March 2016 - Gnso-improvem-impl-sc

REMINDER re: Notes/Actions: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016
by Julie Hedlund April 7, 2016

April 7, 2016

Dear SCI members, Please see as a reminder the notes/actions below in preparation for the continued discussion at our next meeting on Thursday, 07 April. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: <owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Thursday, March 24, 2016 at 4:36 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Notes/Actions: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 Dear SCI members, Please see below the notes/actions captured from the SCI meeting held on 24 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. During today’s call it was agreed that discussion could continue on the list concerning these notes/actions. I’ve included the suggestions provided by IPC, as these were included in today’s discussion. The suggested changes for your review are in red/brackets as indicated below. Staff will separately send a notice for a call in two weeks on Thursday, 07 April at the usual time of 1800 UTC. Kind regards, Julie Notes/Actions re Remaining Issue on Chair/Vice Chair Elections: ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. Suggestion: “In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.” Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs conducting Council business. **ACTION ITEM: The suggestion above is accepted. SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair’s term on the Council is ending. IPC suggestion: If one Vice Chair seat is being vacated, the relevant House should appoint an Interim Vice Chair to work with the continuing Vice Chair in the other House to conduct Council business. Suggestion: “In the case where one of Vice-Chair's terms on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, [OPTION 1: the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected] OR [OPTION 2: the House with a vacant Vice-Chair position shall designate an Interim Vice Chair to join the continuing Vice Chair would to oversee the Chair eletion and conduct Council business. The deadline for the vacant House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? [Note: The previously noted disadvantage would no longer apply if the other House can designate an Interim Vice Chair.] Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs (including an Interim Vice Chair designated by a House) conducting Council business. Question: What is the time limit for the vacant House to to designate an Interim Vice Chair? Note the three options suggested during the call: 1) 10 calendar days after the failed Chair election; 2) 14 calendar days after the failed Chair election; or 3) 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting. ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. IPC Suggestion: should be clear that an appointed Interim Vice Chair is not prohibited from continuing as Vice Chair after the Council Chair election is concluded, provided the relevant House agrees on that Vice Chair continuing. “their service in those roles would end” should be clarified. Suggestion: “In the case where both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing Councilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] The Designated Interim Vice Chairs will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair will not be eligible to serve as Designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest. [However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election.] Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. Notes: - Strike “non-voting” from the NCA option. - Add "The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting”. - After “potential conflicts of interest” add, “However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election." ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. Suggestion: “If both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, [the] non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting]" IPC Suggestion: The reference should be to “the” non-voting NCA since there is only one. An inexperienced incoming non-voting NCA conducting Council business may be a concern but this scenario is a “last resort” and may also provide motivation for the Houses to appoint Interim Vice Chairs quickly as noted by Amr and Sara in chat on Monday. Important to specify at what point Scenario 4 takes effect, i.e. how much time do the Houses have to appoint Vice Chairs in Scenario 3? Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business? Notes: Insert the suggested deadlines for the Houses to designate the Interim Vice Chairs and change reference relating to “the non-voting NCA". ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer.

2 1

REMINDER Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions
by Julie Hedlund March 31, 2016

March 31, 2016

Dear SCI members, Please see as a reminder the attached proposed draft text. Since we did not have time to discuss this item at our meeting on 24 March, we will include it on the agenda for the meeting on 07 April. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: <owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 3:41 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions Dear SCI Members, Per the action item below from the SCI meeting on 05 March relating to the Sub Team A report on Current Practice in Relation to Motions, Mary and I have drafted language for your consideration for a revised version of the GNSO Operating Procedures. The language is contained in a new section 3.3.3 Submitting, Seconding, and Amending Motions in the attached document. The language is based on the documentation of the current procedure, as well as the changes to current procedure, recommended by Sub Team A and agreed to by the SCI. The recommendations are provided below for reference. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Sub Team A Recommendations ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. From: <owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 10:46 AM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 Dear SCI members, Please see below the actions captured from the SCI meeting held at ICANN 55 in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. For your reference, the Sub Team A and B Reports are attached along with the related materials. With respect to the next Sub Team B meeting, staff will send a Doodle Poll. In addition, for the next SCI call these have been held on Thursdays at 1800 UTC. Staff will separately ask for RSVPs for a possible SCI call on Thursday, 24 March. For these two meetings we are skipping the week immediately following the ICANN 55 meeting (13-19 March) as is our usual practice. Kind regards, Julie Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 1. Sub Team A: Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Action Item: Staff will draft language for the SCI to consider to incorporate the informal procedures into the GNSO Operating Procedures. 2. Sub Team B: Report to the SCI on Chair-Vice Chair Elections Issue 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? >From the Report to the SCI: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: “In the case where both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." Action Item: Sub Team B will continue discussion on this issue. Consider whether there should be steps for each possibilty that could ensure a predictable outcome. Issue 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? Action Item: Concerning the Election Timeline — It was noted that the timeline will be very important if incoming councilors can be considered for Chair elections. The request is for the representatives from the two Houses in the SCI to review the timeline and bring their comments back to the SCI. New issue 5: If there is no Chair elected is it the Vice Chairs who run the meetings and calls the votes? Action Item: Sub Team B will consider this issue.

