[At-Large] ICANN Board Nomination

Franck Martin franck.martin at gmail.com
Thu Aug 26 01:07:24 UTC 2010

Rules like x times minimum wage in California, allows to make the pay simple and not escalating by self serving board members.

Also, he does not stop anyone on the board to refuse the compensation, for various reason.

I support the idea of the board to be compensated for their work, if it allows the ability to bring more candidates to the positions.

Don't forget, at the moment, if I'm correct the board members are reimbursed their costs to be on the board (trip+hotel+meal).

----- Original Message -----
From: "John R. Levine" <johnl at iecc.com>
To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Sent: Thursday, 26 August, 2010 12:56:21 PM
Subject: Re: [At-Large] ICANN Board Nomination

> The problem is legal before anything else. To allow the compensation (not
> salary) to the chair we did a formal legal move, consulting the court, and
> this was allowed because there is, really, much more burden to the chair out
> of the internal tasks, not demanded to the members of the board.

Hmmn.  I see why Karl says that board members need their own lawyers. 
Anyone who told you that it was difficult to pay the directors of a 
California non-profit was at best misinformed.

The California not-for-profit law makes it quite clear that directors can 
be paid.  The main rules are that the full board, not just a committee, 
must set the compensation (Section 5212(a)(3)), and that the compensation 
be reasonable (Section 5235(a)), which considering how large ICANN is, and 
how much work it expects of its directors, would never be a problem for 
any plausible amount of pay.

At-Large mailing list
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

More information about the At-Large mailing list