Hello All, The Board will support the community in making reasonable adjustments to the escalation timeframes to support the community's ability to take quick action to exercise its powers, while still having the time it needs to socialize the issues appropriately. Where the community believes that some of the tight timeframes might require adjustment by a matter of days, or have flexibility to simplify some of the steps when broad community support is clear, these are all areas that the Board can support adjusting. As the CCWG works to finalize a revised proposal on this, the Board notes that it would not support an extension of the initial petition phase beyond 30 days, and urges the timelines to be drafted with efficiency and quick action in mind. On thresholds, the Board supports the CCWG modification at Paragraph 62. On Board removal, the Board does not support the change at Paragraph 64. Demonstration of full community support for the exercise of this ultimate power is essential, and the Board does not support a change to lower this threshold. The other areas where this reduced threshold is proposed (blocking budget, fundamental Bylaws changes) do not raise this same concern. A proposed redline of Paragraph 64 to address this concern is: "The CCWG-Accountability also recommends that in a situation where use of the community powers of either blocking a budget or approving changes to Fundamental Bylaws, where only four Decisional SOs or ACs participate, and the threshold is set at four in support these two powers will still be validly exercised if three are in support and no more than one objects. The CCWG-Accountability came to this decision after considering the extended escalation process now proposed prior to the use of Community Powers, and to avoid the risk of powers being un-useable (especially the risk of making changes to ICANN's Fundamental Bylaws effectively impossible)." Regards, Bruce Tonkin ICANN Board Liaison to the CCWG