October 2023 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:35306] Steve Berry's Message to ARRL Board Members
by Richard Norton 02 Nov '23

02 Nov '23

This is a response to Mr. Minster's message claiming someoneassociated with the Board contacted Steve Berry in response to an earliermessage from Mr. Minster to the Board. While I don’t know whetheranyone from the Board did anything with Mr. Minster's original message (I didnot), the following should be noted. On Sunday, September 24, I was made aware of the fact thatSteve Berry had left the League's employ several weeks earlier. The informationdid not come from ODV. I was astounded that the departure of Mr. Minster's veryvaluable hire had left, and that weeks had passed without the Board beingnotified. Mr. Berry had one of the mostimportant roles in the organization and, per the organization chart, was adirect report to Mr. Minster. I forwarded this news to a few other Directors. Quite curiously, on the following day, Mr. Minster finally informed the Board about Mr. Berry’s departure. I attempted to contact Mr. Berry based on outside information, not onMr. Minster's message. Mr. Berry never answered any of my phone calls, nor did hereply to my phone messages. On Thursday,September 28, we all received Mr. Berry's message. The contents of his message adequately addressedthe issues I wanted to cover, so I have made no further attempts to contacthim. In my opinion, Mr. Minster's assertion that there was"a confidentiality issue that the board needs to address" is merely an attempt to deflect attention from the important issues. The real discussion should be about 1) his failure to keep the Board informed on keypersonnel issues, And 2) the uncharacteristically high employee turnover ofARRL staff since Mr. Minster’s arrival. At least 44 employees (update - now, at least 45) have left the League since Mr. Minster became CEO three years ago. Many are people he himself hired, and many were direct reports with management positions. Around four of his secretary/administrative assistants have left (Update - number five has left.) Every single one has departed. Something like eight other direct reports are gone. Responsible Board oversight demands that we understand the root cause of such unusualturnover. Is it our hiring practices,our management practices, the work environment or some combination of these? Although I probably had nothing to do with you all receiving theBerry message, (maybe multiple phone-answering-machine messages from me did give him the idea that some Board members were interested in his departure) I consider it fortuitous that a former employee with the respectMr. Berry had earned outside the League made the effort to speak up. Mr. Berry's comments give the Board solid evidence of what needs to be addressed. Dick, N6AA

3 2

[arrl-odv:35290] Is this an authorized dealer???
by n8sy＠n8sy.com 27 Oct '23

27 Oct '23

Hey, I came across this ad on Facebook this morning and was wondering if anyone knew if this was an authorized dealer. It seems as though WORLDWIDE24.SHOP is now selling T-Shirts, Hoodies and Zip up Sweatshirts with our ARRL logo on the front. Here's a link to the webpage.. https://worldwides24.shop/anw73?fbclid=IwAR05ckgo84TBLmbW3nPrZSp92J5nkUzJd0f 53oWBDJ_eDxjNRVMyVQqjDfA <https://worldwides24.shop/anw73?fbclid=IwAR05ckgo84TBLmbW3nPrZSp92J5nkUzJd0 f53oWBDJ_eDxjNRVMyVQqjDfA&s=hanes-5250&c=White&p=FRONT> &s=hanes-5250&c=White&p=FRONT Scott Scott Yonally, N8SY Great Lakes Division Vice Director ARRL - The National Association For Amateur RadioT <mailto:n8sy@n8sy.com> n8sy(a)n8sy.com 419-512-4445 419-756-5046

3 3

[arrl-odv:35303] Re: FCC Proposed Action on Symbol Rate Removal
by Fred Kemmerer 27 Oct '23

