Ladies & Gentlemen, After considering the information available to me, I feel I must express a level of dissatisfaction over the handling of news about the now-famed Red Cross letter to Joel. My dissatisfaction also impacts my feelings about when we should legitimately enter into negotiations toward a new RC:ARRL SOU. I was not present at the ARES Forum at the HamventionR; therefore, I base any judgment on information released from HQ (web site and ARRL Letter) and discussions on ODV as well as word-of-mouth statements by people who attended the Forum. My perception of word-of-mouth statements and the post on our web site is that it essentially proclaimed the background check issue with RC is resolved. My perception of the statement about this in the most recent ARRL Letter has only very slightly varied from the initial position - i.e., everything is resolved once a t is crossed and an i dotted. Not being an attorney, I do not know just how much additional effort will be needed to be certain the issue is resolved. It seems obvious that further effort toward resolution is needed, otherwise Chris and others would not have expressed concern over the meaning and interpretation of RC's statements. Because of this, I believe we are in the unusual position of having moved from a typical stance of overly conservative in releasing information to our members to one of releasing only the favorable aspects of a complex letter. Concerns appear to remain to be addressed before RC and ARRL are truly aligned. Based upon statements made on ODV, I don't understand why we sent a message of success to our SMs as well as our members without including relevant cautions. I have sufficient faith in the members that they can understand messages that contain both good and un-good (not necessarily bad) information. My expectation as just one Board member is that the background check issue will be fully resolved and agreed before a new SOU is negotiated and agreed. In the meantime, it is inappropriate to tell our members that they/we are an "ARC partner." We cannot be said to be such a partner until there is an agreement of partnership (SOU) between the two organizations. If asked by GLD members about the status of the background check "agreement," I will reply that the situation is promising, but that there is still no such agreement. I will not mislead them. For what it is worth. Jim Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director ARRL Great Lakes Division 5065 Bethany Rd. Mason, OH 45040 E-mail: k8je@arrl.org; Tel.: 513-459-0142 ARRL - The Reason Amateur Radio Is! Members - The Reason ARRL Is!