-----Original Message-----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 7:25 AM
To: avri@xxxxxxx; council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed -
Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
To my recollection, none of our previous elections while I
have been on Council have been public. I thought I'd missed
the rationale for holding it publicly. I've gone back and
reviewed the messages I could find, but haven't seen one. I
had thought we would be voting privately in the week
beforehand with the results announced at the meeting.
I object to our having to hold the election as a roll call
vote. I believe all Councilors should be permitted to cast
votes privately. Casting open ballots will not be conducive
to the improved working relationship that many of us have
articulated a desire to develop. Moreover, given that I have
found the environment at ICANN meetings generally (including
public Council meetings) to be hostile, I believe casting
those votes publicly is more likely than not to exacerbate
that problem.
In sum, I want to vote privately as we've done in the past
and have the results announced at the Council meeting. Doing
so has the extra benefit of having a definitive result at the
Council meeting (assuming there is a clear winner); no delay
from absentee balloting will occur.
K
Kristina Rosette
Covington & Burling LLP
1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20004-2401
voice: 202-662-5173
direct fax: 202-778-5173
main fax: 202-662-6291
e-mail: krosette@xxxxxxx
This message is from a law firm and may contain information
that is confidential or legally privileged. If you are not
the intended recipient, please immediately advise the sender
by reply e-mail that this message has been inadvertently
transmitted to you and delete this e-mail from your system.
Thank you for your cooperation.
-------------------------
Sent from my Wireless Handheld
----- Original Message -----
From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Council GNSO <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thu Oct 15 03:23:01 2009
Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed -
Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Hi,
I wanted to ad a few more details to this part of the process.
On 15 Oct 2009, at 08:01, Glen de Saint Géry wrote:
B. PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR THE VOTING
For this election, the voting will take place at the public Council
meeting in Seoul on Wednesday, 28 October 2009.
Avri Doria, current GNSO Council chair, will serve as
non-voting chair
of the bicameral Council meeting on 28 October until such time as a
new chair is elected, at which time the new chair will assume the
chair responsibilities.
If an absentee ballot is required to complete the chair's election,
this will be a 24 hour ballot scheduled to end on 29 October. If no
chair has been elected by the end of the Annual meeting on
30 October,
the vice-chairs will assume the chair responsibilities as
defined in
the Bylaws and a runoff will be scheduled as determined in
the Council
Procedures.
The winning candidate needs 60% of the votes of each house.
The Council shall inform the Board and the Community
appropriately and
post the election results on the GNSO website within 2
business days
following the election.
In the event that the GNSO Council has not elected a GNSO Council
Chair by the end of the previous Chair's term, the Vice-Chairs will
serve as Interim GNSO Co-Chairs until a successful election can be
held.
Since this election will be done in the meeting, I am
planning to hold it as an open vote via a roll call. This
will be the second major item on the agenda, after a vote on
any amendments to the proposed Operating Procedures the new
Operating Procedures as possibly amended.
I am hoping that all of the council members will be available
for the vote, either in person or via remote communications,
so that the election can be completed on the Wednesday, even
if it needs to go to two rounds. If we do not have everyone
available for the call, then we will need to go a 24 hour
absentee ballot on each round. This means that the first
round would not end until Thursday morning. If necessary we
could schedule a second round for Thursday, though we would
then need to allow for voting at the Thursday meeting, which
would be an exception to our normal practice. In this case a
second absentee ballot would end on Friday afternoon. In any
case, the goal is to enable the election of the new chair, if
at all possible, by the end of the Seoul meeting.
As I said, I am hoping we can avoid needing to do an absentee
ballot so I hope that any council member who cannot attend
the meeting can participate remote in al least the first part
of the Wednesday meeting.
Assuming we have a different candidate from each House, each
council member polled would in turn be able to vote for:
Candidate chosen by Contracted Parties House (CP House or,
Candidate chosen by Non Contracted Parties House (NCP House)
or, None of the above
(In the case of a single candidate chosen by both Houses, the
vote would resemble the second round procedure below)
The votes would be tabulated separately according to House,
though the roll will be called alphabetically.
To succeed a candidate needs 60% or each house. This means 5 out
of
7 votes for the CP House and 8 out of 13 votes for the NCP House.
- If either the CP House candidate or NCP House candidate
get 60% of each House, he or she will have been elected and
will take over as chair of the meeting at that point.
- If 'None of the above' gets 60% of each house, then the
election is halted and rescheduled for a month later. In
this case the two vice- chairs will take over as interim
co-chairs at the end of the week.
- If neither of the candidates (or "none of the above") gets
the required 60% of each house, then a second round is called for.
Assuming every one is present on Wednesday morning, we can
hold this second round vote immediately, otherwise we can
hold it on Thursday.
The second roll call vote will be between:
The candidate who received the greatest combined percentage
of the votes when the results of each house is summed to the
other (Percentage from CP House + Percentage from NCP House)
or, None of the above
If the candidate receives 60% votes of each House ( out of 7
votes for the CP House and 8 out of 13 votes for the NCP
House) then that candidate has been elected and will take
over as chair of the meeting at that point.
Otherwise, the election then the election is halted and
rescheduled for a month later. In this case the two
vice-chairs will take over as interim co-chairs at the end of
the week.
I believe this process follows from the rules set for the
election of chairs in the new bi-cameral council. I very
much look forward to completing a successful election on
Wednesday morning.
Thanks,
a.