Step

Description

Notes

1

At-Large selects members for an ALAC Board Selection Working Group (BSWG)

• Originally referred to as a "Nominating Committee", but it was felt that would be too confusing with the ICANN NomComm.
• The method of selection was not discussed in detail, but one suggested option was that each RALO would appoint or elect two people to the BSWG, well in advance of each election.

2

BSWG is tasked with creating a list of candidates, which is made public

• There were many comments that the BSWG should not just passively wait to hear from interested At-Large insiders, but should also identfy and solicit candidacy from people who would qualify and may be seen to fulfill the positions. There should be a diversity of choices in the list of candidates, but qualified people should not be excluded because there are "too many" from any one region, gender, or other relevant characteristic.
• The Board itself has regional limits; we need to find out if this will apply to the At-Large rep because it could limit who is available as a candidate

3

RALOs may add (a limited number of) candidates to the list supplied by the BSWG

• This was added to allow individuals with strong grassroots support to be advanced as candidates despite being overlooked by the BSWG.
• Any individual wanting to be a candidate must have the support of at least one RALO in this fashion
• Should be limited to only one or two additions per region

4

RALOs to reduce and/or order the preliminary list of candidates, and forward the result to ALAC.

• Each RALO then is to take the preliminary list of candidates (created by the BSWG and then augmented by RALO selections) and reduce the list to the one(s) they approve.
• Optionally, RALOs can order their selections to explicitly indicate a preference, while sending on multiple candidates
• The selection process within each RALO is in keeping with its own ROP and need not be identical
• Each RALO may forward as many candidates as it wants, but should send at least one
• RALOs may put forward candidates (who accept the nomination) from regions besides their own
• The lists from the RALOs are combined into a final candidate list Still to be decided (as discussed in NARALO teleconference of 2009-10-19) is whether the candidate list is simply the lists from all RALOS added together, or whether there is further vetting going on. Having a final ballot of more than 7-10 candidates seems unreasonable and may indicate a lack of confidence in (or failure of) the BSWG original work.

5a

*Option 1:*ALAC elects a Board member from the final candidate list

• The 15 ALAC members each have one vote
• Could be either a secret or open ballot
• Changed at ALAC meeting Oct 25 in Seoul: Ballot should be done in such a manner to lead to an elected candidate receiving at least 51% approval. Possible methods are to be evaluated with the assistance of expert advice from specialists on voting sytstems.

5b

*Option 2:*RALOs elect a Board member from the final candidate list

• Each RALO has one vote (five votes total)
• The selection process within each RALO is in keeping with its own ROP and need not be identical
• Voting method to be determined as described in 5a
• Alternately, ALAC members would do the voting, but only as directed by RALOs (open vote)
• This option was stated as a preference by Alan Greenberg

5c

*Option 3:*ALAC reps and RALO chairs elect a Board member from the final candidate list

• Note: This option was NOT discussed at the Sep 21 meeting but added by EL on Sep 22:
• Similar to (5a) above, but RALO chairs also cast a directed vote on behalf of the RALOs (20 votes total)
• RALO Chair votes are directed by the preference of each region, in a selection process consistent with their own ROP Added at ALAC meting Oct 25: It is possible that the process may be automated such that each region's preference can be submitted as a vote without requiring the regional Chair to cast a directed vote.
• ALAC representative votes are private
• At the conference call of Oct 8, reports indicated that this was the preferred option of AFRALO, LACRALO, EURALO and a clear majority of NARALO,

5d

*Option 4:*All partipating ALSs and individual members cast votes.

• This option was proposed by Wendy Seltzer at the conference call of Oct 8

5e

*Option 5:*All individuals who express interest as individual Internet users cast votes

• This option was proposed by Wendy Seltzer at the conference call of Oct 8
• This option was stated as a preference by Wendy Seltzer, Edward Hasbrouck and Danny Younger

5f

*Option 6:*Each ALS casts one vote

• This option was proposed by Patrick Vande Walle at the conference call of Oct 8