<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Draft Revisions to the ICANN Bylaws Relating to GNSO Restructure
- To: Margie Milam <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx>, "council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "liaison6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <liaison6c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [council] Draft Revisions to the ICANN Bylaws Relating to GNSO Restructure
- From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:04:56 +0100
- In-reply-to: <05B243F724B2284986522B6ACD0504D789167A1228@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: Acmua3MiTsbpDdvLQ5Cw0lDoQsn52gAkrQbo
- Thread-topic: [council] Draft Revisions to the ICANN Bylaws Relating to GNSO Restructure
- User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.14.0.081024
Margie,
Thanks for sending these on. As we are so pushed for time, allow me to get
the ball rolling on this discussion and make a few comments.
Section 3. Article 1.
Moving the ³geographic regions goalposts² up from ³no 2 members² to ³no 3
members² seems like a sensible suggestion for those SGs with 6 Council
members. I agree with it.
Section 3. Article 3.
What¹s your rationale for recommending that ³vacancy rules² be moved to
OR&Ps?
Section 3. Article 7.
Are there no voting thresholds for selecting the chair and vice-chairs?
Section 3. Article 8.
I agree the voting threshold descriptions belong in the OR&Ps, but it would
be helpful for our discussion of the bylaws to have a reminder of what they
are. Can you provide a link to where they are please?
Apart from the points raised above, I think this document is already very
near completion. Having seen it, I must admit I feel a lot more confident
that we can move ahead with sufficient speed to meet the deadlines set in
your email for our review of these proposed bylaws. Congratulations on a
well-written document.
Stéphane
Le 27/03/09 00:34, « Margie Milam » <Margie.Milam@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> Dear All,
>
> As discussed in today¹s GNSO call, ICANN Staff has prepared Draft Bylaws
> Revisions (attached) that contain Staff recommendations for changes relating
> to the GNSO restructure. They are intended to serve as a starting point for
> the GNSO Council¹s discussions.
>
> General Observations
>
> · These Bylaws were drafted to be consistent with Board recommendations
> as to structure and principles.
>
> · Staff also attempted to build in flexibility to accommodate changes
> in the future without requiring Bylaws amendments. For example, Staff
> recommends that some issues be moved from the Bylaws to GNSO Council Operating
> Rules and Procedures that would be approved by the Board.
>
> · Since the Board approved improvements did not provide specific
> details with respect to all topics, ICANN staff developed recommendations to
> address these gaps, which are contained in footnotes throughout the document.
>
> · The Draft Bylaws Revisions are subject to review by the ICANN Office
> of the General Counsel for legal form as well as consistency.
>
> · A few additional decisions will be needed to finalize these Bylaws,
> for example, Board approval of the unresolved open issue concerning Board
> seats 13 and 14, and further Council work on certain of the transition
> procedures (e.g. staggered terms, elections).
>
>
>
> Format of Revisions
>
> · To facilitate reviewing these changes, the Draft Bylaws is organized
> as a side-by-side comparison of the current language and the proposed
> language.
>
> · The yellow highlighted text refers to new or substantially revised
> language compared to the current Bylaws.
>
> · The footnotes include rationale statements where Staff thought an
> explanation might be helpful.
>
>
> Next Steps and Timing
>
> · The GNSO Council will need to decide how it would like to review the
> Draft Bylaws to develop its recommendations.
>
> · ICANN Staff will be working with the GNSO Operations Work Team in
> developing the GNSO Operating Rules and Procedures to incorporate those
> improvements that were omitted from the Bylaws in order to provide
> flexibility.
>
> · In order to seat the new Council by June, the Board would need to
> approve of the revisions by no later than its May 21st meeting.
>
> · A public comment period would need to take place before the May 21st
> meeting.
>
> · The Council would need to complete its review/analysis by the next
> GNSO council meeting on April 16th in order to accommodate the public comment
> period.
>
> · Due to this short time period, the GNSO Council is currently
> evaluating the most effective way to proceed.
>
>
>
> Finally, ICANN Staff is available to provide background and additional
> information on the Draft Bylaws Revisions if it would be helpful for your
> review.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Margie Milam
>
> Senior Policy Counselor
>
> ICANN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|