1 0

MP3 of the SCI meeting - 24 March 2016
by Terri Agnew March 25, 2016

March 25, 2016

Dear All, Please find the MP3 recording for the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Thursday, 24 March 2016. MP3: http://audio.icann.org/gnso/gnso-sci-24mar16-en.mp3 Thank you. Kind regards, Terri From: owner-gnso-secs(a)icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-secs@icann.org] On Behalf Of Terri Agnew Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 8:07 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org Cc: GNSO-SECS(a)icann.org Subject: [gnso-secs] attendance of the SCI meeting - 24 March 2016 Dear All, Due to technical issues the mp3 will be sent shortly. Please see attendance below for the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Thursday, 24 March 2016: On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#mar (transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page) Attendees: Amr Elsadr - NCUC - Primary Angie Graves - BC - Primary Anne Aikman-Scalese - IPC - Primary - Vice Chair Sara Bockey - RrSG - Primary Lawrence Olawale-Roberts - BC - Alternate Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPCP - Primary Martin Pablo Valent - NPOC - Alternate Apologies: Stefania Milan - NCSG - Primary Rudi Vansnick - NPOC -Primary -Chair ICANN Staff: Julie Hedlund Mary Wong Glen de Saint Géry Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew Adobe Chat Transcript 24 March 2016 Terri Agnew:Welcome to the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) meeting held on 24 March 2016 Amr Elsadr:Hi all. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Hello Everyone Mary Wong:Ry SG is not represented. Amr Elsadr:Looks like we're missing RySG, NCSG and NPOC. Amr Elsadr:Yes..., no NCAs either. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:or maybe dial out to them Terri Agnew:as a reminder, please mute when not speaking Terri Agnew:Hi Lawrence, op will dial out to you in a moment Julie Hedlund:All: I have unsynced the document so you can move it. Mary Wong:The consensus call (when the time comes) will also take place on the mailing list, and last approx 2 weeks (per usual practice). Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:@Terri thanks, am dialing in and waiting for approval Terri Agnew:@Lawrence - advising the op Mary Wong:If this suggestion is to be adopted, perhaps consider a time limit for that appointment? Mary Wong:E.g. by the time of the next Council meeting at the latest? Angie Graves:sorry--am in a loud place Angie Graves:You addresed my point Angie Graves:Thank you. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: That sounds OK by me. What if (and this is very unlikely) the Councl fails to elect a chair during a second election round? Mary Wong:@Amr, I meant to have an interim from the vacant House, not the duration of the interim appointment Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Apologies, I'm not sure I understand the question. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: Understood. I meant to ask that if the deadline to appoint an interim is over, but the council persists in failing to elect a chair. This may mean an additional 30 days. Amr Elsadr:Would make sense to extend the interim appointment election, wouldn't it? Mary Wong:@Anne, yes, exactly Amr Elsadr:Sorry. My last comment made no sense. :) Amr Elsadr:I meant that it would make sense to extend the deadline by which an interim can be appointed. Mary Wong:@Amr, haha no worries. My suggestion is meant to not delay Council biz further by having NO chair and NO second VC. Amr Elsadr:OK. Thanks for the context Mary. That sounds good to me. Mary Wong:@Anne, that seems logical too (apply deadline for interim appointment to Scenario 3 too). Amr Elsadr:I believe the bylaws (30 day provision) only applies to Council chair elections, not VC appointments. Is that right? Mary Wong:@Amr, yes Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Sorry I got disconnected. Connectivity is poor, even voice line. I try to follow the chat as good as I can Amr Elsadr:Welcome WUK. Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, I think that is right. Amr Elsadr:@WUK: Welcome back. I'll warn you though, I'm not making much sense in the chat today. :( Terri Agnew:Wolf-Ulrich is only on AC at the moment Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Sounds good. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:can you shed some light on this Mary Wong:So Scenario 4 would kick in if the deadline for interim appointments (e.g. by the next Council meeting) is NOT met. Julie Hedlund:@Mary: That's my understanding. Mary Wong:And under Scenario 4, the "last resort" interm Chair (the non-voting NCA) would be interim Chair until the Chair is elected conclusively, which under the Procedures would be approx a max of 2 months out (normally). Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i think that flies Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i dont see a problem with an interim Vice chair running for a vice chair Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. VCs are appointed/selected by a House, not elected. Angie Graves:Thank you for the SCENARIO 3 note Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:Under scenario 4 there shouldn't be a break in council business until VCs are appointed or the non-voting NCA takes place Terri Agnew:Welcome Martin Silva Julie Hedlund:@Amr: What if we just strike "non-voting NCA"? Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, that is why staff suggested having a deadline for the House(s) to make the interim appointment, i.e. by the time of the next Council meeting. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:the Non-voting NCA presently by the GNSO OP IS eligible to run for council chair, so if same were to hold office for a short while to run an election it should surfice Amr Elsadr:@Julie: I would be OK with that, but am really just wondering whether or not there is some sort of conflict. I'm not actually sure. Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:why not appoint interim VCs on the spot, meaning directly following the meeting where the chair election failed? I guess all SG leading reps should be available to assist... Amr Elsadr:@Lawrence: You are correct, but we are talking about vice-chair, not chair. I don't think there are limitations on that either, but should probably check. Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, maybe that can be phrased as the ideal scenario, but failing that, have a maximum deadline? Just in case. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@ Wolf-Ulrich - House may not be able to agree that quickly as to who should serve Amr Elsadr:Like I said, I see no problem with the non-voting NCA being appointed as an interim chair under scenario 4. It's scenario 3 that I'm wondering about. Martin Silva:Hi all, struggling with a weird connection here but I think I'll manage to be on for the rest of the meeting. Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:hanks Mary, agree Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:T... Julie Hedlund:@Amr: The Procedures are silent on NCAs and Vice Chairs. They say, "a. Each house shall select a Council Vice-Chair from within its respective house.." Julie Hedlund:That;s all. Mary Wong:@Amr, wouldn't that be up to the House? Amr Elsadr:@Anne: a non-voting NCA is not from within a house. Amr Elsadr:Thanks Julie. That's helpful. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: +1 Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. I believe that is best. Mary Wong:The only thing staff can think of is perhaps this is the kind of situation where having a neutral non-voting person may be preferable? Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:+1 i agree also Sara Bockey:@Anne, I agree as well. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:that the non voting NCA should be left out. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:of option 3 Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:senerio 4 would serve as a stimulant to ensuring that election faliure does not get to this point Amr Elsadr:Agree with Mary. Amr Elsadr:Apologies. I missed pretty much everything Mary just said. Had dropped off the call. Amr Elsadr:been dropped off. Amr Elsadr:Back now. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Once an election fails and it is officially announced (which is a 2 day time frame) , tthe process to resheduling and conducting another election should proceed and be in place in the time frame we agree Sara Bockey:I like the idea of a prescribe timeline to make them make a decision sooner rather than later, but I'm not familiar with how Council works ...but that is my inclination Amr Elsadr:Well... Amr Elsadr:Practical. :) Amr Elsadr:Some of those agrees are old. Angie Graves:Mine was old Amr Elsadr:How about a deadline of one week before the following Council meeting? Mary Wong:10 calendar days? Julie Hedlund:@Lawrence -- there has only been one failed election -- in Dublin. The Vice Chairs were continuing and handled the election and business. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:great Amr Elsadr:In Dublin, the NCPH managed to reach some decisions before the week was over. Mary Wong:Sure, Anne Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for that julie Julie Hedlund:@ Anne: We are probably better off holding the call at the usual time. Amr Elsadr:Can we also continue this on-list? Try to take advantage of time between calls? Julie Hedlund:Rather than a Doodle. Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, on the list. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:so it looks like a 2 week time frame could work out well Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye. Martin Silva:Thank you! Angie Graves:thanks Sara Bockey:thank you all Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for the time, bye now Martin Silva:bye bye Mary Wong:Thanks all

