In its formal response to the CCWG-Accountability proposal issued in
August 2015, the ALAC said that it could support the model being
proposed, but preferred something far less complex and
lighter-weight, and that we saw no need for the level of
enforceability that the proposal provided. Moreover, the ALAC had
specific concerns with the budget veto and the apparent lack of
participation of perhaps a majority of AC/SOs.

In light of the reconsideration of a designator model by the CCWG,
along with the recommendations of the Saturday morning break-out
sessions, the ALAC felt that a revised statement was in order.
Accordingly we decided, by a unanimous vote of the 14 ALAC members
present (with 1 not present), to withdraw support for the Membership model.

I want to make it clear that this is not a "red line" decision.
Should a Membership model become one that is generally advocated by
the CCWG, and supported by a supermajority of Board directors (who
ultimately MUST support any changes that they will be called upon to
approve, else they would be in violation of their fiduciary duty),
then the ALAC reserves its right to support such a model.

Alan Greenberg
Chair, At-Large Advisory Committee

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community