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

[SS Kshatriy <sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear  Chuck, I appreciate your comments. I also appreciate your clarifications 
in last conference call that first think for WT is to guided by Board 
recommendations/requirements. I fully agree with this and also that Charter 
analysis is just to be taken as a helpful material--something which somebody 
else has produced. And also that it is a very good reference material.
I had just done a small exercise and wanted to know more about Staff Support 
and also reaction of other members.
thanks,
SS
--

--- On Mon, 5/11/09, Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Gomes, Chuck <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-csg] ACTION ITEMS: OSC-Constituency Operations Work Team 
08 May Meeting
To: sskshatriy@xxxxxxxxx, "Olga Cavalli" <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Michael 
Young" <myoung@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "OSC-CSG Work Team" <gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx>, jahedlund@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 12:26 PM



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-jan09.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