Re: [council] FW: [ga] GA Adcom Election Committee

["Joe Sims" <Joe_Sims@jonesday.com>]

___________________________________________________________________________
____

 This message is intended for the individual or entity named above.  If you
are not the intended
 recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to
others; also please
 notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from
your system.  Thank you.
___________________________________________________________________________
____

In my role as unofficial legal advisor to the Council, let me offer the
following.  My reading of the Bylaws is not compatible with the creation of
some GA AdCom structure.  The Bylaws provide only for a Chair of the GA,
who is appointed by the NC.  In addition, the Bylaws contemplate the the
work of the DNSO should be done in working groups and drafting committees
under the management of the NC.  The GA, as the Bylaws are now written, is
the pool from which those groups or committees are drawn, but does not have
a direct role in the development or determination of consensus, nor any
other specific duty other than to serve as a source of nominees for the
Board, who are then selected by the NC.  The Bylaws do not contemplate any
circumstances when the GA would vote on any issue or elect anyone to
anything.  Thus, an elected GA AdCom would seem to be not only superfluous
but also potentially the source of tension with the NC-elected Chair and
the NC's role to manage the work of the DNSO.


                                                                  
 (Embedded                                                        
 image moved   "Shapiro Ted" <Ted_Shapiro@mpaa.org>               
 to file:      10/04/99 10:50 AM                                  
 pic07925.pcx)                                                    
                                                                  


Extension:

To:   "'[council]'" <council@dnso.org>
cc:    (bcc: Joe Sims/JonesDay)
Subject:  [council] FW: [ga] GA Adcom Election Committee




This is not to say that I am against this proposal. But, instead it raises
a
point that I mentioned after the Santiago meetings. What is GA consensus?
Who determines it? When do we have it? I raise this again because as we go
forward there will be more and more calls for GA consensus on various
points. I thought that the NC had a role in determinig GA consensus. Any
thoughts?

-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Nii N. Quaynor [mailto:quaynor@ghana.com]
Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 4:04 PM
To: General Assembly of the DNSO
Subject: [ga] GA Adcom Election Committee



Dear All,

There is consensus that an elected GA Adcom should be established. We have
subsequently received a number of suggestions on preferred election
procedures and also relations to the NC, including potential bylaws
modifications.

In the meantime, we should advance the process by forming a small group, an
"election committee" from the GA to draft the election announcement and
manage the voting. We believe that a simple method is  preferred and each
GA
member should have a single vote to cast for each regional seat.

Members of the election committee, in fairness to all contestants, should
be
persons who do not intend to run for a GA Adcom seat.

This is therefore a call for three voluteers to kick of the process. The
volunteers should be recommended and the volunteer must accept.

The election committee needs to be in-place by October, 9. We allow for 2
weeks of nominating candidates for the Adcom and a week for voting
just-in-time for LA when the Adcom will be installed.

Nii

pic07925.pcx