[NomComRIWG] NomCom Review: Call for Action

[Joan Kerr]

Thanks Tom,

Will review with NPOC.
Regards,

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 3:35 PM Tom Barrett <tbarrett at encirca.com> wrote:

> Dear Heather, Wolf-Ulrich, Jennifer, Dean, Barbara, Claudia, Stephanie,
> Bruna, Joan, Graeme, and Donna,
>
>
>
> *Re: Proposed Bylaws change on NomCom composition; response requested by
> 30 July 2020.*
>
>
>
> As you may recall, the ICANN Board accepted the Independent Examiner’s
> NomCom Review Final Report [link
> <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/nomcom-review-final-05jun18-en.pdf>]
> and the NomCom Review Implementation Working Group’s (NomComRIWG) Detailed
> Implementation Plan [link
> <https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2019-11-07-en#2.b>]
> in November 2019. The Board directed the NomComRIWG to commence
> implementation of the twenty-seven (27) recommendations. As the Chair and
> Vice Chairs of the NomCom Review Implementation Working Group (NomComRIWG),
> we are contacting you in relation to implementation of Recommendation 10,
> which states that: *“[r]epresentation on the NomCom should be re-balanced
> immediately and then be reviewed every five years.”*
>
>
>
> This recommendation was based on the Independent Examiner’s finding that
> the NomCom “*may not accurately represent constituencies (both across
> SOs/ACs and within SOs/ACs)*. It entails “*periodically reviewing and
> re-balancing the NomCom makeup [to ensure] that it appropriately reflects
> the ICANN community, both from a historic and prospective vantage point”.* Five-year
> intervals for such reviews were set by the Independent Examiner *“based
> on ICANN’s typical review requirements for organizations, as well as the
> Independent Examiner experience with other similar, volunteer-based
> organizations*.”[1]
>
>
>
> Please note that Recommendation 10 needs to be viewed in the context of
> Recommendation 8, which is to *“Maintain the current size of NomCom”*, in
> view of the Independent Examiner’s finding that the NomCom’s current
> membership size is appropriate.
>
>
>
> In our discussion and analysis of these two recommendations, the
> NomComRIWG has agreed on a number of points:
>
>    - Considering Recommendation 10 (see above), we are of the view that
>    the current allocation of nineteen (19) NomCom seats across the various
>    SO/ACs should remain unchanged.
>    - *The GNSO has evolved over time. In addition, Bylaws describing
>    GNSO’s current allocation do not allow for growth and flexibility.*
>    - The NomComRIWG believes that, in relation to rebalancing the GNSO’s
>    allocation of 7 seats, it should be the GNSO’s constituencies and
>    stakeholder groups that decide how these seats are distributed.
>    - NomComRIWG would like to recommend to the Board that the ICANN
>    Bylaws be revised to eliminate language referring to specific seats for
>    stakeholder groups. With such a Bylaws change, the GNSO could then
>    rebalance itself periodically without requiring Bylaw changes.
>    - The GNSO should then undertake a rebalancing exercise for its 7
>    NomCom seats.  Possible outcomes, among others, include maintaining the
>    status quo or rotating the 7 seats among its constituencies and stakeholder
>    groups.
>
>
>
> The NomComRIWG would like to hear from the GNSO’s constituencies and
> stakeholder groups whether they support such a Bylaws change. *We have
> attached a proposed redline draft*. If you are not supportive, the
> NomComRIWG welcomes your explanation and suggestion on an alternative.
>
>
>
> To be clear, we are not asking for the GNSO to undertake the actual
> rebalancing exercise until the Bylaws changes are approved.
>
>
>
> As the NomComRIWG is working on overseeing the implementation of several
> recommendations that require amendments to the Bylaws, we would like to
> bundle all these into a single Bylaw amendment process. Therefore, we would
> value your input on the proposed Bylaw changes *by 30 July 2020*.
>
>
>
> If you have any questions or concerns, we will be very pleased to schedule
> a call to discuss Recommendation 10 or any other recommendation.
>
>
>
> Many thanks and best regards,
>
>
>
> Tom Barrett (Chair), Cheryl Langdon-Orr (Vice-Chair), Zahid Jamil-IG
> (Vice-Chair)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> [1] Independent Review of the ICANN Nominating Committee: *Final Report *(5
> June 2018), p25-26,
> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/nomcom-review-final-05jun18-en.pdf
> .
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Barrett
> President
> EnCirca, Inc
> +1.781.942.9975 (office)
> 400 W. Cummings Park, Suite 1725
> Woburn, MA 01801 USA
>


-- 

Joan Kerr, Entrepreneur, Artist, Humanitarian

_____________________________________

Chair, Climate Smart Victory Garden Team

Chair, ICANN, Not for Profit Operations Constituency

Chair, IEEE Sustainable Agriculture Working Group

Chair, Science for Peace, Climate Smart Victory Gardens

Advisor, IEEE Humanitarian Initiatives Committee

Advisor, Climate Smart Agriculture Youth Network, (CSAYN) Canada

UN WSIS Award Recipient, for Content & Creativity

Durham Region Recipient, Community Partnership Award

Founder, Foundation for Building Sustainable Communities

www.joankerr.ca, www.fbsc.org

Skype: joankerr_fbsc

1-416-907-0783
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/nomcomriwg/attachments/20200617/671383fa/attachment.html>