[NCUC-DISCUSS] URGENT - Time sensitive What is your view on on the question of rebalancing the Nominating Committee (NomCom)

[Raoul Plommer]

Hi Caleb,

You received that very email on 27th of April, and since you've been
preparing the draft since, perhaps you could finally share your work with
us so we could make that statement together as a stakeholder group?

-Raoul

On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 at 21:46, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Where are NCSG's joint recommendations? NCUC can reinforce the message.
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 2:44 PM Caleb Olumuyiwa Ogundele <
> muyiwacaleb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I believe NCUC can consolidate the response with the NCSG's joint
>> recommendations.
>>
>> This will allow us to go out on a united front as non-commercial.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 1:40 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Benjamin,
>>>
>>> Not only do we need to respond, we should reach out to our friends and
>>> colleagues and tell them what the problem is. See the responses below:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 1:57 PM Benjamin Akinmoyeje <benakin at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear NCUC members,
>>>>
>>>> Good day and I hope your week is going well.
>>>> Thank you for participating in the NCUC Readout session.  As discussed
>>>> in the meeting today, please share  your response to these questions to
>>>> gather our community views.
>>>>
>>>> ICANN Board Chair Tripti Sinha is  requesting feedback from your
>>>> respective community groups on the question of rebalancing the
>>>> Nominating Committee (NomCom) by **30 June 2023**. As noted in the
>>>> letter, the ICANN Board wishes to engage with the community to
>>>> understand the community’s views on this topic. The Board is specifically
>>>> seeking input on the following questions:
>>>>
>>>> 1. What does it mean to have a balanced NomCom at a point in time?
>>>> For example, what criteria would you apply to measure or assess whether the
>>>> NomCom is balanced? And further, how can one test whether or not the
>>>> NomCom is balanced?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A balanced NomCom means that the noncommercial and commercial
>>> stakeholder groups as predicted have the same number of delegates. For
>>> example, if the Commercial Group has three delegates, the noncommercial
>>> group should have three delegates. This is the least that can be done when
>>> rebalancing.It should be remodeled based on GNSO council composition.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2. Do you support the view that the current composition of the NomCom needs
>>>> to be rebalanced? Please explain why or why not.
>>>>
>>> Yes it needs to be rebalanced because as we have argued the
>>> noncommercials have fewer delegates compared to the commercial stakeholder
>>> group. In every ICANN group, the commercial and noncommercial stakeholder
>>> groups should have equal number of delegates, irrespective of how many
>>> internal constituencies they each have.
>>> Also the advisory committees either should be voting delegates or
>>> non-voting delegates. Perhaps because ICANN is privately led and the chair
>>> of GAC is a liaison on the board the nonvoting nomcom (which they have
>>> never appointed) might make sense but it is unclear why some advisory
>>> committees are voting and some are not.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3. How frequently does the balance need to be measured or assessed?
>>>>
>>> After rebalancing, if the review of various ICANN structures lead to
>>> structural changes (which it rarely does)  then we need to assess
>>> whether it should affect delegation on Nomcom.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 4. How do you suggest that the NomCom’s composition be rebalanced?
>>>>
>>> Same number of delegates from Commercial and Noncommercial stakeholders
>>> group. If CSG has 3 delegates, NCSG has to have 3 delegates too. We don't
>>> necessarily ask for increasing the number of our delegates but we ask to
>>> reconsider the number of delegates CSG can have.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 5. Who should conduct this work, and how should it be conducted?
>>>>
>>> The board should follow the third party reviewer recommendation.
>>>
>>>
>>>> 6. How would your community group prioritize consideration of this issue
>>>> within your planning efforts?
>>>>
>>>
>>> This has been a priority issue for NCUC and NCSG since a long time. We
>>> are directly affected.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Additional background on the work to date on this topic, including by
>>>> the NomCom Review Implementation Working Group that
>>>> was set up to implement the outcomes of the Second NomCom Review (see
>>>> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/correspondence
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/correspondence> for each of the
>>>> letters sent to all 21 SOAC leaders). In addition, on 25 May 2023, the
>>>> Chair of the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee, Katrina
>>>> Sataki, and members of ICANN org’s Reviews Support & Accountability team
>>>> gave a presentation to the GNSO Council that covered the present
>>>> structure of NomCom, a brief history of the rebalancing matter and
>>>> forthcoming actions. As such, you may find the presentation
>>>> <
>>>> https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/policy/2023/presentation/presentation-gnso-council-
>>>> nomcom-rebalancing-revised-25may23-en.pdf> and
>>>> the recording
>>>> <
>>>> https://icann.zoom.us/rec/share/7pSQ37mSB5wGz8-msQS2PDpzhQ6VdJQISm2SYmWKwfFMWFM_Z6FdMsFiipNyIV-E.J55mm5SBjoZJS9d9?startTime=1684990882000
>>>> > (from
>>>> 00:14:10 - 00:31:38) helpful in discussing any planned feedback with
>>>> your members.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Caleb Ogundele*
>> Email: muyiwacaleb at gmail.com
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20230627/aa6a8231/attachment.htm>