I certainly agree. To those of us who followed these things at a distance, it would be important to walk it through. cheers Stephanie On 2017-10-11 03:17, Rafik Dammak wrote:
Hi Marika,
I support scheduling a separate call for this topic.
Best,
Rafik
2017-09-27 23:53 GMT+09:00 Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org <mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>>:
Dear All,
Following up on the update on the revised GNSO Operating Procedures and ICANN Bylaws that was provided during the last meeting (see https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gop-bylaws-20sep17-en.pdf <https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/gop-bylaws-20sep17-en.pdf>), I wanted to highlight that even though the staff report is long and addresses all the post-transition Bylaw changes and how these have been addressed as a result of the Bylaws DT recommendations, the actual changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures and the ICANN Bylaws are fairly limited. As such, I would recommend that you review the attached redline versions so that you get a better sense of the changes that are being proposed. To summarize, the redline includes:
1. Changes to section 11.3.i of the ICANN Bylaws to reflect new GNSO voting thresholds^1 <https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-op-procedures-2017-06-19-en#foot1>which are different from the current threshold of a simple majority vote of each House. 2. Changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures, section 4.9 (Consent Agenda) to reflect that certain decisions are to be confirmed "automatically" by the GNSO Council through its consent agenda. 3. Addition to the GNSO Operating Procedures to clarify that in specific circumstances, the GNSO Council may waive the timeframes currently referenced in the GNSO Operating Procedures in relation to submission of motions as well as scheduling of meetings to meet its obligations under the timelines outlined in the ICANN Bylaws as a Decisional Participant. 4. Addition to the GNSO Operating Procedures to clarify that certain petitions submitted by an individual must be submitted through a GNSO Stakeholder Group or Constituency to the GNSO Council for consideration. For this purpose, each GNSO Stakeholder Group and Constituency must develop clear rules for the submission of such petitions, including any requirements for the criteria to be included in a petition. These rules would be added to the GNSO Operating Procedures as an annex once available. 5. Addition to the GNSO Operating Procedures to clarify that all petitions concerning a director removal process submitted by an individual must be submitted directly to the GNSO Council. For this purpose, the GNSO Council will develop a clear process and rules for the submission of such petitions, including any requirements for the criteria to be included in a petition. These rules would be added to the GNSO Operating Procedures as an annex once available.
In addition to these modifications, the redline version also includes the following updates:
* Updated references to the ICANN Bylaws as many changed as a result of the post-transition Bylaws; * Updated the generalized schedule for board elections to align it with the timing as well as notification requirements outlined in the post-transition Bylaws; * Included references to the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) Quick Look Mechanism in the PDP Manual as a result of the GAC-GNSO Consultation Group recommendations, and; * Included references to the inclusion of a draft PDP WG Charter in the Preliminary Issue Report in the PDP Manual as a result of the GNSO Improvements recommendations.
As noted during my presentation during the last Council meeting, in response to the public comments provided, staff would suggest making the following updates:
* In relation to the waiver for petitions and the suggestion by the IPC that any recommendations in this regard are unanimously taken by the GNSO Chair and Council Vice-Chairs, staff notes that the proposed language reads ‘as recommended by the GNSO Chair and Council Vice-Chairs’ which implies that this is a unanimous recommendation. However, should there be a desire to explicitly state this assumption, the following wording could be considered ‘as recommended unanimously by the GNSO Chair and Council Vice-Chairs’. * Clarifying the voting results table in Appendix 1 with regards to approval of a petition and approval of a petition notice to remove a director holding seat 13 or 14by changing >75% of one to >75% of the House that appointed the Director
As pointed out during the meeting, until such time the GNSO Council adopts the revised GNSO Operating Procedures and ICANN Bylaws the existing rules apply to any actions and/or decisions related to the GNSO as a member of the Empowered Community.
If it would be helpful, staff would be more than willing to schedule a separate call to go through the proposed changes as well as any questions you may have. Just let us know and we can schedule accordingly.
Best regards,
Marika
*/Marika Konings/*
/Vice President, Policy Development Support – GNSO, Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) /
/Email: marika.konings@icann.org <mailto:marika.konings@icann.org> /
//
/Follow the GNSO via Twitter @ICANN_GNSO/
/Find out more about the GNSO by taking our interactive courses <http://learn.icann.org/courses/gnso> and visiting the GNSO Newcomer pages <http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm#newcomers>. /
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council>
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council