1 0

attendance of the SCI meeting - 24 March 2016
by Terri Agnew March 25, 2016

March 25, 2016

Dear All, Due to technical issues the mp3 will be sent shortly. Please see attendance below for the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation meeting held on Thursday, 24 March 2016: On page: http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#mar (transcripts and recording are found on the calendar page) Attendees: Amr Elsadr - NCUC - Primary Angie Graves - BC - Primary Anne Aikman-Scalese - IPC - Primary - Vice Chair Sara Bockey - RrSG - Primary Lawrence Olawale-Roberts - BC - Alternate Wolf-Ulrich Knoben - ISPCP - Primary Martin Pablo Valent - NPOC - Alternate Apologies: Stefania Milan - NCSG - Primary Rudi Vansnick - NPOC -Primary -Chair ICANN Staff: Julie Hedlund Mary Wong Glen de Saint Géry Terri Agnew ** Please let me know if your name has been left off the list ** Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Kind regards, Terri Agnew Adobe Chat Transcript 24 March 2016 Terri Agnew:Welcome to the Standing Committee on Improvements Implementation (SCI) meeting held on 24 March 2016 Amr Elsadr:Hi all. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Hello Everyone Mary Wong:Ry SG is not represented. Amr Elsadr:Looks like we're missing RySG, NCSG and NPOC. Amr Elsadr:Yes..., no NCAs either. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:or maybe dial out to them Terri Agnew:as a reminder, please mute when not speaking Terri Agnew:Hi Lawrence, op will dial out to you in a moment Julie Hedlund:All: I have unsynced the document so you can move it. Mary Wong:The consensus call (when the time comes) will also take place on the mailing list, and last approx 2 weeks (per usual practice). Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:@Terri thanks, am dialing in and waiting for approval Terri Agnew:@Lawrence - advising the op Mary Wong:If this suggestion is to be adopted, perhaps consider a time limit for that appointment? Mary Wong:E.g. by the time of the next Council meeting at the latest? Angie Graves:sorry--am in a loud place Angie Graves:You addresed my point Angie Graves:Thank you. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: That sounds OK by me. What if (and this is very unlikely) the Councl fails to elect a chair during a second election round? Mary Wong:@Amr, I meant to have an interim from the vacant House, not the duration of the interim appointment Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Apologies, I'm not sure I understand the question. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: Understood. I meant to ask that if the deadline to appoint an interim is over, but the council persists in failing to elect a chair. This may mean an additional 30 days. Amr Elsadr:Would make sense to extend the interim appointment election, wouldn't it? Mary Wong:@Anne, yes, exactly Amr Elsadr:Sorry. My last comment made no sense. :) Amr Elsadr:I meant that it would make sense to extend the deadline by which an interim can be appointed. Mary Wong:@Amr, haha no worries. My suggestion is meant to not delay Council biz further by having NO chair and NO second VC. Amr Elsadr:OK. Thanks for the context Mary. That sounds good to me. Mary Wong:@Anne, that seems logical too (apply deadline for interim appointment to Scenario 3 too). Amr Elsadr:I believe the bylaws (30 day provision) only applies to Council chair elections, not VC appointments. Is that right? Mary Wong:@Amr, yes Wolf-Ulrich Knoben:Sorry I got disconnected. Connectivity is poor, even voice line. I try to follow the chat as good as I can Amr Elsadr:Welcome WUK. Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, I think that is right. Amr Elsadr:@WUK: Welcome back. I'll warn you though, I'm not making much sense in the chat today. :( Terri Agnew:Wolf-Ulrich is only on AC at the moment Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Sounds good. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:can you shed some light on this Mary Wong:So Scenario 4 would kick in if the deadline for interim appointments (e.g. by the next Council meeting) is NOT met. Julie Hedlund:@Mary: That's my understanding. Mary Wong:And under Scenario 4, the "last resort" interm Chair (the non-voting NCA) would be interim Chair until the Chair is elected conclusively, which under the Procedures would be approx a max of 2 months out (normally). Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i think that flies Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:i dont see a problem with an interim Vice chair running for a vice chair Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. VCs are appointed/selected by a House, not elected. Angie Graves:Thank you for the SCENARIO 3 note Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:Under scenario 4 there shouldn't be a break in council business until VCs are appointed or the non-voting NCA takes place Terri Agnew:Welcome Martin Silva Julie Hedlund:@Amr: What if we just strike "non-voting NCA"? Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, that is why staff suggested having a deadline for the House(s) to make the interim appointment, i.e. by the time of the next Council meeting. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:the Non-voting NCA presently by the GNSO OP IS eligible to run for council chair, so if same were to hold office for a short while to run an election it should surfice Amr Elsadr:@Julie: I would be OK with that, but am really just wondering whether or not there is some sort of conflict. I'm not actually sure. Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:why not appoint interim VCs on the spot, meaning directly following the meeting where the chair election failed? I guess all SG leading reps should be available to assist... Amr Elsadr:@Lawrence: You are correct, but we are talking about vice-chair, not chair. I don't think there are limitations on that either, but should probably check. Mary Wong:@Wolf-Ulrich, maybe that can be phrased as the ideal scenario, but failing that, have a maximum deadline? Just in case. Anne Aikman-Scalese (IPC):@ Wolf-Ulrich - House may not be able to agree that quickly as to who should serve Amr Elsadr:Like I said, I see no problem with the non-voting NCA being appointed as an interim chair under scenario 4. It's scenario 3 that I'm wondering about. Martin Silva:Hi all, struggling with a weird connection here but I think I'll manage to be on for the rest of the meeting. Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:hanks Mary, agree Wolf-Ulrich Knoben 2:T... Julie Hedlund:@Amr: The Procedures are silent on NCAs and Vice Chairs. They say, "a. Each house shall select a Council Vice-Chair from within its respective house.." Julie Hedlund:That;s all. Mary Wong:@Amr, wouldn't that be up to the House? Amr Elsadr:@Anne: a non-voting NCA is not from within a house. Amr Elsadr:Thanks Julie. That's helpful. Amr Elsadr:@Mary: +1 Amr Elsadr:@Anne: Yes. I believe that is best. Mary Wong:The only thing staff can think of is perhaps this is the kind of situation where having a neutral non-voting person may be preferable? Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:+1 i agree also Sara Bockey:@Anne, I agree as well. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:that the non voting NCA should be left out. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:of option 3 Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:senerio 4 would serve as a stimulant to ensuring that election faliure does not get to this point Amr Elsadr:Agree with Mary. Amr Elsadr:Apologies. I missed pretty much everything Mary just said. Had dropped off the call. Amr Elsadr:been dropped off. Amr Elsadr:Back now. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:Once an election fails and it is officially announced (which is a 2 day time frame) , tthe process to resheduling and conducting another election should proceed and be in place in the time frame we agree Sara Bockey:I like the idea of a prescribe timeline to make them make a decision sooner rather than later, but I'm not familiar with how Council works ...but that is my inclination Amr Elsadr:Well... Amr Elsadr:Practical. :) Amr Elsadr:Some of those agrees are old. Angie Graves:Mine was old Amr Elsadr:How about a deadline of one week before the following Council meeting? Mary Wong:10 calendar days? Julie Hedlund:@Lawrence -- there has only been one failed election -- in Dublin. The Vice Chairs were continuing and handled the election and business. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:great Amr Elsadr:In Dublin, the NCPH managed to reach some decisions before the week was over. Mary Wong:Sure, Anne Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for that julie Julie Hedlund:@ Anne: We are probably better off holding the call at the usual time. Amr Elsadr:Can we also continue this on-list? Try to take advantage of time between calls? Julie Hedlund:Rather than a Doodle. Julie Hedlund:@Amr: Yes, on the list. Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:so it looks like a 2 week time frame could work out well Amr Elsadr:Thanks all. Bye. Martin Silva:Thank you! Angie Graves:thanks Sara Bockey:thank you all Lawrence Olawale-Roberts:thanks for the time, bye now Martin Silva:bye bye Mary Wong:Thanks all

