RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Followup from the meeting.
I believe that all voting thresholds should be in the Bylaws because they are fundamental to the design of the bicameral structure. Chuck > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria > Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 12:42 PM > To: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [gnso-restruc-dt] Followup from the meeting. > > > Hi, > > some more questions and comments inline. > > thanks > > a. > > > > On 9 Jun 2009, at 18:03, Gomes, Chuck wrote: > > >>> > >>> > >>> Item 1.e in 'ARTICLE X: GENERIC NAMES SUPPORTING > >> ORGANIZATION; SECTION > >>> 3. GNSO COUNCIL' says, "One Nomcom Appointee voting > representative > >>> shall be assigned to each House subject to a selection procedure > >>> defined elsewhere in these by-laws." Is that procedure > going to be > >>> defined in the Bylaws? I thought it was going to be > defined by the > >>> NomCom but maybe I misunderstood the SIC response. > >> > >> yes and no. > >> > >> for the transition, how it is done will be defined by the board. > >> after that by the nomcom. > >> > >> later in the by-laws (x8), the specifics are made clear > regarding the > >> long term on the transition, we tried to change it > yesterday, but we > >> could not find the words and figured that the board would > decide what > >> went there when they were ready. > >> so i think this is covered for now. > > > > Chuck: One thing it seems to me we do not know is whether > it will be > > defined in the Bylaws or elsewhere. One thing we could do > is delete > > "in these Bylaws" and leave the first sentence as "One Nomcom > > Appointee voting representative shall be assigned to each House > > subject to a selection procedure defined elsewhere." I am > comfortable > > with whatever you decide. > > > i have drawn a line though the phrase in an updated version. > what do others think? > > > > > > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> Also in 'ARTICLE X: GENERIC NAMES SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION; > >> SECTION 3. > >>> GNSO COUNCIL', the last paragraph says, "Except as > >> otherwise specified > >>> in the Transition Article XX, Section 5 (link TBD) or Annex > >> A of these > >>> Bylaws (link TBD), all bicameral house voting thresholds > >> required to > >>> pass a GNSO Council motion or other action are prescribed > >> in the GNSO > >>> Council Operating Rules and Procedures approved by the Board." I > >>> thought we had agreed to include the voting thresholds in > >> the Bylaws > >>> and my understanding is that the SIC said the same thing. > >> Shouldn't > >>> we had the voting thresholds to this section with the changes I > >>> mention in the last paragraph below? > >> > >> They would belong in Annex A. which i thought we are not amending > >> until the PDP group finishes its work. > > > > Chuck: My objection is that the clause says, "all bicameral house > > voting thresholds required to pass a GNSO Council motion or other > > action are prescribed in the GNSO Council Operating Rules and > > Procedures". We agreed that they would be defined in the Bylaws. > > Whether that happens now or later after the PDP WG finishes is less > > significant than the fact that we state they will be in Rules. We > > should at least say "all bicameral house voting thresholds > required to > > pass a GNSO Council motion or other action will be > prescribed in the > > Bylaws." > > Except that that sentence already starts: > "Except as otherwise specified in the Transition Article XX, > Section 5 (link TBD) or Annex A of these Bylaws (link TBD).." > > what I am trying to understand is whether you are saying that > we should put all all voting thresholds in the by-laws, even > though SIC appears to be answered that they should be in ORP > except as required by legal. > > > > > > > >> > >> in the meantime we say: > >> > >> "Except as otherwise specified in the Transition Article > XX, Section > >> 5 (link TBD) or Annex A of these Bylaws (link TBD), all bicameral > >> house voting thresholds required to pass a GNSO Council motion or > >> other action are prescribed in the GNSO Council Operating > Rules and > >> Procedures approved by the Board." > >> > >> Does that cover it? > > > > Chuck: Only with the change I stated above. This is needed too. > > > > > >