January 2019 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:27934] ARPA final release
by Michel, Howard, WB2ITX (CEO) 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

Dear Officers, Directors, and Vice Directors, Thanks for helping make this release better. I believe that we have captured the Board's sentiment as expressed in the approved motion and the oral discussion captured in the audio recording. This press release does not go further than that. ARRL Board Statement on Amateur Radio Parity Act At its annual meeting, held Jan. 18-19 in Windsor, CT, the ARRL Board of Directors decided that the organization needs to “review, re-examine and reappraise the ARRL’s regulatory and legislative policy with regard to private land use restrictions.” In order to effectively undertake such a review, the Board adopted a resolution to withdraw its Petition for Rule Making to the FCC (which would amend its Part 97 Amateur Service rules to incorporate the provisions of the Amateur Radio Parity Act), without prejudice to refiling. The resolution also asks the members of Congress who had refiled legislation to enact the Amateur Radio Parity Act (ARPA) to refrain from seeking to advance that legislation pending further input from the ARRL. Board members noted that the ARRL has been pursuing adoption of the ARPA for the past several years and that objective has not yet been achieved. While everyone understands that getting Congressional approval on any matter can be a lengthy process, the difficulties getting the ARPA approved has been a source of frustration to the organization and its members. A majority of the board now believes that there is a need to reassess the organization’s approach to this issue. The Board wants to make clear to its members, and to those whose policies and conduct prevent or impair the right of U.S. Amateur Radio operators to operate from their homes, that this pause is not, and should not be interpreted as an abandonment of its efforts to obtain relief from private land use restrictions. The Board noted that its “intent [is] to renew, continue and strengthen the ARRL’s effort to achieve relief from such restrictions.” This action represents a chance to get the best product possible for all U.S. amateur radio operators. The Board did express its sincere appreciation for the thousands of ARRL members who took the time to contact their representatives in Congress to urge them to support the Amateur Radio Parity Act. The Board also offered its thanks to those members of Congress who have consistently and continuously supported the rights of U.S. amateur radio operators 73, Howard, WB2ITX -- Howard E. Michel, WB2ITX Chief Executive Officer ARRL, The National Association for Amateur Radio® 225 Main Street, Newington, CT 06111-1494 USA Telephone: +1 860-594-0404 email: hmichel(a)arrl.org<mailto:hmichel@arrl.org>

7 8

[arrl-odv:27942] Working Draft or minutes for Edits
by Henderson, Dan N1ND 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

Dear ODV: Attached please find a PDF of the working draft of the minutes from last weekend. Because there are so many new persons, let me explain the process of approvals as set out in the Standing Orders: 1. Draft is sent to ODV for comments/edits corrections. These should be sent back to me to evaluate and incorporate based on all comments. 2. Once I have not received any comments/edits for a 48-hour period, I then circulate a final set of minutes for your consideration. 3. After you have had the final version for 24-hours an email request for your approval will be sent. 4. When you receive the request for approval, please indicate your approval or non-approval in an email to ODV. 5. Once/If eight approvals are received, the minutes are considered approve. At that point they will be posted on the ARRL Web, and released to the email reflector of members that have signed up to receive such notifications. If you have any questions about process, just let me know. Thanks and 73 Dan Henderson, N1ND Assistant Secretary - American Radio Relay League, Inc. Regulatory Information Manager ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio 860-594-0236 dhenderson(a)arrl.org<mailto:dhenderson@arrl.org>

1 0

[arrl-odv:27941] IN-Newsletter January 25 2019
by Pereira, Carla, KC1HSX 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

Please see this week's IN-Newsletter for updates from your colleagues. Happy Friday!

1 0

[arrl-odv:27940] ARPA link on ARRL web site
by W2RU - ARRL 25 Jan '19

25 Jan '19

Now that a post-January 2019 Board Meeting statement about ARPA is headlining the ARRL Letter and ARRL.org, I would think that same statement should appear under the existing “LATEST NEWS” heading at the top of the following page, which is very prominently displayed on the League’s home page, or the page itself removed until it can be revised and updated: http://www.arrl.org/amateur-radio-parity-act Actually, that entire page was “stale” even before the new statement came out — the most recent date reference on it is from 2017. Bud, W2RU

1 0

[arrl-odv:27933] Fwd: AA&BL
by Mike Raisbeck 24 Jan '19

24 Jan '19

Some observations from Tom on the AA&BL .. Mikek1twf Mike Raisbeck k1twf(a)arrl.net -----Original Message----- From: Tom Frenaye <frenaye(a)pcnet.com> To: Mike Raisbeck <k1twf(a)arrl.org> Sent: Wed, Jan 23, 2019 11:19 pm Subject: AA&BL If I remember correctly, the Board decided to go back to the last set of AA&BL filed with the State of CT. Actually, I think we only file the AA. In any case I found the reference to our filing in 2010. It costs $40 to get a copy. So, I used the Wayback machine to get a copy from 2010 after the July meeting. Then I compared them. Interesting differences. For example, we don't have a CEO any more, the title has gone wayback to EVP... -- Tom -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- e-mail: frenaye(a)pcnet.com YCCC --> http://www.yccc.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[arrl-odv:27929] ARPA Statement and Initial Proposal
by jbellows＠skypoint.com 24 Jan '19

24 Jan '19

Director Hopengartens approach divides HOA and Covenant restricted hams into groups and potentially pits the interests of one group against another This multiplies our challenge and opens us up to the possibility of different rules depending on location and circumstances. It also opens the door to allow a HOA lobbyist to suggest and fight for any number of rules for each group in the proposed law. This approach is the absolute reverse of that achieved in PRB1. Under PRB1 the HOA has the burden of showing it is reasonably accommodating the amateur. The soon to be withdrawn ARPA also placed the burden on the HOA to show they were affording the ham an effective antenna. This approach shifts the burden to the amateur to show that his or her proposed antenna fits within the allowed parameters for the specific HOA or Association group The approach suggested by Director Hopengarten could also be turned against us in PRB1 cases. If we say it is fine to classify installations into different groups and are willing to place specific limitations on a single family detached home in an HOA, why shouldnt the same rules apply to homeowners, not in a HOA, but living on a similarly sized parcel? I agree with Director Blocksome that we have just emptied our political capital account on the hill and opened the door to many unintended consequences. That said, my preference is to keep this discussion within the Board and make the best of the situation by carefully examining what we are doing to avoid as many unintended consequences as possible. Finally, I am troubled by the fact Director Hopengarten has stated he represents Lake and Road association and those associations have been placed in a separate group in this proposal. If we press for specific relief for such an association it could appear that he has a conflict of interest in that ARRL resources are being used to benefit a small group to the detriment of the vast majority of HOA and Covenant restricted amateurs. I am not suggesting any intentional impropriety on his part, and I understand that we no longer have a code of conduct or conflict of interest policy, but we were told there are basic obligations of a director under Connecticut Non-Stock Corporation law. Again, in and effort to avoid unnecessary pitfalls it may be worthwhile to run this question by Connecticut corporate counsel. 73, Jay, KØQB --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com

3 2

[arrl-odv:27923] revised ARPA statement
by Michel, Howard, WB2ITX (CEO) 24 Jan '19

