Greetings. The following is absolutely confidential, and subject to the attorney-client privilege against disclosure. Some of you may soon have referred to you, or you may read yourself, an article that appears at page 10 of the July, 2003 issue of 73, Amateur Radio Today, entitled "Inside the ARRL - the Real Story". This article was allegedly authored by John J. Phillips, K2QAI, a former employee of the ARRL. Mr. Phillips was employed by the ARRL from May 7, 2001 to October 18, 2002 as a member of the laboratory staff. He resigned from this position. He was not terminated. He subsequently filed an administrative complaint against ARRL with the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. That complaint is now pending. It asserts, in essence, treatment which constituted wrongful termination of employment. The complaint is viewed by senior staff as meritless and it is being vigorously defended by Connecticut counsel. The Administration and Finance Committee has been updated on this matter. It is urgent that you not discuss Mr. Phillips or his employment with ARRL in any comment you are asked to make, or choose to make, about this article or otherwise. The article is not complimentary to ARRL, to the Board, the Executive Committee, or ARRL's policies. It is inaccurate in all material respects, and the opinions stated in it are without any factual basis or foundation. Nevertheless, it does not, in our view, contain actionable statements. Rather, it contains certain admissions that may be helpful to our attorney in Connecticut. However, any discussion of, or references to, Mr. Phillips by any of our official family could be used against ARRL, and could have very serious repercussions. Please, therefore, make no statement to anyone regarding Mr. Phillips whatsoever or respond to any question regarding Mr. Phillips. Indicate, instead, that, on advice of counsel, you are unable to comment regarding Mr. Phillips. In case anyone should encounter Mr. Phillips, please do not discuss ARRL with him. It is fine to respond to specific questions about the points made in the article that do not deal with Mr. Phillips, to agree or disagree with the substance of it, and to indicate that the article is inaccurate in some respects, as long as none of your remarks address Mr. Phillips, the portions relating to his employment, or his motivations in writing the article. Thank you. To the extent that this article may have been written to provoke some response from ARRL that could be used against ARRL, your careful attention to the above is critical, and we all have a fiduciary duty to ARRL to avoid any statements which might be harmful in this respect. 73, Chris W3KD