I owe the membership and the board an apology. I did not conduct an adequate investigation of facts relating to the "Parity Act," but mistakenly simply relied on the judgement and integrity of of the League General Counsel and head of the Legislative Committee. I had heard vague rumors that some thought that the "compromise" legislation text might not be perfect, but assumed it was probably better than nothing. A day or two ago, I learned that N5AUS had prepared a fairly detailed analysis of why he felt the bill was flawed, and secured a copy of his thoughts. Suddenly my support changed from lukewarm to the belief that this is probably not in the best interests of Amateur Radio. I was not at all pleased when I found that certain actors, who were very aware of this analysis, had apparently conspired to keep it from the board. Meeting our fiduciary obligations as a board requires due diligence, which means directors must show that they conduct adequate investigation of facts relating to proposed actions so that they can form reasoned and principled decisions about them. Not having this information hindered fulfillment of my fiduciary obligation. I am no longer surprised that CAI is claiming victory over the League with respect to this bill. Attached is Stratton's March, 2016 analysis of the compromise language and why he finds it unacceptable. I hope that you concur in my belief that at least you should be aware of these considerations. Even if after reading them, and finding that you still support the wording of the bill, you should be prepared to deal with membership inquiries. 73, Dick Norton, N6AA