July 2010 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:19106] Annex to Document 8
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 06 Jul '10

06 Jul '10

Here is a report from Allen Pitts to complete the CEO's report. Dave DL/K1ZZ

1 0

[arrl-odv:19105] Document #8
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 06 Jul '10

06 Jul '10

1 0

[arrl-odv:19104] A&F Minutes
by Shelley, Barry, N1VXY 06 Jul '10

06 Jul '10

President Craigie asked that the attached A&F minutes be distributed to the Board as it appears that this had not been done. 73, Barry J. Shelley, N1VXY Chief Financial Officer ARRL, Inc-The National Association for Amateur Radio(tm) 225 Main St. Newington, CT 06111 www.arrl.org <http://www.arrl.org/> Phone: (860) 594-0212 E-mail: bshelley(a)arrl.org <mailto:bshelley@arrl.org>

1 0

Doc #33 ECAC
by Greg Sarratt 06 Jul '10

06 Jul '10

73, Greg Sarratt, W4OZK

1 0

[arrl-odv:19102] VUAC Report Doc 32
by Bill Edgar 06 Jul '10

06 Jul '10

1 0

[arrl-odv:19101] DXAC Doc 31
by Bill Edgar 06 Jul '10

06 Jul '10

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:19097] Re: RE: Committee Minutes on Web Site
by Jim Weaver K8JE 04 Jul '10

04 Jul '10

Tom and Dave, Tnx for the info, Tom. I was in the process of running through my hard-copy material, but you saved me time. Dave, I misstated when I referred to minutes. I had been checking to see of the minutes were listed on the web site and had minutes on my mind when I wrote my message. It is actually A&F Board Reports that I cannot access. My question originated because even I am on ODV, when attempting to access A&F Board Reports, I am asked to log in. When I attempt to log in, a message that states in essence denies access appears. Enjoy the 4th in Germany. I am observing the day by watching the Cincy Reds play the Chi Cubs. To make an even greater American celebration, there just may be a hot dog, a couple of pea nuts and a "pop" in my immediate future. No apple pie, though., To everyone, 73 and enjoy, Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director ARRL Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040; Tel. 513-459-1661 ARRL, The national organization for AMATEUR RADIO

1 0

[arrl-odv:19099] Doc.5 second VP report
by Bruce Frahm 04 Jul '10

04 Jul '10

My report to the July board meeting is attached. I would be happy to address any questions prior to the meeting, and look forward to seeing you soon in Hartford. 73 Bruce K0BJ

1 0

[arrl-odv:19098] Region 2 band plan process status
by Kay Craigie 04 Jul '10

04 Jul '10

The attached documents have to do with the process of revising the IARU Region 2 MF-HF Band Plan. By the June 1 deadline, the ARRL submitted our suggestions for changes in the band plan. The relevant ODV message informing the Board about that is from Dave, arrl-odv:19301. Our proposed changes were simply fixes to several inadvertent errors and omissions found in the band plan which took effect in 2008 following the Region 2 conference of 2007. A copy of that band plan is attached for your reference. Because the status of the Region 2 Band Plan for American licensees is informational rather than regulatory, we did not think it was suitable for us to suggest any other changes. On June 15, Region 2 circulated a unified document (the "Prop R2 BP ..." pdf attached to this e-mail) showing all the proposed band plan changes that had been received. The document is in England and Spanish, the two official languages of IARU Region 2 affairs. Only the ARRL and the Radio Amateurs of Canada (RAC) submitted proposals. Please read this unified document before reading the Word document. The unified document was circulated to the EC and referred to the League's Ad Hoc Band Planning Committee, chaired by VP Frahm, for study and comment. The Band Planning Committee gave particular attention to the RAC's proposal for reducing the maximum bandwidth in the 10140 - 10150 segment of the 30 meter band and recommended opposition to this proposal. The EC agreed with this recommendation. The EC further agreed with the additional positions expressed in the Word document attached to this e-mail. To ensure that the League's comments are translated into Spanish and distributed to all societies along with other conference input documents, we had to submit the comments to Region 2 by today. That is being done. I would like to thank VP Frahm and the HF Band Planning Committee for their thoughtful consideration of the issues involved and for providing their report to the EC right on deadline. Proposed changes to the band plan will be discussed in committee at the Region 2 conference and the results of the committee deliberations will be presented to a plenary session of the conference for a vote. The conference is October 4 - 8 in El Salvador. I suggest that in order to avoid setting off exactly the sort of confusion and controversy among members that our position endeavors to prevent, it would be a good idea to keep this 30 meter issue under our hats for the time being. By getting out ahead of the issue through ensuring we have a conference document that will be seen by other societies in advance, and then if we are persuasive enough in committee, the RAC proposal for 30 meters may be DOA anyhow. 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