27 Oct '23

Hello David, Thank you very much for the explanation. Can you clarify if and to what extent these changes will be subject to a comment period before final implementation? Best and 73, Fred Kemmerer, AB1OC (603) 413-5400 Mail: ab1oc(a)arrl.org<mailto:ab1oc@arrl.org> ARRL New England Division Director [Text, logo Description automatically generated] From: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces(a)reflector.arrl.org> on behalf of David Siddall <david(a)davidsiddall-law.com> Date: Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 11:53 AM To: "arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org" <arrl-odv(a)arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:35293] FCC Proposed Action on Symbol Rate Removal All, The FCC has released the proposed text of the item that it will consider on Nov. 15. If adopted, the FCC would: · Delete the HF symbol rate · Adopt a 2.8 kHz bandwidth limit in place of the symbol rate · Leave all other rules in place, including: o prohibition of encrypted modes o small subbands for unattended (automatic) digital modes with bandwidths greater than 500 Hz · Initiate a new Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in which it: o Proposes to eliminate the symbol rates for 6 meters and up o Request comment on the signal bandwidth limits already applicable in those bands o Request comment on eliminating the symbol rate limits applicable to the LF bands, and whether a bandwidth limit is necessary in those bands Link to the proposed Commission item: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-397992A1.pdf. · The proposed Report and Order, which relates to the HF symbol rate, is 100 percent consistent with ARRL positions and advocacy. · The Further Notice makes proposals that also are consistent with ARRL’s recent advocacy on these issues. As always, feel free to direct any questions to me. 73, Dave K3ZJ 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.

2 1

[arrl-odv:35293] FCC Proposed Action on Symbol Rate Removal
by david davidsiddall-law.com 26 Oct '23

26 Oct '23

All, The FCC has released the proposed text of the item that it will consider on Nov. 15. If adopted, the FCC would: * Delete the HF symbol rate * Adopt a 2.8 kHz bandwidth limit in place of the symbol rate * Leave all other rules in place, including: * prohibition of encrypted modes * small subbands for unattended (automatic) digital modes with bandwidths greater than 500 Hz * Initiate a new Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in which it: * Proposes to eliminate the symbol rates for 6 meters and up * Request comment on the signal bandwidth limits already applicable in those bands * Request comment on eliminating the symbol rate limits applicable to the LF bands, and whether a bandwidth limit is necessary in those bands Link to the proposed Commission item: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-397992A1.pdf. * The proposed Report and Order, which relates to the HF symbol rate, is 100 percent consistent with ARRL positions and advocacy. * The Further Notice makes proposals that also are consistent with ARRL’s recent advocacy on these issues. As always, feel free to direct any questions to me. 73, Dave K3ZJ 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.

5 5

[arrl-odv:35297] FW: Urgent Message - RE 60 meter band FCC proposal
by Famiglio, Bob, K3RF (Dir, AD) 26 Oct '23

