Howard, That's an excellent article - Thanks for posting it. There is a lot of good information that will give the board some good ideas on handling this tricky issue. Regards, Rod On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 4:31 PM Michel, Howard, WB2ITX (CEO) < wb2itx@arrl.org> wrote:
Dear Rod, John, ODV,
ARRL is not the only member association that wrestles with the concept of open Board meetings. I've attached an article written by a Fellow of the ASAE, and a lawyer who specialty appears to be association related topics.
I've previously shared this article with Greg's Committee on Communications. It offers some good insights and suggestions along the lines of what Greg talked about regarding meeting minutes.
73, Howard, WB2ITX On 12/19/2019 5:07 PM, Rod Blocksome wrote:
John & ODV,
Regarding your proposed motion "Open Meetings - 1", I have a few observations, concerns, and questions for the board to consider.
1 - Bylaw 25 sets parameters for two regularly scheduled board meetings - the annual meeting and the second meeting. Yet your proposed changes only addresses member attendance to the annual meeting. Was this an oversight and if not, what is the reason?
2 - I'm curious as to the rationale behind requiring 180-days of ARRL membership to be qualified to attend?
3 - My real concern with this motion is the very real potential for unintended consequences. Sections 4.4 & 4.5 of the Director's Workbook provide guidance in the handling of confidential matters within ODV. But would these guidelines apply to members sitting in on board meetings? If not, then I can see much more board work being done in a committee of the whole. Which, in turn, will not only frustrate the member observers but all of our members who read the minutes of the board meetings. The end result will easily be less transparency rather than more.
I'm a firm believer that the best decisions to come out of a board depends greatly on the ability to have free, healthy, and candid debates and discussions. To open the board meetings up to live audio or video streaming and/or large numbers of member observers is going to severely hinder these debates and discussion and hence our ability to accomplish work.
I do believe we should try to capture in the official minutes the important points presented during the discussion of the motion as much as possible without giving away details of plans, strategy, personnel issues, financial & business issues, etc. and always following the confidentiality guidelines in The Director's Workbook sections 4.4 & 4.5. This would give members more insight than the usual "Moved, Seconded, Discussed, Motion passes" minutes required by Robert's Rules of Order.
Perhaps there are other ways to keep members better informed without impinging on the ability of the board to make informed and deliberative decisions? Over .... and Merry Christmas, Rod, K0DAS
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 7:29 PM John Robert Stratton <N5AUS@n5aus.com> wrote:
Ladies, Gentlemen and ARRL Secretary
Enclosed are two motions that I wish to have considered by the Board at the January meeting. The changes appear as underlines.
_______________________________________
John Robert Stratton
N5AUS
Director
West Gulf Division
Office: 512-445-6262
Cell: 512-426-2028
P.O. Box 2232
Austin, Texas 78768-2232
*_______________________________________* _______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv
-- Howard E. Michel, WB2ITX Chief Executive Officer ARRL, The National Association for Amateur Radio® 225 Main Street, Newington, CT 06111-1494 USA Telephone: +1 860-594-0404 email: hmichel@arrl.org