On February 8, 2020 at 8:56 AM "rjairam@gmail.com" <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:

I don’t agree.

I let my membership lapse some years ago for financial reasons. I was still committed to ham radio and the ARRL, ARES and everything else. I just didn’t have the money. 

I did recover and when my situation improved have since opted for life membership. 

It’s easy to say it’s a low bar but we all have our reasons for not renewing, those of us who didn’t renew at some time or another. Several things could also happen:

- Identity theft

- auto renew payment failure (from what I gather this is the reason that this last cycle’s director candidate’s membership lapsed)

- Illness 

- emigrating from another country 

- military service and long deployment 

- renewal mail not reaching them due to postal issues 

And the list goes on.

I also don’t think it’s an objective criteria to measure commitment, and seems entirely arbitrary. 

I also think that the threshold is too strict. There shouldn’t be an interruption for someone who renews within, say, a 30-90 day period. 

Ria

N2RJ 

On Sat, Feb 8, 2020 at 1:35 AM k6jat < k6jat@comcast.net> wrote:

Sorry, Mike. We're not talking about someone who is just late, but someone who missed a year or more. Four years of continuous membership is not a high bar and shows the minimal level of commitment that we want. (I seriously don't believe we'll be short of qualified candidates.)

Having a fundamental understanding of our unique hobby and its culture is essential for the manager of our professional staff.

73,

Jim K6JAT 

Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S8.

-------- Original message --------

From: Michael Ritz < w7vo@comcast.net>

Date: 2/7/20 7:50 PM (GMT-08:00)

To: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org

Subject: [arrl-odv:29636] Re: PDF of Jan30th Meeting CEO Search Committee Minutes

I am going to agree with Fred on this one. I think it needs to be "preferred", not "required" in this case. We need to find the best candidates for the job, and to exclude somebody because he or she was late on an ARRL membership renewal is not grounds to exclude them. 

73;

Mike

W7VO

On February 7, 2020 at 7:24 PM k1vr Fred < hopengarten@post.harvard.edu> wrote:

I oppose any move that would require continuous ARRL membership for the past four years, moving that qualification from “preferred” to “required.” According to Rod, K0DAS, see below (“59 years & 6 months and an ARRL member for most of that time”), there would have been times in his long service to the League when he would have been disqualified under the “required” rule, and that would have represented a great loss.

 

There are other ways to have shown a passion for amateur radio and the ARRL. I consider a new rule requiring membership the past four years to be arbitrary. I’m all for four years (or more!), but without the requirement of contiguous or current. For example, what if we had a candidate who is 35, got married at 30 and has been raising a family for the past four years, inadvertently missing a renewal by 38 days – but before that had been an ARRL club president, an ARISS Board member, a Diamond Club member, and an ARRL Foundation scholarship recipient (make up your own qual . . .), co-author of an FT-8 variant, etc. Let’s say he or she just forgot and missed the renewal deadline.  Arrrrgh.

 

We had a DIR/VDIR candidate we had to disqualify in this past election cycle because he failed timely renewal, and I felt very badly about it. I had no trouble casting my E&E vote against his candidacy, because I thought they rule was clear. But I do not favor eliminating otherwise qualified candidates who might have missed a renewal deadline.

 

If a lawyer misses a renewal deadline for required bar membership, the organized bar has ways (usually a petition and a fine), but they don’t take away the chance to be a lawyer.

 

We are but fallible humans. Let those who are infallible cast the first stone.

 

Fred Hopengarten, Esq.   K1VR

Six Willarch Road

Lincoln, MA 01773

781.259.0088, k1vr@arrl.org

 

New England Director

Serving ME, NH, VT, MA, RI and CT

 

From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Dale Williams
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2020 9:11 PM
To: arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
Subject: [arrl-odv:29630] Re: PDF of Jan30th Meeting CEO Search Committee Minutes

 

I also agree with Rod.

Dale  WA8EFK

On 2/7/2020 8:11 PM, David Norris via arrl-odv wrote:

I agree with Rod!

 

73 

David A. Norris, K5UZ

Director, Delta Division

 

Sent from my iPhone

 

On Feb 7, 2020, at 5:28 PM, Rod Blocksome <rod.blocksome@gmail.com> wrote:

 

I'll throw my $0.02 worth on to the pile ......

To qualify for election as a director, one must be an ARRL member continuously for the preceding four years.

Yet this is only a "preferred" requirement for CEO - and it would seem the "four" years are neither contiguous or current.

 

Same comment goes for "preferred" active amateur radio operator.

 

I think these two attributes should be moved from the "preferred" to the "required" category.

I know the counter argument is this will limit the number of otherwise qualified candidates.  But as an active amateur for the last 59 years & 6 months and an ARRL member for most of that time, I believe these two qualifications are necessary to ensure the long-term leadership stability we must achieve.  I urge the committee to seriously consider this request.

 

Thanks & 73,

Rod, K0DAS

 

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 3:05 PM Michael Ritz <w7vo@comcast.net> wrote:

My take: The primary vision for the ARRL comes from the League's Strategic Plan. The CEO has vital input into the plan, as in the end he or she has to own it. Their primary job is to carry out the goals an initiatives as outlined in the plan. The vision itself is a collaboration derived from input provided by all stakeholders, and is outlined in the plan. 

A point of reference: I never saw or heard the prior CEO discuss anything about the ARRL Strategic Plan, and the first time I spoke with him he didn't even know the plan existed. That surprised me to no end, and I never forgot that conversation. 

 

We need to do better this time. Understanding the fundamentals of strategy is a business essential.

 

73;
Mike
W7VO

 

 

On February 7, 2020 at 12:24 PM "rjairam@gmail.com" <rjairam@gmail.com> wrote:

I agree with Bob.

 

I would especially support a revision of the job title.

 

It needs to be absolutely clear that this person isn’t hired solely for strategic vision. This person must be able to actively manage the affairs of the League including delegation like a general manager would.

 

Perhaps executive director or executive vice-president would fit better.

 

73

Ria, N2RJ 

 

On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 3:12 PM Bob Famiglio, K3RF via arrl-odv < arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> wrote:

Is the description of duties concentric with the bylaw definition of   “The Chief Executive Officer shall manage the affairs of the League under the direction of the Board of Directors”?  Some duties are, but the lists of duties to be published may suggest a different relationship.  And was there any thought to morphing the title to something more realistic such as Executive Director (understanding General Manager, though accurate, is not in vogue anymore except in broadcast) so as not to blur the responsibility with that of the board and particularly the board elected President with regard to policy and direction?  If not, we may end up facing the same issues.

 

Bylaw 31.  The President shall preside over all meetings of the Board of Directors.  He shall, subject to instructions from the Board of Directors, and with the assistance of the Chief Executive Officer, represent the League in its relationships with the public and the various governments, governmental agencies and officials with which the League may be concerned, and shall be the official spokesman of the Board of Directors in regard to all matters of League policy. . .

 

Did we consider how these duties can be reconciled with the job description for a CEO?  Do we want another 30,000 foot view guy or is that job for the board and board officers?  Isn’t the CEO (Exec. Director) supposed to run the shop looking inward and providing leadership in that domain as opposed to outward?  Running 225 Main Street is an important job of course, but are we giving the wrong impression to applicants?  

 

 

Bob Famiglio, K3RF

Vice Director - ARRL Atlantic Division

610-359-7300

<image002.png>

 

www.QRZ.com/db/K3RF

 

 

 

 

 

From: arrl-odv On Behalf Of Kermit Carlson via arrl-odv
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2020 2:11 PM
To: ODV <arrl-odv@arrl.org>
Subject: [arrl-odv:29609] PDF of Jan30th Meeting CEO Search Committee Minutes

 

 

     Hello

 

          Please find attached a PDF file of the minutes as

modified and approved at last evening's meeting of the

CEO Search Committee. 

 

     Thank You,

 

          73, Kermit W9XA

_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
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

 

_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
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

 

_______________________________________________
     

arrl-odv mailing list
     

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

 

_______________________________________________
arrl-odv mailing list
arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org
https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv