On 12/22/17 10:03 PM, Walt Harasty wrote:
Jay:
As a former corporate attorney, and an Adjunct Professor of Corporation Law, who has formed over 30 non-profit corporations I have no clear understanding of this matter because of the lack of FACTS.
I suggest a special meeting of SBARC be called ASAP where the FACTS should be presented, and based on such FACTS, a determination of what action, if any, SBARC should take.
The underlying problem is that ARRL is deliberately suppressing the ability of ARRL members to know any facts and prohibiting their elected representatives from discussing the facts with the membership.
FACT: At the January ARRL board meeting, the board adopted a "Code of Conduct" for Directors and Vice-Directors. This code prohibits Directors and Vice-Directors from disclosing how the Board members voted on an issue, including their own vote. See 6c of linked document. Furthermore, a board member is required to publicly support board decisions even if that member or his constituents are opposed. See section 8 and 8b of linked document. This means that Dick Norton is now required to publicly support his own censure by the ARRL Board. It also prevents the membership from making informed decisions regarding re-election of sitting board members. We can't see how they voted on issues.
Because the no-public-criticism code is a Board action, it prevents public criticism of the no-public-criticism code.
Link: http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ODV/ARRL%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf
FACT: Dick Norton voted against adopting this code of conduct. See page 6 of link below.
Link: http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Board%20Meetings/2017/January201...
FACT: At the Visalia DX Conclave, Dick Norton spoke at the ARRL Forum. He stated that he fully supported the Board's decision (as he is now required to do) and mentioned (correctly) that the new code would impact his interaction with the membership. Several members of the audience expressed opposition to the new code.
Link: https://sites.google.com/site/hamsforabetterarrl/
FACT: On November 14, the ARRL board voted to censure Dick Norton for violating the code of conduct, apparently because he mentioned the code of conduct. Four ARRL members wrote to ARRL in support of Dick Norton. The ARRL article does not mention that any ARRL members wrote in opposition to Dick.
Link: http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-board-of-directors-publicly-censures-southwest...
FACT: A well-respected SBARC member wrote to ARRL CEO Tom Gallagher for an explanation of the Dick Norton situation. The request was at first ignored and when repeated was met with a stonewall response and he was essentially told to go away. (Private email correspondence with me, details provided if permitted by author.)
FACT: Hudson Division Director Mike Lisenco N2YBB has introduced a motion to modify ARRL bylaws to dilute the elected representation of ARRL members by adding the President and three Vice-Presidents who are not elected by the membership as voting members.
Link: http://www.kkn.net/~n6tv/N2YBB_Motions_To_Change_ARRL_ByLaws.pdf
FACT: Sitting Director Doug Rehman K4AC was prevented from running for re-election to ARRL Southeastern Director in 2016 after the ballots had been mailed despite his being previously ruled eligible. K4AC has been a supporter of more transparency in ARRL actions. His opponent was declared elected without a vote.
Link: https://arrlse.org/
I recommend that Dick Norton be present at that meeting.
If he were to attend, he's stuck in the catch-22. He is required to publicly support all Board actions, including his own censure.
If a meeting is called, I recommend that the Bylaws of ARRL and any proposed amendments be made available to the attendees.
Bylaws: http://www.arrl.org/arrl-by-laws
Proposed amendment: http://www.kkn.net/~n6tv/N2YBB_Motions_To_Change_ARRL_ByLaws.pdf
-- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay@impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
CLARIFICATION OF JAY'S EMAIL:
I WROTE LINES 1AND 2 OF THE BELOW EMAIL AND THE TWO LINES AT THE END OF JAY'S EMAIL PRECEDED BY THE PURPLE LINE.
_I DID NOT WRITE THE MATERIAL AFTER LINE 2!!!_
THE INTENT OF MY EMAIL WAS TO GET THE _FACTS_, I.E., "SPECIFICS", LIKE WHAT EXACTLY WHAT DID DICK NORTON SAY OR DO TO BE CENSURED BY THE BOARD.
