AW: [gnso-osc-ops] OSC Transmittal for Section 3.8 and Chapter 4.0

[<KnobenW@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree
 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen 
Best regards 
Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 


Deutsche Telekom AG  
Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 
Heinrich-Hertz-Str. 3-7 
D - 64295 Darmstadt 
+49 2244 873999 (Tel.) 
+49 2151 5300 5206 (PC-Fax) 
+49 151 1452 5867 (Mobil) 
http://www.telekom.com <http://www.telekom.com/>  

Deutsche Telekom AG 
Aufsichtsrat: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Lehner (Vorsitzender) 
Vorstand: René Obermann (Vorsitzender) 
Timotheus Höttges (stellvertretender Vorsitzender) 
Hamid Akhavan, Manfred Balz, Reinhard Clemens, Niek Jan van Damme, Guido 
Kerkhoff, Thomas Sattelberger 
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn HRB 6794 
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bonn 
WEEE-Reg.-Nr.: DE50478376 

 


________________________________

        Von: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] 
Im Auftrag von Ken Bour
        Gesendet: Donnerstag, 20. Mai 2010 23:25
        An: gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx
        Betreff: [gnso-osc-ops] OSC Transmittal for Section 3.8 and Chapter 4.0
        
        

        GCOT Members:

         

        Below is a revised transmittal letter to the OSC in which I updated 
bullet #4 to be consistent with our teleconference on 19 May and the most 
recent documents submitted earlier today, 20 May, for GCOT review and approval.

         

        Ken Bour

        =======

         

        DRAFT TRANSMITTAL LETTER

         

        To:  OSC Members

         

        In early March 2010, in preparation for the ICANN Nairobi meetings, the 
GNSO Council Operations Team (GCOT) submitted to the OSC a new Chapter 
4.0-Voting that it recommended be included within the GNSO Operating Procedures 
(GOP).   As you will recall, the major purpose of that document was a new set 
of provisions for handling abstentions.   Accompanying the new GOP chapter, the 
GCOT also attached an Executive Summary which discussed the major implications 
of abstentions as they apply to GNSO Council voting and explained the GCOT's 
rationale in developing its recommendations.   

         

        During the OSC's Nairobi session, several questions were raised by OSC 
members that caused the GCOT to revisit and revise certain sections of the 
document.   In addition, as a result of the team's continued deliberations, 
additional changes have been made although the underlying architecture of the 
abstention remedies remains intact.   

         

        For the purposes of informing the OSC as to the revisions made, we 
thought it might be useful to outline them in the following section versus 
attempting to rewrite the original Executive Summary (attached), which 
otherwise continues to be an accurate rationale for the GCOT's work on 
abstentions. 

         

        Summary of GCOT Amendments since Nairobi: 

         

        1)      New Section 3.8-Absences and Vacancies

        At the time the original Section 4.5-Abstentions was drafted, it 
included applying the Temporary Alternate remedy for certain absence 
conditions.   During its review, the General Counsel's office recommended that, 
instead of confusing absences and abstentions, a new section be added to the 
GOP to cover absences.  That section was not completed prior to Nairobi; 
however, it is included in this transmission.   The title was subsequently 
changed to, "Section 3.8-Absences and Vacancies" as a result of a question 
raised during Nairobi, that is, "Do Councilor vacancies cause the voting 
denominator to change?" 

        The GCOT recognized that, while vacancy procedures exist in the Bylaws 
{Article X, Section 3(3) <http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm#X-3.3> }, 
nothing is stated about what happens to the voting thresholds in such 
situations.  Certainly a permanent vacancy would ultimately be resolved by 
electing a replacement; however, there might be a period of vacancy before the 
new Councilor takes his/her seat.  During such transitions, the GCOT is 
recommending that the Temporary Alternate remedy be made available to 
appointing organizations.  Section 3.8 was amended to address temporary 
vacancies and, as OCS members will note, it also covers planned and unplanned 
absences as well as leaves of absence.  

        2)      A second issue raised in Nairobi was the need for a procedure 
that allows Councilors to provide a reason or explanation when voting "Yes" or 
"No."  There is a prevailing perception that to offer an explanation requires 
an abstention.   To clarify this subject, the GCOT elected to modify the GOP 
(see Section 4.3.2) to provide that, while Councilors are not required to give 
a reason for a "No" or "Yes" vote, it is permissible and such explanations will 
be recorded in the minutes.   

        3)      A third question raised in Nairobi was, "Did the GCOT consider 
the concept of a 'Permanent' Alternate?  Staff responded that General Counsel's 
advice was to ensure that any application of "Temporary Alternate" be incident 
specific and limited in duration; however, there is nothing in the procedures 
that would prevent a SG/C from selecting an individual who is, more or less, 
"on call" to become a TA whenever that remedy is needed.   {KB Note:  I 
included this item for completeness since Steve Metalitz is an OCS member and 
may recall this item; however, since it did not result in any change to the 
procedures, the team might consider deleting it from this memorandum}.  

        4)      After further deliberation, the GCOT determined that, due to 
the unique challenges presented by the Nominating Committee Appointees (NCA) in 
not having "appointing organizations" as defined in the procedures, it would be 
logistically impractical to involve the Houses in approving remedies for 
abstentions.  The team decided to rewrite the provisions for House NCAs to 
permit Proxy Voting and Temporary Alternate remedies that are automatically 
activated (based on conditions and rules) without requiring action by the 
Houses or the Nominating Committee.  

        5)      The term "Appointing Organization" was needed in Section 3.8, 
but it had only been defined in Section 4.5.   In order to permit the use of 
this terminology throughout the GOP, Staff will be recommending a new 
"Definitions" section to be included in Chapter 1.0.  Staff will also be 
recommending several additional GOP improvements including a Table of Contents, 
a Document Revisions section, and placeholders for new chapters that are in 
process (e.g. Chapter 5.0-Statements and Disclosures of Interest and Chapter 
6.0-GNSO Work Prioritization).  

         

        The GCOT hopes that the above summary of changes will be instructive 
for OSC members in reviewing the revised Chapter 4.0-Voting and Section 
3.8-Absences & Vacancies.  

         

        The GCOT's expectation is that the OSC, in its review process, may make 
certain non-substantive amendments to these documents; however, it requests 
that any substantive changes be remanded to the team for further deliberation.  

         

        If the OSC needs additional explanation or rationale for any of 
attached procedures, please let us know.  

         

        Sincerely,

         

        Ray Fassett

        Chair-GCOT