We have 156,000 (more or less) members, or roughly 10, 400 per ARRL Division, on average.
If we were to have the Dakota Divison annex contiguous states until it got to a total of 10,400 members, it would probably encompass one-third of the land mass of the Lower 48 states.
There are some alternatives:
Directors should base their decisions and their votes on the
quality of the arguments presented during our deliberations; since we share those arguments here on ODV and in our Board and Committee meetings, I don’t see why or how strict proportional representation is a big deal.
Speaking as a League member (not as a Board member), I’m not bothered by this.
Answers to K1TWF’s three questions:
Bud, W2RU
From: arrl-odv <arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org> on behalf of Mike Raisbeck via arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org>
Reply-To: Mike Raisbeck <vze18vwgu@verizon.net>
Date: Friday, February 5, 2021 at 11:21 AM
To: arrl-odv <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org>
Subject: [arrl-odv:31922] And while we're on the topic of voting ...
Folks,
It's been some time since we have discussed the matter of redefining some division boundaries.
Yes, I know just how unpopular this is as a Board topic; it has bubbled up several times during my tenure. No one wants to do it but to ignore it is to condone
a very substantial unfairness in the value of the individual vote of our members.
At the moment, the individual votes in the Dakota Division (all 3241 of them) have 4.6 times the clout of individual votes in the Southeastern Division (all 14,943
of them).
QUESTION 1 - is there anyone on this Board that feels this is fair?
QUESTION 2 - is there anyone on this Board who believes this is acceptable?
QUESTION 3 - is there anyone on this Board willing to admit that s/he doesn't have the [name-your-favorite-vital-body-part]'s to do anything about it?
If anyone answers "yes" to any of these, please present your opinion and arguments to the Board so we can discuss.
So, what ARE we going to do about it ??
Mike
K1TWF
1st VP