RE: [council] GNSO Vote for ICANN Board seat # 14

[Alick Wilson <alick.wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Fellow councillors, perhaps if the sole candidate were to obtain less than
50% of the votes in the first ballot the nominations should be re-opened?

Alick
 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Marc Schneiders
Sent: Friday, 18 March 2005 7:49 a.m.
To: Lucy.Nichols@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: maureen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [council] GNSO Vote for ICANN Board seat # 14


I guess all council members are happy with Michael Palage... That is not a
bad thing in itself, I think.

Marc

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005, at 19:45 [=GMT+0200], Lucy.Nichols@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

> As all interested candidates and their supporters are (or should be) 
> aware of the timelines and procedure, I don't believe the nomination 
> process should be reopened except for exceptional circumstances. 
> Deciding at the last moment to solicit support to run is not, in my 
> opinion, an "exceptional" circumstance.
>
> Regards,
>
> Lucy Nichols
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of ext Maureen Cubberley
> Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 10:09 AM
> To: Bruce Tonkin; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Vote for ICANN Board seat # 14
>
>
> Bruce, Alick and Fellow Councillors,
>
> I am one of several GNSO Councillors who was contacted by Tim Ruiz ( 
> of GoDaddy) last Friday - in my case, just an hour before the 
> nomination period closed. Tim asked if I would nominate him for Board 
> Seat #14. Because his telephone call to me occurred so close to the 
> close of nominations, and I was travelling at the time, there was not 
> time to determine whether or not a second nomination would be a good 
> idea, or even time to consider whether Tim would be a suitable 
> candidate. I advised him I would not be able to nominate him on such 
> short notice.
>
> In the meantime, there has been some further correspondence. I have 
> been contacted again by Tim, and he has contacted Bruce as to the 
> process for extending nominations. Bruce has advised me that;
>
> "In terms of process, the nomination period is closed, but the Council 
> could decide by vote to re-open the nomination period if there were 
> suitable candidates.  A member of Council would need to propose a 
> motion, and preferably have obtained some support from other 
> councillors prior to the meeting."
>
> I wish to emphasize that it is not my purpose or intention in sending 
> you this email to set up a challenge to Michael Palage's candidacy. I 
> am, rather, responding in my capacity as a GNSO Councillor to a 
> request from a member of the Registrar constituency, and attempting to 
> determine whether there is interest amongst the Council members to 
> entertain the possibility of considering another candidate. If there 
> is, perhaps we could have this discussion during today's 
> teleconference, and decide whether or not we want to take the 
> necessary steps to re-open the nomination period.
>
> Best regards,
> Maureen
>
> Maureen Cubberley
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bruce Tonkin <mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: GNSO.SECRETARIAT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 9:49 PM
> Subject: RE: [council] GNSO Vote for ICANN Board seat # 14
>
> Hello Alick,
>
> >
> > In most other organisations, when there is only a single candidate, 
> > when nominations close the single candidate is declared elected 
> > unopposed and there is no vote.
>
> That is not the case for the ICANN Board elections.
>
> >From the bylaws, Article X, section 3, paragraph 6:
> http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#X
>
> "The GNSO Council shall make selections to fill Seats 13 and 14 on the 
> ICANN Board by written ballot or by action at a meeting; any such 
> selection must have affirmative votes comprising a majority of the 
> votes of all the members of the GNSO Council. Notification of the GNSO 
> Council's selections shall be given by the GNSO Chair in writing to 
> the ICANN Secretary, consistent with Article VI, Sections 8(4) and 
> 12(1)."
>
> The appointment is for three years.
>
> Council members should ensure that the candidate meets the selection 
> criteria for a director, and has support from the GNSO community.
>
> In terms of process, we can either use an email vote (to be ratified 
> by a subsequent Council meeting) or we simply hold a vote during a Council
> meeting.   While we could hold a vote in the meeting on 17 March, some
> Council members may feel they need time to interview the candidate and 
> discuss the candidate with members of the GNSO community prior to 
> making a decision.
>
>
> > What happens if the sole candidate does not get a majority of the 
> > votes?
>
> There are two options:
> (1) we re-open the nomination period, and make an effort to seek 
> candidates for the Board.
>
> (2) the sole candidate addresses any concerns that some Council 
> members may have had, and the vote is re-held.
>
> The situation is really no different to that if you have only one 
> current candidate for a job.  If that candidate does not pass a job 
> interview, reference check etc, an organisation would seek more 
> candidates.
>
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
>
>
>