Re: [icann-eu] Second draft for comments on Study Committee

[Alexander Svensson <svensson@icannchannel.de>]

Some comments (mainly) on timing.

Vittorio Bertola <vb@vitaminic.net> wrote:
> "Given the length of the proposed process, the timing of the Study should
> not interfere with the full implementation of the At Large Directors
> selection plan, which is a pre-condition for ICANN's balance, credibility
> and legitimacy. In parallel with the Study, a process should be started so
> to have four more At Large Directors elected and seated by the Annual
> Meeting of the Corporation in 2001. Since no reason can be found at this
> time to assume that the Study will suggest a reduction of the original
> number of the At Large Directors, such reduction should not be anticipated
> unilaterally by the current Board."

The problem is that currently there is no At Large 
Directors selection plan to be implemented.
If both study and election would be running in 
parallel, the study would be largely pointless --
I understand that this may be the point you want to make, 
but I doubt whether this is isn't aimed too high
(to borrow your phrase ;)).

The original time frame was:
- Study completed until 2nd Meeting Jun-2001
- Board amends bylaws at Annual Meeting Nov-2001
- New directors seated at Annual Meeting Nov-2002 
  at the latest

The staff proposal time frame is:
- Study committee reports on schedule and future 
  process at 1st Meeting Mar-2001
- Board decision implemented until Annual Meeting
  Nov-2002 at the latest

Your (Vittorios) proposed time frame is:
- Study committee reports
- At Large members consultation vote
  In parallel:
- Bylaws amemdment
- At Large election
- Seating of directors Nov-2001

This seems to me a very ambitious schedule seeing that
there has to be sufficient time for new At Large membership 
applications even before the consultation vote.

What I like about the original time frame is that there
is a fixed date (in 2001!) when the bylaws are to be changed.
The staff proposal is more flexible, maybe also more
vague. In my view, the bylaws should be changed at an ICANN 
meeting, not at a telephone meeting or the like, and the 
election should not take place during the summer vacation
period.

ICANN's tentative 2001 meeting schedule:
  1st     March       Melbourne, Australia
  2nd     June        Europe 
  3rd     September   Latin America/Caribbean 
  Annual  November    West Coast United States or Canada  

If the study (as the draft for comments correctly demands)
concentrates "on the question how the selection of At Large 
directors can be implemented, and what lessons can be learned 
from the recent At Large elections", maybe the time until
the 2nd meeting is enough to complete it. I would like to 
have a fixed date when the Board has to decide how to 
change the bylaws.

Any comments?

Best regards,
/// Alexander

_______________________________________________________
  ICANN Channel              http://www.icannchannel.de