Re: [council] MOTION - To extend the term of the current GNSO Liaison to the GAC

["James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Paul -

You are correct, "incomplete" is probably not the best word. The intention was 
to leave the door open for the lone application received to be resubmitted.

I'm fine if we strike "incomplete", or even the entirety of WHEREAS 2.

Thank you,

J.
____________
James Bladel


> On Jun 20, 2016, at 16:35, Paul McGrady <policy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hi James,
> 
> I am Ok with this, except I don't understand WHEREAS 2.  What element of the
> application wasn't completed?  I thought from all that back and forth that
> the reason to not move forward with the one candidate we had was that there
> was only 1 applicant and, in the opinion of some, he didn't fit the bill.
> This motion reads as if there was an application form that didn't have all
> the checkmarks checked.  Can you please elaborate on what is meant by
> "incomplete"?  Thanks in advance.
> 
> Best,
> Paul
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of James M. Bladel
> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 3:11 PM
> To: GNSO Council List
> Subject: [council] MOTION - To extend the term of the current GNSO Liaison
> to the GAC
> 
> Councilors -
> 
> As discussed on the list a couple of weeks ago, please see this Motion
> (attached and copied below) to extend the term of the current GNSO-GAC
> Liaison (Mason) through ICANN57 in Hyderabad, and to adopt a new timeline
> for selecting a successor liaison.
> 
> I¹ve also added a new action item (Whereas #5 and Resolved #3) which calls
> for the development of a ³uniform selection process² as part of the
> post-transition implementation work.  If adopted, this uniform selection
> process would be employed in some capacity to fill future appointments to
> Liaisons, Review Teams, and other working groups as necessary.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> J.
> 
> ________________________________________
> 
> 
> Motion to extend the term of the current GNSO Liaison to the GAC and confirm
> the extended timeline for the selection process for the next GNSO liaison to
> the GAC. 
> 
> 
> Whereas:
> 
> 1.The GNSO Council adopted the ŒRequest for Candidates ­ GNSO Liaison to the
> GAC¹ which includes the proposed call for volunteers, application and
> evaluation process (see
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/request-liaison-gac-30mar16-en.pdf during
> its meeting on 14 April 2016.
> 
> 2.The subsequent call for volunteers resulted in one incomplete application
> by the Deadline.
> 
> 3.     The GNSO Leadership team shared with the Council its assessment
> concerning the
> misalignment of the current deadline and the fact that the terms of possible
> candidates (e.g. former Council members) end at the ICANN AGM and as a
> result proposed to extend the selection timeline as follows: Nominations
> Accepted for Candidates - 1 OCT 2016; Council Chairs consider candidates and
> notify first choice - 20 OCT; Chairs submit motion to Council by 29 OCT for
> consideration during Council meeting on 8 NOV; GAC Leadership notified of
> new Liaison by 9 NOV.
> 
> 4.     The current GNSO Liaison to the GAC has agreed to extend his term
> until the ICANN AGM in Hyderabad.
> 
> 5.     The GNSO Council leadership expects that appointments of this
> nature will continue to be necessary in the future, and these selections
> would benefit from a uniform selection process.
> Additionally, the Council notes the upcoming implementation work associated
> with the post-transition bylaws will include work on drafting a uniform
> selection process, and this could be expanded to cover additional roles.
> 
> 
> Resolved:
> 
> 1. The GNSO Council hereby confirms the extension of the term of the current
> GNSO Liaison to the GAC, Mason Cole, until the end of the ICANN AGM in
> Hyderabad. 
> 
> 2. The GNSO Council instructs the GNSO Secretariat to inform the GNSO
> Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies of the extended selection timeline
> (Nominations Accepted for Candidates - 1 OCT 2016; Council Chairs consider
> candidates and notify first choice - 20 OCT; Chairs submit motion to Council
> by 29 OCT for consideration during Council meeting on 8 NOV; GAC Leadership
> notified of new Liaison by 9 NOV).
> 
> 3. The Council instructs Staff to include consideration of a uniform
> selection process as part of the work associated with implementing the
> post-transition bylaws
> 
>