I understand the need for attorney-client privilege. No problem.
But it still seems to be kind of brusque to me to say Mr. Siddall entertained questions, and that's it.
Carl K9LA
From: John Robert Stratton <N5AUS@n5aus.com> Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2022 10:43 PM To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org>; Stafford, Rod, W6ROD (Intl Affairs VP) <w6rod@comcast.net>; Luetzelschwab, Carl, K9LA (Dir, CD) <K9LA@arrl.org> Subject: Re: [arrl-odv:34177] Re: EC meeting minutes — Questions To David Siddall
Carl
Respectfully, permit me to echo Judge Stafford's observation that providing details regarding the specific questions directed to FCC Counsel David Siddall and his responses would/could result in a waiver of the attorney-client privilege between David Siddall
and the ARRL.
However, there is no sin and no waiver in responding to the Member that the questions and responses dealt with legal matters before the FCC and Congress on and for which Mr. Siddall was representing the League. If there is continued insistence, share with
the Member that disclosing either the questions or responses would/could waive the attorney-client privilege resulting in possible damage to efforts being undertaken by the League to protect the Members', including his, interests.
Since the Minutes are to reflect the conduct/actions of the EC, I suggest that an exclusion of matters that came before the EC could result in less kind Members accusing the League of secrecy and "hiding the ball." We didn't and shouldn't do so. I would
(and have when the issue has arisen in my Division) ask the inquisitive Member if he believes we should harbor secrets or maintain legally permitted disclosure when necessary to protect his rights and those of other Members. The inquisitive are usually satisfied
with such a response. But, YMMV.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West Gulf Division
Office:512-445-6262
Cell:512-426-2028
P.O. Box 2232
Austin, Texas 78768-2232
_______________________________________
On 10/16/22 8:28 PM, Rod Stafford wrote:
Providing details could result in revealing privileged attorney-client communications.
Of course, you may want to finesse the answer a bit to the League member Carl.
Rod
Amateur Radio W6ROD
ARRL Int’l Affairs Vice President
On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:57 PM, Luetzelschwab, Carl, K9LA (Dir, CD)
<K9LA@arrl.org> wrote:
The last sentence in item 4 of the September 12 EC minutes says: "Mr. Siddall entertained questions."
A Central Division member asked "What were the 'questions' and what were the answers?"
We should either provide those details or not make such a general statement.