<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] Draft Agenda for GNSO Council meeting - Friday 24 Feb 06
- To: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [council] Draft Agenda for GNSO Council meeting - Friday 24 Feb 06
- From: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:16:07 +1100
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcYtXN3dOATg+qIeQNiC1vWczpvzIAF+IUsQAADbTUAAB8pmgA==
- Thread-topic: [council] Draft Agenda for GNSO Council meeting - Friday 24 Feb 06
Hello Marilyn,
>
> Am I correct that if a councilor cannot attend this segment,
> that they should give a proxy notification to Glen, since
> there will be a vote on the ToR?
The relevant section of the bylaws state:
"Members entitled to cast a majority of the total number of votes of
GNSO Council members then in office shall constitute a quorum for the
transaction of business, and acts by a majority vote of the GNSO Council
members present at any meeting at which there is a quorum shall be acts
of the GNSO Council"
It would appear that proxies won't count towards the development of
quorum, or for the purpose of measuring the majority vote at a meeting
with there is quorum.
We can of course record proxy votes in our minutes as per our rules of
procedure, but the measure of whether the ToR are passed will be based
on those Council members present in-person or via teleconference.
This ensures that all members present can hear the arguments for and
against any particular change, before making a decision.
Regards,
Bruce
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|