August 2020 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:29223] Set An Example
by k5ur＠aol.com 30 Dec '21

30 Dec '21

Hi all: As we close the year,I'd like to ask for those who have not made a monetary donation to the League thisyear to please do so. As volunteers, we already contribute our time and effort,but it’s also important for our development efforts to be able to say that allBoard members have made a monetary donation. Oftentimes when seeking donations,especially from major donors, one of the first questions asked is whether allBoard members have given. I've made my annualdonation. I am asking you to please do the same. To make a donation, click onthe link below: https://www.arrl.org/arrl-donation-form Please help us achieve100% ARRL Board participation. Take a few minutes this weekend and help set anexample. Let's all donate something! Thanks. 73 Rick - K5UR

3 4

[arrl-odv:30824] Proposed Amateur Radio Application Fees
by david davidsiddall-law.com 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

All, Yesterday the FCC did release a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in which it proposes to overhaul its application fee structure. Since so many services use the same ULS system, the effect on amateurs if adopted as proposed would be to charge amateurs the same amounts as those in other radio services for similar actions. Specifically, for the amateur service, the FCC proposes a $50. fee for (1) new or renewal applications; (2) vanity call applications; (3) license upgrade applications. Administrative changes to a license – such as change of address – would continue to be free. There will be the standard opportunity to comment and lobby the Commission, as in most proceedings. Deadlines for doing so have not yet been established. Obviously we will be discussing this, including the Executive Committee when it comes time to comment. The FCC proposal in its entirety can be viewed here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-116A1.pdf. Paragraphs 24-30 address applications in the amateur service (with GMRS and other similar licenses). 73, Dave David R. Siddall Managing Partner DS Law, PLLC 1629 K St. NW, Ste 300 Washington, DC 20006 direct: +1 202 559 4690 Unauthorized Disclosure Prohibited. This e-mail is intended solely for the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is proprietary, confidential or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, it is prohibited to disclose, copy, distribute, or use the contents of this email and its attachments. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all electronic and physical copies of the e-mail message and its attachments. Unintended transmission shall not constitute waiver of attorney-client or any other privilege. Thank you. From: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces(a)reflector.arrl.org> on behalf of "rjairam(a)gmail.com" <rjairam(a)gmail.com> Date: Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 12:41 PM To: ODV <arrl-odv(a)arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30821] New amateur radio application fees? This report says there is going to be a nee $50 fee for amateur radio license applications. I thought we discussed this already and there was not going to be a fee. https://recnet.com/node/3182 Comments? Probably would be a good thing for david Siddal to look into. 73 Ria N2RJ

12 16

[arrl-odv:30765] ARRL Contested Elections
by Pereira, Carla, KC1HSX 30 Aug '20

30 Aug '20

Dear Members of the ODV: Below are the candidates who will run in the 2020 election. Per ARRL Rules and Regulations, I have notified each of the candidates today of the names and callsigns of all candidates running in their division race (timetable attached). Matt Holden K0BBC Dakota Director Vernon "Bill" Lippert AC0W Dakota Director Dale Williams WA8EFK Great Lakes Director Michael Kalter W8CI Great Lakes Director Scott Yonally N8SY Great Lakes Vice Director Jim Hessler K8JH Great Lakes Vice Director Frank Piper KI8GW Great Lakes Vice Director Dave Propper K2DP Midwest Vice Director Lloyd Colston KC5FM Midwest Vice Director Respectfully, [cid:image001.png@01D67A05.34234480]Carla Pereira, KC1HSX Executive Manager ARRL Newington, CT 06111 860-594-0242 http://www.arrl.org/

5 6

[arrl-odv:30825] SK Arnold Spielberg
by 'Hopengarten, Fred, K1VR, (Dir, NE)' 28 Aug '20

28 Aug '20

https://variety.com/2020/film/news/arnold-spielberg-dead-dies-steven-spielbe rg-father-1234748936/ The father of Steven Spielberg was a ham. Anyone know his call? Fred Hopengarten, Esq. K1VR Six Willarch Road Lincoln, MA 01773 781.259.0088, k1vr(a)arrl.org New England Director cid:a4a12f0b-0468-4a39-b953-31b2a3da8564 Serving ME, NH, VT, MA, RI and CT -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

