August 2019 - Gnso-bylaws-dt

DT Action: Final Review 2.2/2.3 & Initial Review of 3.1/3.2/3.3
by Ariel Liang Sept. 4, 2019

Sept. 4, 2019

Dear Drafting Team, Following yesterday’s call, staff have worked with Heather to update the google doc for 2.2/2.3 (Rejection Action). Now all comments/edits have been resolved, except for the newly proposed text in Section 5.2, which is still in the redline form. Please be so kind to review the updated version and provide your final input/feedback. In addition, please also begin reviewing the google docs for 3.1/3.2/3.3 (Board Director Removal / Board Recall). As mentioned during the call, these three documents follow the same/similar logic, structure, wording, timeline, and motion templates of 2.2/2.3, as they all deal with petitions. However, there are some substantive differences between these three documents, including but not limited to: * 3.1/3.2 (Board Director Removal) requires a meeting among the affected parties during the Petition Period, but 3.3 (Board Recall) doesn’t require such meeting; * New voting thresholds have been created for 3.1/3.2/3.3 (as reflected in the ICANN Bylaws Section 11.3(j)), and 3.2 has two separate voting thresholds (one for the petition acceptance, one for the director removal); * 3.1 (NomCom Director Removal) requires support from at least one other Decisional Participant to proceed to the Community Forum, 3.2 (SO/AC Director Removal) does not require support from other Decisional Participants, and 3.3 (Board Recall) requires support from at least two other Decisional Participant; * 3.2 has a 7-day Comment Period following the Community Forum, while 3.1/3.3 don’t have such Comment Period. The above list of differences is not exhaustive, and staff highlight them to help direct your focus when reviewing these documents due to their similarity. Staff also put comments on the Google Docs to highlight specific areas that we seek DT’s input. Please use the links below to access the documents: * 2.2/2.3 (Rejection Action): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g-FNo2qm0Ohc6osJJ20sud1O5yDg9xv1v5Ux0n9… * 3.1 (Nominating Committee Director Removal): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYeAMR5J7a4zN2zTE4LA_hp7sLynsKIqUnQgMWc…<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYeAMR5J7a4zN2zTE4LA_hp7sLynsKIqUnQgMWc…> * 3.2 (SO/AC Director Removal): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T5AUnP-egEPqs9CDoWOzNUmc0dPFROTOlLWPq10… * 3.3 (Board Recall): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fSv0ELSGLmaABoz2_DKXHRsHrG-MyihPR1ePpbm…<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fSv0ELSGLmaABoz2_DKXHRsHrG-MyihPR1ePpbm…> Thank you for your time and review! We look forward to further discussion during the next DT call. Best Regards, Ariel Ariel Xinyue Liang GNSO Policy Support Specialist Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +1 310 804 2761 Skype: ariel.liang.icann www.icann.org

4 4

REMINDER - DT Action: Final Review 2.2/2.3 & Initial Review of 3.1/3.2/3.3
by Ariel Liang Aug. 29, 2019

