[ALAC] EURALO request to ALAC on At Large Board Director Election Process

[Alan Greenberg]

I note that according to our recently adopted 
rule on the Director selection process, the 
timing of the election is a matter for ABSdt 
decision and not that of the ALAC. (I note that 
the ABSdt was copied on the EURALO message.)

Alan

At 22/10/2010 08:52 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
>Dear Cheryl and ALAC members,
>
>please be so kind to find the following letter for your consideration,
>sent on behalf of EURALO.
>
>===
>
>EURALO request to ALAC on At Large Board Director Election Process
>Date: 23/10/2010
>
>At the EURALO Conference call on 19 October, the issue of timing
>for the At Large Board Director Election Process took most of the
>debate time.
>In fact, it became the most important issue, prompting the other
>issues to be re-scheduled for our next EURALO Conference call.
>
>As a result of further discussion which took place on the EURALO
>list since the conference call, we are writing to you with regards
>to the proposed schedule for the election of the At Large Selected
>Board Position.
>
>The issue at hand is the short amount of time which has been
>allocated for the whole election process to take place, from the
>time the BCEC selections are made, to the time the election
>takes place.
>
>The schedule which appears to have been proposed is:
>- 28 October 2010: Board Meeting, where the Board is expected to approve
>the Bylaw changes, and if so:
>- 3 November 2010: BCEC is scheduled to announce the slate of 3-7
>candidates retained for election.
>- 3-12 November 2010 (10 days): candidates able to reach out to the At
>Large community (campaigning)
>- 15-19 November 2010 (5 days): Election takes place
>
>It is understood that the period 12-15 November (4 days) might be used
>for any RALO election process. If added to the 5 days scheduled for the
>election, this provides a total of 10 days for voting - assuming voting
>can be considered legitimate when candidates have barely had a change to
>present themselves.
>
>We refer you to the At Large January 2010 White Paper Recommendation 4:
>"The Board seat should be selected by the ALAC plus the RALO Chairs. The
>RALO-appointed ALAC members and the RALO Chairs may be directed by
>their ALSes if the RALO desires (and in accordance with their RoP).
>This methodology gives ALSes large control over who is selected,
>without the complexity of two-level vote weighting and centralized ALS
>elector verification. The vote should be by secret ballot."
>
>In the interest of empowerment of our ALSes, it is the desire of the
>EURALO Board to conduct a vote directing the EURALO Chair on his vote.
>Whilst no minimum vote timing is defined in the EURALO Rules of
>Procedures, clause 11.18.1 of the EURALO by-laws states that a
>sufficient amount of time is required for all members to record a vote
>on any matter. It is therefore good practice to provide at least 10 days
>of voting time for our ALSes. This appears to be clearly incompatible
>with the currently proposed ALAC schedule of only 4 days voting time.
>
>Whilst we understand that the proposed schedule takes into account a
>number of constraints in order to allow the At Large elected Director to
>take their seat on the last day of the Cartagena Meeting on Friday, 10
>December 2010, we consider it unwise to hurry the process at the
>possible expense of a legitimate vote. ALSes need to be informed in
>time. Campaigning needs to be given enough time for Question/Answer
>sessions. Volunteers in ALSes need to find the time to make a sound
>decision for what is arguably one of At Large's most important decisions
>of recent years.
>
>Some of our members suggested that the seating of an At Large
>Elected Board Director be postponed until after the Cartagena
>Meeting. The consensus was, however, that this was not feasible for
>various reasons and was therefore likely to be rejected by ALAC.
>
>We are aware that an earlier start to the election process could ease
>the pressure by, for example, the BCEC announcing the final slate of
>candidates earlier than 3 November 2010. We feel, however, that whilst
>this will ease timing for candidate RALO petitions, should those
>be called for, it doesn't ease the pressure enough on RALOs desiring to
>conduct ALS consultations on the final voting rounds.
>
>We therefore suggest the following course of action:
>
>* The voting process be given more time, beyond the 15-19 November period.
>An extension of the Election until 30th November would provide more time
>for ALSes to cast their vote. Indeed, we believe that it would provide
>greater legitimacy to the process, thanks to a truly bottom-up
>empowerment. It will allow for voting time to fall closer in line with
>other ICANN processes requiring public input. We emphasize this further
>than standard procedure: it is a matter of credibility to our members
>and to the At Large community.
>
>* The issue of VISAS which has been suggested as being the reason for
>the 19 November deadline could be resolved in two ways:
>  - all candidates who are announced as short-listed on 28th October
>   should set contingency plans in motion if they were not planning to
>   attend the conference in Cartagena in the first place. This includes
>   VISA applications if those are required;
>  - as an exception, even if the above is possible, ICANN should be informed
>   that an At Large Elected Director taking its seat on the Board after the
>   end of the Cartagena meeting might not be able to make it to the meeting
>   in person due to VISA issues, and provisions should therefore be made by
>   ICANN for that person to participate remotely.
>
>* A clear and concise explanation of the voting process and schedule
>should be published as soon as possible, with an explanation of the
>procedure for an ALS petition (if required) including a flow chart to
>help ALSes understand how the process will take place. A further
>explanation of the multiple round voting should be detailed, bearing in
>mind the possibility of RALOs needing to call upon their membership
>between each election round. Should ALS balloting by RALOs not be
>possible for each voting round, this should be explained as soon as
>possible in order for RALOs to devise alternative voting strategies at
>short notice (weighted voting being one possible solution).
>
>
>Thank you for your consideration on this very important subject. Getting
>this process right is of particular importance since it has a direct
>impact on the legitimacy of At Large and the At Large elected Board
>Director. Whilst we do not dispute the fact that it is important that an
>At Large elected Board takes its seat in Cartagena, we would like the
>process itself to be as equitable, transparent and credible to our
>stakeholders. Not rushing the process would be one great step in this
>direction.
>
>Wolf Ludwig
>EURALO Chair
>
>Olivier Crépin-Leblond
>EURALO Secretariat
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>ALAC mailing list
>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>
>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac