I'm thinking about what the Avenue regarding Community looks like. This is to spur discussion and thinking.

From the tree diagram, the limb this seems focused on is "Approval of Key Decisions", with the three subcategories mentioned are changes of bylaws, acting outside bylaws, budgets & strategic plan. It seems to me that the limb "Remove board members" fits here too.

Should other limbs be within this work? (We may discuss this in the meeting, which is about to resume)

The *purpose* of this Avenue/area of work seems to be something like this - first draft, just to get people thinking:

"Accountability improvements through increasing the community's ability to be the ultimate authority within ICANN." 

The *focus* would be on ICANN as a whole and its general operations. 

In particular, none of this work should (in my opinion) be able to be used within the general ICANN policy development or approval processes - they're already well provided for, and the Review and Redress Avenue should improve that situation. 

The sorts of *powers* that have been mentioned are to do things like (these are just examples):

* approve the Strategic Plan, Business/Operating Plan and Budget (or refer it back to the ICANN Board for further work)

* approve proposed changes to the bylaws (or refer them back to the ICANN Board for further work)

* establish that a particular action was outside the Bylaws and refer it back to the ICANN Board for reconsideration

* establish community opposition to a Board or Staff decision and recommit it to the ICANN Board for reconsideration

* invalidate a decision of the ICANN Board

* remove a member of the ICANN Board or the entire ICANN Board

It seems reasonable that this area should be focused on creating and defining powers that don't currently exist, or clearly flagging where it is discussing a power that does exist and why it needs to be considered here.  

In terms of mechanisms, some have been mentioned: creating membership or delegateship under California law; creating within the bylaws a CWG or similar with these "uber" powers. There are no doubt other options but this is where legal advise will be helpful. 

Look forward to your thoughts

Jordan

--