RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Team Guidance re: Section 4-Voting and 3.8-Absences?

["Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx>]

Yes?

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 5:07 PM
To: Ray Fassett
Cc: Ron Andruff; 'Ken Bour'; gnso-osc-ops
Subject: Re: [gnso-osc-ops] Team Guidance re: Section 4-Voting and
3.8-Absences?

 

Ray,

Just a question.  Have the SOI/DOI and Term limits documents that I sent to
you previously gone to the OSC?

Thanks!

Julie


On 5/3/10 4:55 PM, "Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I believe below are the remaining open items?  Anyone disagree?
 

  GOP   Section 3.8: Vacancies and Absences   Addt?l changes under team
review. Targeted to be sent to OSC by 1 June   
  GOP   Chapter 4: Section 4.1: Quorum Section 4.2: Voting Thresholds
Section 4.3: Motions and Votes Section 4.4: Absentee Voting Section 4.5:
Abstentions   Sent to OSC for consideration in Nairobi.   Addt?l changes
being made due to OSC feedback.   Targeted to be sent to OSC by 1 June.     
  Exec Summary & Abstentions Analysis-2009   Companions to Chapter 4-Voting
Sent to OSC on 6 March.   Resend to OSC after Chapter 4 is ready for
resubmission?  

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Ron Andruff
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 2:49 PM
To: 'Ken Bour'; gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Team Guidance re: Section 4-Voting and
3.8-Absences?

Ken,
 
That is precisely why I asked our Chair for an agenda to advise what work is
still on the table, from his perspective.  For my part, I believe we are
close to completing our task, but want to be sure that we indeed get
everything completed prior to the deadline you noted.
 
Kind regards,
 
RA
 

Ronald N. Andruff
President

RNA Partners, Inc.
220 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10001
+ 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Ken Bour
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 2:33 PM
To: gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-osc-ops] Team Guidance re: Section 4-Voting and 3.8-Absences?

GCOT Members:
 
There is a GCOT meeting coming up this Wednesday, 5 May, and I am honestly
not sure what more I should be doing with respect to Chapter 4.0-Voting and
Section 3.8-Absences.  
 
There were a number of concerns raised to my latest version (circulated on
13 April), which I attempted to address on the list; however, the last set
of comments suggested that we have drilled down ?much too deep? and there
are ?way too many words? being expressed.   
 
I am reminded that the OSC deadline for closure on the GCOT?s outstanding
work is 1 June ? 4 weeks away.   I want to be helpful and proactive;
however, at this point, I would appreciate some guidance from the team
concerning how to revise specific language in these two remaining sections.

 
Thanks,
 
Ken Bour 
 

From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Ron Andruff
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:16 PM
To: 'Ken Bour'; gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-osc-ops] New Section 4-Voting and 3.8-Absences

Dear all,
 
Having reviewed the documents, my responses (apart from those sent in the
Avri-Ken string noted earlier) are as follows:
 
Section 4 Voting 
 
4.4 Absentee Voting -- AGREED
4.5.2 Abstention Categories ? To KB?s comment: NO, I do NOT AGREE that the
GCOT should add more language to the volitional abstentions
4.5.2.b. Disclaimer ? need to replace ?Declaration? with ?Disclosure? of
interest pursuant to Metallitz note on DOI.  Terms must be consistent.
Re: 3rd sentence: GNSO Councilors do not have a fiduciary responsibility to
act in the best interests of ICANN in discharging their responsibilities on
the Council.  This language must be modified.  A Councilor, at the very
least, must have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interest of
their SG/C.  Councilors are not independent actors voting according to their
personal views (excluding the NCA?s, of course).
4.5.3 Remedies ? AGREED
4.5.4 Procedures -- AGREED
 
Section 3.8 Absences  -- Minor edits AGREED
           Want clarification re: Avri-Ken string, i.e., 
I don't understand the "fistful of proxies" statement.  What is the harm if
the proxies have been given in good faith"?  I agree with Ken's
interpretation that one Councilor would serve as proxy for the other and
that if two abstentions were given for the same measure new proxies would
need to be found, BUT don't see any reason why a third Councilor could not
deliver his/her vote as well as vote the two proxy votes.  ICANN legal needs
to clarify this....

Kind regards,
 
RA
 

Ronald N. Andruff
President

RNA Partners, Inc.
220 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10001
+ 1 212 481 2820 ext. 11

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Ken Bour
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 1:14 PM
To: gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-osc-ops] New Section 4-Voting and 3.8-Absences

GCOT Members:
 
As promised, attached are the latest documents for Chapter 4.0-Voting and
Section 3.8-Absences & Vacancies.  I have indicated below the major changes
made since the versions sent on 24 March; however, I recommend that GCOT
members read both documents critically from beginning to end.      
 
Chapter 4-Voting:
1)      Section 4.4-Absentee Voting was restored to its original language
and modified as noted.  

2)      Additional changes throughout 4.5 to improve clarity (see redlines
and embedded comments) 


Section 3.8-Absences and Vacancies:
1)      Simplified structure to eliminate redundancy, e.g. one Paragraph
3.8.4-Remedy instead of two duplicates (3.8.2-c and 3.8.3-b) previously.
For ease of reading, I did not redline those structural changes. 

2)      The language that Ron asked be clarified concerning ?All Subjects
Permitted? has been incorporated (see 3.8.4-a). 


I have also attempted to outline (below) the architecture of the Abstentions
procedures as well as Absences/Vacancies.   I summarized key principles and
supported each numbered bullet with quoted/referenced text (italics), where
applicable.   I hope that this exposition will make it a bit easier to
understand the critical components and logic so that the GCOT can decide if
this architecture remains the approach that it wants to recommend to the
GNSO.  
 
