Re: [council] Proposed Resolution for Consideration
I also agree with the direction of Ross' proposed motion. Uniform term limits across constituencies is not something that needs to wait for the broader GNSO reforms, which could take a number of different directions and a long time to institute. This is a great opportunity for the GNSO to act in the best interests of the wider ICANN community, while putting aside our own individual interests. Robin Cubberley, Maureen (CHT) wrote: As a NomCom appointee whose term is up in December of this year, and who has not sought re-appointment and therefore will not be returning, I, too support the direction set out in Ross's proposed resolution, and I am comfortable including NonCom appointees in any policy recommendations made on term limits. In light of Avri's question " Does any wording need to be added to include Nomcom in the scope.", I say yes, it does. Best regards, Maureen -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 10:36 AM To: Ross Rader Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [council] Proposed Resolution for Consideration Hi, Thanks for posting this. I agree with it. Does any wording need to be added to include Nomcom in the scope.note: As someone in a second term, whose first term was partial, I do read this as applying to me as well and am comfortable with that.a. On 9 nov 2006, at 08.21, Ross Rader wrote:Per Bruce's earlier request, here is a proposed resolution for discussion at the next council meeting. This may not be the right resolution, but given the interest in this topic on this list, I believe there is support for a discussion. As a result, I didn't attempt to "wordsmith" and "whereas" this too much, but the salient points of this motion are that;a) there should be term limits for councillors b) the term shall be limited to two consecutive termsc) special circumstances do exist where term limits are not appropriate and these circumstances should be accomodated by our processes d) the Council should act immediately implement this recommendation at the Constituency and board level.I would also note that the the Registrar constituency already abides by these practices and that I am nearing a term limit myself, so I don't believe that I have any special conflicts coming into play by backing a motion of this sort.//begin// Proposed Resolution:The recommendations of the LSE regarding term limits for GNSO Council members should be adopted immediately by the GNSO Council with no grandfathering except in connection with the ability of a council member to serve out their existing term. A council member can serve no more than two consecutive terms (regardless of duration). Moreover, a former council member must remain off the GNSO Council for one full term prior to serving any subsequent term. However, there shall be an exception to the two term limit in connection with special circumstances (I.e. Geographic diversity requirements) where a constituency is unable to find an alternative representative to serve. In applying this special circumstance exception, the existence of an otherwise qualified candidate willing to serve on the council within that constituency shall constitute a non-rebuttable indication that special circumstances do not exist. The GNSO Council will forward this recommendation to the ICANN Board of Directors for implementation in the bylaws and also recommend to the GNSO Constituencies that they voluntarily adopt these practices until such time that they have been formally implemented by the Council and Board.//end// Regards, Ross Rader Director, Retail Services Tucows Inc.
|