Summary & Analysis of Comments Regarding New GNSO Council Work Prioritization Process
Summary and analysis of public comments for: New GNSO Council Work Prioritization Process Recommendations Comment period: Opened 23 April 2010 and Closed 16 May 2010 Summary published: 20 May 2010 Prepared by: Robert Hoggarth, Senior Policy Director I. BACKGROUND At its 21 April 2010 meeting, the GNSO Council approved the use of a set of recommended new operating procedures designed to enable GNSO Councilors to begin categorizing and prioritizing their major work projects so that the Council can fulfill its new role as a strategic manager and coordinator of policy development activities within the GNSO. At its 29 October 2009 meeting in Seoul, the Council organized a Drafting Team (the GNSO Work Process Model Drafting Team - "WPM-DT") to develop a methodology for prioritizing the GNSO's project work. On 9 April 2010, the WPM-DT delivered a recommended model and methodology including a set of procedures to help the Council prioritize its work. At its 21 April meeting the Council accepted the deliverable of the WPM-DT and approved the use of a new Operating Procedures Chapter 6 and ANNEX <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf> [PDF, 137 KB] to conduct its first Work Prioritization effort - scheduled for June 2010 in Brussels, Belgium. In addition to directing the opening of this Comment Forum, the Council approved a timetable for conducting its initial work prioritization effort. The full GNSO Council Resolution approving the use of the recommended new procedures (linked below) contains a timeline for that initial effort. The Council said it reserves the right to modify the procedures described in Chapter 6 and the ANNEX after the conclusion of both the public comment period and the first prioritization effort. Document Links: * Proposed Chapter 6 and ANNEX to GNSO Operating Procedures <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf> [PDF, 137 KB] * Transmittal Letter to GNSO Council from the WPM-DT Chair <http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/cavalli-to-gnso-council-09apr10-en.pdf> [PDF, 13 KB] * WPM-DT Presentation to GNSO Council (21 April 2010) <http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/presentation-wpm-21apr10-en.pdf> [PDF, 559 KB] * GNSO Council Resolution Inviting Public Comment (21 April 2010) <https://st.icann.org/gnso-council/index.cgi?21_april_motions> * WPM-DT Presentation: GNSO Council Status Update (Nairobi) <http://nbo.icann.org/meetings/nairobi2010/presentation-wpm-team-update-10mar10-en.pdf> [PDF, 1.90 MB] * Presentation by D. Michel: GNSO Participation Study (Seoul) <http://sel.icann.org/meetings/seoul2009/presentation-gnso-wrap-up-29oct09-en.pdf> [PDF, 524 KB] II. GENERAL COMMENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS At the conclusion of the public comment period (16 May 2010), a total of 3 community submissions were posted to the forum. Two comments were unrelated to the topic at hand; the third was contributed by the At Large Advisory Committee (hereinafter ALAC). III. SUMMARY & ANALYSIS Disclaimer: This section is intended to broadly and comprehensively summarize the comments of the various contributors to this forum but not to address every specific argument or position stated by any or all contributors. The Staff recommends that readers interested in specific aspects of any of the summarized comments or the full statements of others refer directly to the originally posted contributions. In summary, the ALAC's statement "strongly supports the efforts of the GNSO to prioritize its work, and ultimately to develop processes which will allow the GNSO and ICANN to better manage its limited volunteer and staff resources." The ALAC noted only that the GNSO's Work Prioritization procedures, as documented in the proposed Chapter 6 and ANNEX <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/wpmg-section-6-and-annex-09apr10-en.pdf> , are "not completely clear in regard to whether the ALAC Liaison to the GNSO is a full participant in the prioritization process." ALAC provided its understanding that Liaisons should be entitled to participate fully and that position has been confirmed by the Chair of the Work Prioritization Model Drafting Team (WPM-DT) and the Chair of the GNSO Council. ALAC recommends that the aforementioned procedures be modified to "make it clear that Liaisons are full participants in the prioritization process." IV. NEXT STEPS The GNSO Council is likely to consider the relevant community input provided and move forward regarding the proposed GNSO Work Prioritization according to the timeline approved in its Resolution of 21 April 2010 (linked above).