2008-10-01 - Process for Electing Council Leadership

During the previous discussion, Bruce Tonkin noted that in the original WG-GCR Report there was mention of making the 3 rd NCA available to take on the role of Chair if the Council was unable to elect a Chair. Denise Michel noted that this discussion was related to the next issue regarding the election of the Chair and vice Chairs.

Peter Dengate Thrush noted that the WG-GCR had proposed electing the Chair and Vice Chair of the Council with 60% of the vote. A fallback option was that in the event of a failure to produce a Chair the 3 rd Council-level NCA would serve as voting Chair. Peter noted that there was not agreement on this in the previous Board discussion. He noted that Staff recommends the Board authorize electing the Chair consistent with the WG-GCR proposal, but that no fall back position is necessary. Staff suggested that if the 60% support is not found, there should be subsequent balloting until a Chair is elected.

The Chairman asked whether it was safe to assume the risk, and noted that there had never been a deadlock in previous GNSO Council elections. He asked for Bruce Tonkin's view. Bruce Tonkin indicated that he supported the staff position, and noted that if the Council can't select a Chair it's got a much more serious problem.

Susan Crawford also noted that previous GNSO Chairs have always been elected with a higher threshold than the 60%, and indicated her support for that approach and the staff recommendation. She also noted her support that the Nominating Committee Appointee not being the fall back position for a Chair.

The Chairman asked Rob Hoggarth to provide a sense of the compromises that led to this, noting that the board should only turn down a working group recommendation on a well, informed basis.

Rob Hoggarth indicated that there had not been a full consensus of the WG-GCR on this proposal and that there was opposition to the 3rd NCA fall back option by the Intellectual Property Constituency and the Business Constituency. He also noted that there mere existence of the 3 rd Council-level non-voting NCA was a non-consensus compromise of WG-GCR participants.

Denise Michel noted that this proposal did not receive full consensus support of the working group, and expressed concerns that it might be difficult for the Nominating Committee to find an individual who exhibited the ideal qualifications of independence from ICANN groups, knowledgeable of the organization and ability to lead the Council if necessary. She said if a fall back option is needed, the GNSO should be asked to consider it further in its implementation plan.

Steve Goldstein suggested that the Board could direct the GNSO to consider the option further and come back with a full consensus suggestion of how to deal with the issue if members felt strongly that some fall-back option was still needed.

The Chairman noted that the board does not need to decide the fallback mechanism for them and have it recorded as part of the resolution. The Chairman suggested adopting the staff resolution.

With this change the Chairman moved the following resolution and Raimundo Beca seconded:

It is, Resolved (2008.10.01.07), the Board authorizes the GNSO Council to elect a Chair consistent with the recommendation of the WG-GCR – that the GNSO Chair be elected by a vote of 60% of both voting houses and each voting house has the flexibility to create a process for selecting its own Vice Chair. The Board directs the Council to develop a process for subsequent balloting, if needed, until a Council Chair is duly elected. This process should be developed before the first Chair election of the newly structured Council.