Dear Councilors, Thanks for your participation in the post-SPS Brainstorming session, which focused on the current Board-Council interaction following the adoption by the GNSO Council of PDP recommendations. Maybe to reiterate our starting point for the meeting that this conversation is not intended to change the roles and responsibilities of the Council and Board as outlined in the Bylaws, nor is it about finding a way around the PDP rules: it is intended to identify possible gaps and associated remedies, with an emphasis on remedies that can be easily implemented and tested. I think we all appreciate the constructive conversation and suggestions that came out of this and as a result would like to propose that the staff support team capture the following proposals in the PDP Improvements Tracker so that these can be further considered for implementation: * Following adoption of a PDP Final Report by the GNSO Council, schedule a meeting with the ICANN Board to allow the GNSO Council, with the assistance of the PDP Chair(s), to present the Final Report and recommendations to the ICANN Board and allow for Q & A. Note, this is possibly something that could be trialed if/when the IGO Curative Rights EPDP recommendations are adopted? * Explore where additional touch points during the PDP between the Council and Board may be helpful. For example, at the time of the publication of an Initial Report, should this be a standard topic of conversation during a Board-Council bilateral meeting? * Make more use of informal conversations to discuss possible concerns or questions in relation to PDP recommendations, and particularly (but not only) after an ODP. The informal exchanges being held in the SSAD small team would seem to be a "model" worthwhile pursuing. Note, just because these are informal conversations, this does not mean that these are not public and/or documented. * Consider if/how the role of the Board liaison of a PDP can contribute to more effective communication. This could, for example, be done by communicating clearly at the outset of a PDP the expected role of the Board liaison. I'm hopeful Becky and Matthew would also take back to the ICANN Board some of the specific suggestions that came out of the conversation that would be for the Board to consider such as encouraging Board liaisons to be more proactive as well as considering how to introduce more transparency around the expected timing of next steps in the Board consideration of PDP recommendations. We may use some time at our next meeting with the ICANN Board, likely at ICANN75, to touch base and see the status of these possible improvements and what is the broader Board's sentiment on such an approach (?). If there is anything that has not been captured here, or any further ideas that you may have had after the meeting, please feel free to suggest these in response to this email. Thanks again for taking part. Best Regards, Philippe _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.