RE: [council] GNSO election results

["Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>]

Hello All,

Thanks for the quick responses from Marilyn and Jeff.

Now is not the time to rush to decisions.  The vote can't be ratified until we have a properly constituted council meeting - with appropriate notice.

Louis Touton has agreed to provide a briefing to those council members that may have questions on the process in the teleconference as scheduled by the GNSO Secretariat.  This teleconference is not a formal GNSO Council meeting, and hence cannot make decisions.  I personally am unable to attend the call.

With regard to the Rio meeting, upon further reflection I think the most prudent course of action is to allow the ICANN Secretary to investigate the challenge to the non-commercial constituency vote, and allow the non-commercial constituency to respond, before we ratify the vote.  Hopefully this can be done before the Rio meeting, but at the Rio meeting we should at least be able to get an update from ICANN Secretary and the non-commercial constituency.  There is no immediate need to finalise the appointment of a new ICANN Board Director, and it is better that the new director is elected in circumstances where no aspect of the process can be called into question.


Regards,
Bruce Tonkin





> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neuman, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us]
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 1:24 PM
> To: Bruce Tonkin; council@dnso.org
> Cc: Louis Touton
> Subject: RE: [council] GNSO election results
> 
> 
> Bruce,
> 
> I agree with your analysis and think it is the right 
> approach.  I would
> actually like to move forward with the teleconference and 
> confirm the vote
> tomorrow.  Maybe we can even get a jump start on nominations 
> for the next
> seat a little early and have both seats done by Rio (if it is 
> possible to do
> according to the rules).
> 
> Jeff
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au]
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 8:31 PM
> To: council@dnso.org
> Cc: Louis Touton
> Subject: [council] GNSO election results
> 
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> The tally of the votes cast in the first round of voting are:
> 
> Michael Palage 	  14 votes
> Alejandro Pisanty  6 votes
> Philip Sheppard    4 votes
> Barbara Simons	   0 votes
> ==========================
> Total 		  24 votes
> 
> Note Charles Shaban was appointed by the Business Users 
> Constituency to
> vote in place of Philip Sheppard, who is a candidate in the election.
> 
> The votes were cast as follows (the codes below match those on the
> ballots you received; each member can ascertain that his or 
> her vote was
> counted correctly):
> 
> K13b4Z:[x] Alejandro Pisanty
> K21c2Z:[x] Alejandro Pisanty
> K32a6Z:[x] Michael Palage
> K4f9fZ:[x] Philip Sheppard
> K547aZ:[x] Alejandro Pisanty
> K6872Z:[x] Michael Palage
> K7068Z:[x] Alejandro Pisanty
> K8713Z:[x] Philip Sheppard
> K887bZ:[x] Michael Palage
> K909aZ:[x] Michael Palage
> K9471Z:[x] Michael Palage
> Ka470Z:[x] Michael Palage
> Kab9fZ:[x] Michael Palage
> Kac13Z:[x] Philip Sheppard
> Kc323Z:[x] Alejandro Pisanty
> Ke63cZ:[x] Alejandro Pisanty
> Kt9a7Z:[x] Michael Palage
> Kz52dZ:[x] Philip Sheppard
> 
> Please note that the ICANN Secretary has received a challenge 
> concerning
> the voting process in the recent elections within the Non-Commercial
> Users Constituency for their three positions on the GNSO Council.  The
> vote within the non-commercial constituency must be carried out
> consistent with the by-laws for that constituency.
> 
> No determination has been made yet as regarding this challenge and the
> matter will be investigated.  However, based on the 
> allegations made in
> the challenge it appears that, if the challenge is sustained, 
> either one
> or all three of the Non-Commercial Users Constituency's seats on the
> GNSO Council would become vacant.  In either case, the results of the
> vote for Seat 14 on the Board would not be affected, as follows:
> 
> If the result of the challenge is that only one of the Non-Commercial
> Users Constituency seats becomes vacant, then the vote would be:
> 
> Michael Palage 	  14 votes
> Alejandro Pisanty  5 votes
> Philip Sheppard    4 votes
> Barbara Simons	   0 votes
> ==========================
> Total 		  23 votes
> 
> The 14 votes cast for Mr. Palage are a majority of the total number of
> the votes of all GNSO Council members (23).
> 
> If the result of the challenge is that all three of the Non-Commercial
> Users Constituency seats become vacant, then the vote would be:
> 
> Michael Palage 	  12 votes
> Alejandro Pisanty  5 votes
> Philip Sheppard    4 votes
> Barbara Simons	   0 votes
> ==========================
> Total 		  21 votes
> 
> The 12 votes cast for Mr. Palage are a majority of the total number of
> the votes of all Council members (21).
> 
> If the challenge is rejected, of course, the votes will continue to be
> as noted at the top of this e-mail.  In view of this, no 
> outcome of the
> challenge would affect the result of the vote for Seat 14.
> 
> I propose therefore the following steps:
> 
> (1) We will publicly announce the results of the first round of voting
> to be:
> 
> Michael Palage 	  14 votes
> Alejandro Pisanty  6 votes
> Philip Sheppard    4 votes
> Barbara Simons	   0 votes
> ==========================
> Total 		  24 votes
> 
> Thus there is no need for a further round of voting as Michael Palage
> has a majority of the votes of all GNSO Council members.  It will be
> noted that these results are preliminary until ratified in the council
> meeting in Rio.
> 
> (2) At the ICANN meeting in Rio, the GNSO council will vote to ratify
> these results. Council members should check the information on how the
> votes were cast and confirm that their vote was recorded 
> correctly.  The
> GNSO Council will be confirming in Rio that the election results are a
> true record of how the votes were cast.
> 
> (3) The ICANN Secretary will publicly announce that a 
> challenge has been
> received regarding the recent elections within the 
> Non-Commercial Users
> Constituency, and the election process will be investigated to ensure
> that it was consistent with the by-laws for that constituency.
> The ICANN Secretary will note that the result of this process does not
> affect the majority held by Michael Palage, in the GNSO 
> Council election.
> 
> At this stage I don't see the need for a teleconference, as the
> challenge regarding the Non-Commercial Users Constituency does not
> affect the election result, and it is not for the Council to 
> investigate
> the processes within the Non-Commercial Users Constituency.  We should
> proceed with Council business assuming that the 
> non-commercial elections
> were correct until told by the ICANN Secretary otherwise.
> 
> Council members please let me know if you disagree with the proposed
> steps above, and let me know if you feel the need for a council
> teleconference on the subject.  Please note it is not appropriate for
> the Council to discuss the challenge to the Non-Commercial Users
> Constituency procedures.
> 
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> 
> 
> 
> 
>