2 1

[arrl-odv:30816] CEO story has been posted
by Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) 27 Aug '20

27 Aug '20

Good morning all. The story about the new CEO has been posted on the ARRL web site. 73, Barry, N1VXY

3 2

[arrl-odv:30821] New amateur radio application fees?
by rjairam＠gmail.com 27 Aug '20

27 Aug '20

This report says there is going to be a nee $50 fee for amateur radio license applications. I thought we discussed this already and there was not going to be a fee. https://recnet.com/node/3182 Comments? Probably would be a good thing for david Siddal to look into. 73 Ria N2RJ

2 1

[arrl-odv:30817] Re: ARRL Emergency Manager Director
by Mickey Baker 27 Aug '20

27 Aug '20

Since he copied Rick and others, I thought you might want to see this. I believe Barry was on this conference call. I was in an EOC in lockdown during Irma, when a fire department captain who was designated Incident Commander was relieved of command for behavior in a stressful time. He wouldn't allow people to go to the bathroom and yelled at a lady for "going too often" until she cried. ARRL/ARES role and we are not in command of the overall effort. It is the nature of our contribution. We don't need "Patton" so he might want to tone it down as he builds relationships. Joe is a seen as an ARES leader - but I rarely hear from him. Mickey Baker, N4MB Palm Beach Gardens, FL *“The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead." Robert K. Greenleaf* ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Joe Bassett <bassett.w1wcn(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 5:57 AM Subject: ARRL Emergency Manager Director To: <n4mb(a)arrl.org> Cc: <k5ur(a)arrl.org>, <k5uz(a)arrl.org> Dear Mickey, Below is an excerpt from an email I received last evening from one of the ARRL Force of Fifty with whom I served in Puerto Rico. Is this really an accurate representation of what occured on the call? According to other accounts that I've received, it seems plausible. In light of the conversation that we had in Orlando, is this really the caliber of person the ARRL wished to have in the above mentioned position? "Wish you had gotten the EMD Position at the ARRL. This guy Paul who got the position is a loser. I was on a ZOOM meeting tonight that was supposed to be a Delta Division meeting to identify needs in support of Laura. He took over the meeting and started telling everyone how his hero is Patton and that he plans to run things just like Patton. He wouldn't listening to the LA SEC who was explaining that he is going to need 25 operators on Friday. He said "what you need and what you get is another thing. You may be lucky to get 10." After several minutes of back and forth between the 2, the SEC said, "I'll let my state section manager know my requirements." Paul ordered him not to send his requirements to his Section Manager, but to him in writing. The SEC told him that he answers to the Section Manager and not to him and that he will send his request to the state and hung up. Paul then started praising himself for his 35 years of Public Service Emergency communication experience and that if anyone couldn't take it they should just hang up so I did. Again you would have been an excellent choice for the position." If this is accurate, then I stand embarrassed for the ARRL and am gravely concerned the future of amateur radio emergency services. If it is not accurate, please inform me and I will do all that I can to correct the impression. -- Grace and 73, Joe Bassett - W1WCN ClayARES AEC for Training bassett.w1wcn(a)gmail.com

3 2

[arrl-odv:30813] Fwd: Zoom (1000 users) use for Hurricane Laura
by Michael Ritz 27 Aug '20

27 Aug '20

See below. I'm passing this along to ODV for those Directors and Vice Directors in the areas affected by Hurricane Laura. 73; Mike W7VO > ---------- Original Message ---------- > From: ARRL ID Section <arrl.idaho(a)gmail.com> > To: w7vo(a)arrl.net > Date: 08/26/2020 4:28 PM > Subject: Zoom (1000 users) use for Hurricane Laura > > > Beginning tonight, Wednesday August 26 at 0300Z (11:00 PM EDT / 8:00PM PDT) our 1000 user Zoom account will be available for Hurricane Laura use. > Use the Zoom information shown below. It is a place to go to discuss Hurricane Laura and assist where needed. > Please do not abuse this account and be respectful to others using it. Report abuse immediately to k7rex(a)arrl.net or 208-914-8939 > > NOTE: > If this Zoom account is needed for any official Hurricane Laura use, let me know and I will change the password for that use only. > > Side note: Our Zoom presentations and skill workshops will continue on schedule using a separate, but smaller Zoom account. > > --------------------------------------------- > > Join Zoom Meeting > https://us02web.zoom.us/j/2128884758?pwd=UWNhQ3J5cjRuV1RZZHo5ejlHR3JMQT09 > > Meeting ID: 212 888 4758 > Passcode: Laura > One tap mobile > +13462487799,,2128884758#,,,,,,0#,,268973# US (Houston) > +16699006833,,2128884758#,,,,,,0#,,268973# US (San Jose) > > Dial by your location > +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) > +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose) > +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) > +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) > +1 929 205 6099 US (New York) > +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown) > Meeting ID: 212 888 4758 > Passcode: 268973 > > > --------------------------------------------- > > > - Dan > > Dan Marler, K7REX > 208-914-8939 > > >

3 2

[arrl-odv:30811] Replacement of CEO by Board of Directors - Two Examples
by Richard Norton 27 Aug '20

27 Aug '20

I expect to send this, possibly revised, to the Southwestern Division at some time. Please tell me if anything is untrue. Other comments also welcome. 73, Dick, N6AA --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DRAFT - Report to Southwestern Division Members - Replacement of CEO by Board of Directors - Two Examples In January 2020, the Boards of Directors of two corporations voted to replace their CEO's. The procedures apparently employed differed widely, as did the time it took to get the new CEO aboard. Three major components of effective CEO selection appear to be: 1) knowledge of the business or organization,2) knowledge of the desired CEO skills and attributes, and3) knowledge of the available talent pool. Case 1 - ARRL, The National Association for Amateur Radio The ARRL, run by 15 Directors, with an annual income of approximately $15-million, and somewhat fewer than 100 employees, embarked on what might be described as an interesting search program. A CEO Search Committee was formed at the January Board meeting with the task of selecting three suitable CEO candidates, presenting them to the Board for consideration, organizing a meeting to select a candidate, and managing the negotiation process with the selected candidate. League President Roderick appointed Central Division Director Carlson as committee chairman. Concerning items 1) and 2) of the above list, the search committee took five weeks (not an exaggeration) to come up with a CEO requirements document. The end result was exactly the same as was used for the previous search, with the addition of a requirement that the candidate have a "passion for Amateur Radio." Concerning item 3), the committee employed a search firm to uncover candidates at a cost in five-figures. Note that the League had identified a number of candidates in its recent past search. It appears that none of the final candidates came from the search firm. The committee allowed three additional months for prospective candidates to learn about the opening, and submit applications. The committee members used some unreported mechanism to whittle the list down to around 10, and conducted telephone interviews with the remaining 10. The committee again used some unreported mechanism to further reduce the number to 4. At this point, the committee reported the names of the remaining four candidates to the Board, and and the candidate's resumes were made available. The committee did not give any information on why they selected candidates, or even any summary of positive or negative attributes they found in any of them. The committee chairman even directed (without any apparent authority to do so) Board members to not research candidates on their own, or even discuss candidates with other Board members. Board members were to come to in-person interviews with each of the candidates, and make their decisions based only on resumes and interviews. Only two members of the search committee, one voting, one advisory, expressed any concern with the no-communication directive. A League officer conducted telephone interviews with the references provided by the candidates, and reported on the results. As might be expected, references provided by the candidates had favorable things to say. No information on candidates was gathered from secondary references or other sources. The ARRL Board held interviews approximately seven months after the non-renewal of the previous CEO's contract. On the day after the interviews, the Board voted by secret ballot to select one of the candidates. There was zero group discussion between Board members about the candidates. Case 2 - The Boeing Corporation Boeing, run by 12 Directors with at least one being a licensed Radio Amateur, has annual sales of $67 to $101-billion, or about an amount equal to the yearly-ARRL-sales each hour. Their 161,000 employees is more than 1,600 times the size of the League staff. If divided somewhat equally, there are 1,600 Boeing operations with staffs equal to the size of the League, or 1,600 managerial or supervisory employees with staffs the size of the League. With respect to evaluating the Boeing Board's knowledge of the three components of CEO selection, note that the Boeing Board's selected a replacement CEO at its January Board meeting. Process Summary The following was sent to the ARRL Board - Executive searches — whether for for-profit companies or not-for-profit organizations are complex, time-consuming tasks, even when conducted by a very small search committee, located in a single HQ building, and having a full-time commitment to the hiring organization and the search. The applicability of the paragraph appears to be directly related to familiarity of the above listed components of CEO selection. Question for Members Did the ARRL Board engage in a process that should satisfy member expectations?-_______________________________________________