I look forward to your comments.
 

Ken Bour
 
Abstentions Architecture:
1)      Voting denominators should never be altered. 

The GNSO Council has not established any provision that would permit the
voting thresholds and calculations to be altered, for example, by reducing
the denominator due to an abstention (§4.5.3).
2)      All abstentions are de facto ?No? votes.   

The voting thresholds are calculated based upon the total membership of each
House.  According to existing rules, any abstention, regardless of type or
category, would not contribute to the passing of a motion; therefore, by
default, an abstention functions as a negative (or ?No?) vote (§4.5.3).
3)      SG/Cs should have the opportunity to register a ?Yes,?
discretionally, whenever a Councilor cannot or chooses not to exercise a
vote. 

Given the Council?s size and the voting thresholds that have been defined,
it is important that each Stakeholder Group (or Constituency, where
applicable) vote decisively, through its appointed or elected Councilors, on
every matter that is before the Council for action (§4.5.1).
4)       ?Volitional? abstentions, although acknowledged and permitted,
including remedies, are discouraged. 

Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups are encouraged to provide sufficient
guidance, assistance, education, and direction, where applicable, to avoid
circumstances that might otherwise result in a volitional abstention
(§4.5.2-a).   
Councilors should request and receive sufficient information, including
support from their Constituencies or Stakeholder Groups, as appropriate, so
Councilors may carry out their responsibilities.  When a problem manifests
itself or some issue does not make sense, a Councilor has a duty to inquire
into the surrounding facts and circumstances and seek guidance (§4.5.1-b).
5)      The following remedies are provided for any abstention and should be
considered and selected in order.

The purpose of the remedial procedures in this section is to minimize the
effect of such potential abstentions on Council voting such that the
appointing Stakeholder Group or Constituency may exercise the vote
represented by the abstaining Councilor (§4.5.3).
In general, the remedies proceed from simplest in execution to more
logistically complex and should, under most circumstances, be evaluated and
selected in the order provided (§4.5.3).
a)      Voting Direction [Note:  useful for most ?volitional? abstentions]

o      Requires consensus position in SG/C

b)      Proxy [Note:  useful for either abstention category plus incidental
absences when absentee balloting is not prescribed]

o      Requires consensus position in SG/C

o      Does not count toward quorum

o      Incident specific and time-bound

o      Limit:  1 proxy vote per Councilor 

c)      Temporary Alternate [Note: useful when consensus position cannot be
achieved and for longer-term substitutions including Leaves of Absence (LOA)
and vacancies]

o      Exclusion:  does not apply to NCA

o      Counts toward quorum (if regular Councilor is not present)

o      Incident specific and time-bound

o      Can only participate and vote on specific matters (except when
instituted for LOA or vacancy)

o      Limit:  1 TA per Councilor at a time

6)      Abstentions that are not remedied, either by SG/C choice or,
possibly, because the remedy could not be activated in time, are recorded
and treated as ?No? votes.  

If an abstention cannot be avoided after pursuing the remedies provided in
Paragraph 4.5.3, then the Councilor may abstain from voting and an
?Abstention? will be entered into the record. If the reason for the
abstention warrants such action (e.g. obligational abstention), the
Councilor shall be recused and not participate in discussions on the
affected topic(s) or otherwise attempt to influence other Council members
nor shall he/she vote on any action attendant to the matter for which the
abstention conditions are present.  An abstention shall not affect quorum
requirements or calculations nor will it reduce the denominator in any vote
tabulations for the affected House (§4.5.4-c).
At the Legal Department?s recommendation, instead of handling absence
conditions within the voting remedies procedures, a separate Section 3.8 has
been drafted (attached).  Its architecture is also outlined below to show
how certain remedies apply.  
Absences and Vacancies:
1)      Incidental Absences:  

a)      Planned absences defined and remedies: 

It is understood that, from time to time, it may be necessary for a GNSO
Council member to miss a scheduled meeting due to conflicting personal or
professional obligation or other planned event that cannot be reasonably
altered (§3.8.1-a).
 
i.     Notify GNSO Secretariat in advance

 
ii.     If absentee voting applies and can be utilized, stop.  

 
iii.     If absentee voting does not apply or circumstances do not permit
its use, then Councilor should declare an abstention and continue with
abstention remedies (§4.5). 

b)      Unplanned absences defined and remedies:

Occasionally, it will be necessary for a GNSO Council member to miss a
regularly scheduled meeting due to sudden illness, accident, injury, or
other unforeseen event that cannot reasonably be anticipated.  
 
i.     If absentee voting applies and can be utilized, stop.  

 
ii.     If absentee voting does not apply or circumstances do not allow for
its use, then vote is NOT cast nor is denominator altered.  

2)      Leaves of Absence (LOA):

a)      Planned: Councilor anticipates missing 2 or more consecutive
meetings 

 
i.     Notify GNSO Secretariat and SG/C; continue with (4) below. 

b)      Unplanned: Councilor misses 2 meetings consecutively without prior
notification

 
i.     Secretariat notifies SG/C that ?effective? LOA has been satisfied;
continue with (4) below. 

3)      Vacancies: 

a)      Resignation or other permanent vacancy.  

b)      Bylaws call for replacement according to the Stakeholder Group
Charter (Article X, Section 3(3)).

 
i.     During transition from vacancy until election of replacement
Councilor, continue with (4) below.


4)      Remedy: Temporary Alternate

a)      Same conditions as 5-c above except that subjects and participation
are not limited, i.e., TA may act in all matters that would have otherwise
occupied the absent or vacant Councilor.