24 Jan '19

Dear Officers, Directors, and Vice-Directors, We have revised the proposed statement, hopefully addressing everyone's concerns. If we can get agreement on this statement by 10AM Thursday, we can have it in this week's ARRL Letter. At its annual meeting, held Jan. 18-19 in Windsor, CT, the ARRL Board of Directors decided that the organization needs to “review, re-examine and reappraise the ARRL’s regulatory and legislative policy with regard to private land use restrictions.” In order to effectively undertake such a review, the Board adopted a resolution to withdraw its Petition for Rule Making to the FCC (which would amend its Part 97 Amateur Service rules to incorporate the provisions of the Amateur Radio Parity Act), without prejudice to refiling. The resolution also asks the members of Congress who had refiled legislation to enact the Amateur Radio Parity Act (ARPA) to refrain from seeking to advance that legislation pending further input from the ARRL. The Board noted that its “intent [is] to renew, continue and strengthen the ARRL’s effort to achieve relief from such restrictions.” This action represents a chance to get the best product possible for ARRL members and all amateur radio operators. Board members noted that the ARRL has been pursuing adoption of the ARPA for the past several years and has been unable to achieve its objective. This has been a source of great frustration to the organization and its members. A majority of the board now believes that there is a need to reassess the organization’s approach to this issue. The Board did express its sincere appreciation for the thousands of ARRL members who took the time to contact their representatives in Congress to urge them to support the Amateur Radio Parity Act and also offered its thanks to those members of Congress who have consistently and continuously supported the rights of amateur radio operators. 73, Howard, WB2ITX -- Howard E. Michel, WB2ITX Chief Executive Officer ARRL, The National Association for Amateur Radio® 225 Main Street, Newington, CT 06111-1494 USA Telephone: +1 860-594-0404 email: hmichel(a)arrl.org<mailto:hmichel@arrl.org>

5 4

[arrl-odv:27915] "NTIA" Frequency re-use comment filing
by Kermit Carlson 23 Jan '19

23 Jan '19

Hello ALL - Has the EC approved the wording and file comments onNTIA Docket 181130999-8999-01 ? According to the Fed Register https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/2018-27690_3.pdfComments were due yesterday. In the past we (the Board) have receiveda copy of the Comments when filed. This is especially important tothe Amateur Community and the ARRL since a large portion of amateur spectrum is shared with federal users who are authorizedby the NTIA. Perhaps someone on the EC could comment - 73, Kermit W9XA