2 1

Notes/Actions: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016
by Julie Hedlund March 24, 2016

March 24, 2016

Dear SCI members, Please see below the notes/actions captured from the SCI meeting held on 24 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. During today’s call it was agreed that discussion could continue on the list concerning these notes/actions. I’ve included the suggestions provided by IPC, as these were included in today’s discussion. The suggested changes for your review are in red/brackets as indicated below. Staff will separately send a notice for a call in two weeks on Thursday, 07 April at the usual time of 1800 UTC. Kind regards, Julie Notes/Actions re Remaining Issue on Chair/Vice Chair Elections: ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. Suggestion: “In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.” Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs conducting Council business. **ACTION ITEM: The suggestion above is accepted. SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair’s term on the Council is ending. IPC suggestion: If one Vice Chair seat is being vacated, the relevant House should appoint an Interim Vice Chair to work with the continuing Vice Chair in the other House to conduct Council business. Suggestion: “In the case where one of Vice-Chair's terms on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, [OPTION 1: the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected] OR [OPTION 2: the House with a vacant Vice-Chair position shall designate an Interim Vice Chair to join the continuing Vice Chair would to oversee the Chair eletion and conduct Council business. The deadline for the vacant House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? [Note: The previously noted disadvantage would no longer apply if the other House can designate an Interim Vice Chair.] Notes: There were no objections to the Vice Chairs (including an Interim Vice Chair designated by a House) conducting Council business. Question: What is the time limit for the vacant House to to designate an Interim Vice Chair? Note the three options suggested during the call: 1) 10 calendar days after the failed Chair election; 2) 14 calendar days after the failed Chair election; or 3) 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting. ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. IPC Suggestion: should be clear that an appointed Interim Vice Chair is not prohibited from continuing as Vice Chair after the Council Chair election is concluded, provided the relevant House agrees on that Vice Chair continuing. “their service in those roles would end” should be clarified. Suggestion: “In the case where both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing Councilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting.] The Designated Interim Vice Chairs will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair will not be eligible to serve as Designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest. [However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election.] Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. Notes: - Strike “non-voting” from the NCA option. - Add "The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting”. - After “potential conflicts of interest” add, “However, Interim Vice Chairs are not prohibited from being appointed as continuing Vice Chairs by their respective Houses following a successful Chair election." ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer. SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. Suggestion: “If both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, [the] non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is conclusively elected. The deadline for each House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 10 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected [OR: 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected] [OR: 1 week prior to the next scheduled GNSO Council meeting]" IPC Suggestion: The reference should be to “the” non-voting NCA since there is only one. An inexperienced incoming non-voting NCA conducting Council business may be a concern but this scenario is a “last resort” and may also provide motivation for the Houses to appoint Interim Vice Chairs quickly as noted by Amr and Sara in chat on Monday. Important to specify at what point Scenario 4 takes effect, i.e. how much time do the Houses have to appoint Vice Chairs in Scenario 3? Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business? Notes: Insert the suggested deadlines for the Houses to designate the Interim Vice Chairs and change reference relating to “the non-voting NCA". ** ACTION ITEM: Review additional text in red/brackets above and indicate which deadline option you prefer.

2 1

Actions re: Current Practice in Relation to Motions
by Julie Hedlund March 24, 2016

March 24, 2016

Dear SCI Members, Per the action item below from the SCI meeting on 05 March relating to the Sub Team A report on Current Practice in Relation to Motions, Mary and I have drafted language for your consideration for a revised version of the GNSO Operating Procedures. The language is contained in a new section 3.3.3 Submitting, Seconding, and Amending Motions in the attached document. The language is based on the documentation of the current procedure, as well as the changes to current procedure, recommended by Sub Team A and agreed to by the SCI. The recommendations are provided below for reference. Best regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Sub Team A Recommendations ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS. From: <owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 10:46 AM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 Dear SCI members, Please see below the actions captured from the SCI meeting held at ICANN 55 in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. For your reference, the Sub Team A and B Reports are attached along with the related materials. With respect to the next Sub Team B meeting, staff will send a Doodle Poll. In addition, for the next SCI call these have been held on Thursdays at 1800 UTC. Staff will separately ask for RSVPs for a possible SCI call on Thursday, 24 March. For these two meetings we are skipping the week immediately following the ICANN 55 meeting (13-19 March) as is our usual practice. Kind regards, Julie Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 1. Sub Team A: Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Action Item: Staff will draft language for the SCI to consider to incorporate the informal procedures into the GNSO Operating Procedures. 2. Sub Team B: Report to the SCI on Chair-Vice Chair Elections Issue 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? >From the Report to the SCI: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: “In the case where both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." Action Item: Sub Team B will continue discussion on this issue. Consider whether there should be steps for each possibilty that could ensure a predictable outcome. Issue 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? Action Item: Concerning the Election Timeline — It was noted that the timeline will be very important if incoming councilors can be considered for Chair elections. The request is for the representatives from the two Houses in the SCI to review the timeline and bring their comments back to the SCI. New issue 5: If there is no Chair elected is it the Vice Chairs who run the meetings and calls the votes? Action Item: Sub Team B will consider this issue.

3 5

Re: Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections
by Julie Hedlund March 24, 2016

March 24, 2016

Anne, Thanks very much for the helpful feedback. Staff will include them in the document we put in the Adobe Connect room tomorrow — along with any other comments we may receive. Kind regards, Julie From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 2:21 PM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org> Subject: RE: Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections Julie et al, I have some preliminary comments from IPC Leadership for SCI consideration and discussion as shown inline in red text below. (These are not final positions – just questions and comments.) Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman(a)lrrc.com _____________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com From:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 1:46 PM To: gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections Dear SCI members, The Sub Team B deliberated yesterday on the remaining issue relating to the Chair/Vice Chair elections. They present the following action item and possible scenarios, including pros and cons, to the SCI for consideration and discussion at the meeting on Thursday, 24 March. Also for consideration is a revised draft election timeline. Best regards. Julie Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support Remaining Issue to Address on Chair/Vice Chair Elections ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? Discussion points: The primary goal is to have a successful election of a Chair and a simple solution. The options should give preference to the continuation of the Vice Chairs if they are available to continue (not term-limited). In case there is no incumbent Vice Chair available then the designation should be made by the related House. Designation by both Houses of a non-voting NCA to act as interim Chair in the absence of an available Vice-Chair should be done only as a possible last resort (subject to possible conditions from the NomCom). Action Item--Possible Scenarios and Suggestions in Order of Priority: SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. Suggestion: “In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.” Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair’s term on the Council is ending. If one Vice Chair seat is being vacated, the relevant House should appoint an Interim Vice Chair to work with the continuing Vice Chair in the other House to conduct Council business. Suggestion: “In the case where one of Vice-Chair's' term on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.” Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. It should be clear that an appointed Interim Vice Chair is not prohibited from continuing as Vice Chair after the Council Chair election is concluded, provided the relevant House agrees on that Vice Chair continuing. “their service in those roles would end” should be clarified. Suggestion: “In the case where both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing cCouncilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest.” Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. Question as to how long each House has to do this before we default to Scenario 4. SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. Suggestion: “if both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, a non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is elected. The reference should be to “the” non-voting NCA since there is only one. An inexperienced incoming non-voting NCA conducting Council business may be a concern but this scenario is a “last resort” and may also provide motivation for the Houses to appoint Interim Vice Chairs quickly as noted by Amr and Sara in chat on Monday. Important to specify at what point Scenario 4 takes effect, i.e. how much time do the Houses have to appoint Vice Chairs in Scenario 3? Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business. This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

2 1

Sub Team B Action Item/Scenarios for the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections
by Julie Hedlund March 22, 2016

March 22, 2016

Dear SCI members, The Sub Team B deliberated yesterday on the remaining issue relating to the Chair/Vice Chair elections. They present the following action item and possible scenarios, including pros and cons, to the SCI for consideration and discussion at the meeting on Thursday, 24 March. Also for consideration is a revised draft election timeline. Best regards. Julie Julie Hedlund, Director, SSAC Support Remaining Issue to Address on Chair/Vice Chair Elections ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? Discussion points: The primary goal is to have a successful election of a Chair and a simple solution. The options should give preference to the continuation of the Vice Chairs if they are available to continue (not term-limited). In case there is no incumbent Vice Chair available then the designation should be made by the related House. Designation by both Houses of a non-voting NCA to act as interim Chair in the absence of an available Vice-Chair should be done only as a possible last resort (subject to possible conditions from the NomCom). Action Item--Possible Scenarios and Suggestions in Order of Priority: SCENARIO 1: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but both Vice Chairs are continuing on the Council. Suggestion: “In the case where no Chair is conclusively elected, the two Vice Chairs shall jointly oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.” Pros: Simplest solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Used in Dublin. Cons: Are there concerns with the Vice Chairs conducting Council business? SCENARIO 2: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, but one Vice Chair is continuing on the Council, while the other Vice Chair’s term on the Council is ending. Suggestion: “In the case where one of Vice-Chair's' term on the Council ends at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, the remaining Vice Chair shall oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business until such time as a new Chair is elected.” Pros: A simple solution with minimal changes to the GNSO Operating Procedures. Similar to the procedure in Dublin. Cons: One one House is represented in the Vice Chair position. Are there concerns with one Vice Chair conducting Council business? SCENARIO 3: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected in the first round, and neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council. Suggestion: “In the case where both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing cCouncilor, which may include the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and conduct Council business. Once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest.” Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Not clear if there are concerns from the Council or the NomCom for the non-voting NCAs to be included, or conducting Council business. SCENARIO 4: A new GNSO Council Chair is not elected, neither of the two Vice Chairs is continuing on the Council, and the Houses do not designate Interim Vice Chairs. Suggestion: “if both Houses should fail to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, a non-voting NCA will be designated Interim Chair to oversee the election and conduct Council business until such time as a Chair is elected. Pros: Avoids changes to the Bylaws or a Special Circumstance vote. Cons: Are there concerns from the Council or the NomCom for a non-voting NCA to be in the role of the Chair and conducting business.

1 0

SCHEDULED: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC
by Julie Hedlund March 18, 2016

March 18, 2016

Dear SCI members, Based on the RSVPs received as of COB yesterday, 27 March, staff will go ahead and schedule the call for Thursday, 24 March at 1800 UTC. The GNSO Secretariat will send out a notice. Please see below the actions from the SCI meeting in Marrakech on 05 March. Note that Sub Team B will be meeting Monday, 21 March to discuss the action items from its report to the SCI. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 1. Sub Team A: Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Action Item: Staff will draft language for the SCI to consider to incorporate the informal procedures into the GNSO Operating Procedures. 2. Sub Team B: Report to the SCI on Chair-Vice Chair Elections Issue 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? >From the Report to the SCI: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: “In the case where both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." Action Item: Sub Team B will continue discussion on this issue. Consider whether there should be steps for each possibilty that could ensure a predictable outcome. Issue 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? Action Item: Concerning the Election Timeline — It was noted that the timeline will be very important if incoming councilors can be considered for Chair elections. The request is for the representatives from the two Houses in the SCI to review the timeline and bring their comments back to the SCI. New issue 5: If there is no Chair elected is it the Vice Chairs who run the meetings and calls the votes? Action Item: Sub Team B will consider this issue.

