[council] NC call June 6 - notes to the agenda
Council et al,
In preparation for agenda item two of the June 6 call, I have
now been able to compare the current NC recommendations with the latest report
from the ICANN evolution committee. There is a fundamental difference of
approach. The
Evolution committee paper contains elements which in combination would
implement a much more "top down" Board driven ICANN compared to the situation
today of a "bottom-up" policy process.
These
elements fall into three categories with components in each
category:
1. The
composition of the Board
1.1 Today the policy
development bodies (like the old DNSO) elect 9 board seats. In the proposal
they elect none. Instead a nominating committee (nomcomm) choose 3 board reps to
represent the policy development bodies.
1.2 In addition the
nomcomm appoints some or all other Board members.
1.3 There maybe
some board seats available for advisory bodies such as the Security Advisory
Body (SAC). But the SAC rep on the Board will be a Board
appointee.
2.
Composition of the nomcomm (a circular endorsement
process)
2.1 There is a
suggestion that the Board "ratify" the people proposed to form the nomcomm who
in turn appoint the Board.
3. Control
of the policy development organisations
3.1. The Board
appoints the chair of the policy development organisations who is then also a
Board member.
3.2 The steering committee of
the policy development organisations (such as the old Names Council) will
also have "an appropriate number" of nomcomm appointed
members.
I hope this is
useful analysis before we discuss the concept, scope and composition of a
nominating committee.
Philip
|