Aug. 29, 2019

Dear Drafting Team, This is a gentle reminder to provide your input feedback for the final review of Google Docs of 2.2/2.3, as well as the initial review of 3.1/3.2/3.3. Kindly review the documents in advance of next week’s meeting on 4 September. Thank you, Julie & Ariel From: Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 12:22 PM To: "gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org" <gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org> Subject: DT Action: Final Review 2.2/2.3 & Initial Review of 3.1/3.2/3.3 Dear Drafting Team, Following yesterday’s call, staff have worked with Heather to update the google doc for 2.2/2.3 (Rejection Action). Now all comments/edits have been resolved, except for the newly proposed text in Section 5.2, which is still in the redline form. Please be so kind to review the updated version and provide your final input/feedback. In addition, please also begin reviewing the google docs for 3.1/3.2/3.3 (Board Director Removal / Board Recall). As mentioned during the call, these three documents follow the same/similar logic, structure, wording, timeline, and motion templates of 2.2/2.3, as they all deal with petitions. However, there are some substantive differences between these three documents, including but not limited to: * 3.1/3.2 (Board Director Removal) requires a meeting among the affected parties during the Petition Period, but 3.3 (Board Recall) doesn’t require such meeting; * New voting thresholds have been created for 3.1/3.2/3.3 (as reflected in the ICANN Bylaws Section 11.3(j)), and 3.2 has two separate voting thresholds (one for the petition acceptance, one for the director removal); * 3.1 (NomCom Director Removal) requires support from at least one other Decisional Participant to proceed to the Community Forum, 3.2 (SO/AC Director Removal) does not require support from other Decisional Participants, and 3.3 (Board Recall) requires support from at least two other Decisional Participant; * 3.2 has a 7-day Comment Period following the Community Forum, while 3.1/3.3 don’t have such Comment Period. The above list of differences is not exhaustive, and staff highlight them to help direct your focus when reviewing these documents due to their similarity. Staff also put comments on the Google Docs to highlight specific areas that we seek DT’s input. Please use the links below to access the documents: * 2.2/2.3 (Rejection Action): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g-FNo2qm0Ohc6osJJ20sud1O5yDg9xv1v5Ux0n9… * 3.1 (Nominating Committee Director Removal): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYeAMR5J7a4zN2zTE4LA_hp7sLynsKIqUnQgMWc…<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYeAMR5J7a4zN2zTE4LA_hp7sLynsKIqUnQgMWc…> * 3.2 (SO/AC Director Removal): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T5AUnP-egEPqs9CDoWOzNUmc0dPFROTOlLWPq10… * 3.3 (Board Recall): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fSv0ELSGLmaABoz2_DKXHRsHrG-MyihPR1ePpbm…<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fSv0ELSGLmaABoz2_DKXHRsHrG-MyihPR1ePpbm…> Thank you for your time and review! We look forward to further discussion during the next DT call. Best Regards, Ariel Ariel Xinyue Liang GNSO Policy Support Specialist Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Mobile: +1 310 804 2761 Skype: ariel.liang.icann www.icann.org

1 0

REMINDER: Proposed Agenda: Drafting Team Meeting 04 September at 21:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 29, 2019

Aug. 29, 2019

Dear all, This is a reminder. Please see the following proposed agenda for the Drafting Team meeting Wednesday, 04 September at 21:00 UTC for 60 minutes. For a list of all draft documents including the current versions, see the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GBIDT/Templates+and+Guidelines. Draft Proposed Agenda 1. Review Agenda/Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Update on Coordination with ccNSO GRC re: 18.12 Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NnaaoWKJWUu0Cw3pphuvT0wycmMIXhQmYyy0daP… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 3. Final Discussion: Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g-FNo2qm0Ohc6osJJ20sud1O5yDg9xv1v5Ux0n9… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 4. Continue Discussion: 3.1 (Nominating Committee Director Removal): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYeAMR5J7a4zN2zTE4LA_hp7sLynsKIqUnQgMWc… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 3.2 (SO/AC Director Removal): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T5AUnP-egEPqs9CDoWOzNUmc0dPFROTOlLWPq10… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 3.3 (Board Recall): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fSv0ELSGLmaABoz2_DKXHRsHrG-MyihPR1ePpbm… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 1. AOB Kind regards, Julie & Ariel

1 0

Proposed Agenda: Drafting Team Meeting 04 September at 21:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 26, 2019

Aug. 26, 2019

Dear all, Please see the following proposed agenda for the Drafting Team meeting Wednesday, 04 September at 21:00 UTC for 60 minutes. For a list of all draft documents including the current versions, see the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GBIDT/Templates+and+Guidelines. Draft Proposed Agenda 1. Review Agenda/Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Update on Coordination with ccNSO GRC re: 18.12 Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NnaaoWKJWUu0Cw3pphuvT0wycmMIXhQmYyy0daP… 3. Final Discussion: Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g-FNo2qm0Ohc6osJJ20sud1O5yDg9xv1v5Ux0n9… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 4. Continue Discussion: 3.1 (Nominating Committee Director Removal): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYeAMR5J7a4zN2zTE4LA_hp7sLynsKIqUnQgMWc… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 3.2 (SO/AC Director Removal): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T5AUnP-egEPqs9CDoWOzNUmc0dPFROTOlLWPq10… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 3.3 (Board Recall): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fSv0ELSGLmaABoz2_DKXHRsHrG-MyihPR1ePpbm… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 1. AOB Kind regards, Julie & Ariel

1 0

Actions & Notes: GNSO Drafting Team Meeting 21 August 21:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 23, 2019

