Hello all, The notes, recordings and transcripts for CCWG Accountability WS2 Staff Accountability Subgroup Meeting #7 – 19 January 2017 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/xJ3DAw A copy of the action items and notes may be found below. Thank you. With kind regards, Brenda Brewer, Projects & Operations Assistant Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives (MSSI) Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Action Items · Participants to read A and B document by EOB Monday and provide comments for drafting team- JC to send reminder to list. · Staff to provide answer to sub-group on access to documents by 27 January 2017. · Klaus Stoll to draft answers to Staff Questions for consideration by group by 27 Janaury 2017. Notes (11 participants at start of call) 1. Intro: agenda review, attendance, SOI check Jordan Carter: Avri Doria will not be able to join the call today. 2. Detailed discussion-seeking feedback on working draft Document A v 1.3Document, open to comments and suggested edits, Jordan Carter: JC,AD and KS have cleaned up the document from the 5th of January - still needs a lot of tidying up to get it to first reading. Asking participants to post comments on the clean version of the Google doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wGRrJZ-i7WA0uYBIHaB5Q3ssqfRmbAcgHJwlQ6sc... Klaus Stoll: Would ask everyone to read the document and comment so we can go into a final editing. Jordan Carter: (presentation of the structure document). Klaus Stoll: The first three sections are a rehash of existing document - as such asking a reader to go through 6 pages of introduction - so maybe we could bring our recommendations more at the beginning could be better. Jordan Carter: If a good idea we should be clear about what is standard and what is editorial from us. Anything on the Role Descriptions? (none). Anything on relationships? Pam Little: 1.3.1 Root or just the DNS? Jordan Carter: we should use standard language. Jeff Neuman: Community does not implement policy - is this correct and we should note the gNSO work on this. Jordan Carter: please share that link. So the language is not quite right yet. Back to Relationships section 2. Jeff Neuman: I will try to find a good reference Jordan Carter: Section 3 - any comments. Pam Little: second para - ending - "some important differences" could be removed as we are talking about similarities here. Jordan Carter: Section 4 - this needs quite a bit to tightening up. this gets close to the scope of this group and should be looked at in this light. Section 5 - Recommendations - I disagree with the financial indepence recommendation (registries and registrars should not fund ICANN). Pam Little: @Jeff - ICANN provided a detailed response to our questions. Jeff Neuman: I agree with removal of that bullet point Alan Greenberg: how would this funding recommendation work? Klaus Stoll: This financial relationship sometimes leads to conflicts and so we should look at better way to fund us to avoid this. Jeff Neuman: @Klaus - But you are assuming there is a problem Jeff Neuman: where is the evidence of that? Alan Greenberg: Agree there is an issue but would not resolve it this way. This resolution makes no sense as is. Klaus Stoll: If we do the second part we would be out of the scope of this sub-group. Jordan Carter: There is something there that could put pressure on staff to dealing with those participants who fund the company. Alan Greenberg: No problem with identifying the issue but the recommendation does not make sense. Jeff Neuman: We need to identify sources of information for sections 1 and 2 - otherwise causes confusion for the reader. Jordan Carter: the original longer version of this did have that and we have to bring some of that back. Phil Corwin: Agree that the financial recommendation does not make sense. Second the funds to come from registrants up though registrars and registrants. The funds are used to get a variety of participants in ICANN. We need a document that will identify remedies for issues with staff. Jordan Carter: That is for document A. Klaus Stoll: It would be good to make these comments in the documents would be very helpful. Jordan Carter: reminder to participants to please read and comment the document. 3. Initial discussion / seeking feedback on First Draft Document B - Avri is rapporteur on this Jordan Carter: Waiting for access to documents. Bernard Turcotte: Staff should have a response on thiss by the end of next week. Jordan Carter: We will not go into detail on this document here while we wait for access to the ICANN documents which would inform our work in drafting this further. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UnkJuukv0px-CfIDgLrjdDZa2CpBvSahPvAXdYYT... 4. Volunteers for response to Staff Questions Avri has prepared a document for answers to the questions that staff asked the group Jordan Carter: Who would like to volunteer to draft some further answers? Klaus Stoll: The answer to these questions are mostly in sections 4 and 5 of our document. I could spend some time to attempt a draft answer for us to consider. Jordan Carter: Great thanks. Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): we need to send / resend the links to docs again to our Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO): list with reminder to contribute 5. Schedule check Jordan Carter: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ftd-Ps_qF46pf_iXf5foGjdUfCq64-St_43inFet... --- this is our Next Steps Jordan Carter: We are running a little late vs this schedule. We may not have docs A and B to the plenary prior to Copenhagen but should have one ready for Copenhagen. 6. AOB 1. Jordan Carter: AOB (none) – Adjourned Action Items: · Participants to read A and B document by EOB Monday and provide comments for drafting team- JC to send reminder to list. · Staff to provide answer to sub-group on access to documents by 27 January 2017. · Klaus Stoll to draft answers to Staff Questions for consideration by group by 27 Janaury 2017.