Page History

...

The final draft version to be voted upon by the ALAC will be placed here before the vote is to begin.

...

FIRST DRAFT SUBMITTED

The

...

At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposed recommendations submitted by the Board Working Group on Nominating Committee (BWG-NomCom) regarding size and composition of the Nominating Committee (NomCom), as well as recruitment and selection functions.

The report contains innovative recommendations, such as the delegative voting process, which promotes deliberation and consensus building within the organizations represented in the NomCom.   It also improves parity among the various interests that make up the ICANN community.

The changes in the member composition provide a welcome modification that enhances diversity. 

ALAC supports a staggered 2-year and term limit for its members included in Recommendation #9.   However it should clearly state that, in addition to allowing the NomCom to remove any member by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of its members, the appointing organizations may also remove any of its NomCom representatives according to their rules and procedures. The report needs to be specific on transition rules from the old structure to the new one. For example, are groups allowed to re-appoint someone who has already served 1 or 2 year?

ALAC embraces Recommendation #10 regarding expanding the scope outside of the ICANN community for the selection of the NomCom Chair as this will expand the pool of qualified candidates. 

The rationale on the removal of the Chair-Elect provided in Recommendation #12 has merit but the potential for a chair being appointed with no previous ICANN NomCom experience could lead to instability. ALAC recommends to, instead of eliminating the Chair-Elect, revise the current NomCom procedures to provide surety of selection of the Chair-Elect to the Chair position at the conclusion of the Chair-Elect’s term.

The interim chair process included in Recommendation #12 needs to be clarified and specific to avoid misunderstandings. For example, the pool of “delegation heads” is a term that is not defined anywhere in the report and it should be.  Also, the use of “could” implies that the appointment of an interim Chair is an optional action in case of unforeseen vacancy in the Chair position. This should be mandatory. Otherwise it could lead to instability also.