2 1

[arrl-odv:27918] Re: ARPA statement
by David Norris 23 Jan '19

23 Jan '19

BOARD CONFIDENTIAL for ODV ONLY I am mostly in agreement with Greg’s posting. We need to be very careful with this wording in tone and tenor and to not misstate the events. As this reads, it gives ammo to CAI and may potentially damage any future attempts of gaining relief more closely resembling PRB-1 for private land use. The hams in Florida went to bat for ARRL in a big way and we owe them as well as the thousands of other members across this nation something more, so I well understand Greg’s position. We also need to start a discussion on Plan B and Plan C with regards to ARPA. Inquiring members will want to know. 73 David A. Norris, K5UZ Director, Delta Division Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 23, 2019, at 8:02 AM, Greg Sarratt <gsarratt(a)att.net> wrote: > > Howard and odv, > > The following comments are for ODV only. > > I agree with Rods comments and think we need to correct and soften some comments. Also we need to provide a better reason to the impacted membership that worked beside us by writing over 60,000 letters and taking the time to call and visit Senator Nelson about why the documents were withdrawn. Congress and the FCC will also read this. Here are my additional comments. > > 1: “step back and take the time to get this issue right”. This states that we submitted an un-reviewed or flawed document, we did not. As with last year’s efforts and the filings we want to move forward. As you know the document was edited and improved in the past several years and recently to include: > a: discussed with and met National CAI approval. > b: discussed with and met Florida CAI approval. > c: reviewed and edited by Imlay and two experts last winter. > d: reviewed by the EC. > e: reviewed and edits provided by the Board before the December 17, 2018 filing. > > 2: “decision to file the petition was made without review by the full Board of Directors”. > This is not a true statement. The petition was reviewed by the EC, officers and the Board was provided the document and several submitted edits before the December 17, 2018 filing. > > 3: “this refiling was done with no advance notification to the ARRL.” While true, I think we cannot say it this way because it will help to the burn the bridge. It needs to be softened and left out entirely. > > Thanks, > 73, > Greg Sarratt, W4OZK > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Rod Blocksome <rod.blocksome(a)gmail.com> > Date: 1/22/19 5:32 PM (GMT-06:00) > To: "Michel, Howard, WB2ITX (CEO)" <wb2itx(a)arrl.org> > Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> > Subject: [arrl-odv:27914] Re: ARPA statement > > Howard and odv, > > The following comments are for ODV only - externally I will support the board decisions. > > I have several objections to the wording (or "spin") in this announcement. Specifically: > > 1 - "In order to have time to effectively undertake such a review, ... " I see nothing in the motion to indicate that timing or schedule was a factor or reason for the action. Therefore I request this phrase be stricken from the announcement. > > 2 - "Board members believe that taking this action represents ... " This statement implies that all board members believe... when, in fact, only 10 of the 15 directors did (we don't know what the officers believe). I request this be re-worded to more accurately reflect the situation by changing it to say " A majority of the ARRL directors believe that taking this action represents ..." > > 3 - "Board members believe that taking this action represents a chance to take a step back and take the time to get this issue right." There was nothing in the motion stating we are taking a "step back" though I'm sure CAI will enjoy seeing this term in the announcement. > > 3 - "The Board believe that the timing is appropriate in taking this step, particularly given that ARRL’s petition to the FCC was only filed about a month ago (December 17, 2018), and that the decision to file the petition was made without review by the full Board of Directors. In addition, it has only been a couple of weeks since the ARPA legislation was filed by members of Congress and this refiling was done with no advance notification to the ARRL." This editorial comment is not supported by any language in the motion "Disposition of Amateur Radio Parity Act -r". As I pointed out earlier, timing was not a factor in the motion. Secondly, I'm not aware of any requirement that the FCC petition be reviewed by the full board and this editorial would imply otherwise. The petition was properly reviewed and authorized for submission by the EC. Thirdly, I'm not aware of any requirement for a US congressmen to consult with or provide advanced notification to ARRL prior to refiling a bill that had previously passed in the House of Representatives of an earlier congress. Therefore this paragraph should be removed from the announcement. > > 4. Finally "Dr. Woolweaver was kind enough to work with lobbyist Matt Keelan who will notify Rep. Kinzinger." Does this mean Dr. Woolweaver tasked Matt Keelan for work involving notifying Rep. Kinzinger? Dr. Woolweaver resigned as director during the board meeting Saturday. Or did he do this after the motion passed and before his resignation? > > In summary, I firmly believe we (ARRL Directors) have just emptied our "political capital account" on the hill and opened the door to many unintended consequences. Never mind the thousands of dollars and countless hours of volunteer time expended over the past 3 years. I think we'll able hear the champagne corks popping at CAI HQ when they read this news. Standby for a "hue and cry" from the thousands of ARRL members who have supported this effort over the year. We have abandoned them with only a vague promise of doing "something better". What that will be (and when) is anyone's guess at this point. > > Finally a couple comments on this board meeting: > > This was my 18th board meeting and there is always a certain amount of politicking as we work to improve ARRL and Amateur Radio. But at this meeting, I was especially dismayed at the number of very important motions with far-reaching consequences that were apparently purposefully presented to some board members well in advance of the meeting and to other directors and officers only on the morning of the meeting. It seems the new first-time directors were well versed on these motions as evidenced by their unified voting block on these issues. I think we witnessed the transparency of "back room" politics in action - I'm not impressed. > > Finally let me say I'm extremely impressed with the range of knowledge, skill, and experience brought to the board room by the new Vice-Directors and Directors. We are facing huge challenges and change in the coming years and a wide diversity of expertise and careful thought will be required going forward. > > 73's, > Rod, K0DAS > > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 1:51 PM Michel, Howard, WB2ITX (CEO) <wb2itx(a)arrl.org> wrote: >> Dear Officers, Directors and Vice Directors, >> >> Thank you for your suggestions on the ARPA statement. Here is a revised version. >> >> At its annual meeting, held Jan. 18-19 in Windsor, CT, the ARRL Board of Directors decided that the organization needs to “review, re-examine and reappraise the ARRL’s regulatory and legislative policy with regard to private land use restrictions.” >> >> In order to have time to effectively undertake such a review, the Board adopted a resolution to withdraw its Petition for Rule Making to the FCC (which would amend its Part 97 Amateur Service rules to incorporate the provisions of the Amateur Radio Parity Act), without prejudice to refiling. The resolution also asks the members of Congress who had refiled legislation to enact the Amateur Radio Parity Act (ARPA) to refrain from seeking to advance that legislation pending further input from the ARRL. >> >> Board members believe that taking this action represents a chance to take a step back and take the time to get this issue right. The ARRL has been pursuing adoption of the ARPA for the past several years. The board now believes that there is a need to reassess the organization’s approach to this issue. >> >> The Board noted that its “intent [is] to renew, continue and strengthen the ARRL’s effort to achieve relief from such restrictions.” This action represents a chance to get the best product possible for ARRL members and all amateur radio operators. >> >> The Board believe that the timing is appropriate in taking this step, particularly given that ARRL’s petition to the FCC was only filed about a month ago (December 17, 2018), and that the decision to file the petition was made without review by the full Board of Directors. In addition, it has only been a couple of weeks since the ARPA legislation was filed by members of Congress and this refiling was done with no advance notification to the ARRL. >> >> Also, as an update on notifications to Congress and the FCC. Dr. Woolweaver was kind enough to work with lobbyist Matt Keelan who will notify Rep. Kinzinger. No notification can be made to the FCC until the government reopens. I hope to have David Siddall under agreement at that time. >> 73, Howard, WB2ITX >> >> -- >> Howard E. Michel, WB2ITX >> Chief Executive Officer >> ARRL, The National Association for Amateur Radio® >> 225 Main Street, Newington, CT 06111-1494 USA >> Telephone: +1 860-594-0404 >> email: hmichel(a)arrl.org >> _______________________________________________ >> 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

