[soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Fwd: [council] Concerns over JAS Working Group and Violations of its Charter

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

> From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:12:51 -0400
> Subject: [council] Concerns over JAS Working Group and Violations of its
>  Charter
>
> All,
>
> I wanted to bring to the Council's attention a discussion on the JAS 
> Working Group list which is concerning to me because the 
> conversation by both the Working Group and ICANN staff, and the 
> planned action items, are in direct contravention to the approved 
> JAS Working Group Charter.  Bottom line is that the JAS Working 
> Group is not only providing direct input to the ICANN Board without 
> consultations with the GNSO (or even the ALAC), but the JAS Working 
> Group is also planning on delivering its final report in May 
> directly to the ICANN Board without "the input and consideration by 
> the respective supporting organizations (GNSO and ALAC)."  I believe 
> the Council must take immediate action in order to enforce the 
> Charter we have all approved.  To fail to do so would be an 
> abdication of our responsibilities and more importantly, would 
> constitute a complete failure of the bottom-up policy process.
> On January 13, 2011, the GNSO Council approved a "Joint SO/AC 
> Working Group on support for new gTLD applicants (JAS)" that 
> included the following provisions:
> "3. The Working group shall report its results and present a final 
> report directly to the GNSO Council and the ALAC for discussion and 
> adoption, as appropriate, according to their own rules and procedures.
> 4. All communication to the ICANN Board regarding the work of this 
> Working Group shall be through the respective SO/AC unless expressly 
> approved by the respective SO/AC."  See 
> <https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/Charter+as+approved+by+the+GNSO+Council>https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/Charter+as+approved+by+the+GNSO+Council. 
>
> Despite the clear words of the Charter to "report its results and 
> present a final report to the GNSO Council" and to ensure that "All 
> communication to the ICANN Board regarding the work of this Working 
> Group shall be through the respective SO/AC", the JAS working group 
> on its own initiative (and with some help from ICANN staff) is going 
> in the complete opposite direction.
> On the JAS mailing list on April 12th, in a post from Avri Doria to 
> the  JAS Group, in referring to criteria for a fee waiver program, 
> the following was stated:
>
> "We have a requirement to give the Board a draft on Friday, and the 
> work currently being done is not close to being ready on this 
> issue."  See 
> <http://forum.icann.org/lists/soac-newgtldapsup-wg/msg01378.html>http://forum.icann.org/lists/soac-newgtldapsup-wg/msg01378.html. 
> More discussion took place between the working group about this 
> report to be delivered not to the GNSO (or ALAC), but directly to 
> the ICANN Board.
>
>
> In a subsequent post from Karla Valente (ICANN staff) to the Working 
> Group entitled "call today and summary for the Board", the following 
> was stated:
>
>
> "Please know that I conveyed to Peter and Kurt that there will be a 
> summary for the Board by Friday AND that the work done by Friday 
> will not be the actual "Final Report", which is scheduled to be ready
> for end of May. I also added that this summary, due to time 
> constrains [sp.], will not have the input and consideration by the 
> respective supporting organizations (GNSO and 
> ALAC). 
> <http://forum.icann.org/lists/soac-newgtldapsup-wg/msg01381.html>http://forum.icann.org/lists/soac-newgtldapsup-wg/msg01381.html";
>
> I am requesting that this formally be added to our agenda for April 
> 28th and request that until that time no summary of work be provided 
> by the JAS working group to the Board without review by the 
> GNSO.  This again shows the failure of the cross working group model 
> and the lack of recognition that persons participating in working 
> groups are there in their own individual capacities and not on 
> behalf of their constituency, stakeholder group, advisory committee 
> or even the GNSO.
> Best regards,
>
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> 21575 Ridgetop Circle, Sterling, VA 20166
> Office: +1.571.434.5772  Mobile: +1.202.549.5079  Fax: 
> +1.703.738.7965 / 
> <mailto:jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx>jeff.neuman@xxxxxxxxxxx  / www.neustar.biz
> Please note new address starting March 21, 2011:  21575 Ridgetop 
> Circle, Sterling VA 20166
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only 
> for the use of the recipient(s) named above and may contain 
> confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the 
> intended recipient you have received this e-mail message in error 
> and any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this 
> message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
> communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the 
> original message.