Here is the comment I made to David and Brian as well as the first draft of the statement that the ALAC will consider (possibly for adoption today). Alan --------------------- David, after a more careful review, I would suggest that you change the last sentence of the 2nd paragraph. The Council was given a heads up by Bruce that a discussion of the .com agreement was on the Board agenda (http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg13232.html), but not that there was an intent to approve it. Therefore I would suggest changing:
However, neither the GNSO Council nor its constituencies were aware of the Board's closed session and adoption of the draft .com renewal agreement.
to
However, although the GNSO Council and its constituencies were aware of the Board's intent to discuss the contract, we were not aware of its intent to approve the contract at its closed session.
You also have a small typo in the last sentence - ITS instead of IT. The initial draft that I am recommending to the ALAC is:
The At-Large Advisory Committee wishes to express its disappointment with the Board's decision to meet in a closed session on Saturday 23 June to adopt the draft .com renewal agreement: http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-23jun12-en.htm#2.
ICANN staff had placed this on the Thursday public forum agenda some time ago, and the .com renewal item remains on the public forum agenda tomorrow. Although we were aware that the .com agreement was on the Board's agenda, we were not aware of the intent to approve the agreement at its closed session.
This comment is not with regard to the merits of the Board's action. The ALAC finds the process followed by the Board to be objectionable at a time when ICANN is subject to increased scrutiny. It is therefore imperative that the Board hold itself to the highest standards of transparency and accountability that it is mandated to uphold.