Sorry to miss Thursday deadline, it has been a very rough week with the flu for me and my entire family. Even if we can't vote on this on Thursday, I would like to add it to AOB so we are prepared for a vote in Mexico City. There is nothing new here, I have suggested this several times in the past several months. For Staff to suggest going around the Council, after Council voted down the amendment package, is deeply troubling. This would keep the debate where it belongs, and hopefully will bring about swift, consensus amendments to the RAA in the next few months. Do I have a second? Thanks, Mike Whereas, the RAA has not been amended since inception, and there is widespread community support for amendments to various provisions of the RAA. Whereas, the Registrars Constituency and ICANN Staff have agreed on a set of proposed amendments to the RAA, and that set of amendments has been considered for approval by the GNSO Council. Whereas, a majority of GNSO Council members have refused to support the set of proposed amendments as drafted, but many of those members support many of the proposed amendments. Whereas, the Council wishes to approve the non-contentious, proposed amendments agreed between Staff and the Registrars Constituency as quickly as possible so that the ICANN Board may review them, and if approved then implement them as quickly as possible. RESOLVED: The GNSO Council will form a fast-track Working Group to convene and discuss the proposed set of RAA Amendments, reporting back to Council within 30 days with answers to the following questions: 1. Which of the proposed amendments have full consensus as drafted? 2. Which of the proposed amendments would have full consensus if drafted differently, and what specific revisions are required to gain full consensus? 3. Which of the proposed amendments do not have consensus? 4. What other issues with the RAA are not addressed by the proposed set of Amendments?