[gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER re: DOCUMENTING THE CURRENT PROCESS FOR FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS - YOUR INPUT NEEDED PRIOR TO OCTOBER 8 CALL of SCI
Dear SCI members, I have not seen further comments. If there are non prior to tomorrow's call then please see the attached redlined version reflecting comments provided by Amr and Wolf-Ulrich. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director On 10/5/15 2:09 PM, "Julie Hedlund" <owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx on behalf of julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >Dear SCI members, > >This is a reminder to please send in your comments in advance of >Thursday's call. I have attached the document previously compiled by Mary >Wong with text added as suggested by Amr and Wolf-Ulrich shown in redline. > >Best regards, >Julie > >Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > > >On 9/30/15 4:32 PM, "WUKnoben" <wolf-ulrich.knoben@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>I agree that draft covers all relevant points. >>Re step 2 I recall that the possibility exists that more than 1 council >>members second the motion. This does not affect the process rather it is >>kept in the minutes. >> >>Best regards >> >>Wolf-Ulrich >> >>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>From: Amr Elsadr >>Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 6:42 PM >>To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne >>Cc: Marika Konings ; Julie Hedlund ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx >>Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] DOCUMENTING THE CURRENT PROCESS FOR >>FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS - YOUR INPUT NEEDED PRIOR TO OCTOBER 8 CALL of SCI >> >> >>Hi, >> >>The draft circulated by Marika seems to capture the current practice >>quite >>well. I can¹t think of anything that is missing. I have only one other >>comment: >> >>Step 4 of the current practice suggests that the deadline to second a >>motion >>is up until a vote takes place during a council meeting. This has always >>been true. I¹m just wondering whether or not it may be desirable to >>explicitly point this out in the main text. Right now, it¹s more clearly >>stated in one of the footnotes to inform the reader about the practice in >>regards to publishing the motion without a seconder as part of the >>meeting >>agenda on the council wiki page. >> >>Not terribly important, but just a thought. This could be added as a >>second >>sentence in step 2. >> >>Thanks. >> >>Amr >> >>> On Sep 28, 2015, at 9:55 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Dear SCI MEMBERS >>> Your input and discussion on the list are needed with respect to the >>> document Marika has just resent prior to the October 8 call of the SCI. >>> This is a draft description of the current process in GNSO Council of >>>the >>> handling of friendly amendments to motion. This summary, once refined >>>in >>> our October 8 call, will be presented to Council as part of our report >>>in >>> Dublin. >>> >>> PLEASE TAKE TIME TO REVIEW AND COMMENT ON THE DRAFT FORWARDED TODAY >>>(AND >>> PREVIOUSLY ON SEPT 17) by MARIKA. This is sent in a format that can be >>> redlined with your suggested changes. Your input is especially crucial >>>if >>> you are now or have ever been a Council member. >>> Thank you, >>> Anne >>> >>> <image001.gif> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP >>> One South Church Avenue Suite 700 | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> (T) 520.629.4428 | (F) 520.879.4725 >>> AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx | www.LRRLaw.com >>> >>> >>> From: Marika Konings [mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx] >>> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 11:41 AM >>> To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; Julie Hedlund; >>>gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx >>> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Consensus Call: Waiver of >>>10-Day >>> Motion Deadline and Resubmission of Motions >>> >>> Anne, please find attached the email with an attachment that includes >>>an >>> outline of the current procedure for friendly amendments that was sent >>>to >>> the SCI on 17 September. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Marika >>> >>> From: <owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx> on behalf of >>> "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Date: Monday 28 September 2015 12:29 >>> To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx>, >>> "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx> >>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: Consensus Call: Waiver of 10-Day >>> Motion Deadline and Resubmission of Motions >>> >>> Many thanks Julie. We understand the consensus call is open until COB >>> TUESDAY September 29 THAT IS TOMORROW and failure to object is >>> considered consensus (as in the past.) We prefer a positive >>>confirmation >>> of consensus for our records so please - WILL ALL MEMBERS RESPOND BY >>> TUESDAY? >>> >>> Separately, JULIE, we also do need to have posted to the list the >>> description of the current procedure for ³friendly amendments² draft >>> prepared by Mary so that those on the list can review