FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
Dear SCI members, As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban. Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------ Dear Jonathan, As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures. The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council: * On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems * On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)" The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter? Or should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised the the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council? It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban. Best regards, Ron Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI
I think this looks fine. Anne [cid:867383016@03072013-2518]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<mailto:AAikman@LRLaw.com> • www.LewisandRoca.com/Aikman<http://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. ________________________________ From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 8:16 AM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter Importance: High Dear SCI members, As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban. Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------ Dear Jonathan, As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures. The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council: * On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems * On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)" The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter? Or should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised the the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council? It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban. Best regards, Ron Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI ________________________________ For more information about Lewis and Roca LLP, please go to www.lewisandroca.com<http://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.
I don’t think resubmitting a motion is outside the scope of the present charter because submission and handling of motions used to be part of the improvements process (council operating rules). In addition the two bullet points – at least from my point of view – do not limit the SCI existence because of the periodic iteration. Nevertheless the general question should be discussed. I wonder whether we could achieve in Durban a general “go ahead thinking of a broader SCI scope” by the council and after a while coming back to the council with concrete suggestions. I doubt that we can expect more guidance. See my comments below Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:15 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter Dear SCI members, As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban. Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------ Dear Jonathan, As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. WUK: One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures. The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council: a.. On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems b.. On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)" The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. WUK: Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter? Or Should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised WUK: the by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council? It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban. Best regards, Ron Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI
On Jul 4, 2013, at 2:16 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
I don’t think resubmitting a motion is outside the scope of the present charter because submission and handling of motions used to be part of the improvements process (council operating rules).
i think there's an underlying question of intent. it's true that almost everything the GNSO does was touched by those committees that sprang out of the Board review. but that's the equivalent of saying that everything is touched by the Constitution of a country. i think this goes back to the framers of our charter. what did they intend and why? a broad interpretation of the charter is: - the SCI has a broad mandate to review the operation of the GNSO - it lives forever (it is an ongoing function) a narrow interpretation is: - the SCI reviews issues arising *directly* from the work of the prior committees, and is the last committee in that series - it ends, after completing those reviews (it is a project) i think a lot of things get easier once that basic clarification is made. decisions about the skills of the group, tasks it takes on, expected deliverables, etc. all get a lot clearer. perhaps we could frame the question the the Council this way? mikey
In addition the two bullet points – at least from my point of view – do not limit the SCI existence because of the periodic iteration.
Nevertheless the general question should be discussed. I wonder whether we could achieve in Durban a general “go ahead thinking of a broader SCI scope” by the council and after a while coming back to the council with concrete suggestions. I doubt that we can expect more guidance.
See my comments below
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:15 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
Dear SCI members,
As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban.
Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------
Dear Jonathan,
As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. WUK: One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures.
The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council:
On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)"
The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. WUK: Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter? Or Should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised WUK: the by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council?
It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban.
Best regards,
Ron
Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI
PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
Mickey, Do you have suggested changes to the text of the message to Jonathan as Wolf-Ulrich has done? That would be very helpful. Best regards, Julie From: Mike O'Conner <mike@haven2.com> Date: Friday, July 5, 2013 8:34 AM To: WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> Cc: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter On Jul 4, 2013, at 2:16 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
I don¹t think resubmitting a motion is outside the scope of the present charter because submission and handling of motions used to be part of the improvements process (council operating rules).
i think there's an underlying question of intent. it's true that almost everything the GNSO does was touched by those committees that sprang out of the Board review. but that's the equivalent of saying that everything is touched by the Constitution of a country. i think this goes back to the framers of our charter. what did they intend and why? a broad interpretation of the charter is: - the SCI has a broad mandate to review the operation of the GNSO - it lives forever (it is an ongoing function) a narrow interpretation is: - the SCI reviews issues arising *directly* from the work of the prior committees, and is the last committee in that series - it ends, after completing those reviews (it is a project) i think a lot of things get easier once that basic clarification is made. decisions about the skills of the group, tasks it takes on, expected deliverables, etc. all get a lot clearer. perhaps we could frame the question the the Council this way? mikey
In addition the two bullet points at least from my point of view do not limit the SCI existence because of the periodic iteration.
