Thanks Amr for making the point. Although these cases may look most unlikely your additions could be of “helpful pressure” on both houses. Best regards Wolf-Ulrich From: Julie Hedlund Sent: Monday, May 9, 2016 4:59 PM To: Amr Elsadr Cc: gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 05 May 2016 Hi Amr, Thank you for your helpful comments and the suggested language for Scenarios 2 and 3. When staff send around the revised Operating Procedures with the Section 2.2 new language, we’ll include your suggestion in brackets. Kind regards, Julie Julie Hedlund, Policy Director From: Amr Elsadr <aelsadr@egyptig.org> Date: Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 11:26 AM To: Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> Cc: "gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org" <gnso-improvem-impl-sc@icann.org> Subject: Re: [gnso-improvem-impl-sc] Actions: SCI Meeting 05 May 2016 Hi, On May 5, 2016, at 11:18 PM, Julie Hedlund <julie.hedlund@icann.org> wrote: [SNIP] ACTION ITEMS: Chair/Vice Chair Elections: 1.. Staff will produce a revision of Section 2.2 of the GNSO Operating Procedures (Officer Elections: Chair/Vice-Chair Elections) based on the final proposed language below. 2.. SCI members will review the revision on the list and finalize it no later than at the 19 May meeting. 3.. Staff will submit the final revision for a Consensus Call for two weeks (19 May to 02 June). 4.. Once the Consensus Call is completed Amr Elsadr, as the SCI Liaison to the GNSO Council, will send an update to the Council on its list for possible discussion in Helsinki. These all seem good to me, but I have a suggestion for some additional language that I will explain below. I don’t know if this should be included in the section 2.2 revision, or not. Discussion re: Public Comment on Proposed Revisions: SCI members should review and discuss on the list whether to initiate a 40-day public comment period only on the revisions to the GNSO Operating Procedures relating to motions and amendments, but to wait to submit a complete set of revisions for GNSO Council approval once a separate 40-day public comment process on revisions relating to Chair/Vice Chair elections is completed. Staff notes that until the revised version of the GNSO Operating Procedures is published, the GNSO Council will follow their current informal process relating to motions and amendments. The only change from the current process in the revision to the Operating Procedures is that discussion and voting on the motion at the Council meeting cannot proceed without a second (current informal process allows for discussion, but not voting, on a motion without a second). I agree with the explanation of where things currently stand here, so see no urgency in producing an earlier and separate public comment period for the changes that the SCI is recommending to guidelines on motions/amendments. If the SCI had recommended changes to the current informal practice, then there might have been a reason to try to get this done more quickly. However, since the SCI hasn’t suggested any significant changes, delaying this in order to package it with the Council elections topic shouldn’t have any impact on Council business. Chair/Vice Chair Elections Final Proposed Language: 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. Final Proposed Language: "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.) ISSUE 2: Scenarios relating to the 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. Final Proposed Language: “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.” 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. Final Proposed Language: “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, the House with a vacant Vice-Chair position shall designate an Interim Vice Chair from within this House to join the continuing Vice Chair to oversee the Chair election and conduct Council business. The deadline for the vacant House to designate its Interim Vice Chair is 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected.” I’m wondering if this language may seem ambiguous to some readers, or possibly even lead to a misunderstanding in the future. One could possibly interpret it to mean that if the house that needs to appoint an interim vice-chair fails to do so within 14 days, then the process would be required to proceed to scenario 3…, or more likely scenario 4. I wonder if it would be helpful to add a sentence at the end like this: “Should the vacant House fail to appoint an interim Vice-Chair within the allotted time period, the continuing Vice-Chair from the other House will serve as an Interim Vice-Chair alone until a Council Chair is elected.” 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. Final Proposed Language: “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 from within its respective House, 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 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected. 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.” Again, we may need the language to be specific on that one House appointing an interim vice-chair is enough not to proceed 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. Final Proposed Language: “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 14 calendar days following the Council meeting at which no Chair was conclusively elected." Lets hope it never comes to this!! :) Thanks. Amr