26 Oct '23

Below is just one of many response and phone calls I received to my message yesterday afternoon which itself is included below FYI. If you are drafting a message to your division, I composed a slightly different presentation you are also welcomed to use as a guide. I started with Jim and Bills’ draft and personalized it somewhat. My experience may be different than yours so cut and paste appropriately. I have already received many emails and phone calls in less than 24 hours. Bob Famiglio . K3RF From: Mark Caldwell Walker <marwalk(a)marwalk.com<mailto:marwalk@marwalk.com>> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 9:53 PM To: Famiglio, Bob, K3RF (Dir, AD) <k3rf(a)arrl.org<mailto:k3rf@arrl.org>> Subject: Re: Urgent Message - RE 60 meter band FCC proposal You don't often get email from marwalk(a)marwalk.com<mailto:marwalk@marwalk.com>. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification> Hi, Bob. I don't think I've ever commented on an NPRM before, and your message motivated me to do so this time. What got my attention is that this is not only about 60 meters; this is part of a general attitude that needs to be changed. Information on my submission is as follows: Confirmation Number: 20231026853418346 Click to review: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/status/detail/confirmation/20231026853418346 Proceeding(s): 23-120 Filer(s): Mark Walker Date Submitted: 10/26/2023 Primary Contact Email: marwalk(a)gmail.com<mailto:marwalk@gmail.com> I took your advice and wrote an original comment, which I hope will have some effect. Thanks, Mark AC3EW On 10/25/23 16:06, ARRL Members Only Web site wrote: Those of you who have heard me speak about the threats facing Amateur Radio know that my greatest concerns facing our League are loss of spectrum, loss of antenna rights, and ever increasing RFI. Of these, the most urgent is the threat to our current 60 meter privileges. Why should you care? Whether or not you are active on 60 meters, the proposed 10 dB reduction in power from 100 watts to 9.5 watts is the most sweeping reduction of HF privileges in decades. This erosion of our rights is a slippery slope which will embolden the FCC to remove or modify more HF privileges. Atlantic Division Vice Director Marty Pittenger, KB3MXM, and I strongly encourage you to assist League members and the entire U.S. Amateur Radio community by making your voice heard on the importance of protecting our 60 meter privileges. Submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) before October 30th. Some of you have already filed well-reasoned, persuasive comments, which bear reading at the FCC web site. If you are not familiar with the FCC Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) and its impact on our 60 meter privileges please keep reading the deep dive below or visit our website at https://www.arrl.org/60-meter-band This site has further information with easy instructions and links on how to file comments with the FCC. 60 Meter Deep Dive Like many of you, I have enjoyed operating 60 meters and have participated under the occasional inter-service authority to test interoperability between radio amateurs, FEMA SHARES and Military reserve units on the authorized channels. Even if you are not currently active on 60 meters, the proposed 10 dB reduction in power from 100 watts to an equivalent of less than 10 watts is the most sweeping reduction of HF privileges in decades. If Amateur Radio opposition to this proposed change is weak, and the FCC goes through with the change, that lackluster response from the Amateur Radio community will embolden the FCC to remove or modify more HF privileges. There are other radio services that covet our HF radio spectrum. We need to protect them. The FCC has issued NPRM Docket Number 23-120 which would reduce our power limit on 60 meters from 100 watts ERP (Effective Radiated Power) to the equivalent of 9.5 watts ERP. The NPRM would REPLACE the current five channels (currently each with a 100-watt power limit) with a 15 KHz continuous spectrum from 5351.5 to 5366.5 KHz, but limiting power to the equivalent of 9.5 watts ERP. That is a substantial decrease. Our League is proposing to keep the current five channels AND add the docket’s proposed 15 KHz of continuous spectrum, all at a power level of 100 watts ERP. I have heard from reliable sources that certain agency detractors have labeled ham radio operators as undisciplined on the 60 meter band and even causing interference by running at very high power. They argue that their actions threaten other government users that need that spectrum for operations and emergencies. I have never witnessed this problem, but it is hard to argue against innuendo. Even if true, which I doubt, it must be a tiny minority of operators. Retaining useful privileges on 60 meters is really a valuable goal. So, let’s argue the positive aspects of our presence. If you are an emergency communications enthusiast, present your credentials and cite real examples of the value of 60 meters for such operations. FCC still sees such amateur operations as the highest calling of Amateur Radio. Even if you view amateur radio as strictly a hobby, separate from emergency communications, that may be an insufficient argument to persuade the FCC that we should retain our privileges. It’s important to note that in 2022, Canada enacted our League’s position by keeping the five current channels AND adding the expanded 15 KHz of continuous spectrum, all at 100 watts. ARRL is advocating for the FCC to adopt the identical allocations and power limits which Canada put in place over a year ago. It might be an uphill battle for us, but your comments will help. Let’s try to hold the line. When the FCC authorized 60 meter access for Amateur Radio operators in July 2003, the Commission cited the positive propagation attributes for emergency communications. Believe me, this is the correct argument that still holds today. Over the past twenty years, in the midst of multiple hurricanes, Caribbean Amateur Radio stations used 60 meters to relay critical weather and situational reports to U.S. operators. Clearly, 9.5 watts ERP would be woefully inadequate to maintain communications for these purposes. Having a consistent band plan with Canada will also ensure harmonious communications throughout most of North America. Remember, the FCC does not make decisions on rule making by counting the comments for or against a change on a weighted scale. Rather, personally drafted comments, short or long, are more useful than just a quick cut and paste. But any comments in favor are better than none at all. Please help and get your ham friends and clubs to act NOW. We only have a few more days. Make this your weekend project. Together, we are The National Association for Amateur Radio. PLEASE support our League’s filing in this matter. To learn more about the NPRM and its impact on our 60-meter privileges, please visit your ARRL website at: https://www.arrl.org/60-meter-band. On this site you will find links to file comments with the FCC. Please don’t delay. A substantial response from the ham community before the October 30 deadline is the only way to forestall the loss of our valued operating privileges. Protection of our Amateur Radio spectrum is our number one priority. If you have questions or wish to discuss this further, please feel free to call me at my office number below day or evening. If I’m not immediately available, leave your contact information and I’ll get back to you. Keep the faith and please file a comment either by Express filing or Standard filing by document upload - PDF recommended. Read the filings uploaded far to get the drift. 73, and I will see you on the Radio. Let’s try to make sure that can also be on 60 meters in the future. Bob Famiglio, K3RF ARRL Atlantic Division Director 610-359-7300 -------------------------------------------------------------------- ARRL Atlantic Division Director: Robert B Famiglio, K3RF k3rf(a)arrl.org<mailto:k3rf@arrl.org> -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Mark Caldwell Walker https://marwalk.net

