The ALAC four elected officers, the Chair, the two Vice Chairs, and the Rapporteur. The four officers have been operating as a de facto Executive Committee (Ex-Com).
During the last year, the four Officers happened to be from four of the five ICANN regions. Although this was not planned, it has proven to be a good way to ensure that Ex-Com discussions represent a wide variety of and points of view. To that end, it has been suggested that perhaps a way should be found to have all five regions represented.
In order to formalize the Ex-Com and to address the regional representation issue, following a discussion among the ALAC Officers, I propose the motion below.
Assuming that the motion is passed, there is still work to be done to put in place procedures to elect next year's officers. But since this year's officers are from different regions, we have until next year to fully define the process. This year, we will need to immediately fill the fifth Ex-Com position.
Whereas the ALAC has had a de facto an Executive Committee composed of ALAC Officers for the past year;
Whereas last year's executive included Officers from four or the five ICANN regions;
Whereas this present year's Officers represent four of the five ICANN regions;
Whereas, it is at times necessary for the ALAC to take action without sufficient time to formally engage the entire ALAC and hold a vote;
Whereas in keeping with ALAC and ICANN principles, it is felt that there is a benefit in all five regions participating in an Executive Committee;
Therefore I move that:
1. The ALAC create a 5-member Executive Committee with membership representing all five ICANN regions. The Executive Committee shall be composed of the four ALAC Officers and one additional ALAC member. Until such time as a more refined specification be defined, the Executive Committee shall have no powers other than those explicitly granted by the ALAC, save that in urgent situations, the Executive Committee may make decisions on behalf of the ALAC, such decisions to be ratified at the next ALAC meeting.
2. The ALAC redefine the the two positions of Vice-Chair and the position of Rapporteur, and the associated voting processes to ensure that the Chair, the two Vice-Chairs, and the Rapporteur all represent different ICANN regions, the detailed Rules of Procedures to be approved prior to the 2009 Officer elections;
3. Following the election of the four officers, the ALAC shall nominate and elect an ALAC member from the as-yet un-represented ICANN region to the fifth Executive Committee position.
the proposal is to validate a de facto situation (no legal, because wasn't in ALAC bylaws).
IMHO I think first is neccesary to answer the question : Are we agree in the necessity to have an Ex Com ?.
Particularly I believe that is not necessary because in the last year, when it de facto worked, did not show any difference, not in favour not in against.
In the same sense, I believe, this is create a new burocratic step into ALAC. We need to start our work in different sense, the start is in the RALOs, we need that the RALOs growth, because we are into the bottom up process and this is the idea.
Also, and if the intention is to support Ex Com, I need that someone explain to me, and to everyone of us, the extreme necessity to have it.
To issue a rule or a law either, in all organized systems of the world, you must first know whether that amendment is relevant or not.
Knowing the will of those who have the ability to decide (in this case members of ALAC or ?), if this amendment is necessary and whether the amendment will not create more problems than it tries to resolve.
For example, issues relating to internal bureaucracy (the need for an Ex Com with representation of the 5 regions, voting in case of failure, operating cost, cost of additional conference calls, double work for the committee from which it first Ex Com treated and then must be approved by the full committee, limitation of the discussion that must necessarily be in ALAC, the greater limitation on the participation of some members of ALAC.
That is, to reform a rule and a lot more like this is not a question but a proactive and very delicate task that must be addressed while respecting the right of the majority and taking into account the different positions they may have in this regard.
We need more participation into the regions, no into ALAC only, and I think is first the work of each region, before our work (bottom up process). And this situation will happen with more inputs since-from regions and more communications betwen ALAC and RALOs. (for example with more documents transalated, with more communications in the users languajes. with more capacity building to the end users).
We need to reafirm our group feeling and work with our ideas, and introduce more issues to the discussion, like real problems of the end users.
ALAC is signing their dead certificate if doesn`t take in account the RALOs first, to be advisor is not a superstructure work only, don`t forget that the mayority of ALAc members are RALO representatives. And to be representant means ......
contributed by Guest User on Nov 24 1:47pm
the last comment is belong to me . Carlos Aguirre.
contributed by Guest User on Nov 24 1:48pm
Will a quorum be required for meetings and if so, what is it?
contributed by Guest User on Nov 25 6:10am