From julie.hedlund at icann.org Wed Mar 2 16:23:38 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 16:23:38 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Sub Team A Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Message-ID: <0AEA22CD-39FD-428A-B318-53584BCA311F@icann.org> Dear SCI members, On behalf of Sub Team A ? Sara Bockey, Angie Graves, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, and Lawrence Olawale-Roberts, and Rudi Vansnick ? I hereby transmit below a Report to the SCI for discussion at the next SCI meeting in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March at 0800-0900 UTC/Casablanca. For remote access see: https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/sat-gnso-sci. Note that the virtual meeting room is different from our usual Adobe Connect room. For your reference attached are the original review request, the letter to the GNSO Council documenting the current practice, and the steps/flow chart. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Sub Team A Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Recommendations: ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GNSO Procedures in Relation to Motions - Steps & Flow Chart.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 79368 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI Letter to GNSO Council Chair Concerning Current Practice in Relation to Motions 09 Oct 2015.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 166107 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Wed Mar 2 16:31:50 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 16:31:50 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Sub Team B Report to the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections Message-ID: Dear SCI members, On behalf of Sub Team B ? Anne Aikman-Scalese, Sara Bockey, Angie Graves, Lawrence Olawale-Roberts, and Wolf-Ulrich Knoben ? I hereby transmit below a Report to the SCI for discussion at the next SCI meeting in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March at 0800-0900 UTC/Casablanca. For remote access see: https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/sat-gnso-sci. Note that the virtual meeting room is different from our usual Adobe Connect room. For your reference attached is the original review request and the election timeline. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Sub Team B Report to the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections Recommendations: ISSUE 1: Must the GNSO Chair be a continuing (not new/incoming) Councilor? Should new/incoming Councilors be eligible to stand for election? See Section 2.2(b), which provides that a candidate for GNSO Chair ?does not need to be a member of a house, but must be a member of the GNSO Council.? With the ICANN Bylaws prescribing that a Council member?s term begins and ends at the conclusion of an ICANN annual general meeting, Section 2.2(b) as phrased would seem to limit candidates for the Chair to only incumbent, continuing Council members. AGREED: "A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of a house, but must be a [continuing or incoming] member of the GNSO Council." (Change to the GNSO Operating Procedures in brackets.) ACTION: Update the GNSO Operating Procedures accordingly. ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? See Section 2.2(f): For the Vice-Chairs to ?serve as interim Chairs until a successful election can be held? if a new Chair is not elected by the conclusion of the ICANN annual general meeting at which her term ends. However, the Procedures are silent as to what happens when one or both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council (which are set in the Bylaws) also end at that particular ICANN annual general meeting. The Bylaws state, "the regular term of each GNSO Council member shall begin at the conclusion of an ICANN annual meeting and shall end at the conclusion of the second ICANN annual meeting thereafter?Each GNSO Council member shall hold office during his or her regular term and until a successor has been selected and qualified or until that member resigns or is removed in accordance with these Bylaw.? AGREED: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." ACTION: Discuss with the SCI whether the procedure would apply only when both Vice-Chairs? terms end, or to include when only one Vice-Chair's term ends. Update the GNSO Operating Procedures accordingly. ISSUE 3: What should be the method for posting election results? See Section 2.2(g), which calls for the Council to ?inform the Board and the Community appropriately and post the election results on the GNSO website within 2 business days following each election and runoff ballot, whether successful or unsuccessful? without elaborating on what the appropriate mechanism (in addition to posting on the GNSO website) might be. AGREED: No need to make a change to the procedures if they are followed. However, there be a requirement for staff to follow up on every election (successful or not) with a note to the full Council enclosing the result. ACTION: Discuss in SCI whether the staff notification satisfies "publishing?. ISSUE 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? See Section 2.2: This section does not set out a timetable for the GNSO Chair election or prescribe a modality for setting that timetable for nominations and election in each cycle. AGREED: Create a timeline that includes the call for chair candidate nominations, the nominations of Council members, and time for SG/C/NCA meetings with candidates. ACTION: Review the attached timeline graphic. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GNSO Council Election Timeline.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 78608 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI Review Request - GNSO Officer Elections - updated 10 Nov 2015.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 108618 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lschulman at inta.org Fri Mar 4 17:04:13 2016 From: lschulman at inta.org (Lori Schulman) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 17:04:13 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council In-Reply-To: <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B993C97@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> References: <09F8D26C-EF78-4BFB-BB86-CADF93963BAF@icann.org> <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B991960@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> <50D86BD9-AF49-4A10-8C62-F34357B149CC@icann.org> <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B991A8C@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> <730E2B03-24DA-483A-98B1-ECDF8B1A5052@egyptig.org> <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B991B96@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> <4AD723A1-E5A8-4954-BEBD-DACDA53BF46F@icann.org> <6E406FC4-BEFE-4BB9-B3B0-AFD8710498D4@icann.org>,<9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B993C97@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> Message-ID: I am planning on dialing in which I believe is 2am my time. Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy INTA 202-261-6588 ________________________________ From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Sent: ?3/?4/?2016 12:02 PM To: 'Julie Hedlund'; 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings; gnso-secs at icann.org; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org; Lori Schulman; gregshatanipc at gmail.com Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council Thanks Julie. Unfortunately due to the time zone difference, I will not be able to attend the SCI meetings and the SCI update to GNSO Council remotely. Since being out with bronchitis, it is important for me to get good sleep. I am unsure as to whether Lori plans to participate remotely on behalf of IPC but she is copied here. I know the meetings are in good hands with Rudi. Will miss seeing all of you in Marrakech and hope to join again in the June meeting. Thank you all for your hard work. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman at lrrc.com _______________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com -----Original Message----- From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 9:10 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings; gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council All, Here are the final slides with the change suggested by Anne and confirmed by Amr. Thanks! Julie On 3/2/16, 3:17 PM, "Julie Hedlund" wrote: >Dear Amr, > >I am very sorry that we missed you as a volunteer for the sub teams. I don?t know how that happened. > >Earlier today I submitted on behalf of the two sub teams the reports to the SCI ? did you see them? I will send them directly to you too. > >Kind regards, >Julie > > > >On 3/2/16, 3:10 PM, "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" wrote: > >>Hi Amr. Sorry you did not get added. Subteam B definitely has materials to submit for full SCI discussion on Saturday and I know Julie plans to forward this as we have been finalizing the language and topics for discussion. Wolf-Ulrich took a leadership role in developing our Subteam B work thus far. >>Anne >> >>Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>Of Counsel >>520.629.4428 office >>520.879.4725 fax >>AAikman at lrrc.com >>_______________________________ >> >>Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>lrrc.com >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Amr Elsadr [mailto:aelsadr at egyptig.org] >>Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 1:04 PM >>To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne >>Cc: Julie Hedlund; Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >> >>Hi, >> >>I believe Anne is correct with regards to the order of consensus call followed by the public comment period. I don?t recall any SCI recommendations being subject to public comment in the absence of full consensus of the committee members. Now that I think about it, from a process perspective, that is rather unfortunate, since it robs the members of the SCI from taking public comments submitted into consideration before the consensus call is made. >> >>On the other hand, I don?t recall anyone ever submitting a comment on SCI recommendations, so the point may be practically moot. >> >>On another topic?, I was looking at the GNSO calendar a few days ago and noticed a few SCI sub-team meetings that took place. I thought I had volunteered for both of those (A & B) on one of our calls, but I may be wrong. I looked into it, and did notice that my name wasn?t on the list of sub-team members that was circulated on the SCI email list. Since I failed to respond, I suppose I have nobody to blame but myself. >> >>Are there any plans to provide an update to the full committee on progress made on those sub-teams? Is that what we will be discussing on Saturday morning? Perhaps some material shared in advance of Saturday may make the meeting a little more constructive? >> >>Thanks. >> >>Amr >> >>> On Mar 2, 2016, at 9:34 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Julie. I think the Consensus Call within SCI comes BEFORE putting recommendations out for public comment >>> >>> >>> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>> >>> Of Counsel >>> >>> 520.629.4428 office >>> >>> 520.879.4725 fax >>> >>> AAikman at lrrc.com >>> >>> _____________________________ >>> >>> >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>> >>> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>> >>> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> >>> lrrc.com >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 11:58 AM >>> To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; Rudi Vansnick >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>> Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks so much Anne, that?s a very helpful point. I?ve updated the slides accordingly and attached them. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" >>> Date: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 1:45 PM >>> To: Julie Hedlund , Rudi Vansnick >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr , Mary Wong , Marika Konings >>> Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie ? with regard to Next Steps, I think we have to note that the Consensus Call within SCI is required in each case. >>> >>> >>> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>> >>> Of Counsel >>> >>> 520.629.4428 office >>> >>> 520.879.4725 fax >>> >>> AAikman at lrrc.com >>> >>> _____________________________ >>> >>> >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>> >>> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>> >>> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> >>> lrrc.com >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 9:40 AM >>> To: Rudi Vansnick; Aikman-Scalese, Anne >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>> Subject: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> Importance: High >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Rudi and Anne, >>> >>> >>> >>> Mary and I have drafted for your review the attached slides for the SCI update to the GNSO Council on copy since as GNSO Council Liaison to the SCI. >>> >>> >>> >>> Note that I have attached the slides in both PowerPoint and PDF. You may find that if you don?t have view the PDF. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the ?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. >> >> >>________________________________ >> >>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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Fri Mar 4 18:30:11 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 18:30:11 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council In-Reply-To: <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B993CD4@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> References: <09F8D26C-EF78-4BFB-BB86-CADF93963BAF@icann.org> <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B991960@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> <50D86BD9-AF49-4A10-8C62-F34357B149CC@icann.org> <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B991A8C@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> <730E2B03-24DA-483A-98B1-ECDF8B1A5052@egyptig.org> <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B991B96@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> <4AD723A1-E5A8-4954-BEBD-DACDA53BF46F@icann.org> <6E406FC4-BEFE-4BB9-B3B0-AFD8710498D4@icann.org> <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B993C97@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B993CD4@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> Message-ID: <55358C81-708A-4CE9-BFFE-514E638203A2@icann.org> Many thanks Lori and I hope you feel better Anne! Kind regards, Julie From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" Date: Friday, March 4, 2016 at 5:29 PM To: 'Lori Schulman' , Julie Hedlund , 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick , Mary Wong , Marika Konings , "gnso-secs at icann.org" , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" , "gregshatanipc at gmail.com" Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council Thanks Lori! Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman at lrrc.com _____________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com From: Lori Schulman [mailto:lschulman at inta.org] Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 10:04 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; 'Julie Hedlund'; 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings; gnso-secs at icann.org; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org; gregshatanipc at gmail.com Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council I am planning on dialing in which I believe is 2am my time. Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy INTA 202-261-6588 From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Sent: ?3/?4/?2016 12:02 PM To: 'Julie Hedlund'; 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings; gnso-secs at icann.org; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org; Lori Schulman; gregshatanipc at gmail.com Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council Thanks Julie. Unfortunately due to the time zone difference, I will not be able to attend the SCI meetings and the SCI update to GNSO Council remotely. Since being out with bronchitis, it is important for me to get good sleep. I am unsure as to whether Lori plans to participate remotely on behalf of IPC but she is copied here. I know the meetings are in good hands with Rudi. Will miss seeing all of you in Marrakech and hope to join again in the June meeting. Thank you all for your hard work. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman at lrrc.com _______________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com -----Original Message----- From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 9:10 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings; gnso-secs at icann.org Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council All, Here are the final slides with the change suggested by Anne and confirmed by Amr. Thanks! Julie On 3/2/16, 3:17 PM, "Julie Hedlund" wrote: >Dear Amr, > >I am very sorry that we missed you as a volunteer for the sub teams. I don?t know how that happened. > >Earlier today I submitted on behalf of the two sub teams the reports to the SCI ? did you see them? I will send them directly to you too. > >Kind regards, >Julie > > > >On 3/2/16, 3:10 PM, "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" wrote: > >>Hi Amr. Sorry you did not get added. Subteam B definitely has materials to submit for full SCI discussion on Saturday and I know Julie plans to forward this as we have been finalizing the language and topics for discussion. Wolf-Ulrich took a leadership role in developing our Subteam B work thus far. >>Anne >> >>Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>Of Counsel >>520.629.4428 office >>520.879.4725 fax >>AAikman at lrrc.com >>_______________________________ >> >>Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>lrrc.com >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Amr Elsadr [mailto:aelsadr at egyptig.org] >>Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 1:04 PM >>To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne >>Cc: Julie Hedlund; Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >> >>Hi, >> >>I believe Anne is correct with regards to the order of consensus call followed by the public comment period. I don?t recall any SCI recommendations being subject to public comment in the absence of full consensus of the committee members. Now that I think about it, from a process perspective, that is rather unfortunate, since it robs the members of the SCI from taking public comments submitted into consideration before the consensus call is made. >> >>On the other hand, I don?t recall anyone ever submitting a comment on SCI recommendations, so the point may be practically moot. >> >>On another topic?, I was looking at the GNSO calendar a few days ago and noticed a few SCI sub-team meetings that took place. I thought I had volunteered for both of those (A & B) on one of our calls, but I may be wrong. I looked into it, and did notice that my name wasn?t on the list of sub-team members that was circulated on the SCI email list. Since I failed to respond, I suppose I have nobody to blame but myself. >> >>Are there any plans to provide an update to the full committee on progress made on those sub-teams? Is that what we will be discussing on Saturday morning? Perhaps some material shared in advance of Saturday may make the meeting a little more constructive? >> >>Thanks. >> >>Amr >> >>> On Mar 2, 2016, at 9:34 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Julie. I think the Consensus Call within SCI comes BEFORE putting recommendations out for public comment >>> >>> >>> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>> >>> Of Counsel >>> >>> 520.629.4428 office >>> >>> 520.879.4725 fax >>> >>> AAikman at lrrc.com >>> >>> _____________________________ >>> >>> >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>> >>> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>> >>> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> >>> lrrc.com >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 11:58 AM >>> To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; Rudi Vansnick >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>> Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks so much Anne, that?s a very helpful point. I?ve updated the slides accordingly and attached them. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" >>> Date: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 1:45 PM >>> To: Julie Hedlund , Rudi Vansnick >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr , Mary Wong , Marika Konings >>> Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie ? with regard to Next Steps, I think we have to note that the Consensus Call within SCI is required in each case. >>> >>> >>> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>> >>> Of Counsel >>> >>> 520.629.4428 office >>> >>> 520.879.4725 fax >>> >>> AAikman at lrrc.com >>> >>> _____________________________ >>> >>> >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>> >>> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>> >>> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> >>> lrrc.com >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund at icann.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 9:40 AM >>> To: Rudi Vansnick; Aikman-Scalese, Anne >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>> Subject: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> Importance: High >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Rudi and Anne, >>> >>> >>> >>> Mary and I have drafted for your review the attached slides for the SCI update to the GNSO Council on copy since as GNSO Council Liaison to the SCI. >>> >>> >>> >>> Note that I have attached the slides in both PowerPoint and PDF. You may find that if you don?t have view the PDF. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the ?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. >> >> >>________________________________ >> >>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. 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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From aelsadr at egyptig.org Mon Mar 7 11:11:15 2016 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (Amr Elsadr) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 11:11:15 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Just a Test Message-ID: <7534DDDB-C789-431B-98A5-A87509D6BE7B@egyptig.org> Hi, Been having problems with my hosting provider, and am not receiving emails from this list. I?m working it out now, and just testing using this email, so please disregard it. My apologies for the unnecessary traffic. Thanks. Amr From julie.hedlund at icann.org Mon Mar 7 15:46:09 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 15:46:09 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 Message-ID: <8DA3C871-A646-4379-8853-6F2640D8431B@icann.org> Dear SCI members, Please see below the actions captured from the SCI meeting held at ICANN 55 in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. For your reference, the Sub Team A and B Reports are attached along with the related materials. With respect to the next Sub Team B meeting, staff will send a Doodle Poll. In addition, for the next SCI call these have been held on Thursdays at 1800 UTC. Staff will separately ask for RSVPs for a possible SCI call on Thursday, 24 March. For these two meetings we are skipping the week immediately following the ICANN 55 meeting (13-19 March) as is our usual practice. Kind regards, Julie Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 1. Sub Team A: Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Action Item: Staff will draft language for the SCI to consider to incorporate the informal procedures into the GNSO Operating Procedures. 2. Sub Team B: Report to the SCI on Chair-Vice Chair Elections Issue 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? >From the Report to the SCI: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." Action Item: Sub Team B will continue discussion on this issue. Consider whether there should be steps for each possibilty that could ensure a predictable outcome. Issue 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? Action Item: Concerning the Election Timeline ? It was noted that the timeline will be very important if incoming councilors can be considered for Chair elections. The request is for the representatives from the two Houses in the SCI to review the timeline and bring their comments back to the SCI. New issue 5: If there is no Chair elected is it the Vice Chairs who run the meetings and calls the votes? Action Item: Sub Team B will consider this issue. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Current Practice in Relation to Motions - Steps & Flow Chart.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 93071 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GNSO Council Election Timeline.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 78608 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI Letter to GNSO Council Chair Concerning Current Practice in Relation to Motions 09 Oct 2015.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 166107 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SCI Review Request - GNSO Officer Elections - updated 10 Nov 2015.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 108618 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Julie Hedlund Subject: Sub Team A Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 11:23:36 -0500 Size: 347950 URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Julie Hedlund Subject: Sub Team B Report to the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 11:31:48 -0500 Size: 280138 URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Mon Mar 7 15:55:38 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 15:55:38 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Message-ID: <7B0CEF68-7467-41D0-B2EF-013B0C5C0525@icann.org> Dear SCI members, Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be Mon Mar 7 16:32:22 2016 From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 16:32:22 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: <7B0CEF68-7467-41D0-B2EF-013B0C5C0525@icann.org> References: <7B0CEF68-7467-41D0-B2EF-013B0C5C0525@icann.org> Message-ID: <38174E07-2727-4BFD-8C4F-34701C06C39B@isoc.be> Hi Julie, I will be available for that call, will bock the day already Rudi Vansnick Chair Non-for-Profit Operational Concerns Constituency (NPOC) www.npoc.org rudi.vansnick at npoc.org Tel : +32 (0)9 329 39 16 Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32 > Op 7 mrt. 2016, om 15:55 heeft Julie Hedlund > het volgende geschreven: > > Dear SCI members, > > Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). > > Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. > > Kind regards, > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Mon Mar 7 16:34:03 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 16:34:03 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: <38174E07-2727-4BFD-8C4F-34701C06C39B@isoc.be> References: <7B0CEF68-7467-41D0-B2EF-013B0C5C0525@icann.org> <38174E07-2727-4BFD-8C4F-34701C06C39B@isoc.be> Message-ID: Many thanks Rudi! Kind regards, Julie From: Rudi Vansnick Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 4:32 PM To: Julie Hedlund Cc: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Hi Julie, I will be available for that call, will bock the day already Rudi Vansnick Chair Non-for-Profit Operational Concerns Constituency (NPOC) www.npoc.org rudi.vansnick at npoc.org Tel : +32 (0)9 329 39 16 Mobile : +32 (0)475 28 16 32 Op 7 mrt. 2016, om 15:55 heeft Julie Hedlund het volgende geschreven: Dear SCI members, Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sbockey at godaddy.com Mon Mar 7 15:57:38 2016 From: sbockey at godaddy.com (Sara Bockey) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 15:57:38 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Message-ID: Hi Julie, That time works for me. Sara From: > on behalf of Julie Hedlund > Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 3:55 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Dear SCI members, Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From douglaskarel at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 18:37:20 2016 From: douglaskarel at gmail.com (Karel Douglas) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 14:37:20 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, That time is good for me too. A gentle reminder closer to the date will be greatly appreciated. Thanks Karel On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Sara Bockey wrote: > Hi Julie, > > That time works for me. > > Sara > > From: on behalf of Julie Hedlund < > julie.hedlund at icann.org> > Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 3:55 PM > To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC > > Dear SCI members, > > Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are > requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, > 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding > the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). > > Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend > this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether > there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, > or seek an alternate date. > > Kind regards, > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Mon Mar 7 18:36:08 2016 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 18:36:08 -0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: <7B0CEF68-7467-41D0-B2EF-013B0C5C0525@icann.org> References: <7B0CEF68-7467-41D0-B2EF-013B0C5C0525@icann.org> Message-ID: <1D0F6EF435144300BE0759645D06AB2F@WUKPC> Thanks Julie, that time I?ll be on a train where I hopefully shall have satisfactory connectivity. But we should definitely have this meeting. I?ll do my very best Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 3:55 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Dear SCI members, Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Mon Mar 7 19:32:15 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 19:32:15 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <171367BF-5809-42E8-93BF-FB49DCDF9565@icann.org> Dear Karel and Sara, Thank you very much for confirming. We?ll be happy to send a reminder too. Kind regards, Julie From: Karel Douglas Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 6:37 PM To: Sara Bockey Cc: Julie Hedlund , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Dear All, That time is good for me too. A gentle reminder closer to the date will be greatly appreciated. Thanks Karel On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Sara Bockey wrote: Hi Julie, That time works for me. Sara From: on behalf of Julie Hedlund Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 3:55 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Dear SCI members, Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Mon Mar 7 19:32:46 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 19:32:46 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: <1D0F6EF435144300BE0759645D06AB2F@WUKPC> References: <7B0CEF68-7467-41D0-B2EF-013B0C5C0525@icann.org> <1D0F6EF435144300BE0759645D06AB2F@WUKPC> Message-ID: <72BDE433-7365-4E6E-AE85-1EBBD9F1EC26@icann.org> Dear Wolf-Ulrich, Thank you very much for confirming. Kind regards, Julie From: WUKnoben Reply-To: WUKnoben Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 6:36 PM To: Julie Hedlund , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Thanks Julie, that time I?ll be on a train where I hopefully shall have satisfactory connectivity. But we should definitely have this meeting. I?ll do my very best Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 3:55 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Dear SCI members, Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From icann at microboss.org Tue Mar 8 06:37:22 2016 From: icann at microboss.org (Lawrence Olawale-Roberts) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 06:37:22 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: <72BDE433-7365-4E6E-AE85-1EBBD9F1EC26@icann.org> References: <7B0CEF68-7467-41D0-B2EF-013B0C5C0525@icann.org> <1D0F6EF435144300BE0759645D06AB2F@WUKPC> <72BDE433-7365-4E6E-AE85-1EBBD9F1EC26@icann.org> Message-ID: <20160308063731.96838609F8@relay.mailchannels.net> Hi Julie, I will be available for this call. Lawrence -----Original Message----- From: "Julie Hedlund" Sent: ?3/?7/?2016 7:32 PM To: "WUKnoben" ; "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Dear Wolf-Ulrich, Thank you very much for confirming. Kind regards, Julie From: WUKnoben Reply-To: WUKnoben Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 6:36 PM To: Julie Hedlund , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Thanks Julie, that time I?ll be on a train where I hopefully shall have satisfactory connectivity. But we should definitely have this meeting. I?ll do my very best Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 3:55 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Dear SCI members, Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aelsadr at egyptig.org Tue Mar 8 10:10:19 2016 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (aelsadr at egyptig.org) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 05:10:19 -0500 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Message-ID: <0540bf3dcde487905b8539aec1ba335e.squirrel@kefka.asoshared.com> Hi Julie and all, I should be available for an SCI call on March 24th. Thanks. Amr From julie.hedlund at icann.org Tue Mar 8 10:28:07 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 10:28:07 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: <0540bf3dcde487905b8539aec1ba335e.squirrel@kefka.asoshared.com> References: <0540bf3dcde487905b8539aec1ba335e.squirrel@kefka.asoshared.com> Message-ID: Thanks Amr for confirming. Kind regards, Julie On 3/8/16, 10:10 AM, "owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org on behalf of aelsadr at egyptig.org" wrote: > >Hi Julie and all, > >I should be available for an SCI call on March 24th. > >Thanks. > >Amr > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu Tue Mar 8 10:35:45 2016 From: Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu (Milan, Stefania) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 10:35:45 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: References: <0540bf3dcde487905b8539aec1ba335e.squirrel@kefka.asoshared.com>, Message-ID: Dear Julie, all thanks for your note. Unfortunately I will be traveling all the way till end of March, and I won't be able to attend a teleconference on March 24. The NCSG alternative representative Karel hopefully will be available. Thanks, Stefania ________________________________________ Da: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org per conto di Julie Hedlund Inviato: marted? 8 marzo 2016 11.28 A: aelsadr at egyptig.org; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Oggetto: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Thanks Amr for confirming. Kind regards, Julie On 3/8/16, 10:10 AM, "owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org on behalf of aelsadr at egyptig.org" wrote: > >Hi Julie and all, > >I should be available for an SCI call on March 24th. > >Thanks. > >Amr > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. From julie.hedlund at icann.org Tue Mar 8 10:37:25 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 10:37:25 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: References: <0540bf3dcde487905b8539aec1ba335e.squirrel@kefka.asoshared.com> Message-ID: <938CFCB2-E25D-4D76-9B42-AC25F9E54A13@icann.org> Dear Stefania, Thank you very much for letting us know. If the meeting is scheduled we will include your apologies. Kind regards, Julie On 3/8/16, 10:35 AM, "Milan, Stefania" wrote: >Dear Julie, all >thanks for your note. Unfortunately I will be traveling all the way till end of March, and I won't be able to attend a teleconference on March 24. The NCSG alternative representative Karel hopefully will be available. >Thanks, Stefania > >________________________________________ >Da: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org per conto di Julie Hedlund >Inviato: marted? 8 marzo 2016 11.28 >A: aelsadr at egyptig.org; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Oggetto: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC > >Thanks Amr for confirming. > >Kind regards, >Julie > > > >On 3/8/16, 10:10 AM, "owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org on behalf of aelsadr at egyptig.org" wrote: > >> >>Hi Julie and all, >> >>I should be available for an SCI call on March 24th. >> >>Thanks. >> >>Amr >> >> > >The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lschulman at inta.org Tue Mar 8 10:37:49 2016 From: lschulman at inta.org (Lori Schulman) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 10:37:49 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: References: <0540bf3dcde487905b8539aec1ba335e.squirrel@kefka.asoshared.com>, Message-ID: I can meet at that time. Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy International Trademark Association (INTA) +1-202-261-6588, Skype: lsschulman -----Original Message----- From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Milan, Stefania Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 5:36 AM To: Julie Hedlund ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Dear Julie, all thanks for your note. Unfortunately I will be traveling all the way till end of March, and I won't be able to attend a teleconference on March 24. The NCSG alternative representative Karel hopefully will be available. Thanks, Stefania ________________________________________ Da: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org per conto di Julie Hedlund Inviato: marted? 8 marzo 2016 11.28 A: aelsadr at egyptig.org; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Oggetto: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Thanks Amr for confirming. Kind regards, Julie On 3/8/16, 10:10 AM, "owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org on behalf of aelsadr at egyptig.org" wrote: > >Hi Julie and all, > >I should be available for an SCI call on March 24th. > >Thanks. > >Amr > > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. From julie.hedlund at icann.org Tue Mar 8 10:40:05 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 10:40:05 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: References: <0540bf3dcde487905b8539aec1ba335e.squirrel@kefka.asoshared.com> Message-ID: Thank you Lori for confirming. Kind regards, Julie On 3/8/16, 10:37 AM, "Lori Schulman" wrote: >I can meet at that time. > >Lori S. Schulman >Senior Director, Internet Policy >International Trademark Association (INTA) >+1-202-261-6588, Skype: lsschulman > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Milan, Stefania >Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 5:36 AM >To: Julie Hedlund ; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC > > >Dear Julie, all >thanks for your note. Unfortunately I will be traveling all the way till end of March, and I won't be able to attend a teleconference on March 24. The NCSG alternative representative Karel hopefully will be available. >Thanks, Stefania > >________________________________________ >Da: owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org per conto di Julie Hedlund >Inviato: marted? 8 marzo 2016 11.28 >A: aelsadr at egyptig.org; gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org >Oggetto: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC > >Thanks Amr for confirming. > >Kind regards, >Julie > > > >On 3/8/16, 10:10 AM, "owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org on behalf of aelsadr at egyptig.org" wrote: > >> >>Hi Julie and all, >> >>I should be available for an SCI call on March 24th. >> >>Thanks. >> >>Amr >> >> > >The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Mon Mar 14 17:23:12 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 17:23:12 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Message-ID: <14D4568F-D1ED-4247-8CEF-D3E436B11659@icann.org> Dear SCI members, This is a reminder if you have not already responded. Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From douglaskarel at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 17:48:41 2016 From: douglaskarel at gmail.com (Karel Douglas) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 13:48:41 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: <14D4568F-D1ED-4247-8CEF-D3E436B11659@icann.org> References: <14D4568F-D1ED-4247-8CEF-D3E436B11659@icann.org> Message-ID: Hi, I confirm that I will attend. Please send a reminder the day before - thanks regards Karel On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote: > Dear SCI members, > > *This is a reminder if you have not already responded.* > > Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are > requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, > 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding > the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). > > *Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March* to let us know whether you can attend > this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether > there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, > or seek an alternate date. > > Kind regards, > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Policy Director > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Mon Mar 14 17:51:44 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 17:51:44 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: References: <14D4568F-D1ED-4247-8CEF-D3E436B11659@icann.org> Message-ID: <2840C968-0FB1-4F99-B547-134D32F77AA2@icann.org> Dear Karel, Thank you very much for your confirmation. We will send a reminder after the meeting is scheduled. Kind regards, Julie From: Karel Douglas Date: Monday, March 14, 2016 at 1:48 PM To: Julie Hedlund Cc: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Hi, I confirm that I will attend. Please send a reminder the day before - thanks regards Karel On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote: Dear SCI members, This is a reminder if you have not already responded. Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From douglaskarel at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 18:01:49 2016 From: douglaskarel at gmail.com (Karel Douglas) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 14:01:49 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC In-Reply-To: <2840C968-0FB1-4F99-B547-134D32F77AA2@icann.org> References: <14D4568F-D1ED-4247-8CEF-D3E436B11659@icann.org> <2840C968-0FB1-4F99-B547-134D32F77AA2@icann.org> Message-ID: Dear Julie, Thank you so very much Julie. It is greatly appreciated! Karel On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote: > Dear Karel, > > Thank you very much for your confirmation. We will send a reminder after > the meeting is scheduled. > > Kind regards, > Julie > > From: Karel Douglas > Date: Monday, March 14, 2016 at 1:48 PM > To: Julie Hedlund > Cc: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March > 2016 1800 UTC > > Hi, > > I confirm that I will attend. Please send a reminder the day before - > thanks > > regards > > Karel > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Julie Hedlund > wrote: > >> Dear SCI members, >> >> *This is a reminder if you have not already responded.* >> >> Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are >> requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, >> 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding >> the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). >> >> *Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March* to let us know whether you can >> attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine >> whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either >> schedule it, or seek an alternate date. >> >> Kind regards, >> Julie >> >> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Fri Mar 18 13:46:36 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 13:46:36 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] SCHEDULED: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Message-ID: <771AE151-8F27-4BD4-874F-8D0801D5A695@icann.org> Dear SCI members, Based on the RSVPs received as of COB yesterday, 27 March, staff will go ahead and schedule the call for Thursday, 24 March at 1800 UTC. The GNSO Secretariat will send out a notice. Please see below the actions from the SCI meeting in Marrakech on 05 March. Note that Sub Team B will be meeting Monday, 21 March to discuss the action items from its report to the SCI. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 1. Sub Team A: Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Action Item: Staff will draft language for the SCI to consider to incorporate the informal procedures into the GNSO Operating Procedures. 2. Sub Team B: Report to the SCI on Chair-Vice Chair Elections Issue 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? >From the Report to the SCI: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." Action Item: Sub Team B will continue discussion on this issue. Consider whether there should be steps for each possibilty that could ensure a predictable outcome. Issue 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? Action Item: Concerning the Election Timeline ? It was noted that the timeline will be very important if incoming councilors can be considered for Chair elections. The request is for the representatives from the two Houses in the SCI to review the timeline and bring their comments back to the SCI. New issue 5: If there is no Chair elected is it the Vice Chairs who run the meetings and calls the votes? Action Item: Sub Team B will consider this issue. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Tue Mar 22 20:46:09 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 20:46:09 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections Message-ID: <83A55AA5-FFD0-4C73-8505-A316594D1F8D@icann.org> Dear SCI members, The Sub Team B deliberated yesterday on the remaining issue relating to the Chair/Vice Chair elections. They present the following action item and possible scenarios, including pros and cons, to the SCI for consideration and discussion at the meeting on Thursday, 24 March. Also for consideration is a revised draft election timeline. Best regards. Julie Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support Remaining Issue to Address on Chair/Vice Chair Elections ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? Discussion points: The primary goal is to have a successful election of a Chair and a simple solution. The options should give preference to the continuation of the Vice Chairs if they are available to continue (not term-limited). In case there is no incumbent Vice Chair available then the designation should be made by the related House. Designation by both Houses of a non-voting NCA to act as interim Chair in the absence of an available Vice-Chair should be done only as a possible last resort (subject to possible conditions from the NomCom). Action Item--Possible Scenarios and Suggestions in Order of Priority: SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. Suggestion: ?In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.? Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair?s term on the Council is ending. Suggestion: ?In the case where one of Vice-Chair's' term on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.? Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. Suggestion: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing cCouncilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest.? Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. Suggestion: ?if both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, a non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is elected. Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GNSO Council Election Timeline v3.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 94553 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Wed Mar 23 18:36:10 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 18:36:10 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Re: Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections In-Reply-To: <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B9B138E@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> References: <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B9B138E@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> Message-ID: <0EE95690-AE96-4459-8AB0-E2757D792BD3@icann.org> Anne, Thanks very much for the helpful feedback. Staff will include them in the document we put in the Adobe Connect room tomorrow ? along with any other comments we may receive. Kind regards, Julie From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 2:21 PM To: Julie Hedlund , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: RE: Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections Julie et al, I have some preliminary comments from IPC Leadership for SCI consideration and discussion as shown inline in red text below. (These are not final positions ? just questions and comments.) Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman at lrrc.com _____________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com From:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 1:46 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections Dear SCI members, The Sub Team B deliberated yesterday on the remaining issue relating to the Chair/Vice Chair elections. They present the following action item and possible scenarios, including pros and cons, to the SCI for consideration and discussion at the meeting on Thursday, 24 March. Also for consideration is a revised draft election timeline. Best regards. Julie Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support Remaining Issue to Address on Chair/Vice Chair Elections ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? Discussion points: The primary goal is to have a successful election of a Chair and a simple solution. The options should give preference to the continuation of the Vice Chairs if they are available to continue (not term-limited). In case there is no incumbent Vice Chair available then the designation should be made by the related House. Designation by both Houses of a non-voting NCA to act as interim Chair in the absence of an available Vice-Chair should be done only as a possible last resort (subject to possible conditions from the NomCom). Action Item--Possible Scenarios and Suggestions in Order of Priority: SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. Suggestion: ?In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.? Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair?s term on the Council is ending. If one Vice Chair seat is being vacated, the relevant House should appoint an Interim Vice Chair to work with the continuing Vice Chair in the other House to conduct Council business. Suggestion: ?In the case where one of Vice-Chair's' term on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.? Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. It should be clear that an appointed Interim Vice Chair is not prohibited from continuing as Vice Chair after the Council Chair election is concluded, provided the relevant House agrees on that Vice Chair continuing. ?their service in those roles would end? should be clarified. Suggestion: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing cCouncilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest.? Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. Question as to how long each House has to do this before we default to Scenario 4. SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. Suggestion: ?if both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, a non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is elected. The reference should be to ?the? non-voting NCA since there is only one. An inexperienced incoming non-voting NCA conducting Council business may be a concern but this scenario is a ?last resort? and may also provide motivation for the Houses to appoint Interim Vice Chairs quickly as noted by Amr and Sara in chat on Monday. Important to specify at what point Scenario 4 takes effect, i.e. how much time do the Houses have to appoint Vice Chairs in Scenario 3? Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business. 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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 6488 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Wed Mar 23 19:41:40 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:41:40 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions Message-ID: Dear SCI Members, Per the action item below from the SCI meeting on 05 March relating to the Sub Team A report on Current Practice in Relation to Motions, Mary and I have drafted language for your consideration for a revised version of the GNSO Operating Procedures. The language is contained in a new section 3.3.3 Submitting, Seconding, and Amending Motions in the attached document. The language is based on the documentation of the current procedure, as well as the changes to current procedure, recommended by Sub Team A and agreed to by the SCI. The recommendations are provided below for reference. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Sub Team A Recommendations ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. From: on behalf of Julie Hedlund Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 10:46 AM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 Dear SCI members, Please see below the actions captured from the SCI meeting held at ICANN 55 in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. For your reference, the Sub Team A and B Reports are attached along with the related materials. With respect to the next Sub Team B meeting, staff will send a Doodle Poll. In addition, for the next SCI call these have been held on Thursdays at 1800 UTC. Staff will separately ask for RSVPs for a possible SCI call on Thursday, 24 March. For these two meetings we are skipping the week immediately following the ICANN 55 meeting (13-19 March) as is our usual practice. Kind regards, Julie Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 1. Sub Team A: Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Action Item: Staff will draft language for the SCI to consider to incorporate the informal procedures into the GNSO Operating Procedures. 2. Sub Team B: Report to the SCI on Chair-Vice Chair Elections Issue 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? >From the Report to the SCI: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." Action Item: Sub Team B will continue discussion on this issue. Consider whether there should be steps for each possibilty that could ensure a predictable outcome. Issue 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? Action Item: Concerning the Election Timeline ? It was noted that the timeline will be very important if incoming councilors can be considered for Chair elections. The request is for the representatives from the two Houses in the SCI to review the timeline and bring their comments back to the SCI. New issue 5: If there is no Chair elected is it the Vice Chairs who run the meetings and calls the votes? Action Item: Sub Team B will consider this issue. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GNSO Operating Procedures Proposed Revision Relating to Motions & Amendments 23 March 2016.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 42650 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From aelsadr at egyptig.org Wed Mar 23 20:30:37 2016 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (Amr Elsadr) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 22:30:37 +0200 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1AE0AFC6-BC9A-46F2-94E3-60C13E18CA66@egyptig.org> Hi Julie, Apologies to you, Mary and all for any negligence on my part to this. I was not aware that the SCI had reached an agreement on this topic. I have two points I would still like to discuss further: > On Mar 23, 2016, at 9:41 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote: [SNIP] > Sub Team A Recommendations > > ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? > AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. > ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): > 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. > > ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? > AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. > ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. > > ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? > AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. > ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): > 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. Is there a reason why the SCI believes that motions should not be discussed during Council meetings if not seconded? Couldn?t we leave it to the discretion of the Council to make this decision? > ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? > AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. > ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. I was actually hoping that we could recommend a deadline for suggesting amendments to motions. I?d be happy to discuss this on tomorrow?s call, if time permits. Thanks. Amr From aelsadr at egyptig.org Wed Mar 23 20:31:52 2016 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (Amr Elsadr) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 22:31:52 +0200 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Julie, Apologies to you, Mary and all for any negligence on my part to this. I was not aware that the SCI had reached an agreement on this topic. I have two points I would still like to discuss further: > On Mar 23, 2016, at 9:41 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote: [SNIP] > Sub Team A Recommendations > > ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? > AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. > ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): > 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. > > ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? > AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. > ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. > > ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? > AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. > ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): > 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. Is there a reason why the SCI believes that motions should not be discussed during Council meetings if not seconded? Couldn?t we leave it to the discretion of the Council to make this decision? > ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? > AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. > ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. I was actually hoping that we could recommend a deadline for suggesting amendments to motions. I?d be happy to discuss this on tomorrow?s call, if time permits. Thanks. Amr From julie.hedlund at icann.org Wed Mar 23 22:07:12 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 22:07:12 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <76310CF0-80CF-4B03-A604-593BD3EFAA2A@icann.org> Hi Amr, No apologies necessary and perhaps I was incorrect in capturing the action item from the meeting in Marrakech that the staff should proceed to draft language. However, as this is just draft language staff did anticipate that there would be discussion and consideration on it at the meeting tomorrow at the very least. On your first question if I recall correctly (and Sub Team members can correct me if I am wrong) I think there were two reasons for not starting discussion on a motion without a second. One was that if there was no second and/or one not forthcoming it would be a waste of time to discuss the motion. The other was that a motion without a second might be considered to not have sufficient support for discussion. However, I?ll defer to the Sub Team to provide further clarification. On your second question the Sub Team discussed extensively whether to have a deadline for amendments, but again if I recall correctly (and here again I defer to Sub Team members) I think it was decided that having a deadline could inhibit a productive discussion of an amendment, and that in many cases amendments have been raised during discussion and have resulted in a revised motion that after discussion has passed with the benefit of being amended. Kind regards, Julie On 3/23/16, 4:31 PM, "Amr Elsadr" wrote: >Hi Julie, > >Apologies to you, Mary and all for any negligence on my part to this. I was not aware that the SCI had reached an agreement on this topic. I have two points I would still like to discuss further: > >> On Mar 23, 2016, at 9:41 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote: > >[SNIP] > >> Sub Team A Recommendations >> >> ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? >> AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. >> ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): >> 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. >> >> ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? >> AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. >> ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. >> >> ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? >> AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. >> ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): >> 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. > >Is there a reason why the SCI believes that motions should not be discussed during Council meetings if not seconded? Couldn?t we leave it to the discretion of the Council to make this decision? > >> ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? >> AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. >> ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. > >I was actually hoping that we could recommend a deadline for suggesting amendments to motions. I?d be happy to discuss this on tomorrow?s call, if time permits. > >Thanks. > >Amr -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From aelsadr at egyptig.org Thu Mar 24 11:25:19 2016 From: aelsadr at egyptig.org (Amr Elsadr) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 13:25:19 +0200 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions In-Reply-To: <76310CF0-80CF-4B03-A604-593BD3EFAA2A@icann.org> References: <76310CF0-80CF-4B03-A604-593BD3EFAA2A@icann.org> Message-ID: <4DD2AD67-47CC-40C9-851D-DDD42A4D44CA@egyptig.org> Hi Julie, Thanks for adding some context to the rationale behind the current draft language. That?s really helpful. And I believe that you are correct; that staff prepping draft language was an action item. If I recall correctly, this was one of the action items we agreed to close to the end of the SCI meeting in Marrakech. Others can correct me if I am mistaken. Also?, going over the transcripts of the Saturday morning SCI meeting in Marrakech, I realised that this was discussed as a first agenda item, which I missed because I was tardy in getting to the meeting on time. My fault really. :) Thanks again. Amr > On Mar 24, 2016, at 12:07 AM, Julie Hedlund wrote: > > Hi Amr, > > No apologies necessary and perhaps I was incorrect in capturing the action item from the meeting in Marrakech that the staff should proceed to draft language. However, as this is just draft language staff did anticipate that there would be discussion and consideration on it at the meeting tomorrow at the very least. > > On your first question if I recall correctly (and Sub Team members can correct me if I am wrong) I think there were two reasons for not starting discussion on a motion without a second. One was that if there was no second and/or one not forthcoming it would be a waste of time to discuss the motion. The other was that a motion without a second might be considered to not have sufficient support for discussion. However, I?ll defer to the Sub Team to provide further clarification. > > On your second question the Sub Team discussed extensively whether to have a deadline for amendments, but again if I recall correctly (and here again I defer to Sub Team members) I think it was decided that having a deadline could inhibit a productive discussion of an amendment, and that in many cases amendments have been raised during discussion and have resulted in a revised motion that after discussion has passed with the benefit of being amended. > > Kind regards, > Julie > > > > On 3/23/16, 4:31 PM, "Amr Elsadr" wrote: > >> Hi Julie, >> >> Apologies to you, Mary and all for any negligence on my part to this. I was not aware that the SCI had reached an agreement on this topic. I have two points I would still like to discuss further: >> >>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 9:41 PM, Julie Hedlund wrote: >> >> [SNIP] >> >>> Sub Team A Recommendations >>> >>> ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? >>> AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. >>> ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): >>> 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. >>> >>> ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? >>> AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. >>> ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. >>> >>> ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? >>> AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. >>> ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): >>> 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. >> >> Is there a reason why the SCI believes that motions should not be discussed during Council meetings if not seconded? Couldn?t we leave it to the discretion of the Council to make this decision? >> >>> ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? >>> AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. >>> ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. >> >> I was actually hoping that we could recommend a deadline for suggesting amendments to motions. I?d be happy to discuss this on tomorrow?s call, if time permits. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Amr From Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de Thu Mar 24 13:58:58 2016 From: Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de (Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 14:58:58 +0100 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Re: Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections In-Reply-To: <0EE95690-AE96-4459-8AB0-E2757D792BD3@icann.org> References: <9A9B4207E6315F4080868F440D9CFC7A1B9B138E@ODCMBX01-1.firm.lrrlaw.com> <0EE95690-AE96-4459-8AB0-E2757D792BD3@icann.org> Message-ID: Hi Anne, As I mentioned I'll be on train during the call today and I know that the connection may cut sometimes. I therefore would appreciate you presenting to the SCI the status of our team work. Hope I can contribute as much as possible Thanks and regards Wolf-Ulrich Sent from my personal phone > Am 23.03.2016 um 19:36 schrieb Julie Hedlund : > > Anne, > > Thanks very much for the helpful feedback. Staff will include them in the document we put in the Adobe Connect room tomorrow ? along with any other comments we may receive. > > Kind regards, > Julie > > From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" > Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 2:21 PM > To: Julie Hedlund , "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" > Subject: RE: Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections > > Julie et al, > I have some preliminary comments from IPC Leadership for SCI consideration and discussion as shown inline in red text below. (These are not final positions ? just questions and comments.) > Anne > > Anne E. Aikman-Scalese > Of Counsel > 520.629.4428 office > 520.879.4725 fax > AAikman at lrrc.com > _____________________________ > > Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP > One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 > Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 > lrrc.com > > From:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund > Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 1:46 PM > To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org > Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections > > Dear SCI members, > > The Sub Team B deliberated yesterday on the remaining issue relating to the Chair/Vice Chair elections. They present the following action item and possible scenarios, including pros and cons, to the SCI for consideration and discussion at the meeting on Thursday, 24 March. Also for consideration is a revised draft election timeline. > > Best regards. > Julie > > Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support > > Remaining Issue to Address on Chair/Vice Chair Elections > > ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? > Discussion points: The primary goal is to have a successful election of a Chair and a simple solution. The options should give preference to the continuation of the Vice Chairs if they are available to continue (not term-limited). In case there is no incumbent Vice Chair available then the designation should be made by the related House. Designation by both Houses of a non-voting NCA to act as interim Chair in the absence of an available Vice-Chair should be done only as a possible last resort (subject to possible conditions from the NomCom). > > Action Item--Possible Scenarios and Suggestions in Order of Priority: > > SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. > > Suggestion: ?In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.? > Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. > Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? > > SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair?s term on the Council is ending. If one Vice Chair seat is being vacated, the relevant House should appoint an Interim Vice Chair to work with the continuing Vice Chair in the other House to conduct Council business. > > Suggestion: ?In the case where one of Vice-Chair's' term on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.? > Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. > Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? > > SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. It should be clear that an appointed Interim Vice Chair is not prohibited from continuing as Vice Chair after the Council Chair election is concluded, provided the relevant House agrees on that Vice Chair continuing. ?their service in those roles would end? should be clarified. > > Suggestion: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing cCouncilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest.? > Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. > Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. Question as to how long each House has to do this before we default to Scenario 4. > > SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. > > Suggestion: ?if both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, a non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is elected. The reference should be to ?the? non-voting NCA since there is only one. An inexperienced incoming non-voting NCA conducting Council business may be a concern but this scenario is a ?last resort? and may also provide motivation for the Houses to appoint Interim Vice Chairs quickly as noted by Amr and Sara in chat on Monday. Important to specify at what point Scenario 4 takes effect, i.e. how much time do the Houses have to appoint Vice Chairs in Scenario 3? > Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. > Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business. > > > 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. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de Thu Mar 24 20:06:37 2016 From: wolf-ulrich.knoben at t-online.de (WUKnoben) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 21:06:37 +0100 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions In-Reply-To: <76310CF0-80CF-4B03-A604-593BD3EFAA2A@icann.org> References: <76310CF0-80CF-4B03-A604-593BD3EFAA2A@icann.org> Message-ID: <6E2086E7BF1B40C080B1962149F7374A@WUKPC> Chiming in late to this, when we started discussing I searched Wikipedia for the reason of seconding a motion. The original rationale - grounding from US parliamentary procedures - is as Julie explained: avoid useless discussion. >From this to me it consequently means that a second is needed before the discussion begins. I would say that from submitting a motion according to the rules (10 days before the meeting) a preliminary discussion on the list could take place (e.g. submitting amendments) but when the item is called to discussion at the meeting a second should be available before the meeting discussion on this point begins. So wasting meeting time could be avoided. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 11:07 PM To: Amr Elsadr Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions Hi Amr, No apologies necessary and perhaps I was incorrect in capturing the action item from the meeting in Marrakech that the staff should proceed to draft language. However, as this is just draft language staff did anticipate that there would be discussion and consideration on it at the meeting tomorrow at the very least. On your first question if I recall correctly (and Sub Team members can correct me if I am wrong) I think there were two reasons for not starting discussion on a motion without a second. One was that if there was no second and/or one not forthcoming it would be a waste of time to discuss the motion. The other was that a motion without a second might be considered to not have sufficient support for discussion. However, I???ll defer to the Sub Team to provide further clarification. On your second question the Sub Team discussed extensively whether to have a deadline for amendments, but again if I recall correctly (and here again I defer to Sub Team members) I think it was decided that having a deadline could inhibit a productive discussion of an amendment, and that in many cases amendments have been raised during discussion and have resulted in a revised motion that after discussion has passed with the benefit of being amended. Kind regards, Julie On 3/23/16, 4:31 PM, "Amr Elsadr" wrote: >Hi Julie, > >Apologies to you, Mary and all for any negligence on my part to this. I was >not aware that the SCI had reached an agreement on this topic. I have two >points I would still like to discuss further: > >> On Mar 23, 2016, at 9:41 PM, Julie Hedlund >> wrote: > >[SNIP] > >> Sub Team A Recommendations >> >> ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? >> AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. >> ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and >> attached): >> 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion >> the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. >> >> ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a >> Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? >> AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a >> different stakeholder group or constituency. >> ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. >> >> ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? >> AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. >> ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and >> attached): >> 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion >> and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a >> second. > >Is there a reason why the SCI believes that motions should not be discussed >during Council meetings if not seconded? Couldn???t we leave it to the >discretion of the Council to make this decision? > >> ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting >> amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than >> have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new >> subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a >> motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? >> AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, >> or during, discussion of a motion. >> ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. > >I was actually hoping that we could recommend a deadline for suggesting >amendments to motions. I???d be happy to discuss this on tomorrow???s call, >if time permits. > >Thanks. > >Amr From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Mar 24 20:36:04 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 20:36:04 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Notes/Actions: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 Message-ID: <4DD786B5-DD5D-45A4-87A9-70E00B932D85@icann.org> Dear SCI members, Please see below the notes/actions captured from the SCI meeting held on 24 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. During today?s call it was agreed that discussion could continue on the list concerning these notes/actions. I?ve included the suggestions provided by IPC, as these were included in today?s discussion. The suggested changes for your review are in red/brackets as indicated below. Staff will separately send a notice for a call in two weeks on Thursday, 07 April at the usual time of 1800 UTC. Kind regards, Julie Notes/Actions re Remaining Issue on Chair/Vice Chair Elections: ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. Suggestion: ?In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.? Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs conducting Council business. **ACTION ITEM: The suggestion above is accepted. SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair?s term on the Council is ending. IPC suggestion: If one Vice Chair seat is being vacated, the relevant House should appoint an Interim Vice Chair to work with the continuing Vice Chair in the other House to conduct Council business. Suggestion: ?In the case where one of Vice-Chair's terms on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, [OPTION 1: the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected] OR [OPTION 2: the House with a vacant Vice-Chair position shall designate an Interim Vice Chair to join the continuing Vice Chair would to oversee the Chair eletion and conduct Council business. The deadline for the vacant House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? [Note: The previously noted disadvantage would no longer apply if the other House can designate an Interim Vice Chair.] Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs (including an Interim Vice Chair designated by a House) conducting Council business. Question: What is the time limit for the vacant House to to designate an Interim Vice Chair? Note the three options suggested during the call: 1) 10 calendar days after the failed Chair election; 2) 14 calendar days after the failed Chair election; or 3) 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting. ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. IPC Suggestion: should be clear that an appointed Interim Vice Chair is not prohibited from continuing as Vice Chair after the Council Chair election is concluded, provided the relevant House agrees on that Vice Chair continuing. ?their service in those roles would end? should be clarified. Suggestion: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing Councilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] The Designated Interim Vice Chairs will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair will not be eligible to serve as Designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest. [However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election.] Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. Notes: - Strike ?non-voting? from the NCA option. - Add "The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting?. - After ?potential conflicts of interest? add, ?However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election." ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. Suggestion: ?If both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, [the] non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting]" IPC Suggestion: The reference should be to ?the? non-voting NCA since there is only one. An inexperienced incoming non-voting NCA conducting Council business may be a concern but this scenario is a ?last resort? and may also provide motivation for the Houses to appoint Interim Vice Chairs quickly as noted by Amr and Sara in chat on Monday. Important to specify at what point Scenario 4 takes effect, i.e. how much time do the Houses have to appoint Vice Chairs in Scenario 3? Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business? Notes: Insert the suggested deadlines for the Houses to designate the Interim Vice Chairs and change reference relating to ?the non-voting NCA". ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de Thu Mar 24 22:20:57 2016 From: Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de (Wolf-Ulrich.Knoben at t-online.de) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 23:20:57 +0100 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Notes/Actions: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 In-Reply-To: <4DD786B5-DD5D-45A4-87A9-70E00B932D85@icann.org> References: <4DD786B5-DD5D-45A4-87A9-70E00B932D85@icann.org> Message-ID: <88612CEB-97B5-45A8-B3CE-EE7FE0FE99AB@t-online.de> Thanks Julie, I agree to this analysis. I understand that further discussion shall continue on SCI- rather than subtract level. Regards Wolf-Ulrich Sent from my personal phone > Am 24.03.2016 um 21:36 schrieb Julie Hedlund : > > Dear SCI members, > > Please see below the notes/actions captured from the SCI meeting held on 24 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. During today?s call it was agreed that discussion could continue on the list concerning these notes/actions. I?ve included the suggestions provided by IPC, as these were included in today?s discussion. The suggested changes for your review are in red/brackets as indicated below. > > Staff will separately send a notice for a call in two weeks on Thursday, 07 April at the usual time of 1800 UTC. > > Kind regards, > Julie > > Notes/Actions re Remaining Issue on Chair/Vice Chair Elections: > > ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? > > SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. > Suggestion: ?In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.? > Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. > Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? > > Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs conducting Council business. > > **ACTION ITEM: The suggestion above is accepted. > > SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair?s term on the Council is ending. > IPC suggestion: If one Vice Chair seat is being vacated, the relevant House should appoint an Interim Vice Chair to work with the continuing Vice Chair in the other House to conduct Council business. > > Suggestion: ?In the case where one of Vice-Chair's terms on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, [OPTION 1: the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected] OR [OPTION 2: the House with a vacant Vice-Chair position shall designate an Interim Vice Chair to join the continuing Vice Chair would to oversee the Chair eletion and conduct Council business. The deadline for the vacant House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] > > Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. > Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? [Note: The previously noted disadvantage would no longer apply if the other House can designate an Interim Vice Chair.] > > Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs (including an Interim Vice Chair designated by a House) conducting Council business. > > Question: What is the time limit for the vacant House to to designate an Interim Vice Chair? Note the three options suggested during the call: 1) 10 calendar days after the failed Chair election; 2) 14 calendar days after the failed Chair election; or 3) 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting. > > ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. > > SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. > IPC Suggestion: should be clear that an appointed Interim Vice Chair is not prohibited from continuing as Vice Chair after the Council Chair election is concluded, provided the relevant House agrees on that Vice Chair continuing. ?their service in those roles would end? should be clarified. > > Suggestion: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing Councilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] The Designated Interim Vice Chairs will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair will not be eligible to serve as Designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest. [However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election.] > > Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. > Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. > > Notes: > - Strike ?non-voting? from the NCA option. > - Add "The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting?. > - After ?potential conflicts of interest? add, ?However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election." > > ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. > > SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. Suggestion: ?If both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, [the] non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting]" IPC Suggestion: The reference should be to ?the? non-voting NCA since there is only one. An inexperienced incoming non-voting NCA conducting Council business may be a concern but this scenario is a ?last resort? and may also provide motivation for the Houses to appoint Interim Vice Chairs quickly as noted by Amr and Sara in chat on Monday. Important to specify at what point Scenario 4 takes effect, i.e. how much time do the Houses have to appoint Vice Chairs in Scenario 3? > > Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. > Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business? > > Notes: Insert the suggested deadlines for the Houses to designate the Interim Vice Chairs and change reference relating to ?the non-voting NCA". > > ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From terri.agnew at icann.org Fri Mar 25 01:06:59 2016 From: terri.agnew at icann.org (Terri Agnew) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 01:06:59 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] attendance of the SCI meeting - 24 March 2016 Message-ID: Dear All, Due to technical issues the mp3 will be sent shortly. Please see attendance below for the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Thursday, 24 March 2016: On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#mar (transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page) Attendees: Amr Elsadr - NCUC - Primary Angie Graves - BC - Primary Anne Aikman-Scalese - IPC - Primary - Vice Chair Sara Bockey - RrSG - Primary Lawrence Olawale-Roberts - BC - Alternate Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPCP - Primary Martin Pablo Valent - NPOC - Alternate Apologies: Stefania Milan - NCSG - Primary Rudi Vansnick - NPOC -Primary -Chair ICANN Staff: Julie Hedlund Mary Wong Glen de Saint G?ry Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew Adobe Chat Transcript 24 March 2016 Terri Agnew:Welcome to the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) meeting held on 24 March 2016 Amr Elsadr:Hi all. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Hello Everyone Mary Wong:Ry SG is not represented. Amr Elsadr:Looks like we're missing RySG, NCSG and NPOC. Amr Elsadr:Yes..., no NCAs either. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:or maybe dial out to them Terri Agnew:as a reminder, please mute when not speaking Terri Agnew:Hi Lawrence, op will dial out to you in a moment Julie Hedlund:All: I have unsynced the document so you can move it. Mary Wong:The consensus call (when the time comes) will also take place on the mailing list, and last approx 2 weeks (per usual practice). Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:@Terri thanks, am dialing in and waiting for approval Terri Agnew:@Lawrence - advising the op Mary Wong:If this suggestion is to be adopted, perhaps consider a time limit for that appointment? Mary Wong:E.g. by the time of the next Council meeting at the latest? Angie Graves:sorry--am in a loud place Angie Graves:You addresed my point Angie Graves:Thank you. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: That sounds OK by me. What if (and this is very unlikely) the Councl fails to elect a chair during a second election round? Mary Wong:@Amr, I meant to have an interim from the vacant House, not the duration of the interim appointment Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Apologies, I'm not sure I understand the question. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: Understood. I meant to ask that if the deadline to appoint an interim is over, but the council persists in failing to elect a chair. This may mean an additional 30 days. Amr Elsadr:Would make sense to extend the interim appointment election, wouldn't it? Mary Wong:@Anne, yes, exactly Amr Elsadr:Sorry. My last comment made no sense. :) Amr Elsadr:I meant that it would make sense to extend the deadline by which an interim can be appointed. Mary Wong:@Amr, haha no worries. My suggestion is meant to not delay Council biz further by having NO chair and NO second VC. Amr Elsadr:OK. Thanks for the context Mary. That sounds good to me. Mary Wong:@Anne, that seems logical too (apply deadline for interim appointment to Scenario 3 too). Amr Elsadr:I believe the bylaws (30 day provision) only applies to Council chair elections, not VC appointments. Is that right? Mary Wong:@Amr, yes Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Sorry I got disconnected. Connectivity is poor, even voice line. I try to follow the chat as good as I can Amr Elsadr:Welcome WUK. Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, I think that is right. Amr Elsadr:@WUK: Welcome back. I'll warn you though, I'm not making much sense in the chat today. :( Terri Agnew:Wolf-Ulrich is only on AC at the moment Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Sounds good. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:can you shed some light on this Mary Wong:So Scenario 4 would kick in if the deadline for interim appointments (e.g. by the next Council meeting) is NOT met. Julie Hedlund:@Mary: That's my understanding. Mary Wong:And under Scenario 4, the "last resort" interm Chair (the non-voting NCA) would be interim Chair until the Chair is elected conclusively, which under the Procedures would be approx a max of 2 months out (normally). Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i think that flies Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i dont see a problem with an interim Vice chair running for a vice chair Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. VCs are appointed/selected by a House, not elected. Angie Graves:Thank you for the SCENARIO 3 note Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:Under scenario 4 there shouldn't be a break in council business until VCs are appointed or the non-voting NCA takes place Terri Agnew:Welcome Martin Silva Julie Hedlund:@Amr: What if we just strike "non-voting NCA"? Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, that is why staff suggested having a deadline for the House(s) to make the interim appointment, i.e. by the time of the next Council meeting. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:the Non-voting NCA presently by the GNSO OP IS eligible to run for council chair, so if same were to hold office for a short while to run an election it should surfice Amr Elsadr:@Julie: I would be OK with that, but am really just wondering whether or not there is some sort of conflict. I'm not actually sure. Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:why not appoint interim VCs on the spot, meaning directly following the meeting where the chair election failed? I guess all SG leading reps should be available to assist... Amr Elsadr:@Lawrence: You are correct, but we are talking about vice-chair, not chair. I don't think there are limitations on that either, but should probably check. Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, maybe that can be phrased as the ideal scenario, but failing that, have a maximum deadline? Just in case. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@ Wolf-Ulrich - House may not be able to agree that quickly as to who should serve Amr Elsadr:Like I said, I see no problem with the non-voting NCA being appointed as an interim chair under scenario 4. It's scenario 3 that I'm wondering about. Martin Silva:Hi all, struggling with a weird connection here but I think I'll manage to be on for the rest of the meeting. Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:hanks Mary, agree Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:T... Julie Hedlund:@Amr: The Procedures are silent on NCAs and Vice Chairs. They say, "a. Each house shall select a Council Vice-Chair from within its respective house.." Julie Hedlund:That;s all. Mary Wong:@Amr, wouldn't that be up to the House? Amr Elsadr:@Anne: a non-voting NCA is not from within a house. Amr Elsadr:Thanks Julie. That's helpful. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: +1 Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. I believe that is best. Mary Wong:The only thing staff can think of is perhaps this is the kind of situation where having a neutral non-voting person may be preferable? Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:+1 i agree also Sara Bockey:@Anne, I agree as well. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:that the non voting NCA should be left out. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:of option 3 Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:senerio 4 would serve as a stimulant to ensuring that election faliure does not get to this point Amr Elsadr:Agree with Mary. Amr Elsadr:Apologies. I missed pretty much everything Mary just said. Had dropped off the call. Amr Elsadr:been dropped off. Amr Elsadr:Back now. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Once an election fails and it is officially announced (which is a 2 day time frame) , tthe process to resheduling and conducting another election should proceed and be in place in the time frame we agree Sara Bockey:I like the idea of a prescribe timeline to make them make a decision sooner rather than later, but I'm not familiar with how Council works ...but that is my inclination Amr Elsadr:Well... Amr Elsadr:Practical. :) Amr Elsadr:Some of those agrees are old. Angie Graves:Mine was old Amr Elsadr:How about a deadline of one week before the following Council meeting? Mary Wong:10 calendar days? Julie Hedlund:@Lawrence -- there has only been one failed election -- in Dublin. The Vice Chairs were continuing and handled the election and business. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:great Amr Elsadr:In Dublin, the NCPH managed to reach some decisions before the week was over. Mary Wong:Sure, Anne Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for that julie Julie Hedlund:@ Anne: We are probably better off holding the call at the usual time. Amr Elsadr:Can we also continue this on-list? Try to take advantage of time between calls? Julie Hedlund:Rather than a Doodle. Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, on the list. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:so it looks like a 2 week time frame could work out well Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye. Martin Silva:Thank you! Angie Graves:thanks Sara Bockey:thank you all Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for the time, bye now Martin Silva:bye bye Mary Wong:Thanks all -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From douglaskarel at gmail.com Fri Mar 25 01:53:12 2016 From: douglaskarel at gmail.com (Karel Douglas) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 21:53:12 -0400 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] attendance of the SCI meeting - 24 March 2016 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, Please excuse my non-attendance as I was required to go to Court. I will peruse the meeting notes. regards Karel On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 9:06 PM, Terri Agnew wrote: > Dear All, > > Due to technical issues the mp3 will be sent shortly. Please see > attendance below for the Standing Committee on Improvements > Implementation meeting held on *Thursday, 24 March 2016: * > > On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#mar > > > > (transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page) > > > > *Attendees:* > > Amr Elsadr ? NCUC - Primary > > Angie Graves ? BC ? Primary > > Anne Aikman-Scalese ? IPC ? Primary ? Vice Chair > > Sara Bockey ? RrSG - Primary > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts ? BC ? Alternate > > Wolf-Ulrich Knoben ? ISPCP ? Primary > > Martin Pablo Valent ? NPOC - Alternate > > > > *Apologies: * > > Stefania Milan ? NCSG ? Primary > > Rudi Vansnick ? NPOC ?Primary ?Chair > > > > *ICANN Staff:* > > Julie Hedlund > > Mary Wong > > Glen de Saint G?ry > > Terri Agnew > > ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > Thank you. > > Kind regards, > > Terri Agnew > > *Adobe Chat Transcript **24 March 2016* > > Terri Agnew:Welcome to the Standing Committee on Improvements > Implementation (SCI) meeting held on 24 March 2016 > > Amr Elsadr:Hi all. > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Hello Everyone > > Mary Wong:Ry SG is not represented. > > Amr Elsadr:Looks like we're missing RySG, NCSG and NPOC. > > Amr Elsadr:Yes..., no NCAs either. > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:or maybe dial out to them > > Terri Agnew:as a reminder, please mute when not speaking > > Terri Agnew:Hi Lawrence, op will dial out to you in a moment > > Julie Hedlund:All: I have unsynced the document so you can move it. > > Mary Wong:The consensus call (when the time comes) will also take place > on the mailing list, and last approx 2 weeks (per usual practice). > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:@Terri thanks, am dialing in and waiting for > approval > > Terri Agnew:@Lawrence - advising the op > > Mary Wong:If this suggestion is to be adopted, perhaps consider a time > limit for that appointment? > > Mary Wong:E.g. by the time of the next Council meeting at the latest? > > Angie Graves:sorry--am in a loud place > > Angie Graves:You addresed my point > > Angie Graves:Thank you. > > Amr Elsadr:@Mary: That sounds OK by me. What if (and this is very > unlikely) the Councl fails to elect a chair during a second election round? > > Mary Wong:@Amr, I meant to have an interim from the vacant House, not > the duration of the interim appointment > > Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Apologies, I'm not sure I understand the question. > > Amr Elsadr:@Mary: Understood. I meant to ask that if the deadline to > appoint an interim is over, but the council persists in failing to elect a > chair. This may mean an additional 30 days. > > Amr Elsadr:Would make sense to extend the interim appointment election, > wouldn't it? > > Mary Wong:@Anne, yes, exactly > > Amr Elsadr:Sorry. My last comment made no sense. :) > > Amr Elsadr:I meant that it would make sense to extend the deadline by > which an interim can be appointed. > > Mary Wong:@Amr, haha no worries. My suggestion is meant to not delay > Council biz further by having NO chair and NO second VC. > > Amr Elsadr:OK. Thanks for the context Mary. That sounds good to me. > > Mary Wong:@Anne, that seems logical too (apply deadline for interim > appointment to Scenario 3 too). > > Amr Elsadr:I believe the bylaws (30 day provision) only applies to > Council chair elections, not VC appointments. Is that right? > > Mary Wong:@Amr, yes > > Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Sorry I got disconnected. Connectivity is poor, even > voice line. I try to follow the chat as good as I can > > Amr Elsadr:Welcome WUK. > > Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, I think that is right. > > Amr Elsadr:@WUK: Welcome back. I'll warn you though, I'm not making > much sense in the chat today. :( > > Terri Agnew:Wolf-Ulrich is only on AC at the moment > > Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Sounds good. > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:can you shed some light on this > > Mary Wong:So Scenario 4 would kick in if the deadline for interim > appointments (e.g. by the next Council meeting) is NOT met. > > Julie Hedlund:@Mary: That's my understanding. > > Mary Wong:And under Scenario 4, the "last resort" interm Chair (the > non-voting NCA) would be interim Chair until the Chair is elected > conclusively, which under the Procedures would be approx a max of 2 months > out (normally). > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i think that flies > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i dont see a problem with an interim Vice chair > running for a vice chair > > Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. VCs are appointed/selected by a House, not > elected. > > Angie Graves:Thank you for the SCENARIO 3 note > > Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:Under scenario 4 there shouldn't be a break in > council business until VCs are appointed or the non-voting NCA takes place > > Terri Agnew:Welcome Martin Silva > > Julie Hedlund:@Amr: What if we just strike "non-voting NCA"? > > Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, that is why staff suggested having a deadline > for the House(s) to make the interim appointment, i.e. by the time of the > next Council meeting. > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:the Non-voting NCA presently by the GNSO OP IS > eligible to run for council chair, so if same were to hold office for a > short while to run an election it should surfice > > Amr Elsadr:@Julie: I would be OK with that, but am really just > wondering whether or not there is some sort of conflict. I'm not actually > sure. > > Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:why not appoint interim VCs on the spot, meaning > directly following the meeting where the chair election failed? I guess all > SG leading reps should be available to assist... > > Amr Elsadr:@Lawrence: You are correct, but we are talking about > vice-chair, not chair. I don't think there are limitations on that either, > but should probably check. > > Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, maybe that can be phrased as the ideal > scenario, but failing that, have a maximum deadline? Just in case. > > Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@ Wolf-Ulrich - House may not be able to agree > that quickly as to who should serve > > Amr Elsadr:Like I said, I see no problem with the non-voting NCA being > appointed as an interim chair under scenario 4. It's scenario 3 that I'm > wondering about. > > Martin Silva:Hi all, struggling with a weird connection here but I think > I?ll manage to be on for the rest of the meeting. > > Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:hanks Mary, agree > > Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:T... > > Julie Hedlund:@Amr: The Procedures are silent on NCAs and Vice Chairs. > They say, "a. Each house shall select a Council Vice-Chair > from within its respective house.." > > Julie Hedlund:That;s all. > > Mary Wong:@Amr, wouldn't that be up to the House? > > Amr Elsadr:@Anne: a non-voting NCA is not from within a house. > > Amr Elsadr:Thanks Julie. That's helpful. > > Amr Elsadr:@Mary: +1 > > Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. I believe that is best. > > Mary Wong:The only thing staff can think of is perhaps this is the kind > of situation where having a neutral non-voting person may be preferable? > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:+1 i agree also > > Sara Bockey:@Anne, I agree as well. > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:that the non voting NCA should be left out. > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:of option 3 > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:senerio 4 would serve as a stimulant to > ensuring that election faliure does not get to this point > > Amr Elsadr:Agree with Mary. > > Amr Elsadr:Apologies. I missed pretty much everything Mary just said. > Had dropped off the call. > > Amr Elsadr:been dropped off. > > Amr Elsadr:Back now. > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Once an election fails and it is officially > announced (which is a 2 day time frame) , tthe process to resheduling and > conducting another election should proceed and be in place in the time > frame we agree > > Sara Bockey:I like the idea of a prescribe timeline to make them make a > decision sooner rather than later, but I'm not familiar with how Council > works ...but that is my inclination > > Amr Elsadr:Well... > > Amr Elsadr:Practical. :) > > Amr Elsadr:Some of those agrees are old. > > Angie Graves:Mine was old > > Amr Elsadr:How about a deadline of one week before the following Council > meeting? > > Mary Wong:10 calendar days? > > Julie Hedlund:@Lawrence -- there has only been one failed election -- > in Dublin. The Vice Chairs were continuing and handled the election and > business. > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:great > > Amr Elsadr:In Dublin, the NCPH managed to reach some decisions before > the week was over. > > Mary Wong:Sure, Anne > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for that julie > > Julie Hedlund:@ Anne: We are probably better off holding the call at > the usual time. > > Amr Elsadr:Can we also continue this on-list? Try to take advantage of > time between calls? > > Julie Hedlund:Rather than a Doodle. > > Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, on the list. > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:so it looks like a 2 week time frame could work > out well > > Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye. > > Martin Silva:Thank you! > > Angie Graves:thanks > > Sara Bockey:thank you all > > Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for the time, bye now > > Martin Silva:bye bye > > Mary Wong:Thanks all > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From terri.agnew at icann.org Fri Mar 25 16:21:13 2016 From: terri.agnew at icann.org (Terri Agnew) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 16:21:13 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] MP3 of the SCI meeting - 24 March 2016 Message-ID: Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Thursday, 24 March 2016. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-sci-24mar16-en.mp3 Thank you. Kind regards, Terri From: owner-gnso-secs at icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-secs at icann.org] On Behalf Of Terri Agnew Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 8:07 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org Cc: GNSO-SECS at icann.org Subject: [gnso-secs] attendance of the SCI meeting - 24 March 2016 Dear All, Due to technical issues the mp3 will be sent shortly. Please see attendance below for the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Thursday, 24 March 2016: On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#mar (transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page) Attendees: Amr Elsadr - NCUC - Primary Angie Graves - BC - Primary Anne Aikman-Scalese - IPC - Primary - Vice Chair Sara Bockey - RrSG - Primary Lawrence Olawale-Roberts - BC - Alternate Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPCP - Primary Martin Pablo Valent - NPOC - Alternate Apologies: Stefania Milan - NCSG - Primary Rudi Vansnick - NPOC -Primary -Chair ICANN Staff: Julie Hedlund Mary Wong Glen de Saint G?ry Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew Adobe Chat Transcript 24 March 2016 Terri Agnew:Welcome to the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) meeting held on 24 March 2016 Amr Elsadr:Hi all. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Hello Everyone Mary Wong:Ry SG is not represented. Amr Elsadr:Looks like we're missing RySG, NCSG and NPOC. Amr Elsadr:Yes..., no NCAs either. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:or maybe dial out to them Terri Agnew:as a reminder, please mute when not speaking Terri Agnew:Hi Lawrence, op will dial out to you in a moment Julie Hedlund:All: I have unsynced the document so you can move it. Mary Wong:The consensus call (when the time comes) will also take place on the mailing list, and last approx 2 weeks (per usual practice). Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:@Terri thanks, am dialing in and waiting for approval Terri Agnew:@Lawrence - advising the op Mary Wong:If this suggestion is to be adopted, perhaps consider a time limit for that appointment? Mary Wong:E.g. by the time of the next Council meeting at the latest? Angie Graves:sorry--am in a loud place Angie Graves:You addresed my point Angie Graves:Thank you. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: That sounds OK by me. What if (and this is very unlikely) the Councl fails to elect a chair during a second election round? Mary Wong:@Amr, I meant to have an interim from the vacant House, not the duration of the interim appointment Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Apologies, I'm not sure I understand the question. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: Understood. I meant to ask that if the deadline to appoint an interim is over, but the council persists in failing to elect a chair. This may mean an additional 30 days. Amr Elsadr:Would make sense to extend the interim appointment election, wouldn't it? Mary Wong:@Anne, yes, exactly Amr Elsadr:Sorry. My last comment made no sense. :) Amr Elsadr:I meant that it would make sense to extend the deadline by which an interim can be appointed. Mary Wong:@Amr, haha no worries. My suggestion is meant to not delay Council biz further by having NO chair and NO second VC. Amr Elsadr:OK. Thanks for the context Mary. That sounds good to me. Mary Wong:@Anne, that seems logical too (apply deadline for interim appointment to Scenario 3 too). Amr Elsadr:I believe the bylaws (30 day provision) only applies to Council chair elections, not VC appointments. Is that right? Mary Wong:@Amr, yes Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Sorry I got disconnected. Connectivity is poor, even voice line. I try to follow the chat as good as I can Amr Elsadr:Welcome WUK. Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, I think that is right. Amr Elsadr:@WUK: Welcome back. I'll warn you though, I'm not making much sense in the chat today. :( Terri Agnew:Wolf-Ulrich is only on AC at the moment Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Sounds good. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:can you shed some light on this Mary Wong:So Scenario 4 would kick in if the deadline for interim appointments (e.g. by the next Council meeting) is NOT met. Julie Hedlund:@Mary: That's my understanding. Mary Wong:And under Scenario 4, the "last resort" interm Chair (the non-voting NCA) would be interim Chair until the Chair is elected conclusively, which under the Procedures would be approx a max of 2 months out (normally). Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i think that flies Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i dont see a problem with an interim Vice chair running for a vice chair Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. VCs are appointed/selected by a House, not elected. Angie Graves:Thank you for the SCENARIO 3 note Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:Under scenario 4 there shouldn't be a break in council business until VCs are appointed or the non-voting NCA takes place Terri Agnew:Welcome Martin Silva Julie Hedlund:@Amr: What if we just strike "non-voting NCA"? Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, that is why staff suggested having a deadline for the House(s) to make the interim appointment, i.e. by the time of the next Council meeting. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:the Non-voting NCA presently by the GNSO OP IS eligible to run for council chair, so if same were to hold office for a short while to run an election it should surfice Amr Elsadr:@Julie: I would be OK with that, but am really just wondering whether or not there is some sort of conflict. I'm not actually sure. Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:why not appoint interim VCs on the spot, meaning directly following the meeting where the chair election failed? I guess all SG leading reps should be available to assist... Amr Elsadr:@Lawrence: You are correct, but we are talking about vice-chair, not chair. I don't think there are limitations on that either, but should probably check. Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, maybe that can be phrased as the ideal scenario, but failing that, have a maximum deadline? Just in case. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@ Wolf-Ulrich - House may not be able to agree that quickly as to who should serve Amr Elsadr:Like I said, I see no problem with the non-voting NCA being appointed as an interim chair under scenario 4. It's scenario 3 that I'm wondering about. Martin Silva:Hi all, struggling with a weird connection here but I think I'll manage to be on for the rest of the meeting. Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:hanks Mary, agree Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:T... Julie Hedlund:@Amr: The Procedures are silent on NCAs and Vice Chairs. They say, "a. Each house shall select a Council Vice-Chair from within its respective house.." Julie Hedlund:That;s all. Mary Wong:@Amr, wouldn't that be up to the House? Amr Elsadr:@Anne: a non-voting NCA is not from within a house. Amr Elsadr:Thanks Julie. That's helpful. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: +1 Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. I believe that is best. Mary Wong:The only thing staff can think of is perhaps this is the kind of situation where having a neutral non-voting person may be preferable? Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:+1 i agree also Sara Bockey:@Anne, I agree as well. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:that the non voting NCA should be left out. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:of option 3 Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:senerio 4 would serve as a stimulant to ensuring that election faliure does not get to this point Amr Elsadr:Agree with Mary. Amr Elsadr:Apologies. I missed pretty much everything Mary just said. Had dropped off the call. Amr Elsadr:been dropped off. Amr Elsadr:Back now. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Once an election fails and it is officially announced (which is a 2 day time frame) , tthe process to resheduling and conducting another election should proceed and be in place in the time frame we agree Sara Bockey:I like the idea of a prescribe timeline to make them make a decision sooner rather than later, but I'm not familiar with how Council works ...but that is my inclination Amr Elsadr:Well... Amr Elsadr:Practical. :) Amr Elsadr:Some of those agrees are old. Angie Graves:Mine was old Amr Elsadr:How about a deadline of one week before the following Council meeting? Mary Wong:10 calendar days? Julie Hedlund:@Lawrence -- there has only been one failed election -- in Dublin. The Vice Chairs were continuing and handled the election and business. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:great Amr Elsadr:In Dublin, the NCPH managed to reach some decisions before the week was over. Mary Wong:Sure, Anne Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for that julie Julie Hedlund:@ Anne: We are probably better off holding the call at the usual time. Amr Elsadr:Can we also continue this on-list? Try to take advantage of time between calls? Julie Hedlund:Rather than a Doodle. Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, on the list. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:so it looks like a 2 week time frame could work out well Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye. Martin Silva:Thank you! Angie Graves:thanks Sara Bockey:thank you all Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for the time, bye now Martin Silva:bye bye Mary Wong:Thanks all -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Mar 31 15:27:30 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:27:30 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER re: Notes/Actions: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 Message-ID: <40671240-AAE2-4706-AE9D-39612D3EF8F7@icann.org> Dear SCI members, Please see as a reminder the notes/actions below in preparation for the continued discussion at our next meeting on Thursday, 07 April. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: on behalf of Julie Hedlund Date: Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 4:36 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Notes/Actions: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 Dear SCI members, Please see below the notes/actions captured from the SCI meeting held on 24 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. During today?s call it was agreed that discussion could continue on the list concerning these notes/actions. I?ve included the suggestions provided by IPC, as these were included in today?s discussion. The suggested changes for your review are in red/brackets as indicated below. Staff will separately send a notice for a call in two weeks on Thursday, 07 April at the usual time of 1800 UTC. Kind regards, Julie Notes/Actions re Remaining Issue on Chair/Vice Chair Elections: ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. Suggestion: ?In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.? Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs conducting Council business. **ACTION ITEM: The suggestion above is accepted. SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair?s term on the Council is ending. IPC suggestion: If one Vice Chair seat is being vacated, the relevant House should appoint an Interim Vice Chair to work with the continuing Vice Chair in the other House to conduct Council business. Suggestion: ?In the case where one of Vice-Chair's terms on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, [OPTION 1: the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected] OR [OPTION 2: the House with a vacant Vice-Chair position shall designate an Interim Vice Chair to join the continuing Vice Chair would to oversee the Chair eletion and conduct Council business. The deadline for the vacant House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? [Note: The previously noted disadvantage would no longer apply if the other House can designate an Interim Vice Chair.] Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs (including an Interim Vice Chair designated by a House) conducting Council business. Question: What is the time limit for the vacant House to to designate an Interim Vice Chair? Note the three options suggested during the call: 1) 10 calendar days after the failed Chair election; 2) 14 calendar days after the failed Chair election; or 3) 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting. ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. IPC Suggestion: should be clear that an appointed Interim Vice Chair is not prohibited from continuing as Vice Chair after the Council Chair election is concluded, provided the relevant House agrees on that Vice Chair continuing. ?their service in those roles would end? should be clarified. Suggestion: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing Councilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] The Designated Interim Vice Chairs will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair will not be eligible to serve as Designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest. [However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election.] Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. Notes: - Strike ?non-voting? from the NCA option. - Add "The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting?. - After ?potential conflicts of interest? add, ?However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election." ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. Suggestion: ?If both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, [the] non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting]" IPC Suggestion: The reference should be to ?the? non-voting NCA since there is only one. An inexperienced incoming non-voting NCA conducting Council business may be a concern but this scenario is a ?last resort? and may also provide motivation for the Houses to appoint Interim Vice Chairs quickly as noted by Amr and Sara in chat on Monday. Important to specify at what point Scenario 4 takes effect, i.e. how much time do the Houses have to appoint Vice Chairs in Scenario 3? Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business? Notes: Insert the suggested deadlines for the Houses to designate the Interim Vice Chairs and change reference relating to ?the non-voting NCA". ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: From julie.hedlund at icann.org Thu Mar 31 15:29:28 2016 From: julie.hedlund at icann.org (Julie Hedlund) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 15:29:28 +0000 Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] REMINDER Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions Message-ID: Dear SCI members, Please see as a reminder the attached proposed draft text. Since we did not have time to discuss this item at our meeting on 24 March, we will include it on the agenda for the meeting on 07 April. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: on behalf of Julie Hedlund Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 3:41 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions Dear SCI Members, Per the action item below from the SCI meeting on 05 March relating to the Sub Team A report on Current Practice in Relation to Motions, Mary and I have drafted language for your consideration for a revised version of the GNSO Operating Procedures. The language is contained in a new section 3.3.3 Submitting, Seconding, and Amending Motions in the attached document. The language is based on the documentation of the current procedure, as well as the changes to current procedure, recommended by Sub Team A and agreed to by the SCI. The recommendations are provided below for reference. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Sub Team A Recommendations ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. From: on behalf of Julie Hedlund Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 10:46 AM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc at icann.org" Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 Dear SCI members, Please see below the actions captured from the SCI meeting held at ICANN 55 in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. For your reference, the Sub Team A and B Reports are attached along with the related materials. With respect to the next Sub Team B meeting, staff will send a Doodle Poll. In addition, for the next SCI call these have been held on Thursdays at 1800 UTC. Staff will separately ask for RSVPs for a possible SCI call on Thursday, 24 March. For these two meetings we are skipping the week immediately following the ICANN 55 meeting (13-19 March) as is our usual practice. Kind regards, Julie Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 1. Sub Team A: Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Action Item: Staff will draft language for the SCI to consider to incorporate the informal procedures into the GNSO Operating Procedures. 2. Sub Team B: Report to the SCI on Chair-Vice Chair Elections Issue 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? >From the Report to the SCI: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: ?In the case where both Vice-Chairs? terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." Action Item: Sub Team B will continue discussion on this issue. Consider whether there should be steps for each possibilty that could ensure a predictable outcome. Issue 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? Action Item: Concerning the Election Timeline ? It was noted that the timeline will be very important if incoming councilors can be considered for Chair elections. The request is for the representatives from the two Houses in the SCI to review the timeline and bring their comments back to the SCI. New issue 5: If there is no Chair elected is it the Vice Chairs who run the meetings and calls the votes? Action Item: Sub Team B will consider this issue. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: GNSO Operating Procedures Proposed Revision Relating to Motions & Amendments 23 March 2016.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 42650 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4630 bytes Desc: not available URL: