[council] Motion on Support for a PDP Work Team Face to Face Meeting

[<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear council colleagues,
 
in case we'll decide an exception to the council procedures with regards to the 
request from the PDP work team I suggest to discuss the following draft motion:
 
<<
Draft motion

Whereas the Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) is requesting that 
ICANN supports the organization of a face-to-face meeting with the aim to 
finalize discussions and agree on the overall recommendations and proposed 
changes to the ICANN by-laws in order to implement the new GNSO Policy 
Development Process;

 

Whereas on December 5, 2009 the request was sent to the Policy Process Steering 
Committee (PPSC) list  for comment;
 
Whereas the GNSO Council has reviewed the PDP-WT Request for a face-to-face 
meeting, and the arguments of various PPSC and PDP-WT members on the related 
mailing lists ( <http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-ppsc/> 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-ppsc/ and   
<http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-ppsc-pdp/> 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-ppsc-pdp/)
 
RESOLVED:
 
The GNSO Council supports the organization of a PDP-WT face-to-face meeting as 
outlined in the PDP-WT request;
The GNSO Council instructs ICANN staff to make the necessary arrangements for 
the face-to-face meeting as outlined in the PDP-WT request;
The GNSO Council requests the PDP-WT to provide the GNSO Council with an update 
following the face-to-face meeting, including an expected date for delivery of 
its report.

>>
 
Comments/amendments welcome


Wolf-Ulrich


 

  _____  

Von: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im 
Auftrag von Gomes, Chuck
Gesendet: Freitag, 11. Dezember 2009 15:02
An: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Neuman, Jeff; gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [council] FW: Support for a PDP Work Team Face to Face Meeting
Wichtigkeit: Hoch


Here is a request from Jeff Neuman, chair of the PDP WT and chair of the PPSC, 
for a face-to-face (F2F) WT meeting including ICANN travel funding support.  
Please ignore a previous version of Jeff's message distributed on the Council 
list because it was sent to the Council list prematurely.
 
Please note that a detailed request is provided in the attached file.  In 
preparation for our Council meeting on 17 December, please review Jeff's 
message below and the attached file for discussion and possible action by the 
Council in that meeting.  And please forward this message with the attachment 
to your respective groups immediately so that they can do the same and provide 
Councilors input before 17 December and thereby provide you any direction they 
have on this issue.
 
Note that this request was received after the required deadline in the Council 
Operation Procedures so we will have to decide whether to make an exception to 
the Procedures before taking any action.  The reason for considering this 
exception is because the request is for a F2F meeting in January and to delay a 
decision until our 7 January meeting would be too late to allow adequate time 
for travel plans and other arrangements.  Also note that there are no 
provisions in any of the documents that govern Council operation that provide 
procedures for Council action on issues like this; we quite possibly will need 
to consider that topic sometime in the future.  At present though, I believe it 
is important for the Council to be involved in this decision because already 
budgeted GNSO Improvement funds used for this request would not be available 
for funding of other such requests in the future or for other GNSO improvement 
implementation actions in this fiscal year.  Staff will provide more details on 
funds available.
 
Jeff Neuman has been invited to participate in the 17 December Council meeting 
so he can be available to answer questions.
 
In the meantime, I encourage discussion on the Council list.
 
Chuck

  _____  

From: Neuman, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 9:47 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; gnso-ppsc-pdp@xxxxxxxxx; gnso-ppsc@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Support for a PDP Work Team Face to Face Meeting



Chuck,

 

Please find enclosed a request by the PDP Work Team for a face to face meeting 
in January 2010 which sets forth the rationale for needing such a working 
session.  This draft  was discussed by the PDP Work Team on e-mail and during 
two conference calls.  Although there was not a consensus on the request for 
such a face to face meeting within the PDP WT, there was strong support from 
the RySG, the IP Constituency, the ISP Constituency, ALAC and one of the two 
Business Constituency representatives  for the reasons stated within the 
attached document.  The Registrar representatives and 1 of the business 
constituency representatives were not in favor of the request.  The NCSG 
generally believes that there could be a positive benefit from a face to face 
meeting with the caveats expressed below.  The PDP WT offers no opinion in this 
document on the general role of face to face meetings, the Council's role in 
approving or supporting those face to face meetings, etc., but rather focuses 
on our specific request.

 

The request was sent to the full Policy Process Steering Committee on December 
5, 2009, and although no comments were actually received from any person on the 
PPSC that was not already a member of the PDP WT, there were a number of 
e-mails on various mailing lists on this topic.  The discussions are primarily 
archived on two lists:  (i) the PPSC list ( 
<http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-ppsc/> 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-ppsc/) and (ii) the PDP-WT list (the PDP WT 
list -  <http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-ppsc-pdp/> 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-ppsc-pdp/).   It should be noted that the 
PPSC as a whole has been inactive since the formation of the Work Teams early 
this year.  In fact some members of the PPSC listed at  
<https://st.icann.org/icann-ppsc/index.cgi?policy_process_steering_committee_ppsc>
 
https://st.icann.org/icann-ppsc/index.cgi?policy_process_steering_committee_ppsc,
 may not be members of the Council or even active in the community.  That is a 
separate issue that I plan on addressing in the next few weeks.  

 

The NCSG arguments can be found in full at 
http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-ppsc-pdp/msg00241.html.  To summarize, the 
NCSG has argued that there is not a consensus of the group in support of (i) 
the rationale for the Face to Face meeting, (ii) the appropriateness of holding 
such a meeting in the United States, and (iii) the resolution of how many 
people from each SG or constituency should be funded by ICANN to attend.   The 
NCSG believes that there should be parity of representatives funded to attend 
face to face meetings by Stakeholder Group (as opposed to by Constituency).  
Finally, there was a question raised as to who makes the decisions on holding 
and funding these types of meetings (the Work Team, the Steering Committee, the 
GNSO Council, ICANN Policy Staff, etc.).

 

Whether or not we have a face to face meeting, each member of the PDP WT with 
the exception of one business constituency representative believes that the 
work of the PDP-WT is essential and should be of the highest priority of the 
GNSO Council and community.  The work being performed in the WT was work 
directed to be done ultimately by the Board Governance Committee as part of the 
GNSO Improvements Process.  The finalization of the Policy Development Process 
will guide how all future policy is made under the new structure and as such 
should be resolved as quickly as possible.  The review of the PDP is incredibly 
broad and complex.  There are a number of difficult issues that we have been, 
and continue to be, tackling in order to come up with a process acceptable to 
the global Internet community.  The core group of participants (including ICANN 
policy staff) are diverse, knowledgeable, passionate and highly respected 
members of the community and are fully committed to seeing this process through 
to the end regardless of having this face to face meeting.  I have the utmost 
respect for each member of the team.

 

Please let me know if you have any questions.  I would be happy to make myself 
available for the Council meeting to address any questions.

 

Thank you for your consideration of our request.

 

Jeffrey J. Neuman , PDP Work Team Chair
Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
46000 Center Oak Plaza 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  /  
<http://www.neustar.biz/> www.neustar.biz      

  _____  

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.