and add any >>> redline comments they have based on their experience on Council. This >>>is >>> about DOCUMENTING the existing procedure not about discussing or >>> recommending changes to it. For those not present on the call, we are >>> going to finalize a version of what we think the current procedures are >>> and present that to Council for consideration in Dublin as part of our >>> report. (many thanks to Marika for reminding us there are two steps to >>> this exercise that are ³in scope² for SCI.) >>> >>> Anne >>> >>> <image001.gif> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese, Of Counsel >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP >>> One South Church Avenue Suite 700 | Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> (T) 520.629.4428 | (F) 520.879.4725 >>> AAikman@xxxxxxxxxx | www.LRRLaw.com >>> >>> >>> >>> From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx >>> [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Julie >>>Hedlund >>> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 7:41 AM >>> To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@xxxxxxxxx >>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Consensus Call: Waiver of 10-Day >>>Motion >>> Deadline and Resubmission of Motions >>> Importance: High >>> >>> Dear SCI members, >>> >>> As discussed during the SCI call last week on 17 September, please see >>> below the proposed letter from the SCI to the GNSO Council on the issue >>>of >>> the waiver of the 10-day motion deadline and resubmission of motions. >>> >>> This is a consensus call. >>> >>> Please indicate your agreement with, or objection to, the proposed >>>letter. >>> If there are no objections or changes received by COB Tuesday, 29 >>> September 2015, the letter will be presumed to be accepted by full >>> consensus. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Julie >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >>> >>> ------------------------ >>> Dear Jonathan, >>> >>> On 05 March 2015 the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation >>> (SCI) submitted to the GNSO Council a Review Request (see attached) on >>>the >>> issue of whether the waiver of the 10-day deadline for the submission >>>of >>> motions can be applied to resubmitted motions. The Review Request was >>>one >>> of two that the Council approved at its meeting on 16 April 2015. The >>>SCI >>> is continuing to discuss the other Review Request from the Council for >>>the >>> SCI to consider codifying the current informal procedure for amendments >>>to >>> motions and to recommend any changes SCI believes (through full >>>consensus) >>> are appropriate. >>> >>> The SCI has determined after a review of the GNSO Operating Procedures >>> that by its terms as previously approved by Council, the waiver of the >>> 10-day deadline for submission of motions does not apply to resubmitted >>> motions. Further, after lengthy discussion of the possible issues, the >>>SCI >>> is reluctant to make any recommendations to change the current status >>>of >>> the Operating Procedures given that no instance of a problem arising in >>> this regard has occurred. The SCI also notes that although changes to >>> the GNSO Operating Procedures are not recommended at this time, the SCI >>> could revisit the issue if requested by the Council and, specifically, >>>if >>> there is a contentious issue that warrants further analysis. >>> >>> Please let us know whether you or the Council have any questions or >>> require further information concerning the SCI's response to this issue >>> request. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Anne and Rudi >>> >>> Anne Aikman-Scalese, SCI Chair >>> Rudi Vansnick, SCI Vice-Chair >>> >>> >>> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the >>> individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this >>> message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee >>>or >>> agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the >>>intended >>> recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution >>>or >>> copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If >>>you >>> have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately >>>by >>> replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and >>> any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal >>>and >>> confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the >>> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. >>> >>> >>> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the >>> individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this >>> message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee >>>or >>> agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the >>>intended >>> recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution >>>or >>> copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If >>>you >>> have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately >>>by >>> replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and >>> any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal >>>and >>> confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the >>> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. >> > Attachment:
Current GNSO Council Practice in relation to motions.docx Attachment:
smime.p7s
|