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 cid:a4a12f0b-0468-4a39-b953-31b2a3da8564 Serving ME, NH, VT, MA, RI and CT -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
