Taking this control away from the candidate can have real repercussions, especially for those who need to clear our intent to run for Director with our employer but wish to file anyway given the deadlines.

I’m interested to hear a counter argument to this. I’m keeping an open mind.

Ria

N2RJ

On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 11:21 PM <hopengarten@post.harvard.edu> wrote:

Colleagues,

I attach a Motion from E&E, v3.

W7VO and I think it is a good idea. As does N6AA. I can’t recall, at this moment, hearing from anyone else. As for me, I don’t understand why we don’t release qualified candidate names as soon as they are approved for the ballot. Why wait?

K6JAT objects. So as to not mischaracterize, here is his objection:

“My recollection is that the concerns were with potential impacts and interactions with other rules, bylaws, procedures and time frames governing elections.

Actually, since the Legal Restructuring Committee is going to be reviewing the Bylaws, wouldn't it be best to wait for that effort? I don't think there is any immediate crying need for this amendment.”

W7VO and I hold the view that if there is an interaction of which we are not aware, and it becomes visible later, we can fix it later. But in the meantime, the membership has a right to know who has filed papers and is qualified as a candidate.

K6JAT may ask that this motion be removed from the Consent Agenda. If so, there will be discussion in the normal course.

In the meantime, if you see something that should be changed in this motion, please let me know. Better to bring up issues sooner than later.

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

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

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