<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Proposed Language Concerning 10-Day Waiver and Resubmitted Motions
- To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>, "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx>, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Proposed Language Concerning 10-Day Waiver and Resubmitted Motions
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 20:02:53 -0400
Hi,
(without liaison hat on)
I have a question: does it seem like we are complicating the rules to
the point that it will take lawyers to read and interpret them. I read
the language below and found I had to read it multiple times to get a
clear view of what it was saying.
Is there are chance we might consider readability when making changes?
And perhaps doing a readability pass though the operating procedures at
some point?
avri
On 16-Jun-15 15:48, Julie Hedlund wrote:
> Dear Anne and SCI members,
>
> As discussed on our call on 04 June, Amr and staff considered draft
> language concerning the treatment of resubmitted motions with respect
> to the 10-day waiver rule. After reviewing the language that Amr had
> referenced at the meeting, and that had been suggested by Mary Wong
> last year when this issue was first discussed, we decided that
> language seemed to address the issue succinctly. Here is the language
> [in brackets/highlighted] following the last two sentences of Section
> 3.3.2 Submission of Reports and Motions.
>
> "If these requirements are not met, the motion shall not be
> considered submitted for the next Council meeting. For the avoidance
> of doubt, if the motion is proposed again for a subsequent Council
> meeting, it shall not be considered a resubmitted motion under the
> rules for Resubmission of a Motion in these Operating Procedures.
> [Resubmitted motions made pursuant to Section 4.3.3 of these Operating
> Procedures after the Submission Deadline must meet these requirements
> in addition to those detailed in Section 4.3.3 in order to be eligible
> for consideration by the GNSO Council under this Section 3.3.2.]"
>
> For your reference, I have included below the full text from Sections
> 3.3.2 and 4.3.3.
>
> The next SCI meeting will be held in Buenos Aires on Saturday, 20
> June, from 0745 to 0845 local time (1045 UTC) during which the SCI can
> discuss the proposed language. Of course, you may also wish to send
> comments to the list prior to the meeting.
>
> Best regards,
> Julie
>
> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director
> *
> *
> *Excerpted from the GNSO Operating Procedures, v9 (13 November 2014)*
>
>
> 3.3.2 Submission of Reports and Motions
>
> Reports and motions should be submitted to the GNSO Council for
> inclusion on the agenda as soon as possible, but no later than *23h59
> Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) on the day, 10 calendar*/**//days
> /before the GNSO Council meeting.
>
>
>
> If a motion is submitted after the Submission Deadline, the GNSO
> Council shall consider the motion if the following requirements are met:
>
> a. The motion (including any report or other supporting
> documentation) is submitted to the GNSO Council at least 24 hours in
> advance of the GNSO Council meeting;
>
> b. The motion is accompanied by a request to consider the motion
> despite submission after the Submission Deadline (a “Request for
> Consideration”);
>
> c. A vote on the Request for Consideration shall be called as the
> first order of business for the agenda item that deals with the
> motion. The vote on the Request for Consideration must be unanimous
> (i.e., all Councilors or their proxies must vote and all votes cast
> must be in favor of considering the motion at such GNSO Council
> meeting) for the motion to be considered at such GNSO Council meeting.
>
> If these requirements are not met, the motion shall not be considered
> submitted for the next Council meeting. For the avoidance of doubt, if
> the motion is proposed again for a subsequent Council meeting, it
> shall not be considered a resubmitted motion under the rules for
> Resubmission of a Motion in these Operating Procedures.
>
>
> 4.3.3 _Resubmission of a Motion_: If a motion has been
> voted on by the GNSO Council and not adopted, that motion may
> be resubmitted to the Council for consideration at a
> subsequent meeting of the Council, subject to the following
> criteria:
>
>
> 1. _Explanation_: The Councilor submitting the motion
> must also submit an explanation for the resubmission of the
> motion. The explanation need not accompany the motion when it
> is resubmitted; however, the explanation must be submitted no
> later than the deadline for submitting the motion (_i.e._, no
> later than 23h59 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) on the day
> 10 calendar days before the Council meeting at which the
> motion is to be reconsidered). The explanation does not need
> to meet any requirements other than being submitted in a
> timely manner.
>
>
> 2. _Publication_: The text and explanation of the
> resubmitted motion must be published (_i.e._, circulated to
> the Council mailing list) no later than the deadline for
> submitting the motion.
>
>
> 3. _Second_: Upon the second resubmission of a motion
> (_i.e._, the third time the same motion comes before the
> Council), the motion must be seconded by a Councilor from each
> house as a prerequisite for placing the resubmitted motion on
> the consent agenda.
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|