[ALAC] Motion to amend Rules of Procedure

[Alan Greenberg]

As discussed on the ALAC call of 26 April 2016, based on the 
experience of the 2014 At-Large Board Member Selection, a number of 
amendments to the ALAC Rules of Procedure (RoP) are required. In 
addition, a number of other minor changes to align the rules with our 
current practices are desirable. The hope is that we can amend the 
RoP during the ICANN 56 meeting in Helsinki. According to the RoP 
section 13.1.1, a motion to amend the rules must be made 21 days in advance.

I hereby make the following motion and ask that another ALAC Member second it.

Whereas the At-Large Advisory Committee is currently operating under 
Rules of Procedure (RoP) approved on 03 April 2013 and which went 
into effect on 02 October 2013;

Whereas a number of changes to these (RoP) have been recommended;

Therefore;

The ALAC Adopts the attached Modifications to the Rules of Procedure.

-----------------------------
Also attached is a detailed log describing each change and the 
rationale for it.

The final RoP adopted by the ALAC may be amended as agreed to by the 
ALAC prior to final adoption (as per 13.1.3). Final adoption will 
require a super-majority (2/3) vote of the ALAC.

The most important part of these changes related to the selection of 
the At-Large Director. The other changes (prior to Section 19) all 
effectively adjust the rules to practices that have been the practice 
of the ALAC. If there is any serious objection to these changes that 
cannot be readily adjusted, they will be withdrawn to not delay the 
changes to Section 19.

The changes have all been reviewed by the RoP modification group 
consisting of Alan Greenberg, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Maureen Hilyard, 
Cheryl Langdon Orr and Vanda Scartezini. (Some of that group  have 
not formally approved this last edit and if there are any issues, 
they will raise them at the level of the ALAC.)

During its deliberations, the group reach unanimous agreement on all 
but one section. For that section, 19.11.4, a number of alternatives 
are proposed. I will follow up with another e-mail in a few days 
detailing the options and giving the pros and cons of each. The ALAC 
will then have to reach consensus (or vote) on which option to use.

Alan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ALAC RoP-Version2-Draft-2016-06-06_1.docx
Type: application/msword
Size: 97719 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20160606/03a8f975/ALACRoP-Version2-Draft-2016-06-06_1.docx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ALAC RoP-Log.docx
Type: application/msword
Size: 16352 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20160606/03a8f975/ALACRoP-Log.docx>