January 2016 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:25020] Fwd: co-sponsor's - might be good to circulate this list
by Christopher Imlay 15 Jan '16

15 Jan '16

1 0

[arrl-odv:25016] NE Div report
by Tom Frenaye 14 Jan '16

14 Jan '16

I've attached my report from the New England Division. -- Tom ===== 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

4 3

[arrl-odv:25015] Report to the Board on House Communications and Technology Subcommittee Hearing January 12, 2016
by Mike Lisenco N2YBB 13 Jan '16

13 Jan '16

ARRL BOARD CONFIDENTIAL This information is NOT for disclosure beyond ODV The attached cartoon appeared in the New Yorker a few weeks ago perhaps best illustrates what transpired over the past few days that culminated in today’s subcommittee hearing on HR-1301 and 3 other bills. (See attached) We are somewhere in that mess of lines. Last week Chris and I visited 30 offices over a two day period. It was during that time that we found out that Mr. Walden’s subcommittee was going to hear testimony on H.R.-1301 as well as 3 other bills currently before the subcommittee. However, we learned of this in a strange way. We were first told that the bill was being marked-up before the full committee. Then we were told that was not the case, but instead a hearing would be held in which testimony would be given. We found out that testimony was given by invitation only and that ARRL was not invited. We were told that we could submit a letter in support of the bill that would be entered in the record. Chris prepared a lengthy “letter” that would have actually served as testimony from Kay had we been given a chance, and it was entered into the record. CAI had a letter submitted as well. Like our letter, it is now a matter of public record and is attached. Needless to say, we were very confused as to what was happening. We were completely dependent on the Congressional staff to shepherd the bill, which was frustrating as they were busy preparing for the hearing and were only sporadically able to give us time to get information to us. We were concerned about the possible impact that ranking member Congresswoman Eshoo might have on the hearing as we learned that she had issues with the bill. Her legislative director would not give us the time of day, despite the fact that we had been trying to see Ms. Eshoo for months. Although Ms. Eshoo had cosponsored a similar bill in the past, it appeared that our friends at CAI may have gotten to her as she suddenly was concerned about HOAs authority vis-a-vis “private contracts” as well as “covenants and easements.” To step back a little, we also met with Chairman Upton’s office last week to ascertain if there were any problems or issues that we should be aware of in advance of either the full Committee mark-up, as Mr. Upton is the Chairman of the full Commerce Committee, or in advance of the hearing. We were told that the hearing was pro-forma and a result of a policy instituted at the request of Congressman Pallone (D-NJ) who is the ranking member of the full Commerce Committee. He is insistent that all bills before the subcommittee first have a hearing, then get marked-up by the subcommittee before it gets marked-up by the full committee. Then the discussion took a turn as Mr. Upton’s staffer said that the Chairman will not move a bill forward if there is real animosity or hostility among the members. What was confusing here is that he seemed to imply that we read between the lines. I asked if there was any reason for us to be concerned about that we were told no, but to keep that in mind. ????? There was a lot of back and forth between TKG, the Congressional staff, and us. At times it felt like we were bipolar suffering with extreme highs and equally extreme lows. And then late Monday, Chris talked to Josh Baggett, Rep. Kinzinger’s Legislative Director. Josh explained that indeed it was merely a hearing, there would be no voting, it was pro-forma, and not to worry. At most, he told us, Rep. Eshoo would express concerns about the bill. While we found that to be very reassuring, it is Washington and anything could happen. As the hearing began, Chairman Walden spoke on behalf of the bill as part of his opening remarks. Rep. Eshoo did indeed express concerns about the bill in language that clearly came from CAI’s workbook. We also received a public endorsement from the Harold Fell, the witness from Public Knowledge, an FCC watchdog organization. Nearly all the hearing was devoted to the other bill before the Committee. Shortly before the hearing ended, Congressman Kinzinger made some comments regarding the bill as sponsor. And then the meeting ended with no other comments about the bill whatsoever. All things considered, this went very well for us. A mark-up is expected next month. We hope to avoid a similar situation as happened with Senator Nelson (D-FL) at the Senate Commerce Committee mark-up, who voted against the bill despite our best efforts to the contrary. We understand that Committee staff and Congressional staff will be meeting shortly with CAI. Chris will also be meeting with them separately next week as well. This is not the first time we’ve met with CAI. Chris met with their representative in December. They are unwilling to support reasonable accommodation which is the crux of the bill. We doubt that will change in the near future. A meeting is scheduled next week with David Grossman, minority party Subcommittee staffer for Ms. Eshoo, in an attempt to dissuade her from towing the CAI line. Chris and I look forward to your questions. See you in Hartford. Safe travels. 73 de Mike N2YBB

