Thanks, Barry. I was just trying to see if there was enough support among Directors to even pursue a motion on this, not to actually vote on a motion. That said, Ria has one written that we can now debate here on ODV, get ironed out, then present for a vote at the July formal meeting. My informal poll idea is pretty much a moot point now. Then again, I'm not a legal expert either.... ;-) 73; Mike W7VO
On 06/30/2020 11:50 AM Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) <bshelley@arrl.org> wrote:
Mike et al:
Let me interject here. I believe Connecticut statutes would require a Board motion (or action) should be made in a formal meeting where there is the opportunity for everyone to listen and debate the motion. I wouldn’t want the results to be challenged after the fact because this wasn’t allowed to happen. Apprising the members of the Board that you intend to make a motion is not a problem, but debating and a “straw vote” prior to the meeting without the benefit of everyone involved is not in keeping, in my non-legal opinion, with the statutes.
I would recommend making the motion at the Board meeting and allow the vote to happen there, not in a back channel process. You all can certainly ask questions of the maker of the motion prior to the meeting, but I would suggest they be made on ODV so everyone has the opportunity to hear the responses.
73,
Barry, N1VXY
From: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> On Behalf Of Michael Ritz Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 2:14 PM To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org> Subject: [arrl-odv:30486] Re: Electronic signatures
I can put a Director motion together and submit it to Carla.
Ria, can you work with me on this to help identify exactly what we will allow for digital signatures?
Before I start drafting this up, is there a consensus that it will pass with the required 12 votes? Send me an e-mail off-line and I'll tally them up. If there's enough support among the Directors I'll get started. Assuming the motion gets written, I'll pass it by everybody here before the July meeting.
73;
Mike
W7VO
> >
On 06/30/2020 10:52 AM Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) <bshelley@arrl.org mailto:bshelley@arrl.org > wrote:
Ria:
My position really hasn’t changed. We recognize that our rules have been outpaced by technology so, to allow us to accept electronic signatures generated by one of the commercial software programs, we need to change the rules. Not a big deal, but it will need a motion at the next Board meeting and because it is a By Law change it will need 12 votes to pass. I don’t think changing the rules in the middle of the election cycle is a problem as it is a response to the current situation with events being canceled and no one traveling.
And because it’s an organizational policy, I’m really not the one who has to be convinced (although upon reflection, I’m comfortable with the use of the technology in this case), the Board needs to be comfortable with the technology behind the rule change. We also need to consider not only the method of collecting the signatures, but also how they are transmitted to HQ with the proper paperwork for the nomination. Again, not an insurmountable issue particularly if the software produces a .pdf.
I would suggest the way forward is for either the E&E Committee or an individual Board member plan to make a motion at the upcoming meeting. The maker of the motion should circulate it before the meeting so everyone is comfortable and we get any questions answered before the meeting. This will allow for a smooth process.
If you would like to have the individual you mentioned early contact me to discuss the technology and how we might integrate it in our processes, I’d be happy to talk to them.
73,
Barry, N1VXY
From: rjairam@gmail.com mailto:rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com mailto:rjairam@gmail.com > Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2020 1:29 PM To: Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) <bshelley@arrl.org mailto:bshelley@arrl.org > Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org mailto:arrl-odv@arrl.org > Subject: Re: [arrl-odv:30449] Electronic signatures
Hi Barry,
I hope that I’ve sufficiently addressed your concerns re security.
Do we have a plan?
Ria
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 3:17 PM Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) <bshelley@arrl.org mailto:bshelley@arrl.org > wrote:
> > >
Ria:
As I see it, if the electronic signature program produces a .pdf that can be submitted along with all the other paperwork (candidate info, etc.) via email, that's half the battle.
What will need to change is the By Law and Field Org election rules to specifically allow for collecting signatures, and our accepting those collected, in that fashion. While not wanting to put words in the mouths of the E&E, I would prefer to understand more about safeguards, if any, surrounding falsifying signatures/call signs. What's to keep someone from just creating a document in Adobe Sign or one of the others, and making up 10 signatures with the appropriate call signs? Again, I'm not the technologist. Just asking the question and am willing to be convinced.
73, Barry, N1VXY
-----Original Message----- From: rjairam@gmail.com mailto:rjairam@gmail.com <rjairam@gmail.com mailto:rjairam@gmail.com > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 10:17 AM To: Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) <bshelley@arrl.org mailto:bshelley@arrl.org > Cc: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org mailto:arrl-odv@arrl.org > Subject: Re: [arrl-odv:30449] Electronic signatures
Hi Barry,
Thank you for the detailed response.
I definitely don't see this being a complicated IT project. The documents using Adobe Sign are mailed as PDFs. Docusign uses a slightly different process. This doesn't require server space or even software licenses. Adobe handles this in the cloud and it is seamless and easy to use.
If we already use adobe products (eg. photoshop, acrobat) and have a creative cloud subscription in-house this may already be included for us.
