[bc-gnso] FOR REVIEW: draft BC comment on ICANN's proposed strategy for meetings

[Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

BC member Mike Roberts has drafted a comment for review, regarding ICANN's 
proposed plan for consolidating meeting locations.

ICANN's Public Comment page for the proposed strategy is 
here<http://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/meetings-proposal-2012-02oct12-en.htm>.
    The strategy document is 
here<http://www.icann.org/en/about/participate/meetings-proposal-02oct12-en.pdf>.

As I wrote last week, this proposal is to retain 3 meetings per year, two of 
which are always in Europe and Asia.  For 2014, 2015, and 2016, here is ICANN's 
proposal:
Asia/Pacific gets 1st meeting of each year
Europe gets 2nd meeting of each year
North America/Africa/Latin America alternate for the 3rd meeting.

Below is the BC comment proposed by Mike Roberts:

 The BC endorses the staff proposal to revise the public meetings calendar and 
offers these additional comments.

 (a) There should be a continuous meetings evaluation process.  ICANN public 
meetings are now large and expensive undertakings - over $2 million for ICANN, 
and undoubtedly more than that for participant travel and accommodation costs. 
The number, timing and scope of public meetings should be carefully reviewed to 
make best use of scarce resources.  As ICANN changes, so should the meetings 
adjust to new circumstances.

 (b) Consistent with its commitment to openness and transparency, ICANN should 
place a high priority on selecting host country sites with minimal visa 
requirements and favorable travel costs for participants from developing 
nations.

 (c) Proposed contracts with venues and hotels should include a substantial 
discount from standard rates, and these discounts should be available to all 
attendees.

 (d) The Internet infrastructure of meeting sites must be more than "adequate." 
 ICANN should continue to foster investment in Internet facilities everywhere, 
and should reward hosts who demonstrate their commitment to the network by 
providing superior access and bandwidth.

 (e) The BC suggests that the next step is for the staff to complete an 
evaluation matrix for the proposed future sites, identifying key selection 
factors, and post this information for additional public comment.

Initial comments close 17-Nov.   That gives us enough time to allow our regular 
14-day review and approval period.  So, please reply all with your questions or 
suggestions regarding this draft, before 6-Nov-2012.

Note that  Several comments have already been filed on this topic 
(link<http://forum.icann.org/lists/meetings-proposal-2012/>), including a 
sobering note from Michelle Chaplow about hotel pricing.

Thanks again to Mike Roberts for taking the lead here.


Steve DelBianco
Vice chair for policy coordination
Business Constituency