Aug. 23, 2019

Dear all, Please see below the action items and notes captured by staff from the GNSO Drafting Team meeting held on 21 August 2019 (21:00-22:00 UTC). Staff have posted these to the wiki space. Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording, chat room, or transcript. The recording, AC chat, transcript and attendance records are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=115639465. Please note that all versions of the guidelines may be found on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GBIDT/Templates+and+Guidelines+Deposito…. Best Regards, Julie & Ariel Action Items: 1. 18.12 Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR: Staff will work with Heather and Bart to resolve issues and send the final draft to the DT to review. 2. Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum: a. Staff will accept all changes, resolve all comments, except for those identified in 5.2 and elsewhere (as indicated in the notes below) and send to the DT to review (DONE). b. The DT will review the document and provide comments/suggestions, if any, prior to the next meeting on 04 September. c. In the cover note to the Council with these guidelines note that there needs to be some kind of a session, perhaps in Cancun, where we walk the SGs and Cs through these documents and make sure they understand that they cannot hinder a petition. 3. Section 3.1 Nominating Committee Director removal process, Section 3.2 SO/AC Director Removal Process, Section 3.3 Board recall process: a. Staff will send the documents to the DT for review (DONE). b. DT will review the documents and provide comments/suggestions, if any, prior to the meeting on 04 September. 4. AOB: Form a group of volunteers and ask each to review one of the guidelines documents for clarity and against the Bylaws. Notes: 1. Updates to Statements of Interest: No updates provided. 2. Update on Coordination with ccNSO GRC re: 18.12 Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NnaaoWKJWUu0Cw3pphuvT0wycmMIXhQmYyy0daP… [docs.google.com]<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NnaaoWKJWUu0Cw3pphuvT0wycmMIXhQmYyy0daP…> -- Katrina and Bart put comments into the document, but Katrina’s were put into an older version. -- Ariel has tried to rationalize the changes, but we need to clarify comments with Bart during meeting on 22 August. -- Get the changes nailed down in order to get the revised draft to the DT. -- Question: Are the changes just clarifications, or are they substantive? Answer: Katrina’s comments went to clarity. Those are easy to fix. Bart’s comments have changed substance in ways that don’t work for the GNSO. We will need to resolve them. 3. Final Discussion: Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum (07 August): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g-FNo2qm0Ohc6osJJ20sud1O5yDg9xv1v5Ux0n9… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> Page 5, Section 4.1: -- Checked on the language about an individual and whether an individual had standing to submit a petition. Added clarifying language from the Bylaws. -- Question: How are the SGs and Cs involved in that process? The SGs and Cs will have to deal with the petition, but this could be done in different ways. The Council does not dictate their internal processes, as these are governed by their Bylaws/Charters, and procedures. -- Whatever the internal SGs and Cs procedures are, it is important that they do not limit the ability of the individual to file a petition. It needs to be a pass-through mechanism. -- Change the language to say that the petition “must” come through the SG or C. ACTION ITEM: Need to put this into the cover note to the Council with these guidelines: that there needs to be some kind of a session, perhaps in Cancun, where we walk the SGs and Cs through these documents and make sure they understand that they cannot hinder a petition. Page 6, Section 4.2.2: -- Put in two sub bullet points to make it clear that the provision applies to both (a) and (b). Page 7, Section 4.2.3: -- Per David McCauley change the text to include “if time permits”: The Petitioner may revise and resubmit the Petition, if time permits, noting that however, the updated Petition must be re-submitted no later than the tenth (10) day into the Rejection Action Petition Submission period (as defined in Section 4.2.1 above). Page 10, Section 4.2.8: -- Don't need this bullet point: "A statement whether a Rejection Action Community Forum is requested". Page 13, Section 4.3.5: -- Check the Bylaws to see if a notice needs: A supporting rationale in reasonable detail; Contact information of the GNSO Representative on the EC Administration; Page 14, Section 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 (new sections): -- Is this needed before a community forum: SGs and Cs Feedback on their support for, objection to, or abstention from the Rejection Action under consideration; -- Question re: timing of compilation of feedback. -- Need to clarify the community input process before and after the community forum (see new sections). -- One difference: It seems that the GNSO should have the ability to develop its position internally to be unified in its response at the community forum. But the Bylaws don’t speak to this. Also, there is some uncertainty in the timing and it may be difficult for the GNSO to develop its position, so the new section includes flexibility. ACTION ITEM: DT members should review these new sections and comments. Page 16, Section 5.3: -- Re: “The GNSO Council shall: Take a decision via a simple majority vote [as per the GNSO Operating Procedures] on a motion whether to support, object to, or abstain from the Rejection Action” Page 17, changes to the timeline: -- Keep these in so they can be reviewed along with the new sections noted above as they relate to Section 5.2 and new sections. Page 19, Motion Template Additional Paragraphs: -- Dragged formal actions into motion 1 as a cohesive motion relating to making the EC Rep the contact/liaison with the petitioner. The actions that were deleted were not needed. -- Note that these are motion templates, so they can be customized. Page 23, as to whether a motion is needed for community input: -- Add: to the extent the Council has the time, the GNSO may develop and document a GNSO unified position in the form of a motion. 4. Begin Discussion: Section 3.1 Nominating Committee Director removal process, Section 3.2 SO/AC Director Removal Process, Section 3.3 Board recall process: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYeAMR5J7a4zN2zTE4LA_hp7sLynsKIqUnQgMWc… [docs.google.com]<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYeAMR5J7a4zN2zTE4LA_hp7sLynsKIqUnQgMWc…>;https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T5AUnP-egEPqs9CDoWOzNUmc0dPFROTOlLWPq10QoOc/edit?usp=sharing [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>; andhttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1fSv0ELSGLmaABoz2_DKXHRsHrG-MyihPR1eP… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> -- The three guidelines are very similar, but there are some differences. For example, in the removal of a director there is a requirement for an interview. There also are specific voting thresholds for the removal of a director. AOB: -- From David McCauley: Suggest we form a group of volunteers where we ask someone other than the subject matter expert to review one of the guidelines documents.