3 2

[arrl-odv:35282] Call to action-60 meters-comments to the FCC
by Boehner, James, N2ZZ (Dir, RK) 26 Oct '23

26 Oct '23

To all, Bill N2COP and I spent several days working on a "call to action" email blast to our division to file comments with the FCC. It was sent out last night, and in addition to positive comments to us, we note that comments to the FCC took a significant uptick. Fortunately, unlike the entry in the Federal Register that showed comments that were "all over the place", the majority of recent comments are supporting the ARRL position on 60 meters. We would like to share our email with the board. Should you desire to use it and modify it for your Division, please feel free to use as much or as little as you feel is appropriate. This is available on the ODV division/section bulletins, but in the interest of cut and paste, we offer it to you below my signature. '73 de Jim N2ZZ Director - Roanoke Division Representing ARRL members in North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia ARRL - the national association for Amateur Radio Facebook Page: ARRL Roanoke Division Website: www.arrl-roanoke.org<http://www.arrl-roanoke.org/> [Text, logo Description automatically generated] Dear ARRL Roanoke Division Member: We need your assistance, and we need it NOW. We strongly encourage you to assist the ARRL and the entire U.S. Amateur Radio community by submitting comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) before October 30th to save the privileges we have fought to gain on 60 meters. Even if you are not currently active on 60 meters, the proposed reduction in power from 100 watts to an equivalent of less than 10 watts is the most sweeping reduction of HF privileges in decades. If Amateur Radio opposition to this proposed change is weak and the FCC goes through with the change, will a lackluster response from the Amateur Radio community embolden the FCC to remove or modify more HF privileges? Please read this message in full to understand why your help is needed prior to submitting your comments. The FCC has issued Notice of Proposed Rulemaking's (NPRM) Docket Number 23-120 which would reduce power on 60 meters from 100 watts ERP (Effective Radiated Power) to the equivalent of 9.5 watts ERP. The NPRM would replace the current five channels (currently each with a 100-watt power limit) with a 15 KHz continuous spectrum from 5351.5 to 5366.5 KHz, but limiting power to the equivalent of 9.5 watts ERP. ARRL is proposing to keep the current five channels AND add the docket's proposed 15 KHz of continuous spectrum, all at a power level of 100 watts ERP. It's important to note that in 2022 our neighbor, Canada, enacted ARRL's position by keeping the five current channels AND adding the expanded 15 KHz of continuous spectrum, all at 100 watts. ARRL is advocating for the FCC to adopt the identical allocations and power limits which Canada put in place over a year ago. When the FCC authorized 60-meter access for Amateur Radio operators in July 2003, the Commission cited the positive propagation attributes for emergency communications. Over the past twenty years during hurricanes, Caribbean Amateur Radio stations used 60 meters to relay critical weather and situational reports to U.S. operators. Clearly, 9.5 watts ERP would be woefully inadequate to maintain communications for these purposes. In the May 2023 ARRL survey, members overwhelmingly pointed to Spectrum Defense as the #1 priority of the League. The Roanoke Division takes this priority seriously. For the maximum impact, the FCC needs to hear from ARRL members in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia to underscore the importance of 60 meters in our densely populated region on the eastern seaboard situated between active hurricane zones and our nation's capital of Washington, DC. Having a consistent bandplan with Canada will also ensure harmonious communications throughout most of North America. PLEASE support the ARRL's filing in this matter. To learn more about the NPRM and its impact on our 60-meter privileges, please visit https://www.arrl.org/60-meter-band . On this webpage you will find the links to file comments with the FCC. Please don't delay. A substantial response from the Ham community before the October 30 deadline is the only way to forestall the loss of our valued operating privileges. Please urge your fellow Hams to file comments as well. Protection of our Amateur Radio spectrum is our number one priority. 73 de Jim Boehner, N2ZZ Roanoke Division Director Bill Morine, N2COP Roanoke Division Vice Director