1 0

[arrl-odv:25014] Up to 117
by Mike Lisenco N2YBB 13 Jan '16

13 Jan '16

GM - We are at 117 cosponsors today with the addition of Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA-1). I am aware of one more coming but yet to arrive. Responsible parties please have your membership send appropriate constituent thank you messages. 73 all es cu in Hartford. Safe travels. Mike - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mike Lisenco, N2YBB Director, Hudson Division ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio™ 917-865-3538 n2ybb(a)arrl.org

1 0

[arrl-odv:25013] Hearings Today
by James F. Boehner MD 13 Jan '16

13 Jan '16

Thanks for the update, Dave. I was going to ask the same question. I'll look forward to Chris and Mike's comments. '73 de JIM N2ZZ Director - Roanoke Division Serving ARRL members in the Virginia, West Virginia, South Carolina and North Carolina sections ARRL - The National Association for Amateur RadioT -----Original Message----- From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 7:17 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:25012] Re: Board PIO? Tom, I did not attend the hearing but listened to (and occasionally watched) the web video feed. Most of the hearing was about the other bills but Rep. Kinzinger did read a statement in support of our bill and one of the witnesses made a passing comment that he supported it (although that was simply to create contrast to the bills that he was there to oppose). Ranking Member Eshoo expressed some concern about some of the language in the bill. She said something like "Homeowners' Associations have some concerns and they're who I am hearing from." Kay had some choice words when she heard about that since she had been told by Eshoo's staff to [bleep] (go away). Chris and Mike Lisenco were both present and I'm sure will be glad to provide more detail. Chris's input to the committee was accepted into the record. There was no subcommittee vote on our bill or any other. Dave ________________________________________ From: arrl-odv [arrl-odv-bounces(a)reflector.arrl.org] on behalf of Frenaye, Tom, K1KI Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 6:51 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:25011] Board PIO? Is there an ARRL public information officer that can give any update and inside info about the House hearing on HR1301 today? I just happened upon the ARRL web story that has some positive information and am hungry for more... http://www.arrl.org/news/subcommittee-chair-h-r-1301-sponsor-testify-on-beha lf-of-amateur-radio-parity-act -- Tom ===== 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 _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv

1 0

[arrl-odv:25011] Board PIO?
by Tom Frenaye 13 Jan '16

13 Jan '16

Is there an ARRL public information officer that can give any update and inside info about the House hearing on HR1301 today? I just happened upon the ARRL web story that has some positive information and am hungry for more... http://www.arrl.org/news/subcommittee-chair-h-r-1301-sponsor-testify-on-beh… -- Tom ===== 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

2 1

[arrl-odv:25010] Strategic Plan Document (part of Document #25)
by k9jf＠arrl.org 12 Jan '16

12 Jan '16

All: Attached below is the revised Strategic Plan plus the supplement identifying potential Tactics. A few corrections and tweaks were made during a meeting of the SPWG last week. Most were made following input from Vice Director Woll. We are asking for approval of the Strategic Plan. The supplement (potential tactics and ARRL member benefits is for the Board's review and prioritization for future years, and not part of the plan. A copy of all will be distributed at the meeting. We will also distribute a full version of a power point presentation for your reference. An abbreviated presentation will be presented during the Board meeting. 73 Jim Fenstermaker K9JF Chair Strategic Planning Working Group

1 0

[arrl-odv:25009] Report # 25 from the Strategic Planning Working Group
by k9jf＠arrl.org 12 Jan '16

12 Jan '16

All: Attached is the report from the Strategic Planning Working Group. By a separate attachment, the recommended plan and hard copy power point will be forwarded. 73 Jim James E. Fenstermaker K9JF 2nd Vice President American Radio Relay League (206) 930-9372

1 0

[arrl-odv:25008] ARRL January 2016 Southwestern Division Report
by Richard J. Norton 12 Jan '16

