2014-215 Focal Point Mandate

Every year, YOUNGO reviews and approves he Focal Point mandate vote. The Focal Point mandate was last reviewed in July 2013. I have copied this proposal from last year's, and copied the Draft Mandate from last year's, changing dates only.
Please note the deadlines for discussion and voting.
*This discussion describes a process to review, potentially amend, and decide on the mandate and voting rules for the 2014-2015 YOUNGO Focal Points.
YOUNGO needs to decide on the Focal Point election process before YOUNGO gets to Lima. Please read the entire email if you intend to participate in the review and decision making.*
Title of Proposed Decision: Focal Point Mandate and Election Process 2014-2015
Context of the Proposed Decision: The current, 2013-2014 Focal Point mandate and election process was only approved for one year and governs the current focal points and the election process that was conducted in Warsaw. A new election process and mandate must be approved in advance of the Focal Point election for 2014-2015, tentatively to be held in December 2014 in Lima, Peru. Maintenance of a liaison to the UNFCCC Secretariat is required for YOUNGO's continued existence as a constituency within the UNFCCC. This voting procedure closely follows previous Focal Point voting procedures.
Contact Information for the Facilitators of the Proposed Decision: Bottomlining Team - bottomliners@googlegroups.com
Timeline of the Review and Vote on the Proposed Decision:
The review and vote of the proposed decision will follow the standard Decision Making Procedures already adopted by YOUNGO, with abbreviated time limits due to the need to make a decision before Lima.
Deadline for edits to the proposal: 21 November 2014
Deadline for decision-making: 28 November 2014
Note: Individuals interested in being a Focal Point for 2013-2014 are requested to refrain from active participation in the decision about the voting process
for Focal Point elections. Those who participate actively in this decision are asked to refrain from putting themselves forward as Focal Point candidates for 2013-2014.
How to Comment on the Proposal:
If you support the proposal as written, you do not have to comment now, but please vote accordingly in the voting week.
If you oppose any part of the proposal, you may raise a "red flag" (objection)
* An objection must state which specific part of the proposal you object to and state the rationale for your objection
* The proposal authors will work with the person raising the objection to try to modify the proposal to incorporate the suggestions proposed by the objector
* Objections raised during the decision-making period must relate to objections already raised during the edit period that were not fully addressed, and must be raised by at least two independent people
* If an objection is maintained after discussions, the proposal is blocked until it can be resolved through a resolution committee or mediation between the proposal author(s) and objector(s).
The current Focal Point mandate is here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iANA6jdJ3bW38wfoOAGvVFHesEoraw6HbX5HvYhyYRk/edit?usp=sharing
The proposed updated Focal Point mandate is here: https://docs.google.com/a/davidtong.co.nz/document/d/1W0D4DuGGh-BFXttTejaeNy6WqiSgKt20438QAhNQUg8/edit?usp=sharing

Poll Created Sat 15 Nov 2014 1:54AM
That YOUNGO adopt the proposed new focal point mandate Closed Sat 29 Nov 2014 1:04AM
The revised Focal Point mandate has been adopted. The Bottomlining Team will therefore hold elections according to that mandate, and the 2014-2015 focal points will work under that mandate.
Thanks to everyone who helped us with this decision!
I propose that YOUNGO adopt the proposed 2014-2015 mandate set out here: https://docs.google.com/a/davidtong.co.nz/document/d/1W0D4DuGGh-BFXttTejaeNy6WqiSgKt20438QAhNQUg8/edit?usp=sharing
Results
Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Agree | 81.8% | 9 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Abstain | 18.2% | 2 |
|
|
Disagree | 0.0% | 0 | ||
Block | 0.0% | 0 | ||
Undecided | 0% | 42 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
11 of 53 people have participated (20%)

David Tong
Thu 27 Nov 2014 3:47PM
YES: Subject to the edits on the Google Doc. Please note that this vote is on the edited document.
Those in favour?
Luke Kemp
Thu 27 Nov 2014 4:18PM
An emphatic yes from me (for the updated and edited document)!
Prue Pickering
Thu 27 Nov 2014 10:29PM
I agree to the amended version

Federico Brocchieri
Thu 27 Nov 2014 11:58PM
I agree on the edited version
Nathan Thanki
Fri 28 Nov 2014 6:14AM
think we could have made further changes, separate and further amend the voting process (one of the parts that I think needs further changes) & get more votes--only 50 members are on Loomio & of those 50 only 12% have voted :(
Milan Dehnen
Fri 28 Nov 2014 9:29AM
I think the updated document is a good base for electing FP for Lima.
Deleted User Sat 15 Nov 2014 4:10PM
I agree. Historically, this has been a recurring issue. Focal Points were NEVER meant to represent YOUNGO outside of UNFCCC sessions or outside of YOUNGO's relationship with the Secretariat. Yet this keeps happening. A sentence or two to clarify this restriction would be helpful. The role of Focal Point is actually to help facilitate the selection of other YOUNGO members for these kinds of outside opportunities to represent the constituency.
Klever Descarpontriez Sat 15 Nov 2014 5:19PM
Federico, do you want to add your proposed language in a different color? I think we should all use different colors when we add things to the document so we can keep track of the changes.
Federico Brocchieri · Sat 15 Nov 2014 1:03PM
Hi all,
I think the document is fine, however I would be more specific on the part regarding what focal points shall not do, making it more clear when it comes to participation to events, such as fully-funded international conferences, where YOUNGO is invited to send representatives. Although this is already covered by bullet points 2 and 3, I think it was not totally clear and perhaps this caused wrong interpretations in the past. Shall I add my text integration proposal as a comment on the google doc? Thanks! :)