3 2

[arrl-odv:35283] Fwd: Big 40-year celebration at Kennedy Space Center of ham radio on human spaceflight
by Mark J Tharp 25 Oct '23

25 Oct '23

FYI. Hello to all, Here is a news release hot off the press about ARISS's "big-splash-celebration conference" of 40 years of ham radio on human spaceflight. ARRL did a lot regarding Owen Garriott's first foray into having hams be able to talk to a crew member in space, including loads of PR. I hope this conference will cause some excitement among ARRL VIPs and hard-working Hq staff, and members—and some of you may want to come to Kennedy Space Center to attend. ARISS has already received a commitment from an astronaut and some who said, "pretty-sure-I can-go." The ARISS website page about this just went live. The ARISS news release team will distribute the release in about the next 15 minutes. We're starting to hear from hams. Some are--and some aren't--SAREX and ARISS volunteers. Some were students who want to talk about how these radio contacts shaped STEM study and STEM career choices. Some educators plan to come talk about special students who were affected by these contacts. The news release contains many details. I hope you'll feel the excitement, just as I am. If you have questions, please email me. 73, Rosalie K1STO ARISS You're receiving this message because you're a member of the ARRL ARISS group from American Radio Relay League. To take part in this conversation, reply all to this message. View group files <https://outlook.office365.com/owa/arrl-ariss@arrl.org/groupsubscription.ash…> | Leave group <https://outlook.office365.com/owa/arrl-ariss@arrl.org/groupsubscription.ash…> | Learn more about Microsoft 365 Groups <https://aka.ms/o365g>

2 1

[arrl-odv:35285] Amateur Symbol Rate Repeal Scheduled for FCC's November 15 Meeting
by david davidsiddall-law.com 25 Oct '23

25 Oct '23

ODV, Earlier today FCC Chairwoman Rosenworcel wrote that repeal of the HF symbol rate is scheduled for the Commission meeting on November 15. In addition, I expect that the Commission will propose eliminating the symbol rate for VHF and UHF frequencies and instead relying on the signal bandwidth limits already in the rules. We have strongly supported their adopting a Notice proposing these additional changes during the past several months after consultation with the EC. Since the VHF/UHF symbol rate was not addressed earlier, public comment must be solicited before final FCC action. This won’t be announced more broadly until late tomorrow, but it is not a secret and can be disclosed immediately in general terms. However, I am asking the ARRL staff not to issue a written release until Thursday, after I have seen the details of exactly what the FCC is doing and can confirm not only the HF repeal, but also what I hope and expect is a “Further Notice” proposing broader elimination of the symbol rate applicable to VHF and UHF frequencies. You may remember that earlier this year Congresswoman Lesko introduced H.R. 3241 to statutorily repeal the HF symbol rate and then proceeded to grill Chairwoman Rosenworcel on this subject at an oversight hearing. While the Chairwoman at first suggested that the record needed refreshing, I was able to convince the staff, and the Chairwoman through the staff, that no further delay is justified. She has now approved a draft decision for consideration by the full Commission on November 15, and the other Commissioners seem fully supportive. We can thank Rep. Lesko for getting needed attention to this matter at the FCC. This was done in cooperation with your ARRL Legislative Committee as an add-on to ARRL’s advocacy on antenna legislation. 73, Dave K3ZJ 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.