I HAVE WRITTEN TO THE GENERAL COUNSEL OF ARRL REQUESTING THAT INFORMATION.
WALT HARASTY KU2Q
On 12/23/2017 2:25 PM, Jay Hennigan wrote:
On 12/22/17 10:03 PM, Walt Harasty wrote:
Jay:
As a former corporate attorney, and an Adjunct Professor of Corporation Law, who has formed over 30 non-profit corporations I have no clear understanding of this matter because of the lack of FACTS.
I suggest a special meeting of SBARC be called ASAP where the FACTS should be presented, and based on such FACTS, a determination of what action, if any, SBARC should take.
The underlying problem is that ARRL is deliberately suppressing the ability of ARRL members to know any facts and prohibiting their elected representatives from discussing the facts with the membership.
FACT: At the January ARRL board meeting, the board adopted a "Code of Conduct" for Directors and Vice-Directors. This code prohibits Directors and Vice-Directors from disclosing how the Board members voted on an issue, including their own vote. See 6c of linked document. Furthermore, a board member is required to publicly support board decisions even if that member or his constituents are opposed. See section 8 and 8b of linked document. This means that Dick Norton is now required to publicly support his own censure by the ARRL Board. It also prevents the membership from making informed decisions regarding re-election of sitting board members. We can't see how they voted on issues.
Because the no-public-criticism code is a Board action, it prevents public criticism of the no-public-criticism code.
Link: http://www.arrl.org/files/file/ODV/ARRL%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf
FACT: Dick Norton voted against adopting this code of conduct. See page 6 of link below.
Link: http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Board%20Meetings/2017/January201...
FACT: At the Visalia DX Conclave, Dick Norton spoke at the ARRL Forum. He stated that he fully supported the Board's decision (as he is now required to do) and mentioned (correctly) that the new code would impact his interaction with the membership. Several members of the audience expressed opposition to the new code.
Link: https://sites.google.com/site/hamsforabetterarrl/
FACT: On November 14, the ARRL board voted to censure Dick Norton for violating the code of conduct, apparently because he mentioned the code of conduct. Four ARRL members wrote to ARRL in support of Dick Norton. The ARRL article does not mention that any ARRL members wrote in opposition to Dick.
Link: http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-board-of-directors-publicly-censures-southwest...
FACT: A well-respected SBARC member wrote to ARRL CEO Tom Gallagher for an explanation of the Dick Norton situation. The request was at first ignored and when repeated was met with a stonewall response and he was essentially told to go away. (Private email correspondence with me, details provided if permitted by author.)
FACT: Hudson Division Director Mike Lisenco N2YBB has introduced a motion to modify ARRL bylaws to dilute the elected representation of ARRL members by adding the President and three Vice-Presidents who are not elected by the membership as voting members.
Link: http://www.kkn.net/~n6tv/N2YBB_Motions_To_Change_ARRL_ByLaws.pdf
FACT: Sitting Director Doug Rehman K4AC was prevented from running for re-election to ARRL Southeastern Director in 2016 after the ballots had been mailed despite his being previously ruled eligible. K4AC has been a supporter of more transparency in ARRL actions. His opponent was declared elected without a vote.
Link: https://arrlse.org/
I recommend that Dick Norton be present at that meeting.
If he were to attend, he's stuck in the catch-22. He is required to publicly support all Board actions, including his own censure.
If a meeting is called, I recommend that the Bylaws of ARRL and any proposed amendments be made available to the attendees.
Bylaws: http://www.arrl.org/arrl-by-laws
Proposed amendment: http://www.kkn.net/~n6tv/N2YBB_Motions_To_Change_ARRL_ByLaws.pdf
-- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay@impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
I received more information about the ARRL situation that was sent to SuperSystem users. This information presented below is pretty much self explanatory and partly provided by someone who was actually at the Visalia ARRL Forum that apparently sparked the censor of our SW Division Director, Dick Norton, N6AA.
