July 2014 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:23050] Draft Board minutes
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 28 Jul '14

28 Jul '14

Here are draft minutes of the July Board meeting. Please advise me of any corrections and suggestions at your earliest convenience. 73, Dave K1ZZ

4 3

[arrl-odv:23057] Releasing Divsion E-mails
by Shelley, Barry, N1VXY 28 Jul '14

28 Jul '14

At Minute 34 of the draft minutes of the recent Board meeting the Board approved providing the Board with the ability to have Division e-mails sent out immediately with no review from HQ. To implement this instruction, the IT Dept will add a "check box" that will indicate the message is "for immediate release". If not checked, the message will be held for review under the current procedure. This will allow each Director to make the choice for each message, allowing the opportunity to change their preference according to the message being sent. We will let you know as soon as this is ready, likely later this afternoon or tomorrow morning. 73, Barry J. Shelley, N1VXY Chief Financial Officer ARRL, Inc. The National Association for Amateur Radio (860) 594-0212 www.arrl.org

2 1

[arrl-odv:23049] Emergency Communications vs. Public Service
by Jim Pace K7CEX NW Division Director 28 Jul '14

28 Jul '14

Hi all: I assume you all returned home safely and in an almost timely manner. I certainly enjoyed that great convention and my first time in the hot seat on the front table (very interesting) After taking some time to think about the subject of the QST article and subsequent writings on the issue of Emergency Communications vs. Public Service, I'd like to point out a couple of things: First, Part 97.1(a) is very clear that one of the purposes of our license grant is "emergency communications". Although I agree that 'emergency communications' comes under a very broad umbrella called 'public service', I am not willing to concede to the second term and the elimination of the first. Second, the addition of amateur radio in ESF-6 and ESF-15 (in addition to already being in ESF-2), in the new ARRL/FEMA MOU, was a welcome sight to me. Although not previously written into those Emergency Support Functions (ESF) we, at least here in the Northwest, have always provided communications for those ESFs when asked to do so - which is quite often. I suspect that my colleagues in the hurricane regions find the same thing. Third, in my opinion, the CQ article didn't seem to be a put down or attack on Mike Corey but was merely quoting him. I must admit that, for this forum only, I agree with some of what is put forth in the article. While I do think the Gordon West video was way over the top - and the ARRL deserves an apology - I don't think the CQ article is too far off base, if at all. (Unless Mike was mis-quoted). My conclusion: This was a very poor time and subject matter to be discussed in our monthly Journal. It may, in my opinion, represent a systemic problem we have in communications with our membership, and that is the timing of our releases. Releasing an article talking about eliminating the term 'emergency communications' from our lexicon - or even just minimizing it - at the same time when we are trying to get Congressional consideration based partly on 'emergency communications'..well, that pain you feel is where you just shot yourself in the foot and the smoking gun is in your hand. This is much like releasing the notice of HR 4969, asking the membership to help with our efforts and releasing a 'talking points' paper well after the announcement. NOTE HERE: I think the 'talking points and suggested letter are excellent and commend Chris and all that worked on them, but in my opinion, the time for their release is at the time of the original notice. We here in the Northwest and FEMA Region 10, write into our plans and use amateur radio for emergency communications when other communication systems are overloaded or fail. We also use the term 'EmComm' and our served agencies do understand it and use it as well. We also use the term 'public service' and conclude that events, other than emergency/disaster, are great training events for our ARES teams. I am certain that Mike did not intend to start such a fire storm, as has developed. I am also certain that Mike did not intend to establish policy..which as I understand it is the board's charge - not staff...even if the article and subsequent talks and writings make it appear as if he has established a policy. Speaking of talks; did you hear the excellent talk by Craig Fugate, FEMA Administrator - he actually said that ham radio was important to 'emergency communications'..or am I mis-quoting him? 73 and good hamming Jim Pace, K7CEX Director, Northwestern Division

1 1

[arrl-odv:23053] Emergency Communications vs. Public Service
by James F. Boehner MD 28 Jul '14