2 1

[arrl-odv:35284] Re: False Financial Information Being Sent to Members
by Richard Norton 24 Oct '23

24 Oct '23

More on Messaging to Life Members Sentences in communication from Mr. Minster, such as 1) "what we have been permitted by the auditors to draw from the LM funds," (from Mr. Minster's email to ODV), and 2) "ARRL has only been able to withdraw $26 for each Life Member to fund $49 in dues," (from Mr. Minster's email to Life Members) do not factually describe either the handling of Life Member dues or the roll of the auditors. They incorrectly imply problems with Life Member financial issues. If there is going to be an A&F discussion about Life Membership funding, it might be beneficial to invite the long-term audit-firm partner, Paul Balasay, He should be able to educate attendees on the actual role the auditing firms play. I believe he would reinforce the points made in my initial email. The paragraph about "anyone with more than a couple years experience on A&F" strongly suggests that the author does not understand how the League handles Life Member funds. The claims that "the rate" is greatly deficient and that "term members have had to make up the difference" have no basis in fact. There has never been any detailed breakdown of costs attributable to Term Members, Life Members, Blind Members, Youth Members, or any combinations of any groups ever presented to A&F or the Board. The League, under present management, does not even bookkeep labor costs by project or activity, so that any such cost partitioning is likely to be inaccurate. It is fair to say that, over the years, the League's overall financial position has been solid, and the reserves for Life Membership have been solid. Those reserves for Life Member dues shown in the annual reports have gone from $5.5M to $9M in the years I've been on the Board where the number of Life Members has not changed much. The existing system has served us reasonably well. Recent Life Member and Term Member Board Actions Three years ago, the League instituted a reduced price Life-Membership for members over 70 with 25 years of prior membership. The program was actuarily revenue neutral for members of age 70, and therefore revenue beneficial to the League for those older than 70. It didn't require making up any difference by Term Members. The program was revenue beneficial by itself, and that's with the printed magazine included. Nearly half of our Life Members are over 70 years old, and most of them paid the full, undiscounted Life Member fees. At the July 2023 Board meeting, the Board voted to live up to its membership agreement concerning printed magazines with the Life Members. The Board abrogated essentially the same agreement it had with the Term Members, demanding that they pay more for what they contracted for when they paid their dues. Possible Actions 1) The printed magazine issue has created ill will that could have been avoided by continuing the printed magazine through the remainder of the respective membership terms. There's still an opportunity to make this change, defuse the issue, and retain some of the goodwill of those Term Members who now feel cheated. 2) The revenue information conveyed to the Life Members in Mr. Minster's email was not consistent with our published financial records. Members who perceive that they are being given inaccurate information, especially for cost-related issues, may feel less inclined to support and promote ARRL. I welcome suggestions about possible ways to ameliorate this. 73, Dick Norton, N6AA On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 10:21:21 AM PDT, Minster, David NA2AA (CEO) <dminster(a)arrl.org> wrote: The Life Member program will be discussed at length at the A&F meeting. I will ensure that Diane includes a schedule of what we have been permitted by the auditors to draw from the LM funds going back a descriptive number of years. Anyone with more than a couple of years' experience on A&F should very well know that the rate was $26 before recently moving to $33. The fact remains that it is greatly deficient, term members have had to make up the difference, this has been going on and getting worse for decades, and only now are we taking action to correct the problem. It is easy to get diagnostic about why this has continued to languish, but the results aren’t particularly constructive or useful. I note that the email was censored obscuring who if anyone has the concern. Please forward the original email on to me so that we can respond to our member. Thanks. David Get Outlook for iOSFrom: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces(a)reflector.arrl.org> on behalf of Baker, Mickey, N4MB (Dir, SE) <mbaker(a)arrl.org> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 10:27:20 PM To: Norton, Richard N6AA (Dir, SW) <richardjnorton(a)yahoo.com>; arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org <arrl-odv(a)arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:35280] Re: False Financial Information Being Sent to Members Hey, Dick, Thanks for the history. As you know, this is a write down from funds that should be enough to service those members. It has been a long time since this was adjusted. $33 isn’t likely enough if we were to value inflation since it was changed. But these are budgetary numbers. Whatever it cost to meet the needs of life members for the year will be the actual cost. We simply chose the recommended number because we believe it is nearer to reality. Reading the historical documents, the hope of the AMS project was to provide more tracking of member interaction so that we can get more detail around and control. It has not turned out that way. Personify is something that we will, sooner or later, need to bite the bullet and replace. But before that, we need an inventory of services we offer and corresponding systems support. Then we can prioritize a plan for integrated systems for replacement. Thoughts? MickeyFrom: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces(a)reflector.arrl.org> on behalf of Richard Norton via arrl-odv <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 8:03 PM To: arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org <arrl-odv(a)arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:35279] False Financial Information Being Sent to Members I've received communication from a member questioning the validity of information about ARRL finances that is being sent to members. Based on the analysis below, I believe this member's suspicion is valid. An email from Mr. Minster, contained the following - An Important Message about ARRL Life Membership and Printed Magazines Dear xyz This letter is to explain a recent decision taken by the ARRL Board of Directors about the future of printed magazines (QST and On the Air specifically) and how this affects you, one of our loyal Life Members. Life Membership was created in 1968 to raise money to help ARRL overcome a projected deficit in the budget. The introduction of Life Membership worked, however, the program has not sustained its ability to fund the full cost of annual dues for its members since 1973. In recent years, ARRL has only been able to withdraw $26 for each Life Member to fund $49 in dues. A program that clearly demonstrates loyalty to ARRL to this very day lost its way financially, and we were loath to modify or eliminate this program. The sentence shown in bold is factually untrue. The Board, through the A&F Committee, settled on a number that it felt represented a fair cost of carrying the Life Members, as it is required to do under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The numbers were also approved as being appropriate each year by the League's auditors, CohnReznick. The adequacy of the Life Member reserve is further evaluated every few years by an independent actuary, as was done in 2022 by the actuarial and benefits consulting firm, Hooker and Holcombe. For many years the Board did allocate $26 a year, not because it couldn't allocate more, but because both management and the auditors felt $26 was the appropriate, fair, amount. Bear in mind that ARRL incurs lower cost to handle Life Members for reasons such as lack of need to solicit or process membership renewals or give any books or other incentives for renewing, . At the suggestion of Hooker and Holcombe, in 2022 the A&F Committee upped the $26 to $33 a year. In the 2022 ARRL Annual Report’s Statements of Financial Position, under current liabilities, the current portion of deferred life membership dues was $626,706 for 2022 and $620,392 for 2021. With 18,801 (2022) and 18,883 (2021) Life Members this works out to roughly $33 per Life Member. That’s a far cry from $26. The League’s financial accounts show a total reserve of nearly $500 per Life Member. Even ignoring any earnings on these funds, that’s about fifteen years’ worth of services at the present rate, not exactly a precarious position given the average Life Member age of 69 years old and rising. It should be beneath ethical standards for an organization concerned with serving its members to resort to misleading our membership. The email sent to our Life Members mischaracterizes the nature of the Life Member withdrawal, misstates the actual amount, and falsely implies inadequacy of the life member funds. 73, Dick Norton, N6AA

