[NCUC-EC] Fwd: NCUC Bylaws Revision

[William Drake]

Hi

Yesterday afternoon I had a long chat with Rob (the staffer responsible for us on operational matters) on a number of matters, e.g. bylaws revision, budget allocations, civil society roundtable, and proposed outreach and administrative funding.  I'm rushing to deal with something else at the moment but will send a summary tomorrow.  But before getting to that, I thought I should pass along the below.  His bottom line is that there's no way our proposed timetable for revising the bylaws can work due to the turn around time need by the Board SIC committee, the public comment period, etc.  So there's no point killing ourselves to complete a revision in October, since it can't go to NCUC members during the November election anyway.  That said, there's also no reason not to begin dialogue and work on the issues with an eye to member adoption of a SIC-approved revision down the line somewhere, and in particular to address the most pressing outstanding item, which is whether to reboot the PC or establish some other formal process for the adoption of policy positions and statements.

More to come,

Bill

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Robert Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: NCUC Bylaws Revision
> Date: September 5, 2013 5:39:52 PM GMT+02:00
> To: William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
> Cc: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen at icann.org>
> 
> Hi Bill;
> 
> I think staff can certainly help the NCUC complete its internal efforts to amend its Charter by November, but I don't think you would have the second step --- Board approval --  completed by that time.
> 
> Even after a community elects to make charter amendments, those changes need to be "approved" by the ICANN Board.  Even if you gave me formal notice today that the NCUC had voted to approve a charter change, I doubt that we would be able to get them approved by the Buenos Aires Board meeting. That is primarily because the current Board-approval process (at present less-than-formal, but soon to be formalized – see http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/structures-charter-22jun13-en.htm) includes the requirement for a Public Comment Forum for community review and comments on any proposed charter changes. So there is a minimum 21 – or 42 day -- period built into the process. 
> 
> My observation is that these efforts always take longer than expected.  It wouldn't be a bad idea to get a group started asap even if its just to discuss and outline potential changes and staff (me and our experienced consultant Ken Bour) would be delighted to support the effort. Staff is not an "approval" bottle neck in any effort, but in my experience the Board is more comfortable with charter changes when they know that community leaders and staff have been engaged in an active dialogue. We can also highlight potential problem areas and suggest solutions so that any Board concerns can be anticipated and resolved before the changes/amendments are announced. 
> 
> I am happy to chat about this with anyone from the NCUC you designate on this.  Please feel free to share this note with any of those folks who are itching to get started. Let's discuss on our call tomorrow.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Rob

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20130907/66ed5d8c/attachment.html>