Dick, I told you a long time ago, the first time you attempted to lecture me about how to write contracts, that I am a professional person and I expect to be treated like one. I also told you that we should be able to disagree without being disagreeable. But I have had to endure an awful lot of completely baseless personal attacks from you and others either now or formerly associated with the Board and I don't intend to sit back and take it any longer. You are out of line. Cut it out. You have no business serving on a non-profit board of directors because you know nothing of collegiality and your interpersonal skills are clearly inadequate for the job. You really should consider resigning from the Board, Dick. Seriously. Chris On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Richard J. Norton <richardjnorton@gmail.com> wrote:
Shame on me.
Yeah. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. He did it again, and I fell for it.
---------------
Number 1
A while back, I expressed displeasure after finding out that the League's General Counsel, through the Legislative Action Committee appeared to have withheld important analysis of the HR555 language from the rest of the board. Vice Director Stratton clearly illustrated why CAI proposed the "compromise language," and why they are claiming victory.
Even Fred Hopengarten, K1VR, the most experienced lawyer involved with amateur antenna litigation says hams would be worse off if HR555 becomes law, and we should should work to stop it, a view shared by most all involved antenna attorneys.
Basking in this Potemkin Village illusion of success may be briefly satisfying, but when reality hits, the League will likely suffer another blow to its reputation. If HR555 becomes law, a good many HOA-based hams may actually be hurt.
------
Number 2
At March's Executive Committee meeting in Denver, I again believed the League's General Counsel, this time when he told the assembled group that the League's governance structure needed to be changed to bring it into compliance with Connecticut state law. I was actually thinking through what should be done to solve the problem. What should we do with our non-compliant Vice Directors?
It was quite a shock when Vice Directors Raisbeck and Tiemstra not only eviscerated the "out-of-compliance" claim, but even the claim that Day Pitney's advice even actually said that it was out-of-compliance.
Yes, it appears that the governance structure is not out-of-compliance, and that Day Pitney's advice actually did not say that it was!
Its sad to now need to skeptically view what is delivered to us as being "legal advice" might simply be camouflage for some hidden political agenda.
I have never been an Vice Director, but have seen significant value imparted to the League by a number of them. I am of the belief that Vice Directors should continue their role, and nothing needs to be done, particularly in a panic.
From the information I have received, which included observing the full March EC meeting, I have no intention of supporting any changes in the position and status of Vice Directors. Of course, this might change should I see something compelling in he future.
I expect to be on Monday's webinar.
As I'll be aboard a cruise ship on Thursday, with pretty steep Internet charges, would someone please confirm that I can be reimbursed from the board meeting account. From discussions I've had, there is likely inadequate support for the measure to even bother continuing with Thursday's meeting, but feel the need to follow any conversation thoroughly, should it occur.
73,
Dick Norton, N6AA
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
-- Christopher D. Imlay Booth, Freret & Imlay, LLC 14356 Cape May Road Silver Spring, Maryland 20904-6011 (301) 384-5525 telephone (301) 384-6384 facsimile W3KD@ARRL.ORG