[arrl-odv:19097] Re: RE: Committee Minutes on Web Site
by Tom Frenaye 04 Jul '10

04 Jul '10

Here's what I could find on the web upgrade project from A&F minutes and A&F board reports. -- Tom A&F - November 17, 2007 meeting 4. 2008 Plan Mr. Kramer began by introducing Jon Bloom, KE3Z, Manager of the Web Software Development Department, who joined the meeting at this point. He led the Committee through a discussion of the ARRL's web site which, he proposed, needs a comprehensive upgrade. The architecture of the site is very complex. Originally was built in 1995, it has approximately 40,000 pages of content. He proposed that the organization needs to take a more strategic view of our web site. Mr. Kramer noted that, earlier this year, they had begun a process, talking to firms who do this kind of work. Using an internal team, three different companies who could or would be able to do the work were identified. Each company was asked for a proposal and, not surprisingly, each proposed a similar process to identify the issues surrounding the ARRL website. This includes talking to stakeholders, internal and external, in addition to inventorying the web pages. During the discussion, it was noted that other Amateur Radio web sites get more traffic than the ARRL. QRZ.com and E-Ham both get more traffic. We believe that one of the reasons for this is that they offer information in a more organized format and more current in some cases (and interactive forums). This raises the issue of individual content control which is an objective in any upgrade of the site architecture. Site navigation also needs to be improved. Mr. Kramer noted that the overall upgrade of the web site is a long term project but one that can be done in modules. In total it could be a 2-3 year process. Plan and costs will be presented in modules. The initial study is proposed to cost $9,000 and results would be presented at the January or April committee meeting depending on the completion of the study. The company selected to do the initial study is named Fathom, a company located in Hartford. It was noted in the discussion that this project is the beginning of the next step in the technology of the ARRL. The current architecture of the organization's systems is that one monolithic system that does everything. Our current technology is to create the views and processing outside the database. The new computing environment involves technology which separates the data storage from the process of presenting data with a controller linking the two. Mr. Kramer presented statistics for web transactions both publications and membership. At this point, almost 60% of publication transactions occur on the web and 30% of membership transactions. Mr. Vallio questioned the amount of resources available to do the systems/web projects already identified and the priorities. He questioned the timing of the DXCC/LOTW integration presented in the 2008 Plan. Mr. Bloom described the two functions and work that is on-going as well as the reasoning for the prioritization of the projects. On the motion of Mr. Edgar, seconded by Mr. McCobb, the Committee unanimously agreed to allocate $9,000 for a study of the re-architecture of the ARRL Web site and that the results of the study be presented in the first quarter of 2008. A&F - January 17, 2008 meeting e) Web Site Upgrade Mr. Kramer presented an oral status report of the study of the ARRL web site for which funding was approved at the last meeting of the Committee. The first meeting between the vendor and the ARRL user team is scheduled for next week. One large group meeting has already been held. He told the Committee that the results of the process will be a plan to upgrade the web site including a funding proposal. This proposal is expected to be completed later in 2008, hopefully prior to the spring A&F meeting. A&F - January 2008 Board report One step that is essential in our preparation for the future is the analysis work that has started on our existing web site. We have a wealth of material on-line but overall the site has not kept pace with the changes in Internet technology and interaction with customers expected in today's world. Taking the necessary steps will require a serious commitment of resources and significant changes in our approach to doing business electronically. A&F - April 12, 2008 meeting 4. Fathom Web Project Brent Roberts, President and Exec. Creative Director, KB1PYY, and Bob Margolis, VP of Business Development for Fathom, a strategic marketing and web design firm joined the meeting at this point. Also joining the meeting was Jon Bloom and Bob Inderbitzen of the ARRL staff. Mr. Margolis began the presentation discussing his background as a former President of a volunteer board of a trade association. He noted that Fathom staff had had several meetings with various members of the ARRL staff and told the Committee that the staff at ARRL is the most dedicated enthusiastic staff he's ever seen. He went on to describt Fathom which is a 25 person graphic design, brand strategy and strategic marketing firm. It represents the combination of two firms about 3 years ago. 30-40% of their work is done for not-for-profits organizations. He noted that they have experience in large web sites as well as smaller projects. He then proceeded to discuss the overall objectives for the ARRL web site. Mr. Roberts described his own background for the Committee noting that he has a personal background in ham radio. His father was ham radio operator and Brent has recently become licensed. As a result, he has gone through the process of beginning in the hobby and learned about the resources available in that process. He noted that the ARRL web site is an on-line "property" and talked about the need to unlock the value of this asset for the organization. He said that the project of creating new web site architecture involves taking a step back and looking at the objectives of the organization and how to best meet them through the web site. Mr. Roberts then walked the Committee through the web strategy document noting that a one of the objectives was to position ARRL as a member-centric organization and create a destination site that people want to go to often. He then led the Committee through a detailed discussion of the top level architecture of the site including sample designs of pages. This was followed by a discussion of the three phases of the project. Mr. Margolis then discussed the proposal document. He described the team from Fathom that will work on the project noting that all work will be done in-house by Fathom personnel. None will be outsourced. He also noted there are key milestones in the project and the fact that there is a relatively short period of time before we will begin to see preliminary designs. The meeting was then opened up for questions from the Committee: Mr. McCobb asked how the project compared to other Fathom projects of a similar size and scope. Mr. Roberts discussed several other projects of similar scale and the results achieved with those projects. Mr. Ahrens asked about the potential cost/benefit piece of this proposal asking about Fathom's experience with a project of this size and cost. Mr. Margolis gave examples of a smaller firm project and the results. He noted that a properly executed site can be very successful. Mr. Roberts added that metrics are very important for this kind of site, that being one for a not-for-profit organization. Its important to know who is coming to the site, where they are going on the site and other items. Mr. Bellows noted that a web site is a tool which will require a lot of support to maintain and asked about the staff resources necessary to keep all the content up-to-date, etc. Mr. Roberts responded that this will be defined in Phase 1 and 2 of the project. The on-going cost of maintaining the site needs to be identified and quantified. Mr. Ahrens mentioned that he liked the concept of database driven pages and asked about other resources and the purchases of other software/hardware that will be required to complete this project as well as the time and IT resources needed for conversion. Mr. Roberts responded that the planning will include how to integrate the existing information databases in the new web site. Mr. Bloom discussed his preference in the Fathom approach because it is planned that the new sire will be run on a Linux server running Apache software. This is not an expensive proposition and is the same technology we're using on the current site. Mr. Roberts did mention that it might drive different disaster recovery systems but not a whole new, significant investment in hardware and software. Noting that the current estimate for Phase III of the project is approximately $100-150k, Mr. Bellows asked about the circumstances that would drive the upper limit. Mr. Margolis responded, noting that the amount is a conservative estimate. He did say that changes to the original plan would drive costs but that Fathom would require a formal change process to manage these items which would include ARRL sign-off before work begins. Mr. Roberts said that Fathom was looking at the proposal as a "hard, not to exceed" proposal and as long as the project doesn't expand, the cost estimate will be met. Mr. Ahrens asked about the nature of this project and where it fits in with all the projects completed by Fathom. Further he questioned the potential to downsize this project to fit a smaller budget. Mr. Roberts noted that the project could be downsized by eliminating some functionality if necessary. Mr. Fenstermaker asked about the overall cost for the duration of the project including staff costs. Mr. Kramer responded by noting that the exact costs are not known at this time. He went on to discuss the risks of the project including what he described as the biggest risk which is the internal resources the ARRL can apply to the project. Will these be enough? It was noted that we do have some control over the level of resources that are needed for creation and on-going maintenance. Local content control is going to be a big portion of the project. Mr. Margolis projected that the project, it will require roughly 2 Full Time Equivalent's, on average, from the ARRL. Mr. Bellows inquired as to Fathom's ability to deliver the resources necessary to complete the project. Mr. Roberts responded that Fathom did have the resources and had already been planning for the project. In closing, Mr. Kramer stated that we need to do this project. He told the Committee how it will make us a better membership organization and how it has the potential to allow us to tap into the organizational potential of several areas not currently being maximized. Mr. Ahrens and Mr. Bellows offered some proposed contract question which the Fathom representatives and ARRL management agreed would be included in the final contract. At this point, the Committee broke for lunch @ 11:45 am and Messers Roberts, Margolis and Bloom left the meeting. The Committee reconvened at 12:40 pm with all the original participants, plus Mr. Inderbitzen, in attendance. A&F - July 17, 2008 meeting (nothing in the minutes about the web project) A&F July 2008 Board report Along with increasing inter-board communication, the committee received a presentation by representatives from Fathom. This firm specializes in creating strategic marketing and web design. Fathom is one of a number of firms staff reviewed in an effort to consolidate ideas and system architectural requirements for a new ARRL Web Site. Following presentation by the Fathom firm and follow-on discussion with staff (specifically Jon Bloom and Bob Inderbitzen), the committee approved follow-on planning and involvement of ARRL staff to complete the first phase of the project. The committee approved management's recommendation to proceed on Phase I and II of the project with periodic updates prior to approval to continue. These updates will be presented to both the A&F and entire board at the July 2008 meeting. A&F - November 22, 2008 meeting 8. Mr. Kramer distributed a written report on the status of the web site project including sample designs for web pages. He reported that Phase 1 was completed on budget of $50,000. That Phase 2 has begun and is expected to cost $50,000, which was the budgeted amount A detailed discussion of the new web site followed. A&F - January 15, 2009 meeting 3. Administration Report-Mr. Kramer Web site project-Mr. Kramer passed out a report on the status of this project noting that representatives of Fathom, the outside design firm, would be doing a presentation updating the status of the project for the full Board at the meeting. He told the Committee that Phase I of the project had been completed on budget and that Phase II is almost complete and will also be on-budget. Phase III- Mr. Kramer continued noting that Fathom had exceeded our expectations and that their process has worked well with the ARRL. He explained to the Committee it was now time to request funding for the final Phase of the project. He told the Committee that the project is critical to the future of the organization and, over the years, that many issues with the current site architecture had been identified. He reminded the Committee that the original estimate for Phase III had been $100-150,000. He went on to present the work plan and cost proposal for Phase III which represents an investment of $134,500. Mr. Kramer noted that the programming portion of the work plan is possibly the softest estimate. The Committee had a lengthy discussion of the project including the staff training component and overall administration of the project. Timing of the project, expectations of timely completion and Fathom's performance to date were all discussed. Mr. Sumner talked about the opportunities the new site will give the organization in allowing us to provide content for, and from, different communities of interest within Amateur Radio. The overall investment in the project and its impact on the organization's reserves and bottom line were also discussed. On the Motion of Mr. Mileshosky, seconded by Mr. Bodson, it was unanimously approved that the A&F Committee recommends a capital expenditure of $134,500 to fund Phase III of the project to complete the new ARRL web site. A&F - January 2009 Board report Mr. Kramer discussed the status of the Fathom Web Project and noted that the project is on track. Further information will be presented to the committee and entire board in January. A&F - April 30, 2009 meeting 5. Administration/Operations Report - Mr. Kramer Mr. Kramer then discussed the Fathom project to redo the web site noting it was on track. He said there were no major slippages in the schedule so far noting that the majority of the architecture has been completed. He informed the Committee that he would be hiring an intern for the summer to coordinate the organization of the web site content. He still anticipates a 4th qtr launch of the web site. 11. Web site project-Mr. Kramer Mr. Fenstermaker asked a question regarding the on-going maintenance of the new web site, one implemented. Mr. Kramer noted that there were two components to this answer, the technical infrastructure and the content. He noted that the technical component, i.e. the host server, Internet connection, etc. would be managed as it is today, by the ARRL IT Department. It was pointed out that the web page is hosted off-site today and that will continue, in fact, we may add another hosting site. Further, Mr. Kramer discussed the concept of individual departments being responsible for content control of those web pages for which they are responsible. He noted that this was one of the fundamental objectives for the new site, including the ability to create and/or modify forms. Staff training was included in the cost estimate for the project. What is unknown at the moment is the amount of overall effort that will be required. He noted that additional resources may be required but this is not known at present. Mr. McCobb asked about the possibility of staff reductions as a result of implementation of the new web site noting that this should be investigated. Mr. Kramer responded that we will be looking into this, particularly in regards to data entry across a variety of functions. Mr. Weaver noted the possibility of using volunteers to help maintain web content and/or help change the site if necessary. Mr. Shelley noted that any new "functions" that are proposed for the web site in the future will be evaluated as to the priority for the project as well as the resources required. Decisions will be made on which resources to use to complete approved projects and in what timeframe. A&F - July 16, 2009 meeting 10. Administration/Operations Mr. Kramer presented a short report to the Committee, referring to his extensive written report delivered to the full Board. He noted that the staff continues to make progress with the web site project. He reported that the project was still on track with the schedule. He noted than an intern had been hired to assist with the conversion of the content from the existing site to the new one. Mr. Kramer noted that a decision has not been made yet on the e-commerce software to handle that portion of the web site. This piece was still being researched. He also reported that they were also looking for a 3rd party software program to use for advertising on the web site. He then discussed the content control system, mentioning the training component which would be included. He concluded by telling the Committee that the project was still anticipating a January launch. The Committee raised questions about the operations/staffing requirements for the new site. Mr. Kramer noted that it was too early to tell exactly what the staffing requirement would be. Mr. Fenstermaker suggested that the outside consulting firm might be able to give us an indication of potential staffing requirements. Mr. Mileshosky noted that the ARRL was making a significant investment in the new web site which the organization had needed for some time. He noted that maintaining the site will be necessary for the organization to get the most from its investment. He further suggested that turnover of content on a regular basis will be necessary to keep it fresh and interesting. He raised the concern about prioritization of portions of the site to insure appropriate content is maintained. Mr. Kramer noted that there was a possibility of using volunteers to help maintain certain portions of the site. Mr. McCobb noted that changes in major systems, such as this one, offer the opportunity to change the processes as well as the possibility of new revenue sources. Mr. Kramer mentioned the new advertising system as an example of this possibility. A&F - July 2009 Board report (nothing in the report on the web project) A&F - November 21, 2009 meeting 4. Operations Report Ms. Glass, the ARRL staffer working on the content conversion for the new web site project, gave a presentation on the content management software being developed by Fathom. She noted that the content from the current web page had been revised and edited by mid September and that the focus is now on porting the revised content to the new platform. Mr. Fenstermaker asked how much IT time will be freed up through the use of local content managers. Mr. Shelley responded that it should be at least one full-time position. The Committee then had a long discussion of the capabilities of the new web site and its functionality. 18. Other Business Mr. McCobb spoke on the history of major projects within the organization and noted the need to identify and quantify results, including any cost savings after the project is completed. He identified the web site project specifically and noted that there may or may not be positions eliminated as a result of its implementation. A&F - January 14, 2010 meeting (meeting minutes not found in my files - not sure they were distributed to the Board) A&F - January 2010 Board report Mr. Kramer discussed the status of the operational areas and particularly about the Fathom project to update the ARRL web site. He noted that the roll-out to members projected for the end of January. During the upcoming A&F meeting prior to the board meeting, he will give an update. A&F - May 5, 2010 meeting 3. Administration/Operations Report Mr. Kramer began his operations report with a discussion of the status of the implementation of the new ARRL web site. Mr. Norton asked about the Fathom contract and its construction. Mr. Kramer noted that the contract encompassed three "phases", each with a set of deliverables and that 10% ($15,000) of the contract price is being withheld until completion. Messrs Norton and Ahrens asked for a copy of the contract and Mr. Kramer promised to provide it. There ensued a long discussion about the contract, the project itself and various deliverables and details of the project. Mr. Kramer described the difficulty in bringing a project like this to fruition and presented various examples of data and other functions that were still not operational. He mentioned anomalies in the internal data structure highlighting his belief that most of the remaining issues are data related. In this discussion he used the data issues of Section, VEC and Education departments as examples. Mrs. Craigie asked how we will know when the project is finished and we can sign off. Mr. Kramer noted that there were punch lists of outstanding items and that completion of the contract would be when all elements of the old site are operational on the new site. He estimated that this would be in about 4-5 weeks. Documentation of the site was also raised as an item for completion prior to releasing the final payment. Mr. Fenstermaker questioned about any additional cost associated with the work to complete the site and Mr. Kramer said there would be no additional cost at this time. Mr. Fenstermaker also asked about the necessary documentation. Mr. Ahrens asked about on-going support from Fathom. Mr. Kramer told the committee that no specific on-going support would be required, however, a decision to use Fathom for specific project related items is possible. A lengthy discussion ensued about IT Dept priorities and time to complete. Mr. Shelley discussed current priorities and the implementation of other projects and the resource requirements both internal and external for various projects. He did note that the unexpected time to implement the web site was taking time away from other projects as the web site had been considered the top priority so far this year. Mr. Bodson asked about the general lay-out of the web site. Mr. Sumner responded with a discussion of "new" and people accepting change. Mr. Kramer also discussed the issue of page "permissions" which has been a difficult issue to corral. Mr. Tiemstra noted that the "drill down" methodology used in the construction of the web site could be construed as a "negative" but believes that this is the way web sites are going. Mr. Norton asked about the Digital Content Coordinator and the level of IT staffing going forward. Mr. Kramer responded the majority of the time for the DCC position will be spent on moving us forward in the digital area. He said that there would probably be more electronic content initiatives like digitized magazines, etc. which would be the responsibility of this position. A discussion of advertising on the site followed noting revenue levels, placement and other issues. At 02:57 AM 7/4/2010, Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ wrote: >Hi Jim, > >Happy 4th from Germany, where they are celebrating another win in the World Cup (two weekends in a row -- I've heard enough vuvuzelas for a lifetime). > >I'd don't recall that committee minutes have ever been available on the Web site. They are not made public and I don't think we have ever collected them in one place in the ODV files, although it seems like a good idea. > >Barry may have A&F minutes collected in one place -- he has to do that for the auditors -- so he may be able to help you out after the holiday weekend. > >73, >Dave DL/K1ZZ > > > >---------- >From: Jim Weaver K8JE [mailto:K8JE@ARRL.org] >Sent: Sat 7/3/2010 5:08 AM >To: arrl-odv >Subject: [arrl-odv:19092] Committee Minutes on Web Site > >Harold, > >I am unable to access A&F minutes on the new web site. When I sign in to ODV and then try to access the minutes I am asked to sign in. This seems strange to me because I'm automatically signed in to ODV to begin with. > >When I attempt to sign in, I am unsuccessful. > >Are these minutes not linked to the site yet? > >FYI, what I am trying to find is the first time A&F heard the presentation about the new site project from FATHOM. I can't find a date on the presentation manual that was give to A&F. > >Tnx, > >Jim > ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0