RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate
Is there any reason why we couldn't hold a live email election? I don't know
the limitations of the election software.
Chuck
> -----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.
>
>
>
>
>