1 0

REMINDER RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC
by Julie Hedlund March 14, 2016

March 14, 2016

Dear SCI members, This is a reminder if you have not already responded. Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

2 3

RE: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC
by aelsadr＠egyptig.org March 8, 2016

March 8, 2016

Hi Julie and all, I should be available for an SCI call on March 24th. Thanks. Amr

4 5

RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC
by Julie Hedlund March 8, 2016

March 8, 2016

Dear SCI members, Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

4 5

Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC
by Sara Bockey March 7, 2016

March 7, 2016

Hi Julie, That time works for me. Sara From: <owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org<mailto:owner-gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org>> on behalf of Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>> Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 3:55 PM To: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org>" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org>> Subject: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] RSVP: SCI Meeting 24 March 2016 1800 UTC Dear SCI members, Per the action item from the SCI meeting on 05 March 2016, we are requesting RSVPs for a possible SCI call at the usual day/time of Thursday, 1800 UTC. The next available date would be Thursday, 24 March (avoiding the week after the ICANN meeting as is customary). Please RSVP by Thursday, 17 March to let us know whether you can attend this meeting. Based on the number of RSVPs staff will determine whether there are enough participants to hold the call and will either schedule it, or seek an alternate date. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

3 2

Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016
by Julie Hedlund March 7, 2016

March 7, 2016

Dear SCI members, Please see below the actions captured from the SCI meeting held at ICANN 55 in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. For your reference, the Sub Team A and B Reports are attached along with the related materials. With respect to the next Sub Team B meeting, staff will send a Doodle Poll. In addition, for the next SCI call these have been held on Thursdays at 1800 UTC. Staff will separately ask for RSVPs for a possible SCI call on Thursday, 24 March. For these two meetings we are skipping the week immediately following the ICANN 55 meeting (13-19 March) as is our usual practice. Kind regards, Julie Actions: SCI Meeting 05 March 2016 1. Sub Team A: Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Action Item: Staff will draft language for the SCI to consider to incorporate the informal procedures into the GNSO Operating Procedures. 2. Sub Team B: Report to the SCI on Chair-Vice Chair Elections Issue 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? >From the Report to the SCI: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: “In the case where both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." Action Item: Sub Team B will continue discussion on this issue. Consider whether there should be steps for each possibilty that could ensure a predictable outcome. Issue 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? Action Item: Concerning the Election Timeline — It was noted that the timeline will be very important if incoming councilors can be considered for Chair elections. The request is for the representatives from the two Houses in the SCI to review the timeline and bring their comments back to the SCI. New issue 5: If there is no Chair elected is it the Vice Chairs who run the meetings and calls the votes? Action Item: Sub Team B will consider this issue.

1 0

Just a Test
by Amr Elsadr March 7, 2016

March 7, 2016

Hi, Been having problems with my hosting provider, and am not receiving emails from this list. I’m working it out now, and just testing using this email, so please disregard it. My apologies for the unnecessary traffic. Thanks. Amr

1 0

Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council
by Julie Hedlund March 4, 2016

March 4, 2016

Many thanks Lori and I hope you feel better Anne! Kind regards, Julie From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> Date: Friday, March 4, 2016 at 5:29 PM To: 'Lori Schulman' <lschulman(a)inta.org>, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, 'Amr Elsadr' <aelsadr(a)egyptig.org> Cc: Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick(a)isoc.be>, Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org>, "gnso-secs(a)icann.org" <gnso-secs(a)icann.org>, "gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org>, "gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com" <gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com> Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council Thanks Lori! Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman(a)lrrc.com _____________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com From: Lori Schulman [mailto:lschulman@inta.org] Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 10:04 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; 'Julie Hedlund'; 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings; gnso-secs(a)icann.org; gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org; gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council I am planning on dialing in which I believe is 2am my time. Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy INTA 202-261-6588 From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne Sent: ‎3/‎4/‎2016 12:02 PM To: 'Julie Hedlund'; 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings; gnso-secs(a)icann.org; gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org; Lori Schulman; gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council Thanks Julie. Unfortunately due to the time zone difference, I will not be able to attend the SCI meetings and the SCI update to GNSO Council remotely. Since being out with bronchitis, it is important for me to get good sleep. I am unsure as to whether Lori plans to participate remotely on behalf of IPC but she is copied here. I know the meetings are in good hands with Rudi. Will miss seeing all of you in Marrakech and hope to join again in the June meeting. Thank you all for your hard work. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman(a)lrrc.com _______________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com -----Original Message----- From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org] Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 9:10 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings; gnso-secs(a)icann.org Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council All, Here are the final slides with the change suggested by Anne and confirmed by Amr. Thanks! Julie On 3/2/16, 3:17 PM, "Julie Hedlund" <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> wrote: >Dear Amr, > >I am very sorry that we missed you as a volunteer for the sub teams. I don’t know how that happened. > >Earlier today I submitted on behalf of the two sub teams the reports to the SCI — did you see them? I will send them directly to you too. > >Kind regards, >Julie > > > >On 3/2/16, 3:10 PM, "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> wrote: > >>Hi Amr. Sorry you did not get added. Subteam B definitely has materials to submit for full SCI discussion on Saturday and I know Julie plans to forward this as we have been finalizing the language and topics for discussion. Wolf-Ulrich took a leadership role in developing our Subteam B work thus far. >>Anne >> >>Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>Of Counsel >>520.629.4428 office >>520.879.4725 fax >>AAikman(a)lrrc.com >>_______________________________ >> >>Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>lrrc.com >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Amr Elsadr [mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org] >>Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 1:04 PM >>To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne >>Cc: Julie Hedlund; Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >> >>Hi, >> >>I believe Anne is correct with regards to the order of consensus call followed by the public comment period. I don’t recall any SCI recommendations being subject to public comment in the absence of full consensus of the committee members. Now that I think about it, from a process perspective, that is rather unfortunate, since it robs the members of the SCI from taking public comments submitted into consideration before the consensus call is made. >> >>On the other hand, I don’t recall anyone ever submitting a comment on SCI recommendations, so the point may be practically moot. >> >>On another topic…, I was looking at the GNSO calendar a few days ago and noticed a few SCI sub-team meetings that took place. I thought I had volunteered for both of those (A & B) on one of our calls, but I may be wrong. I looked into it, and did notice that my name wasn’t on the list of sub-team members that was circulated on the SCI email list. Since I failed to respond, I suppose I have nobody to blame but myself. >> >>Are there any plans to provide an update to the full committee on progress made on those sub-teams? Is that what we will be discussing on Saturday morning? Perhaps some material shared in advance of Saturday may make the meeting a little more constructive? >> >>Thanks. >> >>Amr >> >>> On Mar 2, 2016, at 9:34 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Julie. I think the Consensus Call within SCI comes BEFORE putting recommendations out for public comment >>> >>> >>> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>> >>> Of Counsel >>> >>> 520.629.4428 office >>> >>> 520.879.4725 fax >>> >>> AAikman(a)lrrc.com >>> >>> _____________________________ >>> >>> <image004.png> >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>> >>> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>> >>> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> >>> lrrc.com >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 11:58 AM >>> To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; Rudi Vansnick >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>> Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks so much Anne, that’s a very helpful point. I’ve updated the slides accordingly and attached them. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> >>> Date: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 1:45 PM >>> To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick(a)isoc.be> >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr(a)egyptig.org>, Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> >>> Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie – with regard to Next Steps, I think we have to note that the Consensus Call within SCI is required in each case. >>> >>> >>> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>> >>> Of Counsel >>> >>> 520.629.4428 office >>> >>> 520.879.4725 fax >>> >>> AAikman(a)lrrc.com >>> >>> _____________________________ >>> >>> <image003.png> >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>> >>> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>> >>> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> >>> lrrc.com >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 9:40 AM >>> To: Rudi Vansnick; Aikman-Scalese, Anne >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>> Subject: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> Importance: High >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Rudi and Anne, >>> >>> >>> >>> Mary and I have drafted for your review the attached slides for the SCI update to the GNSO Council on copy since as GNSO Council Liaison to the SCI. >>> >>> >>> >>> Note that I have attached the slides in both PowerPoint and PDF. You may find that if you don’t have view the PDF. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the §2510-2521. >>> >>> >>> >>> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. >> >> >>________________________________ >> >>This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