Nevertheless the general question should be discussed. I wonder whether we could achieve in Durban a general ³go ahead thinking of a broader SCI scope² by the council and after a while coming back to the council with concrete suggestions. I doubt that we can expect more guidance.
See my comments below
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Julie Hedlund <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:15 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
Dear SCI members,
As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban.
Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------
Dear Jonathan,
As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. WUK: One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures.
The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council: * On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems * On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)"
The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. WUK: Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter?Or Should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised WUK: the by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council?
It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban.
Best regards,
Ron
Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI
PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com <http://www.haven2.com> , HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
here goes… i've shifted this over to a Word document, as the formatting won't survive the listserv for some. mikey (hey Julie, Mikey, not Mickey. Mickey's the mouse) Dear Jonathan, As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the scope of the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to should also address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. WUK: One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures. The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council: On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)" The SCI also seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. WUK/Mikey: Should the SCI be considered the last in the series of committees that arose from the Board review and thus cease to exist when it has completed its review of that work? Or should the SCI continue indefinitely, to as an ongoing body which considers procedural questions as raised WUK: the by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council? It seems that The SCI requests that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can considers revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban. On Jul 5, 2013, at 8:40 AM, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote:
Mickey,
Do you have suggested changes to the text of the message to Jonathan as Wolf-Ulrich has done? That would be very helpful.
Best regards, Julie
From: Mike O'Conner <mike@haven2.com> Date: Friday, July 5, 2013 8:34 AM To: WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> Cc: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org>, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
On Jul 4, 2013, at 2:16 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
I don’t think resubmitting a motion is outside the scope of the present charter because submission and handling of motions used to be part of the improvements process (council operating rules).
i think there's an underlying question of intent. it's true that almost everything the GNSO does was touched by those committees that sprang out of the Board review. but that's the equivalent of saying that everything is touched by the Constitution of a country. i think this goes back to the framers of our charter. what did they intend and why?
a broad interpretation of the charter is:
- the SCI has a broad mandate to review the operation of the GNSO - it lives forever (it is an ongoing function)
a narrow interpretation is:
- the SCI reviews issues arising *directly* from the work of the prior committees, and is the last committee in that series - it ends, after completing those reviews (it is a project)
i think a lot of things get easier once that basic clarification is made. decisions about the skills of the group, tasks it takes on, expected deliverables, etc. all get a lot clearer. perhaps we could frame the question the the Council this way?
mikey
In addition the two bullet points – at least from my point of view – do not limit the SCI existence because of the periodic iteration.
Nevertheless the general question should be discussed. I wonder whether we could achieve in Durban a general “go ahead thinking of a broader SCI scope” by the council and after a while coming back to the council with concrete suggestions. I doubt that we can expect more guidance.
See my comments below
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:15 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
Dear SCI members,
As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban.
Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------
Dear Jonathan,
As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. WUK: One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures.
The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council:
On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)"
The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. WUK: Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter?Or Should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised WUK: the by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council?
It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban.
Best regards,
Ron
Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI
PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
Thanks Mickey for the changes. SCI members, Please see the attached version from Mickey and let us know if you have changes/comments ASAP. Best regards, Julie From: Mike O'Conner <mike@haven2.com> Date: Friday, July 5, 2013 11:56 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org>, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter here goes i've shifted this over to a Word document, as the formatting won't survive the listserv for some.
And of course I mean Mikey, and not Mickey! From: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Date: Friday, July 5, 2013 12:07 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> Subject: FW: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter Thanks Mickey for the changes. SCI members, Please see the attached version from Mickey and let us know if you have changes/comments ASAP. Best regards, Julie From: Mike O'Conner <mike@haven2.com> Date: Friday, July 5, 2013 11:56 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org>, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter here goes i've shifted this over to a Word document, as the formatting won't survive the listserv for some.
I’m fully agreeing that this discussion is needed. We might also compare the SCI status with the SIC (on board level) Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Mike O'Connor Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 2:34 PM To: WUKnoben Cc: Julie Hedlund ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter On Jul 4, 2013, at 2:16 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote: I don’t think resubmitting a motion is outside the scope of the present charter because submission and handling of motions used to be part of the improvements process (council operating rules). i think there's an underlying question of intent. it's true that almost everything the GNSO does was touched by those committees that sprang out of the Board review. but that's the equivalent of saying that everything is touched by the Constitution of a country. i think this goes back to the framers of our charter. what did they intend and why? a broad interpretation of the charter is: - the SCI has a broad mandate to review the operation of the GNSO - it lives forever (it is an ongoing function) a narrow interpretation is: - the SCI reviews issues arising *directly* from the work of the prior committees, and is the last committee in that series - it ends, after completing those reviews (it is a project) i think a lot of things get easier once that basic clarification is made. decisions about the skills of the group, tasks it takes on, expected deliverables, etc. all get a lot clearer. perhaps we could frame the question the the Council this way? mikey In addition the two bullet points – at least from my point of view – do not limit the SCI existence because of the periodic iteration. Nevertheless the general question should be discussed. I wonder whether we could achieve in Durban a general “go ahead thinking of a broader SCI scope” by the council and after a while coming back to the council with concrete suggestions. I doubt that we can expect more guidance. See my comments below Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:15 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter Dear SCI members, As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban. Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------ Dear Jonathan, As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. WUK: One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures. The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council: a.. On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems b.. On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)" The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. WUK: Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter? Or Should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised WUK: the by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council? It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban. Best regards, Ron Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
there's at least one important difference between the SCI and the SIC. the SIC is a sub-committee *of the Board* (so only Board members are eligible to serve) where we are not a sub-committee of the Council and membership eligibility is broader. that is one of the things that confuses me about the "broad" definition of our charter (ongoing, addressing all manner of issues, similar to SIC). it seems to me that if that is the direction our charter is going, then we might want to review (and make more rigorous) our membership criteria as well. mikey On Jul 5, 2013, at 12:55 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
I’m fully agreeing that this discussion is needed. We might also compare the SCI status with the SIC (on board level) Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Mike O'Connor Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 2:34 PM To: WUKnoben Cc: Julie Hedlund ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
On Jul 4, 2013, at 2:16 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> wrote:
I don’t think resubmitting a motion is outside the scope of the present charter because submission and handling of motions used to be part of the improvements process (council operating rules).
i think there's an underlying question of intent. it's true that almost everything the GNSO does was touched by those committees that sprang out of the Board review. but that's the equivalent of saying that everything is touched by the Constitution of a country. i think this goes back to the framers of our charter. what did they intend and why?
a broad interpretation of the charter is:
- the SCI has a broad mandate to review the operation of the GNSO - it lives forever (it is an ongoing function)
a narrow interpretation is:
- the SCI reviews issues arising *directly* from the work of the prior committees, and is the last committee in that series - it ends, after completing those reviews (it is a project)
i think a lot of things get easier once that basic clarification is made. decisions about the skills of the group, tasks it takes on, expected deliverables, etc. all get a lot clearer. perhaps we could frame the question the the Council this way?
mikey
In addition the two bullet points – at least from my point of view – do not limit the SCI existence because of the periodic iteration.
Nevertheless the general question should be discussed. I wonder whether we could achieve in Durban a general “go ahead thinking of a broader SCI scope” by the council and after a while coming back to the council with concrete suggestions. I doubt that we can expect more guidance.
See my comments below
Best regards
Wolf-Ulrich
From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:15 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter
Dear SCI members,
As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban.
Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July.
Best regards,
Julie
Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------
Dear Jonathan,
As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. WUK: One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures.
The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council:
On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)"
The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. WUK: Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter? Or Should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised WUK: the by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council?
It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban.
Best regards,
Ron
Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI
PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com, HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
Dear Mikey and all, SCI membership is made up of all supporting organizations/constituencies with one primary and one secondary rep. So membership is inclusive of all ICANN bodies. What is more important, in my view, is for the members to be more diligent to ensure that at least the primary or secondary rep is on every call. Kind regards, RA Ron Andruff RNA Partners <http://www.rnapartners.com> www.rnapartners.com From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org] On Behalf Of Mike O'Connor Sent: Friday, July 5, 2013 15:51 To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter there's at least one important difference between the SCI and the SIC. the SIC is a sub-committee *of the Board* (so only Board members are eligible to serve) where we are not a sub-committee of the Council and membership eligibility is broader. that is one of the things that confuses me about the "broad" definition of our charter (ongoing, addressing all manner of issues, similar to SIC). it seems to me that if that is the direction our charter is going, then we might want to review (and make more rigorous) our membership criteria as well. mikey On Jul 5, 2013, at 12:55 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> > wrote: I'm fully agreeing that this discussion is needed. We might also compare the SCI status with the SIC (on board level) Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Mike O'Connor <mailto:mike@haven2.com> Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 2:34 PM To: WUKnoben <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> Cc: Julie Hedlund <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org> ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter On Jul 4, 2013, at 2:16 PM, WUKnoben <wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de <mailto:wolf-ulrich.knoben@t-online.de> > wrote: I don't think resubmitting a motion is outside the scope of the present charter because submission and handling of motions used to be part of the improvements process (council operating rules). i think there's an underlying question of intent. it's true that almost everything the GNSO does was touched by those committees that sprang out of the Board review. but that's the equivalent of saying that everything is touched by the Constitution of a country. i think this goes back to the framers of our charter. what did they intend and why? a broad interpretation of the charter is: - the SCI has a broad mandate to review the operation of the GNSO - it lives forever (it is an ongoing function) a narrow interpretation is: - the SCI reviews issues arising *directly* from the work of the prior committees, and is the last committee in that series - it ends, after completing those reviews (it is a project) i think a lot of things get easier once that basic clarification is made. decisions about the skills of the group, tasks it takes on, expected deliverables, etc. all get a lot clearer. perhaps we could frame the question the the Council this way? mikey In addition the two bullet points - at least from my point of view - do not limit the SCI existence because of the periodic iteration. Nevertheless the general question should be discussed. I wonder whether we could achieve in Durban a general "go ahead thinking of a broader SCI scope" by the council and after a while coming back to the council with concrete suggestions. I doubt that we can expect more guidance. See my comments below Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund <mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:15 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org <mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] FOR REVIEW: Draft Note to GNSO Council Chair re SCI Charter Dear SCI members, As discussed in our meeting yesterday, below for your review is a draft message alerting Jonathan that the SCI would like to discuss the issues concerning the SCI Charter with the Council during the working session in Durban. Please send any comments by Friday, 05 July. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director ----------------------------- Draft Message to Jonathan ------------------------ Dear Jonathan, As you know, the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) will provide an update on its work to the GNSO Council in Durban on 13 July. One of issues the SCI is considering is an update of its Charter, as we have reported previously. This began as an effort to update the Charter to include procedures to elect the SCI Chair and Vice Chair, but recently the SCI also has considered whether other updates are necessary. After discussing possible updates the SCI members realized that they need guidance from the GNSO Council as to whether the SCI's work should be limited to a review of the procedures developed in the GNSO Implementations process, or whether the GNSO Council intends for the SCI to address other procedural issues not related to the improvements process. WUK: One such example might be the re-submission of a motion, which is an issue the Council asked the SCI to address and for which the SCI currently is considering revised procedures. The current Charter states: "The GNSO Standing Committee on Improvement Implementation (SCI) will be responsible for reviewing and assessing the effective functioning of recommendations provided by the Operational Steering Committee (OSC), Policy Process Steering Committee (PPSC) and Policy Development Process Work Team (PDP-WT) and approved by the GNSO Council: * On request for those recommendations that have been identified to present immediate problems * On a periodic timescale for all recommendations in order to identify possible issues and/or improvements (subject to a clear definition by the SCI on which recommendations should be reviewed)" The SCI seeks guidance from the Council on what is its intent with respect to the duration of the SCI work. WUK: Should the SCI cease to exist when it has completed the second bullet above from the Charter? Or Should the SCI continue indefinitely to consider procedural questions as raised WUK: the by the GNSO Council or a group Chartered by the Council? It seems that these fundamental questions need to be addressed before the SCI can consider revisions to the Charter. The SCI members look forward to discussing these questions with the Council in Durban. Best regards, Ron Ron Andruff, Chair, SCI PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com <http://www.haven2.com/> , HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) PHONE: 651-647-6109, FAX: 866-280-2356, WEB: www.haven2.com <http://www.haven2.com> , HANDLE: OConnorStP (ID for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.)
participants (5)
-
Aikman-Scalese, Anne -
Julie Hedlund -
Mike O'Connor -
Ron Andruff -
WUKnoben