Re: [council] FYI - Draft letter to BFC and CCWG-ACCT Chairs, requesting webinar on Cost Control Mechansisms

[Paul McGrady <policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I like it. Thanks James. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 7, 2016, at 10:27 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hi Phil and Paul. Thanks for these thoughts, and to Paul for catching the 
> omission of this topic. 
> 
> I agree that we should raise this, but the goal of this letter is to secure 
> the webinar. We should, however, flag the subject as an X factor that we will 
> be watching for in the webinar, and the work of WS2. 
> 
> How about we split the baby, by adding something along the lines of:
> 
> "Of particular interest to many in the GNSO community is the unresolved 
> question of the scope of Work Stream 2, as it applies to the governing 
> jurisdiction of I can. Please come prepared to discuss this issue at the 
> webinar, as our ultimate approval of this proposal and budget allocation may 
> be dependent upon a resolution to this question."
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> J.
> ____________
> James Bladel
> GoDaddy
> 
> On Jul 7, 2016, at 08:40, Phil Corwin <psc@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> +1 to Paul, and let me add this --
>>  
>> On Sunday afternoon in Helsinki I presented my view that ICANN’s California 
>> non-profit incorporation should be made a Fundamental Bylaw, to sync with 
>> the facts that the revised Bylaws require both the PTI and EC to be so 
>> incorporated and for that to be Fundamental Bylaws, and that the entire 
>> accountability plan has been designed to fit within and function optimally 
>> within the context of California law. Based upon some of the comments that 
>> elicited, it seems clear that other members of the community have a very 
>> different perspective and want to address the question of changing 
>> jurisdictions.
>>  
>> I don’t think we should be asking the BFC and CCWG-ACCT Chairs whether the 
>> question of moving ICANN’s jurisdiction may arise in WS 2, as it is the 
>> community’s decision and not theirs. I think we should be telling them that 
>> it is quite likely to arise in WS 2 and that the budget should include the 
>> need for expert legal advice on that question if it arises.
>>  
>> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal
>> Virtualaw LLC
>> 1155 F Street, NW
>> Suite 1050
>> Washington, DC 20004
>> 202-559-8597/Direct
>> 202-559-8750/Fax
>> 202-255-6172/Cell
>>  
>> Twitter: @VlawDC
>>  
>> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey
>>  
>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
>> Behalf Of Paul McGrady
>> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2016 9:24 AM
>> To: 'James M. Bladel'; 'GNSO Council List'
>> Subject: RE: [council] FYI - Draft letter to BFC and CCWG-ACCT Chairs, 
>> requesting webinar on Cost Control Mechansisms
>>  
>> Hi James,
>>  
>> I thought we agreed to ask them in our correspondence whether or not the 
>> question of the location of ICANN’s corporate formation was an open question 
>> in WS2 so that we know how to analyze their budget (which seems very low if 
>> we have to undo WS1  and rebuild it in another jurisdiction – and evaluate 
>> all the possible jurisdictions for the “best” one).  Can we please include 
>> that in our letter and ask them for a crisp “yes” or “no”?
>>  
>> Best,
>> Paul
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
>> Behalf Of James M. Bladel
>> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2016 8:11 AM
>> To: GNSO Council List
>> Subject: [council] FYI - Draft letter to BFC and CCWG-ACCT Chairs, 
>> requesting webinar on Cost Control Mechansisms
>>  
>> Council Colleagues -
>> 
>> Following from our discussions in Helsinki, please see below for a draft 
>> letter (email) that will be sent to the BFC and the CCWG-ACCT Co Chairs.  
>> 
>> Please let me know if you have any questions or edits.
>> 
>> Thank you -
>> 
>> J.
>> 
>> ----------------------------------
>> 
>> Dear Members of the Board Finance Committee, Dear CCWG-Accountability Chairs,
>> 
>> On behalf of the GNSO Council, I would like to request a webinar to brief 
>> the GNSO Council and the broader GNSO Community on the Proposed Cost Control 
>> Mechanisms, as well as the request for validation of the CCWG-Accountability 
>> Budget.
>> 
>> We appreciate the information provided by email and presented by Xavier 
>> during the GNSO meetings in Helsinki, but the GNSO Council would appreciate 
>> a clear overview of what, specifically, is being requested from the GNSO as 
>> a chartering organization, along the the expected timeframe for approval. As 
>> the next GNSO Council meeting is scheduled for 21 July, this webinar would 
>> ideally take place well before that meeting in order to provide GNSO 
>> Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies sufficient opportunity to review this 
>> information, and provide instructions to their representatives at the 
>> Council meeting. 
>> 
>> Otherwise, because there is no Council in meeting scheduled for August, this 
>> topic will be taken up by the GNSO Council during its next meeting in 
>> September.
>> 
>> If needed, the GNSO Secretariat is available to assist with the planning and 
>> scheduling of the webinar.
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> 
>>  
>> James Bladel
>> 
>> GNSO Chair
>> 
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4613/12558 - Release Date: 07/04/16