-----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.