For the record, I like and respect Dick, and view what happened at the ARRL board meeting as outrageous.
Marvin, KE6HTS
***************
Comments on ARRL actions. From: Harold Hackman w6hvh1@gmail.com To: david corsiglia WA6TWF@gmail.com Date: Mon, Dec 4, 2017 7:50 am
Dear SuperSystem members,
David, WA6TWF, has asked that I forward these emails to each of you:
From: Mark [mailto:m.weiss@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 24, 2017 8:32 AM To: Mark Subject: ARRL Code of Conduct & Director Dick Norton
November 24, 2017
Actions taken this year by the ARRL leadership have undermined my admiration and respect for the League, its officers and directors. As a long time ham, I grew up in the hobby with the understanding that I could always count on the League to be a fair and democratic national organization devoted to the best interests of amateur radio.
Well things apparently changed in 2017.
The Code of Conduct is one of the most outrageous piece of legislation that I could imagine. The gag order that binds the directors to secrecy offends my sense of ethics and propriety. What possible harm can result in allowing a director to share with his or her division’s hams the vote taken by that director on any Board resolution that passed or failed? Without that information, how can the members evaluate whether or not he or she deserves another term? Members will simply have no basis upon which to reelect (or throw out) a sitting director. Worse yet, a challenger can freely slander and attack the existing league administration; but the sitting directors will not have the right to counter false and malicious attacks.
The Code of Conduct is something I would expect to be enacted in countries that have totalitarian despotic leaders who strive to maintain a government without opposition or dissent. Shame on the ARRL; it should be better than that!
As for Norton, he was convicted by the League in the absence of evidence against him. Apparently the ARRL’s sense of due process does not require evidence.
Since the Board’s groundless censure of Norton, I have attended several amateur radio gatherings. Response to my negative comments about the Code of Conduct and about Norton’s censure has been 100% supportive of my strongly felt opinions.
Please review the copy of my November 9, 2017 email that I sent to the ARRL directors and officers. In that email, I clearly stated (at the 2017 Visalia DX Convention) that it was the membership that expressed strong disagreement with the Code of Conduct, not Norton. Norton clearly stated that he fully supported the League and its actions.
Please also review the copy of November 8, 2017 email to the officers and directors of ARRL from Tim Duffy, K3LR.
You are authorized and encouraged to widely share and publish this email (and the incorporated emails) throughout the ham radio community. Maybe responsive chords will resonate.
Thank you and 73,
MARK A. WEISS, K6FG
-----------------
Verbatim copy of November 9, 2017 email sent by K6FG to the ARRL officers and directors:
November 9, 2017
Dear ********,
This email is sent to you in response Director Dick Norton’s request that I provide you with my recollection of some events that took place at the ARRL Forum during the 2017 International DX Convention in Visalia, California.
For your consideration, at the end of this letter I have included a brief statement of my relevant background information.
I don’t recall the identity of all of the members of the Visalia ARRL Forum’s panel, but Dick Norton appeared to be the primary speaker.
One of the topics addressed was the new Code of Conduct.
Dick Norton began the program by stating that he, as a Director, fully supports the actions of the Board of Directors. He covered some points of the new code that impact his relationship with the membership. Dick then inquired of those present if there were any questions or comments from the floor.
In response to Dick’s inquiry, several of us raised our hands and were recognized.
When I spoke, I was very direct in my strong opposition to enactment of the confidentiality provisions contained in the Code of Conduct. My expressed thoughts included, but were not limited to the following:
1. I acknowledged that Board member loyalty and commitment to the League was properly mandated; but the gag order contained in the Code of Conduct is clearly contrary to my sense of serving the best interests of the ARRL members.
2. I stated that contrary to the view expressed by the current ARRL administration, ARRL is a representative organization. That is, our districts elect directors and vice-directors to create and implement policies and rules that best represent the interests of amateur radio in general, AND THE INTERESTS OF OUR DISTRICT IN PARTICULAR.
3. It is my understanding that directors and vice-directors are precluded from informing their district members of the various (and conflicting) views expressed by the directors during the legislative process. If my observation is correct, I fear following will occur: A. I may never be provided with information upon which I can evaluate the propriety of the Board’s action.
B. I will never know the positions advocated or supported by my director at the Board meeting.
C. I will never know if my elected director acted in furtherance of the best interests of the hobby in general, or in the best interests my district in particular.
D. I will have no factual basis upon which to support or oppose my director’s bid for reelection when his or her current term ends.
Much to my surprise, as I was sitting down after I finished delivering my brief remarks, there was unanimous and very loud applause. I was shocked because I had not intended to stir up widespread opposition to the ARRL leadership’s action; it was my intention to simply express the reasons for my opposition to the Code of Conduct.
It was immediately apparent to me that my remarks resonated with nearly everyone in the room. In fact, at the conclusion of discussion of the issue, the call for a vote in support or opposition to the Code of Conduct resulted in an overwhelming condemnation of the Code.
The Code of Conduct has been discussed at meetings I attended this year at our local radio clubs. The consensus among the club members was always consistent with the reaction to my comments at the Visalia ARRL Forum.
It is my fear that the League is heading down the path of becoming a secret “Star Chamber” organization without the transparency to which our membership is entitled.
Please do not form the impression that I believe Board disclosure to the membership is absolute. I indeed recognize the need to maintain confidentiality of proceedings in appropriate circumstances.
The Code of Conduct is already generating adverse consequences to the League. I personally know of valuable bequests that have been withdrawn as a result of the new disclosure rules. If this action is a trend, the League will definitely be harmed.
It is my opinion that the League’s leadership made a major mistake in adopting the Code of Conduct. Please do what you can to cause the Board to revisit the Code of Conduct legislation. Please remove the “gag order” provisions. Please freshen the air the surrounds the ARRL leadership.
Thank you & 73, MARK A. WEISS, K6FG
P.S. The following is a brief summary of my background:
Amateur Radio ARRL life member Former chair of IARU Region 2 Band Plan Committee Former member of ARRL Band Plan Committee
Employment: 1967-1968: Litton Data Systems. Engineer 1969-1985: Attorney 1986-2006: Los Angeles County Superior Court
-----------------
Verbatim copy of November 8, 2017 email sent by K3LR to the ARRL officers and directors:
Dear Officers and Directors of the American Radio Relay League, Inc.;
I attended the ARRL Forum held at the April 2017 International DX Convention in Visalia, California, as I do every year. Dick Norton, N6AA has asked me to report on two of my observations during the ARRL forum.
One item discussed at the ARRL forum was the new ARRL code of conduct for ARRL Directors. Dick Norton covered items contained in the code of conduct. It was clear that the audience was not happy about what was being told to them. A number of forum audience participants spoke in strong opposition to certain aspects of the code. My own personal attorney (and ARRL volunteer counsel) K3LA was surprised by what N6AA presented. K3LA is also opposed to the code and seeing the audience was clearly upset by Dick's presentation concerning the code, he walked out of the room. The opposition came from the upset audience, not from Dick Norton. Norton specifically pointed out that he supports the board's positions. I have previously discussed this code and other ARRL topics with Dick. I was not surprised by the audience's strong negative response to the code. Their reaction also mirrors my own feelings.
Second, I have been asked to report that there were many other topics covered at the forum. That is true. The code of conduct was only a part of the agenda that Dick discussed at the ARRL forum.
Please do not hesitate to contact me directly if you have questions.
Very 73, Tim Duffy K3LR ARRL Maxim Society & ARRL Diamond Club Member ARRL Life Member
-
Jay Hennigan -
Marvin Johnston -
Walt Harasty