<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] Whois PDP Vote - by-law requirements
- To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] Whois PDP Vote - by-law requirements
- From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 21:11:11 -0700
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,
At today's meeting we discussed the following by-law requirement:
The Staff Manager will be present at the final meeting of the
Council, and will have five (5) calendar days after the meeting to
incorporate the views of the Council into a report to be submitted
to the Board (the "Board Report"). The Board Report must contain at
least the following:
a. A clear statement of any Supermajority Vote recommendation
of the Council;
b. If a Supermajority Vote was not reached, a clear statement
of all positions held by Council members. Each statement should
clearly indicate (i) the reasons underlying each position and (ii)
the constituency(ies) that held the position;
In order to complete this report within 5 days, Liz needs for all
council members to get statements in to her by Monday morning Start
of Business UTC.
As was discussed in today's meeting, joint statements by several
council members are fine.
Note: we have a changeover of council members this weekend. I think
the requirement only applies to council members who were members at
the time of the vote, even if they are no longer council members.
Additionally, however, i don't think there is a necessary prohibition
against including a statement by a new council member, but if one
does, i think this fact should be flagged.
thanks
a.
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|