12 Jan '16

As has been explained to me, the purpose of division director reports is to bring things to the attention of the board and officers that might be addressed at the upcoming meeting. The purpose was not to either present individual director travelogues or simple cheer-leading messages. This report is intended to comport to the initial objective. *1) ARRL Division Population Balance Restructuring.* A reasonable plan has been detailed in a previous ODV message. A one-year implementation plan has also been shown. Adoption of this plan will greatly address what is probably the most significant inequity in ARRL member representation. I urge its adoption. *2) ARRL Board Background Briefings* Thursday evening gatherings were at one time devoted to providing board members with knowledge about other organizations and systems, so that they would be better able to steer the League in a manner that benefits Amateur Radio overall. I propose we return to that model. Some appropriate briefings might include: *a) Responsibilities, liabilities, and insurance related to board and officer activities.* What actions can a board member be sued for? What kind of insurance does the ARRL provide to cover this? Which staff members are "bonded?" What does this mean? How much does the League pay for this coverage? Has the League ever been successfully sued in court, and what was the outcome? What did insurance cover? *b) Status of other large domestic Amateur Radio organizations.* Review a list of other significant USA Amateur Radio operations, including their size, budget if available, popularity, membership trends, and perceived staying power. Included would be QRZ.com eHam, contesting.com, QCWA, AMSAT, Winlink, silentkeyhq, and others. *c) Status of other large international Amateur Radio organizations.* Review a list of overseas Amateur Radio operations, including their size, budget if available, popularity, apparent membership trends, and perceived staying power. Included would be RSGB, WIA, JARL, REF, SARL, and others. *d) Status of Amateur Radio equipment museums* Review museums and private collections with significant amounts of Amateur Radio history. Include AWA, California Historical Radio Society, Vintage Radio and Communication Museum of Connecticut, New England Wireless and Steam Museum, W9EVT Collection, WA6MHZ collection, K6JAD collection, and any others. Include size, funding, popularity with both hams and the public, and perceived staying power. *e) Status of Amateur Radio Equipment manufacturers* Review a list of significant manufacturers, including their financial reputation, and history with ARRL advertising.Are there any that we might expect to fold or severely retrench? *f) Status of Amateur Radio legal issues* Review the overall status of anti-antenna court decisions. Review the term "reasonable accommodation," and the apparently disparate meanings being presented toward HOA-related issues and local government issues. *3) ARRL Policy Discussions* Currently, some portion of the board spends Friday evenings of board meetings watching movies that appear to have no relevance to Amateur Radio. I suggest we start Friday night policy forums, where concepts can be discussed. I would hope vice directors would be able to participate orally. Discussion topics might include:follow-up to *any of the six briefing topics suggested in 2*), plus specifically the following: *a) Relations between ARRL and other domestic Amateur Radio organizations*. Should we be in any way partners with any of them? Does the fact that QRZ.com has more members than the ARRL deserve any discussion? Should we have a very low-cost life membership option with no benefits, or would that significantly eat into paid membership numbers? The ARRL has been very insular. For example, management cooperation with N4MC's VanityHQ site (now silentkeyhq) did not seem to be enthusiastic. *b) Relations with Amateur Radio museums* Should the League adopt a policy toward museums similar to its club policy? Should there be ARRL-affiliated museums? Would museums welcome such action? Would Amateur Radio's primary age cohort support museums? Is it to the League's benefit to be at all concerned with history? It has been reported that certain ARRL officials have publicly stated something like, "The ARRL is concerned with the future of Amateur Radio, not the past." Is this a known board position, or a personal view? We also have a League employee actively working on small museum area in the Newington facility. Are his actions within League policies? *c) Should the League adopt a more aggressive policy toward assisting Amateurs with antenna issues*? The status of antenna litigation and overall legal picture should be discussed. The General Consul's report seems to paint a pretty bleak picture. Are we all knowledgeable about current happenings? Thank you for your consideration of these proposed changes to League and board operation. 73, Dick Norton, N6AA

1 0

[arrl-odv:25007] Silent Keys
by Kay Craigie 11 Jan '16

11 Jan '16

If there are Silent Keys whom you would like to have listed in the Minutes, please send the names and call signs to Dave as soon as you can. 73, Kay N3KN Sent from my iPhone

1 0