I agree with Director Widin’ s comments. Regards, Dennis From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of G Widin Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 11:04 AM To: Kay Craigie Cc: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:23281] Re: EC study motions With regard to Minute 28, making the E&E Committee members elected, I have a few thoughts-- Currently, the E&E members are appointed by the President. The President, of course, is elected by the Board. And the President appoints the standing committees of the Board. This system has worked smoothly, it would appear, for some considerable time. I believe this is a sensible system--the President must, after all, be able to work well with the committees and particularly the committee chairs, as the means of accomplishing his or her objectives, which are presumably a part of why the Board chose that person in the first place. If I were President, I would want the opportunity to appoint people who were compatible with me, and who shared my goals and viewpoints on what objectives were important and why. If you don't trust the President to make these appointments, don't vote for that person. It seems that making committee membership (and particularly E&E) elected suggests that there should be at least two different points of view within the Board of how we do things. I don't think that's something we should encourage. I'm completely in favor of a diversity of opinion on the Board, but I don't think we want to encourage factions within an organization of 15 members. And I come back to a question I've asked before--what problem does this solve? I think the appointed E&Es have done a good job of dealing with some difficult issues. I don't see how making them elected would have improved anything. 73, Greg, K0GW On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Kay Craigie <n3kn@verizon.net <mailto:n3kn@verizon.net> > wrote: At the Board meeting, three items were referred to the EC. Two have to do with internal governance matters, and one has to do with a possible FCC Rules change. They are as follows. Minute 27 - Addition of a Bylaw affecting Vice Director attendance at meetings. The proposed language from Mr. Rehman's motion says: "Unless a majority of the Directors vote to exclude the Vice Directors from a specific meeting, Vice Directors have the right to be present at all formal meetings of the Board including Special Meetings, Electronic Meetings, and meetings of the Committee of The Whole." Minute 28 - Change of the final paragraph in Bylaw 44. The proposed language from Mr. Rehman's motion says: "The members of the committee shall be elected at the Annual Meeting of the Board from among those Directors not subject to election during the year of service. The Director receiving the greatest number votes will be the chairman of the committee. Should two or more Directors tie, an election will be held between the tied Directors to determine the chairman." Minute 37 - Petition the FCC to change Technician privileges, granting more digital privileges. The operative part of Mr. Rehman's motion says: "Create a 10 kHz Technician Digital Subband with a limit of 200 watts in the 80m, 40m, and 15m bands. Digital modes would be limited to RTTY and PSK. The subbands would be 3,600-3,610 kHz (moving the bottom of the Extra phone band to 3,610 kHz), 7,115-7,125 kHz, and 21.190-21.200 MHz." Additionally, there is the matter of Bylaw 45. After the events of this past spring, it's evident that the Bylaw should be reviewed to make sure it clearly embodies the principles that are necessary and sufficient to the organization's best interests *and* that the Board will objectively and consistently apply not only to candidate wanna-bes but also to incumbents as our life situations change. The appeal process also needs attention. The motion proposing revision to this Bylaw was not introduced and thus not formally referred to the EC, but we don't need a weatherman to see which way the wind blows. We need to think about principles and processes. The principles become the yardstick to which we compare the existing COI policy and any proposed revisions of it. The processes for application of the Bylaw (particularly with regard to appeals) should be explicit, with reasonable deadlines. Directors, Vice Directors, and Officers are encouraged to post input on any or all of these items at your earliest convenience so the EC will have the benefit of your thoughts well in advance of their in-person meeting. Thanks & 73 - Kay N3KN _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org <mailto:arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> http://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv