[registrars] Dues Structure

[Nevett, Jonathon]

Thanks all for the helpful and constructive discussion.  As you can
tell, there are no easy answers to this issue.  In an effort to frame
the debate and to do an informal straw poll, let me make a few points
and ask a question:

 

First, the question has come up about the benefits of membership to the
Registrar Constituency ("RC").  A number of members recently have raised
the economic decision Richard Lau discussed in his posting.  Why should
a registrar pay dues vs. enjoying many of the benefits of membership
without paying?  For those of you who were not at the San Juan meeting,
we are trying to address this "free rider" issue in a number of ways,
and believe that the following more than justifies an investment of $250
per year. 

 

Current Benefits of RC Membership Not Available to Non-Members  

Ability to vote in elections and on motions, the budget, issue
statements, etc. 

Ability to represent the RC as an officer, on the GNSO Council, the
Nominating Committee, or various task forces and working groups

Ability to attend closed sessions of RC meetings

Ability to sit at the table at the RC meetings with better access to the
limited microphones and power strips (new)

Ability to post and receive e-mails on the member-only list that we are
creating (new)

Ability to receive access to a list archives that are organized and
searchable (proposed)    

 

Second, I support fully the efforts to retain a part time professional
staff person to support the constituency.  This is a very important time
for registrars as we are at a period during which we likely will see
changes to our contract with ICANN for the first time in six years,
structural changes to ICANN itself, as well as structural changes to the
GNSO impacting our role in the policy development process.  We need to
be out in front of these issues and other policy issues that are being
discussed.  A proactive RC is much more effective than just a reactive
one.  I haven't heard much in the way of objection to the proposal to
retain such a staff person either during our discussion in San Juan or
subsequently on the list, so for purposes of this note I will assume it
is supported as long as we can work out the financing.

 

Finally, the issue then is how we pay for the additional services.  I
absolutely agree with Marcus that the constituencies should receive some
support from ICANN, so my hope is that this is a short term issue.  Just
like Rob and Bob described, the dues were $750 at some point in the past
and then were reduced when the need no longer existed to have them at
that level.  I hope the same will be true through due to support from
ICANN.  Until such a time, however, we need to work out an equitable
solution to address the shortfall.  In the budget, we proposed a fixed
rate with an ability to seek forgiveness, but are open to other options
if the membership prefers.  Here are the options I have seen thus far.

 

1.	Fixed dues without forgiveness - about $650 per member.
Everyone treated equally, but we might lose members who can't afford the
dues. 
2.	Fixed dues with forgiveness - current proposal - $750 per member
with ability to seek reduction to $250 based on need.
3.	Fixed dues with a collections plate (Connelly Proposal) -
registrars that can afford it donate additional amounts to the RC, but
no additional benefits for donating.
4.	Tiered dues based on domain names under management (Barrett
Proposal) - large registrars must pay more based on size, but no
additional benefits for paying more.
5.	Tiered dues based on registrar choice (Lau Proposal) - maybe one
tier at $1250 and another at $250 - all registrars have an equal right
to choose between Gold and Silver membership levels, but the Gold level
members receive additional benefits in addition to the ones enumerated
above (this may require changes to the Bylaws depending on what
incentives to join the Gold level are included -- e.g. weighted voting).

 

I apologize if I mischaracterized or missed any of the proposals, but it
would be helpful if folks let us know which of the 5 options they would
support (maybe more than one).  

 

Thanks.

 

Jon

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/registrars/attachments/20070730/acaa1b3d/attachment.html>