Dear DT Members, Following our last meeting, staff needed some time to digest your feedback (see notes attached) and, as requested, reviewed the current time limits present in the GNSO Operating Procedures (see overview hereunder) to see whether these could be adapted to accommodate the timeline requirements related to petitions in the ICANN Bylaws. However, reviewing this information it became quickly clear that it would be very difficult to create separate timelines for each possible petition scenario, noting that in many cases it will depend on the exact circumstances if/when/how consultations, meetings and decisions can take place. As such, we would like to recommend instead that a waiver is added to the GNSO Operating Procedures that allows the GNSO Council, when there is no objection, to deviate from the timing, deadline as well as voting outside of a regular meeting requirements in the GNSO Operating Procedures in order to meet the ICANN Bylaw timing requirements. It is the expectation that over time, it might be possible to document the process flow / ideal timing for some of these petitions, and eventually even incorporate these into the GNSO Operating Procedures, but some more experience with these mechanisms will be needed before that is possible. It may also be worth noting that the ccNSO has identified the timing of petitions as one of the items that may require further community discussion. In addition, upon further review, staff has observed that the Bylaw provisions related to a director removal process are specific about the process that is supposed to occur upon a petition being raised and before it is considered by the Decisional Participant. Having such a petition first go through SG/C process may therefore not be compliant. As a result, staff would like to propose that petitions of this nature are submitted directly to the GNSO Council so that the steps as outlined in the Bylaws can be followed. This will require the GNSO Council to develop a process for individuals to submit a petition. You can review in the attached document the proposed wording to be added to the staff report if there is support for this approach. In the attached updated version of the staff report, you will find in redline all the changes that have been made to address the outstanding questions / issues, based on our last discussion and further staff review. If this is in line with the DT’s views, staff will now go ahead and make the proposed changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures and ICANN Bylaws so that these can be published for public comment. As noted before, there are a number of other changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures that were pending from other efforts, so we’ll take advantage and also include these as part of the revision of the GNSO Operating Procedures. Please share any comments, questions and/or your support by 26 May at the latest. If you believe there is a need to further discuss any of these proposed updates, please let the mailing list know so staff can schedule a call accordingly. Thanks, Marika ================= Current Procedures on deadlines and timing of Council meetings: The GNSO Council’s current calendaring practice is unlikely to be sufficiently flexible to accommodate the 21-day period (Council meetings are planned on a 12-month basis beginning with the seating of a new Council at an AGM). While it is possible for the Council to call additional, this does not seem feasible for exercising this EC power as the meeting requirements under the Operating Procedures are: * A minimum 7-day notice for administrative meetings, 14 days for policy matters * If the Council is to act by voting, the motion and related documents must be submitted at least 10 calendar days in advance of a meeting * A specific exception exists for motions submitted after the deadline which requires a unanimous vote at the meeting in order for the late motion to be considered at the meeting Current Procedures on voting outside a regular Council meeting: This is permitted by the Procedures but the current scope may not be broad enough to accommodate the Rejection Petition Notice process, as the following cumulative requirements must be met: * The topic must have been “adequately discussed and sufficient time given to each Stakeholder Group and Constituency to consider the issue by the time the vote is called”; * The Chair determines after consultation with the Council that the Council’s regular meeting schedule “would make it difficult to resolve the issue without scheduling an extra meeting and this would be impractical in light of the circumstances at that time”; * No Councilor objects to the vote being taken outside a regularly scheduled Council meeting; and * The GNSO Chair provides “at least seven (7) calendar days’ advance notice of the vote, along with notice of the beginning and ending day and hour of the voting period (in UTC), which period shall not be less than four (4) calendar days.” 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-e...>.