But in this case though, ARRL does not need a software license as the candidate has his license and originated the document and collected signatures. All I'm asking for is for the League to recognize this as a valid process rather than requiring paper.
I would be more than happy to support a motion, but it may be appropriate for this to come from E&E. I would definitely like this to happen in this cycle rather than just sit and become stale.
The candidate has offered to help staff with tech support. He is the head of tech support at a technology company that powers a lot of fortune 500 companies, including one I've worked for and had personal experience with. So he is very much a known quantity. In other words, he is fully willing to take the load off of ARRL IT support to get the staff up and running.
Ria N2RJ
On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 08:59, Shelley, Barry, N1VXY (CEO) <bshelley@arrl.org mailto:bshelley@arrl.org > wrote: > > Ria et al: > > Once again, it would appear that technology is moving faster than the ARRL. I've looked through our rules and recent actions regarding nomination petitions. Neither the rules nor the interpretations have considered the use of commercially available software like Adobe Sign, DocuSign and VeriSign. The issue comes down to whether or not we would accept the ultimate paperwork whereby the candidate has collected signatures using electronic means. This is something that, prior to this, has not been contemplated. > > By Law 18 addresses the filing of nominating petitions for Director/Vice Director elections. In part it states ".....The submission may be made by facsimile or electronic transmission of images, provided that upon request by the Secretary the original documents are received by the Secretary within seven days of the request." > > The "rules" I found for Section elections are similar. The Rules and Regulations Concerning American Radio Relay League Division and Section Manager Elections state "....Nominating petitions may be made by facsimile or electronic transmission of images, provided that upon request by the Field Services and Radiosport Manager the original documents are received by the Manager within seven days of the request...." > > In keeping with this, last year's Ethics and Elections Committee confirmed the practice of accepting .pdf copies of nominating petitions where the candidate had collected the signatures by sending the form out for signature and the individual had hand-signed and returned the form to the candidate electronically (pdf). This year's Committee reaffirmed that position. This also assumed that all the individual forms were aggregated and submitted to HQ either by mail or electronically with the other paperwork. While that was for Division elections, I believe it should also apply to Section elections as well. > > This is a long winded way of saying that our current election rules do not specifically address collecting signatures electronically and but they indicate only facsimile or electronic transmission of images (.pdf) are the acceptable forms for submission of nominating petitions. I realize that is not in keeping with the current technologies but it would seem to exclude use of those technologies at the current time. > > Having said that, there may be a way to change this, albeit within the current Division and Section election cycles. The Board could change By Law 18 to include electronic signatures at the upcoming meeting in July. It would take 12 votes as we're within the 30 day window prior to the meeting, but it could be done. > > HERE'S THE CAVEAT: Because I am not personally familiar with the technologies (although I've used them as a signee on many occasions), I can't say with any certainty what it would take to insure our ability to create and/or accept electronically signed documents both from the candidate and from individually signed petitions within an acceptable timeframe. I think we need to work to figure this out before any action by the Board. However, I don't want to add an IT project to the existing list of critical projects and defer resources for this. If this requires ARRL IT time or server space to complete, I would recommend it being deferred to later in the year and dealt with at the January meeting. > > I look forward to discussing this with you and will answer any questions you might have if I can. > > 73, > Barry, N1VXY > > > Message----- > From: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org > On Behalf Of > rjairam@gmail.com mailto:rjairam@gmail.com > Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 8:35 PM > To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@arrl.org mailto:arrl-odv@arrl.org > > Subject: [arrl-odv:30449] Electronic signatures > > One of the candidates for section manager in my division reached out to me regarding electronic signatures. He collected electronic signatures using Adobe Sign and is now being asked to submit "originals" presumably by mail on paper. > > Organizations all over the US and the world for that matter are now accepting these electronic signatures. You sign with a stylus or your finger on your phone and the signature is placed on the document and also recorded in an electronic database. Everyone from the FAA to the FCC, financial institutions and even car dealerships and insurance companies are now accepting them, and VE sessions are being conducted with e-signatures. Our LoTW system is also based on digital signatures, albeit a different type. > > The purpose of this email is twofold. > > 1. Barry - can you clarify if the staff are equipped to handle e-signatures, for, among other things - election petitions, and if not, can we ensure that they are equipped to do so. > > 2. Can we amend the by-laws to clarify that we will accept e-signatures? I would like to have E&E investigate the possibility and sponsor a motion, if needed. > > The need for this is that in times of restrictions due to public health emergencies such as Covid-19 or whatever else gets thrown at us, we can still carry on business with electronic signatures. This person is in New York City and as you know the virus hit hard there. > Traveling around the city to collect signatures (which would usually be done on mass transit) would be difficult due to the risk. > > Thank you for your consideration. > > Ria > N2RJ > _______________________________________________ > arrl-odv mailing list > arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org > https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
> >
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
> _______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv