<html>
<body>
Dear Alberto,<br><br>
I will comment on the issues of the Outreach and Engagement and CROPP
issues separately. Despite the two groups being chaired by the same
person, they operate under different rules and processes.<br><br>
<b>Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement<br><br>
</b>The Subcommittee (SC) is composed of two members named by each RALO
plus any other people that chose to participate. Operationally, the SC
does not distinguish between the two types of participants. The SC
leadership is selected by the SC itself. See
(<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+on+Outreach+and+Engagement">
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+on+Outreach+and+Engagement</a>
) for further details.<br><br>
There are 14 members from LACRALO, more than from any other region.
<br><br>
Any work product of the SC should be a product of the entire SC, or at
least those who choose to be active and participate. That certainly
should include the official members selected by the region. The SC may
decide to ask RALOs for input, but even if it doesn’t, it is the
responsibility of the regional members to ensure that the region is
involved. In a multistakeholder environment, every participant cannot get
exactly what they want, but every participant should have an opportunity
to be heard. If a work product is about a particular region (as it is for
the CROPP strategies), that region clearly has a very important role to
play. In the case of LACRALO, we go to great efforts to ensure that the
SC has Spanish interpretation to ensure that your members can participate
equitably.<br><br>
To the best of my knowledge, there has been no major complaint from
within the SC that people are not being listened to. <br><br>
The Independence of RALOs, like most things in life, is not absolute. In
many cases, an ALAC SC or WG carries out work on behalf of ALAC and
At-Large. They do this with the participation of people from all regions.
Generally these decisions or documents do not impact what a RALO can do,
but occasionally the ALAC gives a SC explicit responsibility to take
action on behalf of ALAC and At-Large even if the results do not go back
to the ALAC for ratification.<br><br>
In the specific case of the CROPP strategy document, I am not an expert,
but I do not see a wide difference between the resultant document and
what I have heard is of specific interest to LACRALO. The exact words may
be different, but the intent seems the same. But regardless of how I read
it, IF the region has a problem, it should be dealt with within the SC
and by those appointed by LACRALO to work on the SC. If there is a
situation where the SC members and the Chair and Co-Chairs cannot resolve
an issue, I expect it to be presented to me or the ALAC Leadership Team,
ensuring that the ALT Member from the region is aware of the issue.
<br><br>
You mention that the internal LACRALO document had more concrete details.
That is quite reasonable. As I understand the situation, the plans to be
submitted to GSE did not require that level of detail and implementation.
As long as the two were complementary and did not conflict, there is no
problem.<br><br>
<b>CROPP Program<br><br>
</b>Last year, the CROPP program within At-Large was carried out by the
CROPP Review Team (RT) from the previous year. The current RT is composed
of two people from each region, one appointed by the Members of the
Finance and Budget Subcommittee, and one by the Members of the Outreach
and Engagement SC.<br><br>
A requests for use of CROPP funds goes from the originator to the RALO
and then to the CROPP RT. Exactly how the RALO approves a project is up
to the RALO. I suspect that most RALOs do this with their leadership team
and perhaps a few others. Once the CROPP RT is notified by RALO
leadership that a request is approved by the RALO, the CROPP RT must
review it. They have the duty to ensure that the request meets the
regional strategy and is in all ways a good request. If they are not
satisfied, they can either reject the request or refer it back to the
originator or RALO for modification. My understanding is that the LACRALO
trip to Haiti and the Dominican Republic was satisfactory and I do not
see the need to review the process it followed at this time.<br><br>
For the record, Dev Anand Teelucksingh did not travel to Buenos Aires on
CROPP funds. His trip was funded by GSE under a completely different
program.<br><br>
I hope that this addresses all of your issues.<br><br>
Regards, Alan<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">TRANSLATION BY SILVIA
VIVANCO:<br>
<br>
<br>
Dear Alan, I am obliged as President of LACRALO to get in touch about
this issue:<br>
<br>
The insistence of the Chairman of a Subcommittee of the ALAC
(Outreach and Engagement SC ) in making decisions which should, by
regulation be made inside of LACRALO and with full participation of its
members ALSs, compels me to do so.<br>
Repeated clarifications do not justify such a decision.<br>
<br>
Comments from Pisanty and myself have been cited as if they were an
approval of the Plan generated in the O/E Subcommittee, which acted
without previously consulting the document which we already had prepared.
Both mine, and the opinion of Alejandro Pisanty were critical of such
document. <br>
Subsequently, and despite the bad procedure, we, in display of good will
and seeking peace in our Region, accepted this plan, despite the fact
that ours had more concrete details about the countries, according to the
list that I promptly submitted, and long before this Strategic Plan.<br>
<br>
The main detail was that the plan should take into account as a
priority, those countries that had the lowest rate of Internet
penetration, as a way to start that required greater support and major
actions to coordinate with ICANN GSE.<br>
I asked for clarifications to the Chairman of the Subcommittee on our
last monthly meeting. At that meeting, he not only insisted on his
mistake, but he confirmed that the persons forming such
Subcommittee would be in charge of the implementation of such plan and
they were also analyzing the alternatives of the CROPP Program for its
implementation by of such Subcommittee.<br>
<br>
In summary: first an ALS presents a project, which shall be
approved by consensus within LACRALO and then leadership of LACRALO sends
it for approval through the CROPP program and then to GSE. <br>
<br>
They are assuming a power which does not correspond to them, even though
I requested by email and at the last monthly meeting that they
did not.<br>
<br>
He also insisted that the Sub-Committee was formed by members of LACRALO,
erroneously understanding this validated such actions. <br>
<br>
The MOU that LACRALO has signed with ICANN, gives us the independence in
decisions, which should be taken within the scope of our Region and
within our normative discussions area, not within a Sub-Committee of
ALAC, despite the fact that this is composed of members of LACRALO.<br>
<br>
In the links listed in the email below, you can see that a similar
program for AFRALO was approved by the members of AFRALO on September 21,
2015; of APRALO by their leaders on July 3, 2015; of NARALO by
Glenn McKnight 4l 4 August 2015; of EURALO by Dev Anand
Teelucksingh the 29th September 2015; and the LACRALO also by Dev
Anand Teelucksingh on September 15, 2015. At least for LACRALO, he has
taken a role which does not correspond to him. <br>
<br>
In the emails cited by the Chair of the Subcommittee, there are
inconsistencies such as the exchange of emails for the proposal by
Carlton Samuels to go to Surinam; this was only presented by Dev Anand
Teelucksingh in the meeting which we had on the Haiti and Dominican
Republic. There was such urgency that we did not have time to submit it
to LACRALO and exceptionally we decided with Humberto at that
meeting so as to avoid losing our CROPP trip allocation. <br>
<br>
In the meeting previous to the last meeting of ICANN in Buenos Aires, it
is said that we agreed and published the names of who would travel to
such meeting. <br>
<br>
CROPP?s Chair, Dev Anand Teelucksingh, published such names,
but omitted in the list his own name, because he travelled to
Argentina with a travel allocation of such program. <br>
<br>
To safeguard our decisions, our autonomy and hoping to avoid future
inconvenient, I request that you proceed to issue the
appropriate Directive to such
Subcommittee.</blockquote><br><br>
<br>
At 11/01/2016 07:16 AM, Alberto Soto wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Estimado Alan, me veo obligado
como Presidente de LACRALO a ponerme en<br>
contacto por este tema.<br>
<br>
La insistencia del Presidente de un Subcomité de ALAC (Alcance y
compromiso<br>
SC) en tomar decisiones que por norma deben tomarse en el interior
de<br>
LACRALO y con participación de sus ALSs miembros, me obliga a ello.<br>
Las repetidas aclaraciones no justifican esa decisión.<br>
<br>
Se ha citado comentarios de Alejando Pisanty y míos como si hubieran sido
de<br>
aprobación del Plan generado en ese subcomité sin haber consultado<br>
previamente el documento con el que ya contábamos. Tanto la opinión
de<br>
Alejandro como la mía, eran críticas de tal documento. A posteriori y
pese a<br>
ese mal procedimiento, como muestra de buena voluntad y buscando la paz
en<br>
nuestra Región, dimos como aceptado dicho Plan, pese a que el nuestro
tenía<br>
detalles más concretos sobre los países, según la lista que yo
oportunamente<br>
presentara, y mucho antes de este Plan Estratégico. El detalle principal
era<br>
que se debía tener en cuenta como prioridad, a aquellos países que
tuvieran<br>
el menor índice de penetración de Internet, como una forma de comenzar
por<br>
los que requerían mayor apoyo y mayores acciones a coordinar con GSE
de<br>
ICANN.<br>
<br>
Pedí aclaraciones al Presidente del Subcomité en nuestra última
reunión<br>
mensual; allí no solo insistió en su error, sino que confirmó que
las<br>
personas integrante de dicho Subcomité se harían cargo de la
implementación<br>
de dicho plan, y además estaban analizado las alternativas del
programa<br>
CROPP para su implementación por parte de dicho Subcomité. Como síntesis
de<br>
este tema en particular: primero una ALS presenta un proyecto, se
aprueba<br>
por consenso en LACRALO y luego el liderazgo de LACRALO lo envía para
su<br>
aprobación al programa CROPP y de allí a GSE. Se están arrogando una<br>
atribución que no corresponde, pese a que se pidió por mail y en la
última<br>
reunión mensual que no lo hicieran.<br>
<br>
También insistió en que dicho subcomité estaba conformado por miembros
de<br>
LACRALO, entendiendo erróneamente que ello convalidaba tales acciones.
<br>
El MOU que LACRALO tiene firmado con ICANN, nos da la independencia en
las<br>
decisiones, las que deben tomarse dentro del ámbito de nuestra Región y
en<br>
nuestro ámbito normativo de discusiones, y no dentro de un Subcomité
de<br>
ALAC, pese a que esté integrado por miembros de LACRALO.<br>
<br>
En los links que están indicados en el mail de abajo, se puede ver que
el<br>
programa similar de AFRALO fue aprobado por los miembros de AFRALO el 21
de<br>
septiembre de 2015; el de APRALO por sus líderes el 3 de julio de
2015; el<br>
de NARALO por Glenn McKnight 4l 4 de agosto de 2015; el de EURALO
por Dev<br>
Anand Teelucksingh el 29de septiembre de 2015; y el de LACRALO
también por<br>
Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 15 de septiembre de 2015. Al menos por LACRALO,
se<br>
ha tomado una atribución que no le corresponde.<br>
<br>
En los mail citados por el Presidente del subcomité, hay
inconsistencias<br>
tales como el intercambio de correos para la propuesta de Carlton
Samuels<br>
para ir a Surinam; esto solo fue presentado por Dev Anand
Teelucksingh en<br>
una reunión que mantuvimos por el tema de Haití y República Dominica.
Era<br>
con tal urgencia que no tuvimos tiempo de presentarlo ante LACRALO y<br>
excepcionalmente lo definimos con Humberto en esa reunión para no perder
un<br>
viaje de CROPP. En la reunión previa al último meeting de ICANN en
Buenos<br>
Aires, se cita que concordamos y fueron publicados los nombres de
quienes<br>
viajarían a dicho meeting. El Presidente del CROPP, Dev Anand
Teelucksingh<br>
publicó dichos nombres, pero omitió en la lista el suyo propio,
dado que<br>
viajó con una vacante de dicho programa.<br>
<br>
Por el resguardo de nuestras decisiones, nuestra autonomía, y
esperando<br>
evitar futuros inconvenientes, solicito tengas a bien dar la
directiva<br>
correspondiente a ese Subcomité.<br><br>
Saludos cordiales<br><br>
Alberto Soto</blockquote></body>
</html>