RE: [registrars] Dues Structure

["Lau" <richard@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Jonathon,

 

Since my name is on Option 5, I thought I'd just comment that I'm not
opposed to a weighted voting, so long as it is weighted according to the
dues level, and not weighted according to the number of domains managed.

 

You could even make the $250 entry level, a non-voting membership. 

 

Entry Level RC Membership ($250):

Current Benefits of RC Membership Not Available to Non-Members  

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)    

Use of RC logo on own website

 

Full RC Membership ($1250):

All benefits of Entry Level, plus:

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

 

 

Oh, and in keeping with JB's input, the Entry Level members can only eat
after the Full RC Members are finished. (j/k of course).

 

Richard

 

 

  _____  

From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nevett, Jonathon
Sent: 30 July, 2007 5:10 PM
To: Registrar Constituency
Subject: [registrars] Dues Structure

 

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