<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[gnso-osc] FW: Further Council Ops Procedures Thoughts
- To: "Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-osc@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [gnso-osc] FW: Further Council Ops Procedures Thoughts
- From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:40:35 -0400
Ray,
Do you see any problems from the point of view of the GCOT regarding the
following, in particular the amendments at the end and using the reformatted
document for public comment?
OSC members: Please send any comments you have on the following today because
this will be discussed in the Council meeting early tomorrow.
Chuck
________________________________
From: Robert Hoggarth [mailto:robert.hoggarth@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 6:40 PM
To: Gomes, Chuck; Avri Doria
Cc: Glen de Saint Géry; Ray Fassett; Liz Gasster; Denise Michel; Julie Hedlund;
Margie Milam
Subject: Further Council Ops Procedures Thoughts
Dear Avri and Chuck;
Ken Bour and I spent a couple of hours today going over the new Bylaws and the
recommended Council Ops Procedures in an effort to better understand the issues
behind the recent brief dialogue on abstentions with Kristina and Phillip on
the Council email list AND in an effort to test and or break the ops processes
and voting mechanisms.
As a result of our effort, we have have come up with a number of ideas/concepts
we wanted to float by you prior to the Council meeting.
1. We've developed some edits to the recommendations - specifically Section
5.4 (# of votes cast) and section 3.5 (Quorum) that we think address the
affirmative vote/no vote abstaining issue by providing some more clarity to the
recommended voting procedure. That potential compromise language is set forth
at the end of this message.
2. At the conclusion of the Work Team's deliberations, noting that the team
had focused on the substance of each specific recommendation and not on the
overall format of the procedures, I suggested to Ray Fassett (copying Ray on
this message) that in preparation for the public comment period, Staff could
work on the format and presentation of the recommendations to make them more
clear and clean. We've started some work in that regard - not making any
substantive changes, but merely trying to pull different sections together and
consolidating common subjects areas (e.g., voting ) where there may be
references in more than one section of the recommendations. We should have a
suggested format finished for you all to take a look at tomorrow.
3. We discussed the conundrum of the incoming Council voting on the Ops
Procedures (before new voting procedures exist). We suggest that you consider
creating a procedural bridge between the two Councils in which the outgoing
Council "conditionally approves" the new procedures as a transitional matter
(perhaps this could take place at a "special" Council meeting during the
weekend in Seoul) and then have the incoming Council ratify them as its first
order of business. The new Council could then make changes over time as it
works with and develops some experience with the new procedures. Haven't
discussed this with the GC yet - just brainstorming.
4. We have also started to develop a a matrix/voting record spreadsheet as an
unofficial tool for the new Chair and Glen to use for recording votes. The
idea is to have a clear and understandable score sheet that can be used during
votes to easily show when voting thresholds have been met (or not). We'll get
Glen's feedback on the concept and share that with you when she is comfortable
with a draft document.
We are hopeful that the language suggested below is useful. Your comments are
most welcomed.
Cheers,
RobH
SUGGESTED REVISED LANGUAGE FOLLOWS. SUGGESTED CHANGES IN BOLD RED UNDERLINED
TEXT.
In the recommended Council Operating Procedures, we suggest some new language
to modify Section 5.4 and 3.5 as follows:
5.4 The Number of Votes Cast
OLD: To pass, a motion must attain a majority of the votes cast in each house
unless otherwise specified in these procedures or in the ICANN Bylaws.
Abstentions count as votes cast and shall include a reason for the abstention.
This has the effect of making an abstention count the same as a vote against
except as described in ICANN Bylaws, ANNEX A, GNSO Policy-Development Process,
Section 3, Initiation of PDP. [INSERT LIVE LINK TO THE BYLAWS.]
NEW: Unless otherwise specified in these procedures or in the ICANN Bylaws, to
pass a motion or other action, greater than 50% of the eligible voters in each
House must cast affirmative votes. For all votes taken, the number of eligible
voters in each House shall be fixed to the number of seats allocated in the
Bylaws (a.k.a. the denominator) and is not affected by the number of members
present or absent at the meeting in which the motion or other action is
initiated. Abstentions shall be recorded as non-votes and shall include a
reason.
3.5. Quorum
OLD: In order for the GNSO Council to initiate a meeting a quorum must be
present. A quorum is a majority of voting members, which includes at least one
member of each Stakeholder Group. [INSERT LIVE LINK TO BYLAWS.] Whenever a vote
is taken there must be a quorum.
NEW: In order for the GNSO Council to initiate a vote, a quorum must be
present. A quorum is a majority of voting members in each House, which
includes at least one member of each Stakeholder Group.
***END SUGGESTED LANGUAGE ***
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|