1 0

Post Call | GNSO Drafting Team | Wednesday, 21 August 2019 at 21:00 UTC
by Julie Bisland Aug. 21, 2019

Aug. 21, 2019

Dear all, All recordings for the GNSO Drafting Team call held on Wednesday, 21 August 2019 at 21:00 UTC can be found on the agenda wiki page <https://community.icann.org/x/qYTkBg> (attendance included) and the GNSO Master calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group…> . These include: * Attendance (please let me know if your name has been left off the attendance list) * Audio recording * Zoom chat archive * Zoom recording (including audio, visual, rough transcript) * Transcript For additional information, you may consult the mailing list archives <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-bylaws-dt/> and the main wiki page<https://community.icann.org/x/_pUWBg>. Thank you. Kind regards, Julie

1 0

REMINDER: Proposed Agenda: Drafting Team Meeting 21 August at 21:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 19, 2019

Aug. 19, 2019

Dear all, This is a reminder. Please see the following proposed agenda for the Drafting Team meeting Wednesday, 21 August at 21:00 UTC for 60 minutes. For a list of all draft documents including the current versions, see the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GBIDT/Templates+and+Guidelines. Draft Proposed Agenda 1. Review Agenda/Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Update on Coordination with ccNSO GRC re: 18.12 Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NnaaoWKJWUu0Cw3pphuvT0wycmMIXhQmYyy0daP… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 3. Final Discussion: Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum (07 August): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g-FNo2qm0Ohc6osJJ20sud1O5yDg9xv1v5Ux0n9… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> 4. Begin Discussion: Section 3.1 Nominating Committee Director removal process, Section 3.2 SO/AC Director Removal Process, Section 3.3 Board recall process: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YYeAMR5J7a4zN2zTE4LA_hp7sLynsKIqUnQgMWc…; https://docs.google.com/document/d/1T5AUnP-egEPqs9CDoWOzNUmc0dPFROTOlLWPq10…; and https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fSv0ELSGLmaABoz2_DKXHRsHrG-MyihPR1ePpbm… 5. AOB Kind regards, Julie & Ariel

1 0

REMINDER - REVISED FOR REVIEW: Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum (07 August 2019)
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 15, 2019

Aug. 15, 2019

Dear DT members, Further to the message below this is a reminder for DT members to review the document at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g-FNo2qm0Ohc6osJJ20sud1O5yDg9xv1v5Ux0n9… <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> and provide any edits or comments prior to the next meeting on Wednesday, 21 August at 21:00 UTC. Kind regards, Julie & Ariel From: Gnso-bylaws-dt <gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Friday, August 9, 2019 at 4:08 PM To: "gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org" <gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] REVISED FOR REVIEW: Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum (07 August 2019) Dear DT members, Per action item 2(c) below from the meeting on 07 August, please review the revised draft of the GUIDELINES & MOTION TEMPLATE: Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum (07 August 2019) at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g-FNo2qm0Ohc6osJJ20sud1O5yDg9xv1v5Ux0n9… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…>. The document will be on the agenda for discussion at the next meeting on Wednesday, 21 August at 21:00 UTC. In the meantime, DT members are encouraged to make suggested edits and comments in the Google document. Thank you very much for your consideration. Kind regards, Julie & Ariel From: Gnso-bylaws-dt <gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, August 8, 2019 at 2:38 PM To: "gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org" <gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] Actions & Notes: GNSO Drafting Team Meeting 07 August 21:00 UTC Dear all, Please see below the action items and notes captured by staff from the GNSO Drafting Team meeting held on 07 August 2019 (21:00-22:00 UTC). Staff have posted these to the wiki space. Please note that these are high-level notes and are not meant as a substitute for the recording, chat room, or transcript. The recording, AC chat, transcript and attendance records are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=111391354. Please note that all versions of the guidelines may be found on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GBIDT/Templates+and+Guidelines+Deposito…. Best Regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions Items: 1. Section 1.3 Approval Action Community Forum: Staff will resolve all comments and post the document to the wiki. 2. Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum: * Staff will make the edits as identified below; * Heather will review; * Staff will send to the DT to review Notes: 1. Updates to Statements of Interest: No updates provided. 2. Results of Final Call: Section 1.3 Approval Action Community Forum (24 July): Section 4.2 – input and feedback is from the stakeholder groups and constituencies; -- Is there an argument to get input from individuals in the GNSO community? -- If we open up to individuals for 2.2 and 2.3 (and 3.1 an 3.2), shouldn’t we do so here? -- You may want to note this part of Annex D: “any Supporting Organization or Advisory Committee (including Decisional Participants) may deliver to the EC Administration in writing its views and questions on the Approval Action prior to the convening of and during the Approval Action Community Forum”. -- Concerned that the input needs to come under the Bylaws from the SO... the GNSO is made up of SGs/Cs. -- And “ each Decisional Participant shall inform the EC Administration in writing as to whether such Decisional Participant (i) supports such Approval Action, (ii) objects to such Approval Action or (iii) has determined to abstain". -- Unlike Rejection Actions, the Bylaws/Annex D do not specifically mention “individuals”; though of course there is nothing to prevent a Decisional Participant from expressly including a requirement within its own procedures about receiving individual views. It’s just not a requirement (unlike Rejection Petitions). -- ACTION ITEM: Resolve all comments and post final version on the wiki. 3. Continue Discussion: Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum (24 July): 1. Introduction: ACTION ITEM: Make the same changes to the introductory text in all of the guidelines and templates documents. 4. GNSO Rejection Action Petitions 4.1 Who is eligible to submit a Rejection Action Petition to the GNSO Council? The GNSO Council will consider a Petition from a GNSO Stakeholder Group or Constituency. -- Comment from Wolf-Ulrich: Individuals? See Annex D, 2.2.b -- The bylaws say “subject to the procedures and requirements developed by the applicable Decisional Participant, an individual may submit a petition to a Decisional Participant, seeking to reject the Rejection Action and initiate the Rejection Process (a "Rejection Action Petition")." -- GNSO can decide how they want to do this. Structure suggests that it would fall with the Stakeholder Group and Constituency. -- As long as the GNSO (in this case) allows for a process where individuals may submit petitions, there is no Bylaws requirement as to how you do it. -- Should be a process for how an individual from a Constituency or SG may make a petition. Could be that an SG/C might not agree with the petition but might allow it to go forward. Acc. to 2.2b: ...an individual may submit a petition to a Decisional Participant, ... -- This is a really important point: you will have the same issue with removal of Board members, so you should make the language consistent. -- The GNSO is unique as a Decision Participant. The distinction is between the right of an individual to send in a petition to the GNSO and the method by which the petition is transmitted. An individual should have a right to do it, but it should go through an SG/C. -- For the GNSO is it conceivable that an SG/C might have a charter that says they won’t accept a petition from an individual. But make sure that there is a route for an individual to go through an SG/C to get a petition to the Council. -- It’s really a critical “constitutional” right that you’re dealing with here and, like I said, it comes up again in other powers (like Director removal). ACTION ITEM: Come back to this suggested draft text – “As per Bylaws Section 2.2(b) of Annex D of the ICANN Bylaws, an individual from a GNSO Stakeholder Group of Constituency may submit a Petition to the GNSO Stakeholder Group of Constituency, seeking to reject the Rejection and initiate the Rejection Process.” 4.2.1 Rejection Action Petition Submission Period Within the first ten (10) days after the start of a Rejection Action Petition Period, any constituent identifiedlisted in Section 4.1 above may submit a Rejection Action Petition to the GNSO Council. 4.2.3 Rejection Action Petition Review and Certification On receipt of a Rejection Action Petition submitted by an eligible constituent per Section 4.1 of this Guideline, the GNSO Secretariat will promptly circulate the Rejection Action Petition to the GNSO Council via the GNSO Council mailing list. -- Change “call” to “meeting”. 4.2.6 Informing the Community, Other Decisional Participants and the EC Administration of Acceptance of the Rejection Action Petition Within twenty-four (24) hours after the GNSO Council decides to accept the Rejection Petition, the GNSO Representative on the EC Administration, now acting on behalf of the GNSO as the Rejection Action Petitioning Decisional Participant, will promptly provide a Rejection Action Petition Notice to the EC Administration, the other Decisional Participants, and the ICANN Corporate Secretary. In accordance with the Bylaws (Annex D, Section 2.2(a)(i)(A)-(E)) the Rejection Action Petition Notice must include: • The Petition and the rationale for the Petition; and • The GNSO Council Decision, and the rationale for their decision to accept the Petition.— Council may provide a rationale for its decision to accept the Petition, but is not required to do so. -- Agree that it should be the rep to the EC Admin. -- I think you need the rationale for SOME types of Rejection Action Petition Notices. -- The rationale of the rejection but not the rationale for other steps along the way in coming to that decision. -- Unlikely that the Council will NOT include a rationale where there is one that clearly explains its decision. 4.2.7 Solicitation of Support from Other Decisional Participants The GNSO Council shall use Tthe motion template in Section 6.1.2 of this Guideline should be used by the GNSO Council immediately after it accepts the Rejection Action Petition during the Special GNSO Council meetingCall. -- “Shall” is mandatory; “should” is exhortatory - encouraging but not requiring. Timeline: Day 12: GNSO Council leadership determines whether a Rejection Action Petition meets requirements and informs the Petitioner and Council (within 2 days of receipt of the Petition) 4.3.1 Scheduling of GNSO Council Meetings “Upon receipt of the Board Notification of a Rejection Action, the GNSO Chair will schedule a GNSO Council meeting...” – Should be done under 4.3.2? (comment from Wolf-Ulrich) -- resolved; leave it as it is. -- Add a sentence to indicate that it will be canceled if no notice received. 4.3.2 Receipt and Publication of a Request from another Decisional Participant to Support a Rejection Action Petition Upon receipt of a request from another Decisional Participant to support a Rejection Action Petition, the GNSO Representative on the EC Administration shall notify the GNSO Council, and have the request posted on the GNSO website/wiki, and inform the Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies via the Stakeholder Group and Constituency mailing listinform the community accordingly. 4.3.3 Solicitation of Community Feedback During a three (3) day period directly following the receipt of the request to support a Rejection Action Petition, GNSO Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies may submit their feedbackopinion on the merits of the GNSO becoming a Rejection Action Supporting Decisional Participant. Immediately upon the conclusion of this community feedback solicitation period, the GNSO Council leadership will work with GNSO support staff to categorize and summarize any have the comments received, if any, categorized and summarized, and post the summary to the GNSO Council list. 5.2 GNSO Community Feedback -- Ariel reorganized the language in order to clarify. -- As long as there’s enough time to get support from another Decisional Participant during that 7 day period. -- If we say, “if such a consultation occurs” suggests that is a formal meeting. Does the Council call a meeting? -- In any case, the Bylaws don’t require the DPs to have formal meetings (i.e. no rule about mechanism for a decision); but the Bylaws DO require the formality of notices that announce the decision reached. ACTION ITEM: Check the Bylaws to see if a formal meeting is required.

