RE: [council] Concerns over JAS Working Group and Violations of its Charter

[<john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I must agree with Jeff.

Berard

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [council] Concerns over JAS Working Group and Violations of
> its Charter
> From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, April 12, 2011 6:12 pm
> To: "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> All,
>  
> I wanted to bring to the Council&#8217;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 &#8220;the input and consideration by the 
> respective supporting organizations (GNSO and ALAC).&#8221;  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 &#8220;Joint SO/AC Working 
> Group on support for new gTLD applicants (JAS)&#8221; that included the 
> following provisions:
> &#8220;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.&#8221;  See 
> https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/Charter+as+approved+by+the+GNSO+Council. ;
>  
>  
> Despite the clear words of the Charter to &#8220;report its results and 
> present a final report to the GNSO Council&#8221; and to ensure that 
> &#8220;All communication to the ICANN Board regarding the work of this 
> Working Group shall be through the respective SO/AC&#8221;, 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:
>  
> &#8220;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.&#8221;  
> See  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 &#8220;call today and summary for the Board&#8221;, the following 
> was stated: &#8220;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&#8221; 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 / 
> 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.
>  
> 
>