28 Jul '14

Jim, et al., It was a very educational week, and this was one of the prime topics. I spoke with many regarding this issue, and even talked with Mike Corey for a half hour or so for some history. Hopefully minute 31 of the Board Minutes, draft recently distributed, will inform members of our position of the issue. I think Mike was trying to standardize terminology with our partners (New term for served agencies). He may not have understood how members would react. That being said, another ARRL staffer came down to my division and addressed an audience of diehard ARES/AUXCOMM members with the same message. Things did not go well. It took about 6 months to fully dig out of that ****storm. Live and Learn. The term "Emergency" evokes an emotion, one that is actually associated with amateur radio by federal statute, to our advantage. We can use that emotion to gain public support for a number of things, currently and most important, HR-4969. Whether the term "Emergency" is correct or not by definition, we do not gain anything at this time by trying to be semantically correct by using a broader term. We may have a fairly silent majority of members that probably do not care one way or the other, but those who care REALLY care! So, I hope that with ARRL publications and e-publications, we slowly restart using the term "emergency communications", but in doing so, not throwing Mike Corey "under the bus". He has worked to build relationships with other organizations, and needs to keep credibility with those agencies and members so that he can continue his work effectively. On a very personal opinion, the term "When all else fails, Amateur Radio" is going away because some in the emergency community are offended by that slogan. I am sorry they're offended, but that's what we do... '73 de JIM N2ZZ From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Jim Pace K7CEX NW Division Director Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2014 2:19 PM To: ODV Subject: [arrl-odv:23049] Emergency Communications vs. Public Service Hi all: I assume you all returned home safely and in an almost timely manner. I certainly enjoyed that great convention and my first time in the hot seat on the front table (very interesting) After taking some time to think about the subject of the QST article and subsequent writings on the issue of Emergency Communications vs. Public Service, I'd like to point out a couple of things: First, Part 97.1(a) is very clear that one of the purposes of our license grant is "emergency communications". Although I agree that 'emergency communications' comes under a very broad umbrella called 'public service', I am not willing to concede to the second term and the elimination of the first. Second, the addition of amateur radio in ESF-6 and ESF-15 (in addition to already being in ESF-2), in the new ARRL/FEMA MOU, was a welcome sight to me. Although not previously written into those Emergency Support Functions (ESF) we, at least here in the Northwest, have always provided communications for those ESFs when asked to do so - which is quite often. I suspect that my colleagues in the hurricane regions find the same thing. Third, in my opinion, the CQ article didn't seem to be a put down or attack on Mike Corey but was merely quoting him. I must admit that, for this forum only, I agree with some of what is put forth in the article. While I do think the Gordon West video was way over the top - and the ARRL deserves an apology - I don't think the CQ article is too far off base, if at all. (Unless Mike was mis-quoted). My conclusion: This was a very poor time and subject matter to be discussed in our monthly Journal. It may, in my opinion, represent a systemic problem we have in communications with our membership, and that is the timing of our releases. Releasing an article talking about eliminating the term 'emergency communications' from our lexicon - or even just minimizing it - at the same time when we are trying to get Congressional consideration based partly on 'emergency communications'..well, that pain you feel is where you just shot yourself in the foot and the smoking gun is in your hand. This is much like releasing the notice of HR 4969, asking the membership to help with our efforts and releasing a 'talking points' paper well after the announcement. NOTE HERE: I think the 'talking points and suggested letter are excellent and commend Chris and all that worked on them, but in my opinion, the time for their release is at the time of the original notice. We here in the Northwest and FEMA Region 10, write into our plans and use amateur radio for emergency communications when other communication systems are overloaded or fail. We also use the term 'EmComm' and our served agencies do understand it and use it as well. We also use the term 'public service' and conclude that events, other than emergency/disaster, are great training events for our ARES teams. I am certain that Mike did not intend to start such a fire storm, as has developed. I am also certain that Mike did not intend to establish policy..which as I understand it is the board's charge - not staff...even if the article and subsequent talks and writings make it appear as if he has established a policy. Speaking of talks; did you hear the excellent talk by Craig Fugate, FEMA Administrator - he actually said that ham radio was important to 'emergency communications'..or am I mis-quoting him? 73 and good hamming Jim Pace, K7CEX Director, Northwestern Division

1 0

[arrl-odv:23055] Emergency Communications vs. Public Service
by Jim Pace 27 Jul '14

27 Jul '14

Hi all: I assume you all returned home safely and in an almost timely manner. I certainly enjoyed that great convention and my first time in the hot seat on the front table (very interesting) After taking some time to think about the subject of the QST article and subsequent writings on the issue of Emergency Communications vs. Public Service, I'd like to point out a couple of things: First, Part 97.1(a) is very clear that one of the purposes of our license grant is "emergency communications". Although I agree that 'emergency communications' comes under a very broad umbrella called 'public service', I am not willing to concede to the second term and the elimination of the first. Second, the addition of amateur radio in ESF-6 and ESF-15 (in addition to already being in ESF-2), in the new ARRL/FEMA MOU, was a welcome sight to me. Although not previously written into those Emergency Support Functions (ESF) we, at least here in the Northwest, have always provided communications for those ESFs when asked to do so - which is quite often. I suspect that my colleagues in the hurricane regions find the same thing. Third, in my opinion, the CQ article didn't seem to be a put down or attack on Mike Corey but was merely quoting him. I must admit that, for this forum only, I agree with some of what is put forth in the article. While I do think the Gordon West video was way over the top - and the ARRL deserves an apology - I don't think the CQ article is too far off base, if at all. (Unless Mike was mis-quoted). My conclusion: This was a very poor time and subject matter to be discussed in our monthly Journal. It may, in my opinion, represent a systemic problem we have in communications with our membership, and that is the timing of our releases. Releasing an article talking about eliminating the term 'emergency communications' from our lexicon - or even just minimizing it - at the same time when we are trying to get Congressional consideration based partly on 'emergency communications'..well, that pain you feel is where you just shot yourself in the foot and the smoking gun is in your hand. This is much like releasing the notice of HR 4969, asking the membership to help with our efforts and releasing a 'talking points' paper well after the announcement. NOTE HERE: I think the 'talking points and suggested letter are excellent and commend Chris and all that worked on them, but in my opinion, the time for their release is at the time of the original notice. We here in the Northwest and FEMA Region 10, write into our plans and use amateur radio for emergency communications when other communication systems are overloaded or fail. We also use the term 'EmComm' and our served agencies do understand it and use it as well. We also use the term 'public service' and conclude that events, other than emergency/disaster, are great training events for our ARES teams. I am certain that Mike did not intend to start such a fire storm, as has developed. I am also certain that Mike did not intend to establish policy..which as I understand it is the board's charge - not staff...even if the article and subsequent talks and writings make it appear as if he has established a policy. Speaking of talks; did you hear the excellent talk by Craig Fugate, FEMA Administrator - he actually said that ham radio was important to 'emergency communications'..or am I mis-quoting him? 73 and good hamming Jim Pace, K7CEX Director, Northwestern Division

1 0

[arrl-odv:23047] PR for the HR
by Kay Craigie 27 Jul '14

27 Jul '14

I have started a special Twitter account that I am using to push out information on H.R. 4696 and to encourage people to contact their members of Congress about co-sponsoring. The Twitter account name that people can follow is @KayCraigieN3KN. The hashtag for the bill is #hr4969. One of the first tweets I did was a link to the video. This is not an ego trip for me. I will use the account to report the legislative advocacy activities of ARRL leaders such as your contacts (in-person, phone calls, e-mails, etc.) with Congress. I will note your Division e-mail bulletins, Facebook page posts, convention and club speeches, etc., that refer to the bill. You can help me keep the encouragement flowing by posting your activities on the ODV and/or sending me personal e-mails, whatever you prefer. If you know that your Section Managers are lighting fires under members, that information can also be noted if you'll pass it along to me. For example, it looks like 12 SMs so far have sent Section e-mail bulletins mentioning the bill. Also, I certainly don't have to be the only one who does this. For example, two Divisions that I know of have Facebook pages and some Sections do, too. If you use social media or have a trusted member who knows the ropes, this would be a good time to use the capability. Other ideas for use of social media in this effort? This is a no-cost way to increase the buzz. 73 - Kay N3KN

