.  Whether
or not such procedures need to be in a charter or in some other place
can be debated.

                         

                        Regarding the management of a constituency, we
may need to be careful about weighing in on that topic unless it relates
directly to a Board recommendation.  I think we should be able to
clearly connect any recommendation we make to a specific Board
recommendation for improvement for constituencies (and SGs).

                         

                        Chuck

                                 

________________________________

                                From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of SS Kshatriy
                                Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 4:04 AM
                                To: Olga Cavalli; Michael Young
                                Cc: OSC-CSG Work Team;
jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
                                Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION
ITEMS: OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team 08 May Meeting

The Chair,

Subject:  Comments and inputs in relation with the documents drafted by
Staff 

Ref: Meeting Notes: 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?osc_constituency_operation_work
_team_meeting_notes 

 

Julie has produced a good analysis of Constituency Charters. It is good
to make a start. 
Is it possible to make detailed analysis touching as many criteria as
possible? 

  

As an example I am giving below my analysis on two criteria under
Subtask 1.2. 

a.         Bringing out a Motion on Policy Issues and 

b.         Elections. 

  

Regards, 

SS 

-- 

Subtask 1.2:   Analysis of Constituency Charters 

1. Commercial and Business Constituency have in their charter 
http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/recertification-bc-constituency-ja
n09.pdf : 

a. Procedure for developing written policy by bringing out a motion on
policy issue by appointed 'Rapporteurs'. There is passing reference that
any member can propose a position paper. But there is no procedure for
this. 

It needs to be elaborated and clear rules laid down.         

 

b. There are clear rules for Election of Officers for representation in
GNSO but it lacks proper management. Management of the Constituency is
governed by:                     section 4.2 'Officers and 4.3
Secretariat'. It is a surprising that election is done for GNSO Council
and such councilors become Officers of the Constituency to run and
manage the organization. It should have been otherwise. Assume a typical
situation when due to any reason, Constituency has no representation in
GNSO Council. It will then be left with no management. Ideal situation
should be that there is a well managed Organization that has
representation in GNSO Council and other bodies. 

Hence provision for regular management body, independent of GNSO
representation should exist. 

 

2. Registries (gTLD) have 'Articles of Operation' 
http://www.gtldregistries.org/about_us/articles , which has clear and
elaborate rules for: 

a. Bringing out a motion for decision making on an issue and 

b. Election of officers. 

 

3. Internet Service Provider & Connectivity Provider Constituency
(ISPCP) 
http://gnso.icann.org/en/improvements/recertification-ispcp-04feb09.pdf
have called their submission a Charter. 

 

a. Section 3.1 'Decision Making Processes in the ISPCP' needs
strengthening and elaborating. 

It should have provisions for Constituency Members to raise issues and
carry out motions. 

b. It has procedures for elections. 

c. There is no proper Charter. Above referred document is a submission
for Constituency Renewal. There is no link for any Charter Document in
the ISPCP's Website and as such, it is not a public document.
The Constituency should have proper Charter or Byelaws. 

 

4. Non-Commercial User's Constituency 
http://ncuc.syr.edu/current_charter.htm 

 

a. There is no provision for members to raise issues. Changes in Charter
alone can be brought about. This needs to be incorporated in the
charter. 

Section IX Communication needs to be strengthened for this purpose. 

b. Charter has well laid out procedure for elections. 

  

5. Registrars Constituency http://www.icannregistrars.org/RC_Bylaws  and
http://www.icannregistrars.org/Registrar_Constituency_Rules_of_Procedure


The Constituency has good rules for: 

a. Bringing out a motion for decision making on an issue and 

b. Election of officers. 

 

6. Intellectual Property Constituency 
http://www.ipconstituency.org/bylaws.htm 

The Constituency has good rules for: 

a. Bringing out a motion for decision making on an issue. However, there
is no provision at all for the members belonging to Category 1A and 1B
to participate in the affairs of the Constituency or for them to be
heard. 

There should be some provision for such members for participation. 

b. Good rules for election of officers. 

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- On Fri, 5/8/09, Julie Hedlund <jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

        From: Julie Hedlund <jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx>
        Subject: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION ITEMS: OSC-Constituency
Operations Work Team 08 May Meeting
        To: "OSC-CSG Work Team" <gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>
        Date: Friday, May 8, 2009, 11:00 AM

        Dear Work Team Members,

         

        Here are the action items from today's meeting.  These also are
posted on the wiki at: 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.
In addition, you may reference the meeting notes at: 
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?osc_constituency_operation_work
_team_meeting_notes and the MP3 at 
http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-ops-20090508.mp3.  The transcript will
be posted to the wiki as soon as it is available.  Note also that all
reference documents are linked to the wiki.    

         

        08 May Meeting Action Items:

         

        1. Letter to OSC: Michael will draft and circulate to the team
for review a letter to the OSC expressing concern about possible
conflicts with respect to the work of the team and the timing of the
Board approval of constituency and stakeholder group charters, as well
as concerns with the constituency renewal process. Due date: Friday, 15
May.

        2. Project Plans: Each subtask leader should develop a
preliminary project plan suggesting the timing for completing the
subtask. Due date: Two weeks - by the next meeting on Friday, 22 May.

        3. Identification of Best & Bad Practices: Subtask leaders and
their team members should identify best practices as well as bad
practices, as they relate to their subtasks, using as a starting point
the preliminary analysis of constituency/stakeholder charters, but also
information on constituency web pages and directly from constituencies.
Due date: Four weeks - by the meeting on Friday, 05 June.

         

        Comments and clarifications on the action items and meeting
notes are welcome.   Thank you.

         

        Best regards,

         

        Julie

         

        Julie Hedlund

        Policy Consultant