1 0

RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council
by Lori Schulman March 4, 2016

March 4, 2016

I am planning on dialing in which I believe is 2am my time. Lori S. Schulman Senior Director, Internet Policy INTA 202-261-6588 ________________________________ From: Aikman-Scalese, Anne<mailto:AAikman@lrrc.com> Sent: ‎3/‎4/‎2016 12:02 PM To: 'Julie Hedlund'<mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org>; 'Amr Elsadr'<mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org> Cc: Rudi Vansnick<mailto:rudi.vansnick@isoc.be>; Mary Wong<mailto:mary.wong@icann.org>; Marika Konings<mailto:marika.konings@icann.org>; gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>; gnso-improvem-impl-sc(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org>; Lori Schulman<mailto:lschulman@inta.org>; gregshatanipc(a)gmail.com<mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council Thanks Julie. Unfortunately due to the time zone difference, I will not be able to attend the SCI meetings and the SCI update to GNSO Council remotely. Since being out with bronchitis, it is important for me to get good sleep. I am unsure as to whether Lori plans to participate remotely on behalf of IPC but she is copied here. I know the meetings are in good hands with Rudi. Will miss seeing all of you in Marrakech and hope to join again in the June meeting. Thank you all for your hard work. Anne Anne E. Aikman-Scalese Of Counsel 520.629.4428 office 520.879.4725 fax AAikman(a)lrrc.com _______________________________ Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 lrrc.com -----Original Message----- From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org] Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 9:10 AM To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; 'Amr Elsadr' Cc: Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings; gnso-secs(a)icann.org Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council All, Here are the final slides with the change suggested by Anne and confirmed by Amr. Thanks! Julie On 3/2/16, 3:17 PM, "Julie Hedlund" <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org> wrote: >Dear Amr, > >I am very sorry that we missed you as a volunteer for the sub teams. I don’t know how that happened. > >Earlier today I submitted on behalf of the two sub teams the reports to the SCI — did you see them? I will send them directly to you too. > >Kind regards, >Julie > > > >On 3/2/16, 3:10 PM, "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> wrote: > >>Hi Amr. Sorry you did not get added. Subteam B definitely has materials to submit for full SCI discussion on Saturday and I know Julie plans to forward this as we have been finalizing the language and topics for discussion. Wolf-Ulrich took a leadership role in developing our Subteam B work thus far. >>Anne >> >>Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>Of Counsel >>520.629.4428 office >>520.879.4725 fax >>AAikman(a)lrrc.com >>_______________________________ >> >>Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>lrrc.com >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Amr Elsadr [mailto:aelsadr@egyptig.org] >>Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 1:04 PM >>To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne >>Cc: Julie Hedlund; Rudi Vansnick; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >> >>Hi, >> >>I believe Anne is correct with regards to the order of consensus call followed by the public comment period. I don’t recall any SCI recommendations being subject to public comment in the absence of full consensus of the committee members. Now that I think about it, from a process perspective, that is rather unfortunate, since it robs the members of the SCI from taking public comments submitted into consideration before the consensus call is made. >> >>On the other hand, I don’t recall anyone ever submitting a comment on SCI recommendations, so the point may be practically moot. >> >>On another topic…, I was looking at the GNSO calendar a few days ago and noticed a few SCI sub-team meetings that took place. I thought I had volunteered for both of those (A & B) on one of our calls, but I may be wrong. I looked into it, and did notice that my name wasn’t on the list of sub-team members that was circulated on the SCI email list. Since I failed to respond, I suppose I have nobody to blame but myself. >> >>Are there any plans to provide an update to the full committee on progress made on those sub-teams? Is that what we will be discussing on Saturday morning? Perhaps some material shared in advance of Saturday may make the meeting a little more constructive? >> >>Thanks. >> >>Amr >> >>> On Mar 2, 2016, at 9:34 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Julie. I think the Consensus Call within SCI comes BEFORE putting recommendations out for public comment >>> >>> >>> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>> >>> Of Counsel >>> >>> 520.629.4428 office >>> >>> 520.879.4725 fax >>> >>> AAikman(a)lrrc.com >>> >>> _____________________________ >>> >>> <image004.png> >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>> >>> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>> >>> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> >>> lrrc.com >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 11:58 AM >>> To: Aikman-Scalese, Anne; Rudi Vansnick >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>> Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks so much Anne, that’s a very helpful point. I’ve updated the slides accordingly and attached them. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> From: "Aikman-Scalese, Anne" <AAikman(a)lrrc.com> >>> Date: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 at 1:45 PM >>> To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund(a)icann.org>, Rudi Vansnick <rudi.vansnick(a)isoc.be> >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr(a)egyptig.org>, Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org> >>> Subject: RE: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie – with regard to Next Steps, I think we have to note that the Consensus Call within SCI is required in each case. >>> >>> >>> >>> Anne E. Aikman-Scalese >>> >>> Of Counsel >>> >>> 520.629.4428 office >>> >>> 520.879.4725 fax >>> >>> AAikman(a)lrrc.com >>> >>> _____________________________ >>> >>> <image003.png> >>> Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP >>> >>> One South Church Avenue, Suite 700 >>> >>> Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611 >>> >>> lrrc.com >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 9:40 AM >>> To: Rudi Vansnick; Aikman-Scalese, Anne >>> Cc: Amr Elsadr; Mary Wong; Marika Konings >>> Subject: FOR REVIEW: Slides for SCI Update to the GNSO Council >>> Importance: High >>> >>> >>> >>> Dear Rudi and Anne, >>> >>> >>> >>> Mary and I have drafted for your review the attached slides for the SCI update to the GNSO Council on copy since as GNSO Council Liaison to the SCI. >>> >>> >>> >>> Note that I have attached the slides in both PowerPoint and PDF. You may find that if you don’t have view the PDF. >>> >>> >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Julie >>> >>> >>> >>> Julie Hedlund, Policy Director >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the §2510-2521. >>> >>> >>> >>> This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. >> >> >>________________________________ >> >>This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521. ________________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