1 0

REMINDER: Proposed Agenda: Drafting Team Meeting 21 August at 21:00 UTC
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 15, 2019

Aug. 15, 2019

Dear all, This is a reminder. Please see the following proposed agenda for the Drafting Team meeting Wednesday, 21 August at 21:00 UTC for 60 minutes. For a list of all draft documents including the current versions, see the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GBIDT/Templates+and+Guidelines. Draft Proposed Agenda 1. Review Agenda/Updates to Statements of Interest 2. Update on Coordination with ccNSO GRC re: 18.12 Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NnaaoWKJWUu0Cw3pphuvT0wycmMIXhQmYyy0daP… 3. Final Discussion: Section 2.2 Petition Process for Specified Actions and Section 2.3 Rejection Action Community Forum (07 August): https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g-FNo2qm0Ohc6osJJ20sud1O5yDg9xv1v5Ux0n9… 4. Begin Discussion: Section 3.1 Nominating Committee Director removal process, Section 3.2 SO/AC Director Removal Process, Section 3.3 Board recall process: Link pending 5. AOB Kind regards, Julie & Ariel

1 0

Re: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] REMINDER FOR REVIEW: Revised Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR 15 July 2019
by Julie Hedlund Aug. 15, 2019

Aug. 15, 2019

Dear ccNSO GRC and GNSO DT members, Per the message below, this is a reminder that your review is requested not later than this Friday, 16 August. Kind regards, Julie & Ariel From: Gnso-bylaws-dt <gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 9:52 AM To: ccnso-grc <ccnso-grc(a)icann.org>, "gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org" <gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org> Cc: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken(a)icann.org>, Kimberly Carlson <kimberly.carlson(a)icann.org>, Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] REMINDER FOR REVIEW: Revised Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR 15 July 2019 Dear ccNSO GRC and GNSO DT members, This is a reminder per the message below that it would be very helpful if you could review the draft of the Revised Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR 15 July 2019 (15 July 2019) at: CLEAN VERSION: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OnFqzjkFTJEw0rzvaiBqAKLVnbbli-c_5t9aV2T… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (permission set to suggestions/comment) REDLINE VERSION: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NnaaoWKJWUu0Cw3pphuvT0wycmMIXhQmYyy0daP… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (permission set to suggestions/comment) We request that the members of your two groups should review at your earliest convenience, but not later than Friday, 16 August, the revised version of the guidelines. If you have suggested edits/comments it will be very helpful if you could include them in the CLEAN version of the Google document. The REDLINE version is primarily for reference. Thank you very much for your consideration as we finalize these guidelines. Kind regards, Julie & Ariel Julie Hedlund and Ariel Liang: From: Gnso-bylaws-dt <gnso-bylaws-dt-bounces(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, July 18, 2019 at 6:50 PM To: ccnso-grc <ccnso-grc(a)icann.org>, "gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org" <gnso-bylaws-dt(a)icann.org> Cc: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken(a)icann.org>, Bart Boswinkel <bart.boswinkel(a)icann.org> Subject: [Gnso-bylaws-dt] FOR REVIEW: Revised Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR 15 July 2019 Dear ccNSO GRC and GNSO DT members, The ccNSO GRC and the GNSO DT had a very productive joint meeting on Monday, 15 July, to review the questions and consider responses to the questions previously identified by the GRC (attached), and determine revisions to the guidelines. Thanks to all who were available to attend that meeting and to participate. Per the action items below from that meeting, please review the draft of the Revised Guidelines for GNSO-ccNSO Joint Consultation on Initiation of a Special IFR 15 July 2019 (15 July 2019) at: CLEAN VERSION: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OnFqzjkFTJEw0rzvaiBqAKLVnbbli-c_5t9aV2T… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (permission set to suggestions/comment) REDLINE VERSION: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NnaaoWKJWUu0Cw3pphuvT0wycmMIXhQmYyy0daP… [docs.google.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__docs.google.com_docume…> (permission set to view) Please also see Word versions of the clean and redlined documents, as well as a list of all draft documents including the current versions, on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/display/GBIDT/Templates+and+Guidelines. GNSO DT Support Staff worked closely with Heather Forrest and David McCauley to revise the document to capture the action items and discussion in the Google and Word documents. We request that the members of your two groups should review at your earliest convenience the revised version of the guidelines. If you have suggested edits/comments it will be very helpful if you could include them in the CLEAN version of the Google document. The REDLINE version is primarily for reference. Thank you very much for your consideration as we finalize these guidelines. Kind regards, Julie & Ariel Julie Hedlund and Ariel Liang From: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, July 15, 2019 at 8:45 AM To: ccnso-grc <ccnso-grc(a)icann.org>, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, Ariel Liang <ariel.liang(a)icann.org> Subject: NOTES: GRC | Monday, 15 July 2019 at 12:00 UTC Hello everyone. Please find included below the notes and action items the joint meeting between the GRC and the GNSO drafting team on Monday, 15 July 2019 at 12:00 UTC Best regards, Joke Braeken ACTION ITEMS: Action item #1: Q3. David McAuley to suggest alternative language, with added flexibility. [completed by Julie Hedlund] Action item #2: Q5. David McAuley to suggest alternative language Q5. GNSO staff to verify the guideline to ensure there is a formal reference in the guidelines to note that the work is concluded. Action item #3: Julie Hedlund to update the guidelines document based on today’s discussion, and share the revised text with the GNSO DT, and GRC. Incorporate the timing into the guideline document. Action item #4: Staff will adjust the timeline to show the maximum and minimum timing NOTES: 1. Welcome and roll call Attendance will be taken based on who is on Zoom. Apologies from: Alyssa Moore. Calls will be recorded and posted on the public wiki. Please remember to mute your phones and microphones when not speaking. 2. Special IFR Julie Hedlund: questions from the previous meeting. Edits/suggestions in red by David McAuley. David McAuley: 5 questions displayed on screen. Suggestions by David to the GNSO design team. Q1. when to establish sIFR? First to PTI Board, then to ICANN CEO and then to the Board. Q2. GNSO and ccNSO councils working together. SICT to issue statement, and mention both councils signed off on it. Support by Heather. Helpful to have guidelines. Flexible timing is appreciated. Q3. even distribution of the work Suggestion for SICT to keep duties under 5.4 and 5.6 and council deals with 5.5. (deciding whether to request a public comment period). “The councils may determine that …” More flexibility might be needed in the phrasing: avoid being too prescriptive. Action item #1: Q3. David McAuley to suggest alternative language, with added flexibility. [completed by Julie Hedlund] Q4. other avenues to address the PTI issue Alternative language suggested Steve Del Bianco: It’s an excellent idea to require consideration of alternative means to address an IANA functions problem. Bart: ICT to suggest to councils to look into alternative means to address the issue around PTI performance. When looking at the timeline, it becomes an issue. Q5. closing down SICT if the CSC manages to fix the problem. No alternative language suggested yet by David. Bart: close the loop, the process to avoid unclarity on whether to proceed or not. Heather: do we have a formal way of communicating - regardless of whether SICT has concluded its work or not? Action item #2: Q5. David McAuley to suggest alternative language Q5. GNSO staff to verify the guideline to ensure there is a formal reference in the guidelines to note that the work is concluded. Action item #3: Julie Hedlund to update the guidelines document based on today’s discussion, and share the revised text with the GNSO DT, and GRC. Incorporate the timing into the guideline document. Bart: speaks to the timeline. Starting point is when CSC sends a formal notification of the GNSO and ccNSO councils. In the meanwhile the CSC did already some actions under the Remedial Action Procedure. Min 10 days before the notification. More realistically: 30 days. During that period, when the Board is informed by the CSC: good timing for the coordination group to be established. Do every year a reminder. Starting point (day 0): CSC notifies both councils (use a template). Review actions: how long this will take is determined by internal procedures. 3 weeks, maybe less. Inform the Board, and then the Board will call a special review to commence. Call for volunteers, run by ICANN Org. Action item #4: Staff will adjust the timeline to show the maximum and minimum timing Next steps: once the update document is being shared, GRC to review. Absolute minimum: bylaw requirement? Flexibility not to launch a public consultation.so you can get rid of 45 days. Critical part: how long do the councils need? GNSO staff to share the document by the end of the week. Suggestion to conclude the work by the end of August. 3. AOB 4. Closure Thank you all. Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken(a)icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO [twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ccNSO&d=Dw…> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/ [facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_ccnso…> http://ccnso.icann.org [ccnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ccnso.icann.org&d=DwMGa…>

4 4