RE: [council] ICANN 50: GNSO Council Meeting with the ICANN Board

[john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Jonathan,
 
The process of electing a member of the board by the non-contracted party's 
house and the expanding discussion about ICANN accountability led me to review 
the bylaws and to this: "Article VI, Section 7: Directors shall serve as 
individuals who have the duty to act in what they reasonably believe are the 
best interests of ICANN and not as representatives of the entity that selected 
them, their employers, or any other organizations or constituencies."  The bold 
face is mine.
 
I would like to talk to the Board about how, in light of their role there can 
be a better counterbalance for the view of the community.  Yes, each entity can 
express its view, but there is not place in ICANN's structure where the view of 
the community can roll up to serve as a counterbalance to management 
initiatives aimed at growth and expansion that are, by bylaw, supported by the 
board.  Even if you consider the GNSO Council, the ccNSO Council, the GAC, ALAS 
and all the other SOs and ACs as significant the portfolio of each is narrower 
than it is in combination.
 
There is some discussion at the constituency level and experience arising from 
the proliferation of cross community working groups, but without a permanent 
voice for the community as a whole, there is a likelihood that the community 
will continue to find itself trying to catch up.
 
That is what I would like to talk about.
 
Berard
 
--------- Original Message --------- Subject: RE: [council] ICANN 50: GNSO 
Council Meeting with the ICANN Board
From: "Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 6/12/14 10:32 am
To: "'Reed, Daniel A'" <dan-reed@xxxxxxxxx>, council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

  Thanks Dan.
  
   From: Reed, Daniel A [mailto:dan-reed@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: 12 June 2014 18:26
To: jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] ICANN 50: GNSO Council Meeting with the ICANN Board
 


 Transparency on decision processes is what I hear most often with respect to 
the ICANN board (relates to bypassing processes).
  
   From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 7:37 AM
To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [council] ICANN 50: GNSO Council Meeting with the ICANN Board
 

 
 All,
 
 Please can you provide input as to the topics your SG and/or Constituency 
would like to see the Council (bearing in mind the role and function of the 
Council) raise and discuss with the ICANN board in our meeting in London.
 
 A couple of ideas:
 
 -          An update on key themes of the work of the Council and associated 
policy work in the GNSO (Keeping this very short)
 o   GNSO / GAC CG
 o   PDP improvements
 o   Other?
 -          Effective and appropriate management of policy work in the ICANN 
structures. 
A point related to concerns over bypassing policy processes.  Has this 
improved, got worse or stayed the same?
 -          A N Other
 
 
 Jonathan