1 0

Sub Team B Report to the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections
by Julie Hedlund March 2, 2016

March 2, 2016

Dear SCI members, On behalf of Sub Team B — Anne Aikman-Scalese, Sara Bockey, Angie Graves, Lawrence Olawale-Roberts, and Wolf-Ulrich Knoben — I hereby transmit below a Report to the SCI for discussion at the next SCI meeting in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March at 0800-0900 UTC/Casablanca. For remote access see: https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/sat-gnso-sci. Note that the virtual meeting room is different from our usual Adobe Connect room. For your reference attached is the original review request and the election timeline. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Sub Team B Report to the SCI on Chair/Vice Chair Elections Recommendations: ISSUE 1: Must the GNSO Chair be a continuing (not new/incoming) Councilor? Should new/incoming Councilors be eligible to stand for election? See Section 2.2(b), which provides that a candidate for GNSO Chair “does not need to be a member of a house, but must be a member of the GNSO Council.” With the ICANN Bylaws prescribing that a Council member’s term begins and ends at the conclusion of an ICANN annual general meeting, Section 2.2(b) as phrased would seem to limit candidates for the Chair to only incumbent, continuing Council members. AGREED: "A candidate for GNSO Council Chair does not need to be a member of a house, but must be a [continuing or incoming] member of the GNSO Council." (Change to the GNSO Operating Procedures in brackets.) ACTION: Update the GNSO Operating Procedures accordingly. ISSUE 2: Is there a gap to be addressed when the Vice Chairs' terms end at the same time as that of the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected by that time? See Section 2.2(f): For the Vice-Chairs to “serve as interim Chairs until a successful election can be held” if a new Chair is not elected by the conclusion of the ICANN annual general meeting at which her term ends. However, the Procedures are silent as to what happens when one or both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council (which are set in the Bylaws) also end at that particular ICANN annual general meeting. The Bylaws state, "the regular term of each GNSO Council member shall begin at the conclusion of an ICANN annual meeting and shall end at the conclusion of the second ICANN annual meeting thereafter…Each GNSO Council member shall hold office during his or her regular term and until a successor has been selected and qualified or until that member resigns or is removed in accordance with these Bylaw.” AGREED: Suggested new language for the GNSO Operating Procedures: “In the case where both Vice-Chairs’ terms on the Council end at the same time as the Chair, and no Chair is conclusively elected, this procedure would apply: Each House should designate a new or continuing councilor, including the voting and non-voting NCAs, to temporarily fill the role of Vice Chair on an interim basis, not as an elected Vice Chair. These individuals will co-chair the Chair election and once the election is completed their service in those roles would end. Candidates for Chair would not be eligible to serve as designated Interim Vice Chairs, to avoid potential conflicts of interest." ACTION: Discuss with the SCI whether the procedure would apply only when both Vice-Chairs’ terms end, or to include when only one Vice-Chair's term ends. Update the GNSO Operating Procedures accordingly. ISSUE 3: What should be the method for posting election results? See Section 2.2(g), which calls for the Council to “inform the Board and the Community appropriately and post the election results on the GNSO website within 2 business days following each election and runoff ballot, whether successful or unsuccessful” without elaborating on what the appropriate mechanism (in addition to posting on the GNSO website) might be. AGREED: No need to make a change to the procedures if they are followed. However, there be a requirement for staff to follow up on every election (successful or not) with a note to the full Council enclosing the result. ACTION: Discuss in SCI whether the staff notification satisfies "publishing”. ISSUE 4: Should the timetable (or a modality for setting one) for the GNSO chair election be specified in the Operating Procedures? See Section 2.2: This section does not set out a timetable for the GNSO Chair election or prescribe a modality for setting that timetable for nominations and election in each cycle. AGREED: Create a timeline that includes the call for chair candidate nominations, the nominations of Council members, and time for SG/C/NCA meetings with candidates. ACTION: Review the attached timeline graphic.

1 0

Sub Team A Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions
by Julie Hedlund March 2, 2016

March 2, 2016

Dear SCI members, On behalf of Sub Team A — Sara Bockey, Angie Graves, Wolf-Ulrich Knoben, and Lawrence Olawale-Roberts, and Rudi Vansnick — I hereby transmit below a Report to the SCI for discussion at the next SCI meeting in Marrakech on Saturday, 05 March at 0800-0900 UTC/Casablanca. For remote access see: https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55/schedule/sat-gnso-sci. Note that the virtual meeting room is different from our usual Adobe Connect room. For your reference attached are the original review request, the letter to the GNSO Council documenting the current practice, and the steps/flow chart. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director Sub Team A Report to the SCI on Current Practice in Relation to Motions Recommendations: ISSUE 1: Must every motion be seconded? AGREED: Every motion must be seconded before a vote. ACTION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 5. If a GNSO Council member (other than the proposer) seconds the motion the GNSO Council Chair calls for its discussion or a vote. ISSUE 2: Must the seconder be not just a different Councilor but also a Councilor from a different Stakeholder Group/Constituency? AGREED: Do not include a requirement that the seconder should be from a different stakeholder group or constituency. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO THE CURRENT PROCESS. ISSUE 3: Should there be a deadline for motions to be seconded? AGREED: A motion should be seconded prior to discussion. ATION: UPDATE THE PROCESS AND FLOW CHART ACCORDINGLY (in red below and attached): 4. The motion can be discussed up to the Council meeting, but discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second. ISSUE 4: Should there be a time limit /deadline for submitting amendments, to allow each SG/C adequate time to discuss them rather than have the Council deal with what could potentially be substantively new subject matter "on the fly" during a Council meeting? When should a motion be deferred in certain circumstances, e.g. "competing" amendments? AGREED: Do not require a deadline for submission of amendments prior to, or during, discussion of a motion. ACTION: NO CHANGE TO CURRENT PROCESS.

1 0