3 3

[arrl-odv:27912] ARPA statement
by Michel, Howard, WB2ITX (CEO) 23 Jan '19

23 Jan '19

Dear Officers, Directors and Vice Directors, Thank you for your suggestions on the ARPA statement. Here is a revised version. At its annual meeting, held Jan. 18-19 in Windsor, CT, the ARRL Board of Directors decided that the organization needs to “review, re-examine and reappraise the ARRL’s regulatory and legislative policy with regard to private land use restrictions.” In order to have time to effectively undertake such a review, the Board adopted a resolution to withdraw its Petition for Rule Making to the FCC (which would amend its Part 97 Amateur Service rules to incorporate the provisions of the Amateur Radio Parity Act), without prejudice to refiling. The resolution also asks the members of Congress who had refiled legislation to enact the Amateur Radio Parity Act (ARPA) to refrain from seeking to advance that legislation pending further input from the ARRL. Board members believe that taking this action represents a chance to take a step back and take the time to get this issue right. The ARRL has been pursuing adoption of the ARPA for the past several years. The board now believes that there is a need to reassess the organization’s approach to this issue. The Board noted that its “intent [is] to renew, continue and strengthen the ARRL’s effort to achieve relief from such restrictions.” This action represents a chance to get the best product possible for ARRL members and all amateur radio operators. The Board believe that the timing is appropriate in taking this step, particularly given that ARRL’s petition to the FCC was only filed about a month ago (December 17, 2018), and that the decision to file the petition was made without review by the full Board of Directors. In addition, it has only been a couple of weeks since the ARPA legislation was filed by members of Congress and this refiling was done with no advance notification to the ARRL. Also, as an update on notifications to Congress and the FCC. Dr. Woolweaver was kind enough to work with lobbyist Matt Keelan who will notify Rep. Kinzinger. No notification can be made to the FCC until the government reopens. I hope to have David Siddall under agreement at that time. 73, Howard, WB2ITX -- Howard E. Michel, WB2ITX Chief Executive Officer ARRL, The National Association for Amateur Radio® 225 Main Street, Newington, CT 06111-1494 USA Telephone: +1 860-594-0404 email: hmichel(a)arrl.org<mailto:hmichel@arrl.org>

5 4