Anne E. Aikman-Scalese
Of Counsel
Lewis and Roca LLP • Suite 700
One South Church Avenue • Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611
Tel (520) 629-4428 • Fax (520) 879-4725
AAikman@LRLaw.com • www.LewisandRoca.com/Aikman

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

This e-mail contains legally privileged and confidential information
intended only for the individual or entity named within the message.
If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the
agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is prohibited.  If this communication
was received in error, please notify us by reply e-mail and delete the original message.

• Survey on the experiences with WG Guidelines needs to be added to list of work items
• (Note – Staff would be happy to prepare a first draft of such a survey that might serve as a basis for further work / discussion)

• Include procedure sent by J. Scott (see http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-improvem-impl-sc/msg00146.html) into the comparison table to facilitate comparison by SCI (Action item: Marika)

• Deferral of motions: currently unwritten rule which allows deferral upon request from SG/C, which is always allowed. Normally only one time deferral only, although there have been exceptions in the past. Council has requested SCI whether a formal procedure is needed / preferred. PDP rules allow individual member of Council to request deferral on PDP related vote (once). Individual vs. SG/C? What is the role of 'socializing' motions prior to formally introducing them - does that reduce the need for deferrals?

• Threshold rules needed for delaying a PDP - overview of current rules and recent situation on delaying 'thick' Whois PDP.

• At the last GNSO Council meeting a proxy was requested but not in the correct way. Do rules need to be adapted to accomodate situations where no formal proxy can be given? Overview of current proxy voting rules (section 4.6 of Operating Procedures) provided. Current rules don't provide for last minute situations, assumes a certain time delay between knowing that Council member cannot attend Council meeting and giving proxy. Do youneed to create rules for every possible exception? Several members of the SCI noted that they do not think modifications need to be made to the current rules.

• As a result of the adoption of the new PDP and related update of the voting thresholds in the ICANN Bylaws, the voting results table has been updated. SCI requested to review the table, which has been updated to be consistent with the changes as a result of the new PDP, so it can be included in the GNSO Operating Procedures.

For more information about Lewis and Roca LLP, please go to www.lewisandroca.com.

Phoenix (602)262-5311		Reno (775)823-2900
Tucson (520)622-2090		Albuquerque (505)764-5400
Las Vegas (702)949-8200		Silicon Valley (650)391-1380

  This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender of this E-Mail by return E-Mail or by telephone.

  In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we advise you that if this email contains any tax advice, such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.