To: The members of the CAC and the DXAC From: The Programs and Services Committee Date: December 2020 Topic: Reorganization of the Advisory Committee Structure At both meetings of the Executive Committee in 2018, the topic of evaluating and possibly restructuring the current Advisory Committee structures was discussed. During the EC’s Spring meeting working group of Directors David Norris, K5UZ and Jim Boehner, N2ZZ, and Assistant Secretary Dan Henderson, N1ND, were appointed to discuss the matter, and report back to the Board. After the EC’s Fall meeting, it was decided to refer the topic to the Programs and Services Committee for consideration and to develop a proposal for consideration by the full Board at a later time. During 2019 and 2020, the PSC appointed a working group of Directors David Norris, K5UZ, Rod Blocksome, K0DAS, and Assistant Secretary Dan Henderson, N1ND to make recommendations. What you have before you is the proposal from that working group, that was passed by the full PSC in a December 15th teleconference. It has not been approved by the Board or ordered implemented at this time. It will be an item for discussion bythe full ARRL Board at its January 2021 meeting. The question that is immediately raised is, of course, why take this action? Several thoughts came into consideration here. After significant discussions, and over a period of time starting before the EC’s consideration of this action in 2018, there became a growing consensus that smaller, short-term working groups were a more efficient method for the advisory committees to provide input. Having a small group of recognized experts on specific topics, working to provide input to the PSC, allows for quicker response times and allows the PSC to more quickly have follow-up input from a working group. This proposal is not in anyway, and should not be seen as, an attempt to “fire” the current members of the CAC or the DXAC. It’s also in no way meant as an indication of unhappiness with the work product of either group. In fact, if the proposal is approved and implemented, the PSC strongly encourages each director, as they vet and nominate persons for the Advisory Working Group pools, to determine if their existing representatives are willing to consider become involved in the new structure. This proposal expands the “talent pool” of vetted experts on various issues that the PSC can draw on to serve. It allows for the “old guard” to continue to play a role in the process, while also allowing newer, younger members, who have demonstrated an interest to participate, the chance to bring new perspective and additional talent from which the League can benefit. The proposal offers every director the opportunity to enlist and engage more “advisors” from their division’s membership. It offers the chance for more people to be involved in helping shape league policies by working with their director on issues of concern to the “rank and file” membership. A quick tasking to a vetted working group on a variety of topics that come up could easily be put together, sent to the selected working group, and have a faster turn-around time. This would allow the PSC (or other Board-level groups seeking input) to more quickly and efficiently be able to address the issue in question. Again, to emphasize the point that this is not being considered in any way because of either the DXAC or the CAC not performing their functions. It is a recognition of the ability to more quickly and efficiently solicit information and opinions from the every-growing group of ARRL members with talent and expertise in a wide range of topics. Small working-groups have been used at times, especially by the PSC, and have proven a very good tool to assist the PSC in its work. It is the belief of the PSC that reorganizing the Advisory Committee structures to such a model will allow the PSC to better serve the membership and the Board, allow a greater voice from more individuals when looking at new policies, programs and procedures, and to improve the services offered by the ARRL. If the Board approves this recommendation, the details of sunsetting the existing structures and implementing the changes will be hammered out and announced. Also the PSC will be working on the vetting criteria and formalizing the new procedures into the ARRL’s rules for advisory committees. The PSC will keep the existing CAC and DXAC apprised of the status and implementation of any changes that are approved.