1 1

[arrl-odv:23046] CAI Opposition to H.R. 4969
by Christopher Imlay 25 Jul '14

25 Jul '14

Brian asked how we might motivate our membership to help us get cosponsors for H.R. 4969. You might try showing them the following from CAI to its membership: > From: CAI Government Affairs [mailto:government@caionline.org] > Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 2:53 PM > To: Mike Jeffrey > Subject: Call to Action: Protect Your Association's Rules and Standards, Tell Your U.S. Representative to Oppose H.R. 4969 > > [http://images.capwiz.com/advocacycenter/images/cai_logo.gif] > > GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS > > Dear CAI Member, > > Last month, U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) introduced H.R. 4969< http://capwiz.com/advocacycenter/utr/1/DVUHTXLPCH/KBPKTXLRTJ/10472539821>, legislation that may invalidate community association rules and architectural standards that govern the installation and use of amateur radio towers and antennas. > > If H.R. 4969 becomes law, homeowners who want to install a radio tower or antenna for amateur radio use would not have to go through the architectural review process or follow existing community guidelines. > > We need your help to stop this legislation. > > Please contact your member of the U.S. House of Representatives today to ask them: > > 1. Not to co-sponsor H.R. 4969 > 2. Oppose H.R. 4969 if it comes up for a vote > H.R. 4969 is a highly controversial federal government intervention into the basic private contracts that establish and govern community associations without any demonstration of a clear and compelling national interest. > > H.R. 4969 requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to amend its Code of Federal Regulations to invalidate sections of community association covenants that apply to installation of radio towers and/or antennas for amateur radio use. > > With limited exception, all community associations will be prevented from governing installation of HAM radio towers and antennas if H.R. 4969 becomes federal law. > > CAI recognizes the importance of amateur radio users' assistance during a disaster or emergency. Importantly, CAI notes that amateur radio users' success in assisting with communications during a disaster or emergency has not been inhibited by covenants created by neighbors in the community associations in which they have chosen to make their home. A 2012 study by the FCC reached this conclusion, too. > > The FCC has rejected five official requests by amateur radio operators to relieve them of their contractual obligation to follow community procedures concerning the installation of radio towers and antennas. The FCC has determined there is no compelling national interest to warrant invalidating contractual agreements between private citizens. > > On behalf of the 65 million Americans who choose to live in their community associations, CAI must oppose H.R. 4969 to preserve the model of community allowing neighbors elected by neighbors to create and enforce covenants for the betterment of the community as a whole. > > Please act today!< http://capwiz.com/advocacycenter/utr/1/DVUHTXLPCH/LNIUTXLRTK/10472539821> Contact your member of the U.S. House of Representatives and use the template< http://capwiz.com/advocacycenter/utr/1/DVUHTXLPCH/CCVTTXLRTL/10472539821> we've provided or draft your own message to urge your member of Congress to oppose H.R. 4969. Click here to use the template.< http://capwiz.com/advocacycenter/utr/1/DVUHTXLPCH/GYPDTXLRTM/10472539821> > > With your support, CAI members will continue creating communities in America that are preferred places to call home. > > Sincerely, > > Dawn M. Bauman, CAE > Senior Vice President, Government Affairs > Community Associations Institute > dbauman(a)caionline.org<mailto:dbauman@caionline.org> > > For further information and history on this issue, please click here< http://capwiz.com/advocacycenter/utr/1/DVUHTXLPCH/KDCVTXLRTN/10472539821>. > > CAI Government Affairs represents the interests of the 65 million people living and working in America's community associations on legislative and regulatory issues at the local, state, and federal level of government. > > Attached also for your review are: (1) a letter from Associa to Rep. Kinzinger; and (2) my letter to Josh Baggett in Mr. Kinzinger's office, which Josh requested, in rebuttal. 73, Chris W3KD -- Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret & Imlay, LLC 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD(a)ARRL.ORG

1 0

[arrl-odv:23045] FW: Congratulations on the 100th celebration ARRL Convention
by Kay Craigie 25 Jul '14

25 Jul '14

This just in from President Emeritus Larry Price W4RA. Dave has forwarded it to the Staff. 73 - Kay N3KN From: Larry E. Price [mailto:Price.LE@frontiernet.net] On Behalf Of lprice(a)iaru.org Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 12:48 PM To: n3kn(a)arrl.org Cc: k4ac(a)arrl.org; 'Butler Frank' Subject: Congratulations on the 100th celebration ARRL Convention TO: President Kay info: SE director, hon. vp Kay: Congratulations to you, your Officers and the ARRL Staff for a fine convention last week in Hartford. My daughter and I enjoyed it immensely. Thanks for everything including the completely unexpected Medal! It was good to be in the company once again of so many former colleagues. 73 Larry, W4RA

1 0

[arrl-odv:23043] HR-4969 Status Update
by Christopher Imlay 25 Jul '14

25 Jul '14

Please excuse the tedious sports jargon but with respect to our legislative effort, we are now really "coming together as a team to get the job done." Yesterday, Doug Rehman and Frank McCarthy made rounds to about 20 offices on the House side delivering letters that were obtained at the Centennial Convention booth. They brazenly asked at each office for a few minutes with the telecom staffer for the Congressperson and, startlingly, got about a 50% return on those requests! They made the substantive pitch for our Bill at more than 9 offices and got good responses from each. This is unheard of in my experience so *kudos* to Doug and Frank for that. The Keelen Group is in the process of distributing the hundreds of letters that we generated at the legislative booth at the Centennial. *A good predicate for followup visits.* Next week, both Mike Lisenco and Kay Craigie are coming to town to do meetings. Kay will do the important Subcommittee member meetings, including Anna Eshoo, the ranking minority member of the Communications and Technology Subcommittee, chaired by Greg Walden. We have every reason to believe that Eshoo will back us as she has done in the past. Mike has some good targets lined up and has had a *huge* return rate on his visits, so we are pounding the pavement next week before the break. During the August recess, Bill Hudzik will be visiting Rep. Frelinghuysen and Leonard Lance, who Mike and I met personally and briefed on the Bill last time Mike was in town. We need the rest of ODV to do the same kind of thing here. Don't let Mike and Doug and Kay and Bill do all of the heavy lifting. If you can't do these meetings at District offices in your divisions during the August recess personally, get your field organization to do it and give them our talking points paper and a copy of the Bill. Here is why we need to pull out all the stops now: CAI, the Community Associations Institute, has issued a call to arms to its members. President Craigie was pondering how, politically, CAI could oppose "reasonable accommodation". We have found out the answer: CAI is just outright lying about our Bill. They refer to "towers and antennas" of course, but more ominously, they claim - falsely - that if the Bill passes, it would "invalidate community association rules and architectural standards" and that "homeowners who want to install a radio tower or antenna for amateur radio use would not have to go through the architectural review process or follow existing community guidelines." Both of those statements are patently untrue. They also claim that the bill would prevent all community associations from governing installation of ham towers and antennas. They have letters for HOAs to sign just as we have letters for our members. Frank has visited with Josh Baggett, the ham in Rep. Kinzinger's office. Josh has a meeting on Monday with representatives of Associa, an HOA management company with over 9000 HOAs in 31 states under its care. Associa will try to get Kinzinger to back off on the Bill. Josh said that Kinzinger will NOT back off on the Bill and that Josh will give Associa a tough meeting on Monday. But he asked us for some talking points to rebut arguments in a letter that Associa sent to Kinzinger. We are getting those to Josh via Frank today. So, that is where this stands now. This is your chance to get us some more cosponsors. We want 30 and we can get that many, before our savior Greg Walden makes the call to FCC. -- Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret & Imlay, LLC 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD(a)ARRL.ORG

2 1

[arrl-odv:23039] HR-4969 Talking Points Paper and Washington Visits, Week of July 28.
by Christopher Imlay 24 Jul '14

24 Jul '14

Greetings. Thanks to some helpful input from Rod Blocksome, Cliff Ahrens, Marty Woll and Dave Sumner I have made a few tweaks to the Talking Points Paper that I circulated just before the end of the Board meeting. Please use this version rather than the one I circulated on Tuesday in your meetings with Congressional district offices during August when the Hill is in recess. CAI has urged its members to do the same thing in opposition to the Bill, by they way. Some of the HOAs will be doing this. It is critical for all hands to be on deck right now. Don't let CAI beat us to the punch. Let Matt and Frank know what district offices you want to visit and they will make arrangements for you. At the grassroots training session that Matt and Frank conducted for us last Sunday, we discussed the possibility of some Washington visits next week just before the August recess. I realize that was short notice and that it is not possible to arrange that schedule for many of you, but just in case you intend to come to town during next week (Mike Lisenco and I are all set to do two days of House visits next week) it is important that Frank and Matt and Steve have time to set up some meetings for you. Doug Rehman decided to come to Washington yesterday and today, and Frank and Matt are doing the best they can to accommodate him on very short notice, but it would be far better to do this on a coordinated basis with as much advance notice to Matt and Frank and Steve as possible so that the best use of your time can be planned by the Keelen Group in advance. Are any of the rest of you planning to come to D.C. next week? If so, could you let me know please? 73, Chris W3KD -- Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret & Imlay, LLC 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD(a)ARRL.ORG

3 3