1 0

[arrl-odv:35289] EC-FSC meeting
by Dale Williams 24 Oct '23

24 Oct '23

The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Emergency Communications and Field Services Committee is Thursday October 26 at 8:00 PM Eastern Time. The proposed Agenda is attached. As usual, we request that non-committee members please mute their audio and video during the meeting. Thanks and 73, Dale Williams WA8EFK EC-FSC Chairman ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dale Williams is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. Topic: EC-FSC' Zoom Meeting Time: Oct 26, 2023 08:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) Join Zoom Meeting https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84031738894?pwd=qeaMtuX3feSPTQ7WZEajjUCHftSQKL.1 Meeting ID: 840 3173 8894 Passcode: 058438 --- One tap mobile +13092053325,,84031738894#,,,,*058438# US +13126266799,,84031738894#,,,,*058438# US (Chicago) --- Dial by your location • +1 309 205 3325 US • +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) • +1 646 558 8656 US (New York) • +1 646 931 3860 US • +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC) • +1 305 224 1968 US • +1 669 444 9171 US • +1 689 278 1000 US • +1 719 359 4580 US • +1 720 707 2699 US (Denver) • +1 253 205 0468 US • +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) • +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) • +1 360 209 5623 US • +1 386 347 5053 US • +1 507 473 4847 US • +1 564 217 2000 US Meeting ID: 840 3173 8894 Passcode: 058438 Find your local number: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/kKBeo6c5Y

1 0