2 1

[arrl-odv:30810] Fwd: How I am voting in the Special Meeting - and Why!
by Mickey Baker 26 Aug '20

26 Aug '20

At the meeting tonight to hire a CEO, I am going to vote NO. I don't think I will be the only one, but I hope you will read this and understand my reasoning, and perhaps consider this, if not now, in future CEO hires. Electing the right - or the wrong - CEO for the ARRL has serious consequences. After being in office for fewer than 3 weeks, I had to answer questions from members who wondered why Dr. Michel was "not re-elected" using the semantics that we prefer to use. It was tough. All of us will need to stand for re-election, or give up our seat. All of us will need to support our position to membership. The criticism about hiring Dr. Michel was sharp - and I'm still hearing it, even though I was not on the board at the time. This message explains my reasoning – something I hope all of you will read completely before you vote. I will make a redacted version of this message public, as I anticipate that the tenure of the intended candidate will be a hot topic among many of our perennially dissatisfied members. THIS WILL BE THE THIRD CEO THE BOARD hired with ESSENTIALLY THE SAME PROCESS AND IT IS ANOTHER CLOSE CONTEST. The 8-6-1 vote in Denver to move forward with our next CEO is not acceptable. It is a divided board, there is no consensus. One vote, one election, could flip the electorate next January and the Board could fire the CEO. It is too tenuous a situation. At no time, was there discussion of a convened board consolidating our multiple interviews with candidates. Other than for those on the hiring committee, our times were much too short and constrained – 10 of the 15 directors were only allowed 20 or so minutes with the four final candidates and were not offered the opportunity to submit written questions. The Hiring Committee did not do what hiring committees where I have participated throughout my career. There were no published questions with allocated scores or written responses from candidate, simply, from the perception of the board, a black box where several candidates popped out. How do we know that our candidates can even write a cogent sentence without written questions and answers? That level of interview is expected at the C level, yet I find no written words from our chosen candidate except profane complaints about American Express and other amateur radio operators. It has become clear to me that the ARRL board is not a board of equals – in this case, the hiring committee placed constraints on the rest of the board speaking with candidates. Criteria was notprovided that eliminated the vast majority of candidates who applied. This turned into a subjective popularity poll, not an objective, repeatable, defendable process - which is likely the reason for all the secrecy. Let me be clear - without the benefit of a full-on discussion with this board about what we need in our next CEO and whether this process that is currently near completion has delivered the result we need, I am not able to perform my fiduciary duty of care without complete information about a candidate, and certainly don't have it from this process about this candidate. This process is absent due diligence required by deliberation *according to the resolution creating the committee in January, in terms of timing and reporting to the full board. This is yet another transparency issue!* We should have been openly discussing candidates with one another all along so that we could arrive at a better choice than a bare 8 vote majority. Our leaders should be encouraging - not stifling - the necessary dialog. The fear of some looming lawsuit has been given as a reason for limiting communication. This is, at best, an uninformed, unfounded, and greatly overblown paranoia. At worst, it is a directed strategy to limit board access to information that will reveal the full stories, with all their pros and cons, about the candidates, and which would undoubtedly lead to the emergence of a clearly superior candidate. Either way, these restrictions on communication have resulted in complete suppression of our opinions and the individuality that our members expected when they sent us here, as well as the benefits of collegial collaboration that those same members expect from us. We, as a board, have been in this exact position before. At it's July 2018 meeting, the board elected to proceed into the negotiating phase with Dr. Michel - on the narrowest of margins, without the benefit of full-throated board discourse. Consider the ramifications of that selection and look at where we are today. We have the same split board we had in 2018. Why should we expect a better outcome today than we experienced following our actions two years ago? Consider that 7 of us voted for candidates other than David Minster. I was concerned about our selection process from the moment it was started in January. I took an opportunity to speak with Steve West W7SMW, a Maxim Society member, who was on the Board of Directors at Cisco, a $50B company, and was on the search committee to replace John Chambers, Cisco's Founding CEO. "The most important thing," Steve said, "Is to find a candidate that the entire board can support publicly to lead the stockholders." I