I would urge people to reject this idea.
 
It sounds to me like a formula that, rather than improving the decision-making process, would enshrine the "Good Ole' Boy" mentality of the Board more deeply into our rules.
 
Mike
K1TWF
 
 
On 06/24/14, Doug Rehman<doug@k4ac.com> wrote:
 

Greg:

 

In the past 3 months a significant amount of man-hours were lost dealing with two decisions of the E&E: notification of the membership concerning ballots (3-0) and Dwayne’s situation (2-1). Between emails, phone calls, and GoToMeeting sessions, I personally expended dozens of hours.

 

While Dwayne’s situation was complex, I believe that E&E could have reached the same end result as it took the entire Board to do.

 

The decision concerning ballot notifications was, pardon the colloquialism, just plain wrong.

 

By making the E&E elected, the committee will better reflect the thought process of the entire Board and thereby eliminate left field decisions that cause the entire Board to become involved in a review/repair of the situation.

 

E&E is perhaps the most important of the committees. Just as the EC is chosen by a plurality of the Board, the best selection of committee members for E&E would be done by a plurality of the Board.

 

73,

Doug

K4AC

 

 

From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of G Widin
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:08 AM
To: arrl-odv
Subject: [arrl-odv:22867] Bylaw 41 change--making E&E elected

 

Doug et al.,

What problem is being solved by making E&E elected, rather than appointed?

     Greg, K0GW




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