Tom — QSLing your note below. I’m happy to address the questions and comments made during my verbal report to the Board. 73, Brian N5ZGT
On Jul 3, 2017, at 7:55 AM, Tom Frenaye <frenaye@pcnet.com> wrote:
At 11:31 PM 6/22/2017, Brian Mileshosky/N5ZGT wrote:
For your awareness, the following message was just emailed directly to every Section Manager and Official Observer Coordinator to provide information and an update about the OO Program study that is underway.
Hi Brian -
Thanks for trying to keep the Board, SMs and OOCs updated.
Since you consistently describe what you are doing as a revitalization of the OO program, do you intend to make changes to the traditional peer-to-peer activity of sending out postcards to people who may or may not know of rules infractions, or to those who deserve Good Operator Report? I'm guessing you don't intend major changes for these activities, maybe just modernizing the process.
From our prior conversations, it sounds like the major focus is on the Amateur Auxiliary, which relates to our interaction with the FCC when we have significant problems that friendly postcards are not able to impact. None of your communications has mentioned the Amateur Auxiliary which was the formal name given to the portion of the OO program that supports enforcement activities with the FCC.
Given that we eliminated the job of the person coordinating our interface with the FCC (K0BOG) more than a year ago, and that the study committee has been talking about OO changes for nearly a year now, it really feels like we're stuck in the quicksand.
As of last July, we had 754 Official Observers in the Field Organization database, and it is the only individual field appointment where the number of volunteers has grown in the last five years..
I urge you and HQ to continue to encourage the OO program to do the peer-to-peer reminder job it has been doing since 1926. The formal involvement with FCC on enforcement is relatively new (25 years?), and I agree it needs to be updated, but working with the FCC is really a small portion of the overall effort we take to encourage amateurs to be aware of and follow the FCC rules.
I fear the present communications and delays have only discouraged volunteers more. At last weekend's New England Division cabinet meeting, Tom Gallagher gave a brief update on the OO program issues and made it sound like the only focus of the program was on getting the bad guys in front of the FCC. It isn't. I know that's the focus of your committee's work though. By not acknowledging the peer-to-peer activities are and will continue, it makes every volunteer question whether his or her efforts are appreciated. 90% of the OO volunteers will never be involved in the more serious cases that should be referred to the FCC, we really should only need to focus on the subset of those who will. Keep the rest of the OO volunteers active, interested and appreciated.
I was also surprised to learn that we have stopped allowing Section Managers to make Official Observer appointments while this study is pending. I don't know how long that policy has been in place but it was news to me and seems like a counter-productive step.
Your update to SMs/OOCs says your report will be delivered to the Executive Committee. Does that mean you don't expect to finish until at least the fall EC meeting? The EC won't be able to approve action to change the program and any commitments we have with the FCC, that would have to be the full board. So are we now looking at waiting until January 2018? Hope not.
-- Tom
===== e-mail: k1ki@arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ <http://www.arrl.org/>Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv