* Final day for receiving motions to amend Budget motion.
Dear Members: This is the final day for posting motions to amend (and endorsements to said motions to amend) the Budget motion. My motion to limit access to the list of members who request forgiveness from paying US$750/year has not received the necessary endorsement. Our Chair has suggested limiting access to the four elected officers plus our paid Secretariat, said Secretariat being a full time employee of a consultant to a paid RC Member Registrar. I am not comfortable having that information in the hands of other than an elected officer. There those who would want to shame the "forgiven" Member and/or make them feel like a second class citizen. I am willing to revise my notion to the following: Proposed Amendment to Budget Motion: Moved that only the Chair, CTO, Treasurer and Secretary be in possession of the amount of dues paid by each member of the Registrar Constituency. The dollar value of dues paid must not be divulged to any other member or to any agency or authority outside the Registrar Constituency, not to GNSO, and not to ICANN. Total confidentiality is to be assured. end quote: I await any other proposed amendments. And I seem an endorsement to this amendment. Regards, BobC
Dear Bob, I would certainly hope that whoever is chosen as Secretariat can be trusted with minor confidential information such as this, as opposed to shaming members and/or making them feel like second class citizens. Your motion does not include a limitation on the forgiveness amount. Are you proposing that some members could pay nothing? Regards, ~Paul :DomainIt At 12:16 PM 8/3/2007, Robert F. Connelly wrote:
Dear Members:
This is the final day for posting motions to amend (and endorsements to said motions to amend) the Budget motion.
My motion to limit access to the list of members who request forgiveness from paying US$750/year has not received the necessary endorsement. Our Chair has suggested limiting access to the four elected officers plus our paid Secretariat, said Secretariat being a full time employee of a consultant to a paid RC Member Registrar.
I am not comfortable having that information in the hands of other than an elected officer.
There those who would want to shame the "forgiven" Member and/or make them feel like a second class citizen.
I am willing to revise my notion to the following:
Proposed Amendment to Budget Motion:
Moved that only the Chair, CTO, Treasurer and Secretary be in possession of the amount of dues paid by each member of the Registrar Constituency. The dollar value of dues paid must not be divulged to any other member or to any agency or authority outside the Registrar Constituency, not to GNSO, and not to ICANN. Total confidentiality is to be assured.
end quote:
I await any other proposed amendments. And I seem an endorsement to this amendment.
Regards, BobC
At 01:14 PM 8/3/2007 Friday -0400, Paul Goldstone wrote:
Your motion does not include a limitation on the forgiveness amount. Are you proposing that some members could pay nothing?
Dear Paul: Oh, the "forgiveness" level is in the proposed budget, it's $250. I think you or some thoughtful member suggested "not less than $250". I'm sure a payment of >=$250 but <$750 would require "forgiveness". Margie's budget has a proposed income line of 10*$250.00 = $2,500.00. Thank you for your recent membership and for your thoughtful analyses. Regards, BobC
I would certainly hope that whoever is chosen as Secretariat can be trusted with minor confidential information such as this, as opposed to shaming members and/or making them feel like second class citizens.
Indeed under the current arrangement, there is a legally enforcible duty not to use the information for such purposes. John
I am not comfortable having that information in the hands of other than an elected officer.
This would, of course, be a necessary consequence of the parallel proposal to have ICANN manage the treasury. To review, the RC funds are held in an attorney trust account under the Pennsylvania IOLTA program (www.paiolta.org). Interest on the account accrues to the benefit of the IOLTA program, which is the legal "owner" of the account. As nominated trustee of the account, I derive no personal benefit from such position, and any time spent on the account is my personal contribution to the RC. Transactions made in this account are subject to attorney confidentiality, and cannot be disclosed to other than the RC excom, as the RC is the client for the purpose of the account. The short of it is that if any information about transactions in the account are disclosed without authorization of the Excom, then I can be hled personally liable and disbarred. The details of this arrangement are governed by the following disciplinary regulations: Day-to-day transactions in the account are monitored by Cristin Donahue. She does not have signatory authority over the account, as only a licensed attorney can do so. Accordingly, she reports payments and balances to the RC Excom. With respect to disbursements, my only inquiry is whether they are authorized by the Excom. Cristin's conduct is governed under the provisions of Rule 5.3 of the Pennsylvania Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. ---- Rule 5.3 Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants With respect to a nonlawyer employed or retained by or associated with a lawyer: (a) a partner and a lawyer who individually or together with other lawyers possesses comparable managerial authority in a law firm shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the firm has in effect measures giving reasonable assurance that the person's conduct is compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer. (b) a lawyer having direct supervisory authority over the nonlawyer should make reasonable efforts to ensure that the person's conduct is compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer; and (c) a lawyer shall be responsible for conduct of such a person that would be a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct if engaged in by a lawyer if: (1) the lawyer orders or, with the knowledge of the specific conduct, ratifies the conduct involved; or (2) the lawyer is a partner in the law firm in which the person is employed, or has direct supervisory authority over the person, and in either case knows of the conduct at a time when its consequences can be avoided or mitigated but fails to take reasonable remedial action. ------- With respect to the confidentiality of information: -------- Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information (a) A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent , except for disclosures that are impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation, and except as stated in paragraphs (b) and (c). (b) A lawyer shall reveal such information if necessary to comply with the duties stated in Rule 3.3. (c) A lawyer may reveal such information to the extent that the lawyer reasonably believes necessary: (1) to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm; (2) to prevent the client from committing a criminal act that the lawyer believes is likely to result in substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another; (3) to prevent, mitigate or rectify the consequences of a client's criminal or fraudulent act in the commission of which the lawyer's services are being or had been used; or (4) to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the client, to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim or disciplinary proceeding against the lawyer based upon conduct in which the client was involved, or to respond to allegations in any proceeding concerning the lawyer's representation of the client; or (5) to secure legal advice about the lawyer's compliance with these Rules; or (6) to effectuate the sale of a law practice consistent with Rule 1.17. (d) The duty not to reveal information relating to representation of a client continues after the client-lawyer relationship has terminated. ------- To put it another way, there are zero binding legal obligations on an officer of the RC concerning the handling of transaction information relating to the account. There are concrete legal obligations governing the disclosure of transaction information by either Cristin Donahue or myself. So the point here reduces to "we want to make sure the information is only available to people with no legal duty to keep it confidential". The rational approach which I have brought up several times, upon finding out that the treasury had been casually bounced around for years, is that the RC should consider setting up a non-profit corporation with by-laws that mirror those of the RC, and the treasury moved to an interest-bearing account under the direct ownership of the RC itself. The other choices are: (1) to have the treasury moved to another non-profit (e.g. ICANN) which adds a layer of administrative nuisance and delay, and which provides LESS protection for confidentiality, or (2) to return to having it kept in a personal account of the treasurer, and they can do their own year-end tap dance with the tax authorities (I gather previous treasurers simply treated the treasury as if it did not exist, for tax purposes) The historic problems of joining the RC have been "Who do I pay?" and "How long before I get on the lists and can vote?" We currently have a stable payment system which can respond rapidly, and the membership has grown as a result of it. I would suggest that changes in the direction of "fixing a known bug" are preferable.
said Secretariat being a full time employee of a consultant to a paid RC Member Registrar.
This sentence requires further clarification. I am the designated representative of Domain Name Sales Corp. in the RC. With respect to the treasury, those duties are performed in my capacity as an attorney, acting as trustee to the RC directly. There is no conflict in these distinct engagements, as there is no adversity of interest between DNSC and the RC. Information relating to any one of my engagements is not shared with other clients. Domain Name Sales Corp. has no access to information concerning the trust account in which the treasury is maintained. I have also acted as counsel in specific engagements with several RC members, and with individual representatives of members of the RC. That does not provide any of them with access to my files generally, nor can I provide "consultant" services comprising the illegal disclosure of confidential information among them. John
participants (3)
-
John Berryhill -
Paul Goldstone -
Robert F. Connelly