then arranged a meeting between him and Rick Roderick - I'm certain he told Rick the same. In our case, our stockholders are our members and contributors. This should have raised a flag to improve communication with the hiring committee and the Board. Apparently, it had no effect. With one change of heart tonight, the rules allow that narrow majority offer a final opportunity to change this decision. The seven opposing votes could allow ONE person to change this selection. ARRL is fortunate to have an active board - a board that wants to do the hard work of driving necessary change. But that potential cannot be realized in our current climate of limited access to full information and suppression of healthy dialog. Compartmentalized organizations are one reason the ARRL membership is not growing - members don't trust us. Why are we, once again, in this split vote situation? It's because some of our colleagues are not convinced of the strength of the candidate who garnered the majority of votes by the slimmest of margins. *This is not the point at which the matter should be considered decided. We have to delve deeper and reconsider our vote tonight.* If we want to go forward with the strength of unity on our side, we need to explore, listen, learn, and be willing to adapt our perspectives and positions. We have the opportunity to act tonight to make this needed change. *The Candidate – my observation* *Why I didn't vote for Mr. Minster* The membership deserves better than yet another executive with NO LEADERSHIP HISTORY in the ARRL or the amateur community. We need a leader who has demonstrated a commitment to the betterment of amateur radio and the ARRL. We need a loyal and longtime contributor, not an opportunist appearing out of nowhere in a flash of sparkle and smoke. *1. Volunteerism, the need for a servant leader* Mr. Minster has never volunteered for any ARRL positions. He now offers to work for a salary. I asked all candidates similar questions, seeking the quality of “servant leadership” as defined by Robert Greenleaf. I found this in two candidates, but not Mr. Minster. According to his answer to my question, “What have you done to help or volunteer for the ARRL?” I found that the candidate we are voting on tonight has never held an ARRL appointment and his involvement with ARRL is nonexistent. When I asked him, “What have you done to contribute to amateur radio?” his answer was “I’ve given people Bonaire on satellite.” *2. Skills* We need a leader who can help us turn a corner and guide the League with fresh new vision. The skills learned in the retail jewelry industry DO NOT play well into a 501(c)(3) charitable membership organization. We heard it in the interviews. PROFIT and COST CONTROL are NOT as important as the mission of the ARRL. The mission to further amateur radio must not be sacrificed to put money in the bank. We heard about plans focused on short term, tactical actions, not a strategic direction for the future of amateur radio and the League. Mr. Minster's idea was "more video" and "grow the brand" with little detail. In Minster's interview, I heard of a history of a profit driven manager cutting budgets and people, not one of shared vision and collective success or a culture of empathy and support for individual growth and achievement. We heard for the first time from an individual we don't know, a stranger to ARRL, seeking to take advantage of an immediate opportunity, not a long-time friend of the organization whose motives include demonstrated love for and loyalty to all of amateur radio and the League in particular. As we realized when we hired the last CEO, there were a number of political diatribes on social media that the CEO had posted that were offensive to membership. This candidate has a number of postings using expletives that will haunt us – I've attached one that reflects on his temperament under pressure and, hopefully, doesn’t predict how he will treat ARRL Staff. I'm sure membership will find and produce the others I've seen. You can verify this is unretouched and current at: https://twitter.com/david_minster/status/1164307098131243008 Further, there is a web site that collects employee opinions about their employers. Several of our candidates were reference, but by time frame and by position. Here is a link about what employees thought about the CEO at his prior positions. Note the comments during his tenure: https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Scott-Kay-Reviews-E274514.htm (August 2013 - Feb 2015) https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/David-Yurman-Reviews-E39047_P15.htm (2001-2012) *We can do better. And, we must. Or, as one of our interviewees with a Ph.D., a professional consultant and business analyst said, "Without major changes, the ARRL won't last another 10 years. And without the ARRL, amateur radio will follow."* “Ego can’t sleep. It micro-manages. It disempowers. It reduces our capability. It excels in control.” ― Robert K. Greenleaf, Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness <https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/175613> I'll speak with you in a bit. 73, Mickey Baker, N4MB Palm Beach Gardens, FL *“The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead." Robert K. Greenleaf*

1 0