Where Never Is Heard... ARRL Board "Code of Conduct" on HamRadioNow

​

Our cryptic title refers to the ARRL Code of Conduct for Directors, initiated in January 2017, that contains multiple provisions requiring Directors to support League positions even if they personally disagree, and not publicly speak against them. The link takes you to a copy of the PDF that I've marked up to highlight the many sections that apply.

This HamRadioNow program brings CQ editor Rich Moseson W2VU, blogger and podcaster Dan Romanchik KB6NU and blogger and podcaster Sterling Coffey N0SSC together with hosts David W0DHG and Gary KN4AQ for an in-depth discussion of the Code of Conduct and the underlying issues with the ARRL Board.

We talk about how the Board has apparently been systematically removing 'disruptive' members by finding ways to keep them from running for re-election (Doug Rehman K4AC [former SE Div Director], Bob Famiglio K3RF [EPA Vice Director, seeking to run for Director]), and how we predict that will happen to current SW Div Director Dick Norton N6AA following his censure by the Board for allegedly speaking out against the Code of Conduct at the Visalia International DX Conference in April 2017.

CQ's December editorial, ARRL: Circling the Wagons, and a White Paper with even more details on what's happening at the ARRL Board, will be online soon at the CQ web site. CQ's January editorial will focus on the Code of Conduct itself.

Dan Romanchik KB6NU's blog post - What the heck is the ARRL Board thinking? - on Dick Norton's censure contains comments from prominent hams who were there and said that Dick spoke about the Code of Conduct, but not against it. The minutes of the meeting where the Code was approved show that Dick and two others Board members voted against it.

Here's the show. You can get the audio-only version at our web site, https://HamRadioNow.tv, or on your favorite podcast app:

​

 

Oh boy now you went ahead and did it Gary,

This sure sounds like a large Australian marsupial running back-n-forth on a wood floor thingamajiggy tossing a large Orange ball in a net, I'm sure you can figure this meaning out.

I sure feel like I pulled a RIP-VAN-WINKLE and woke up to have Adolph Schicklgruber and his clan running the ARRL.

Also, I sure hope that none of you 5 rabble-rousers use LOTW or subscribe to QST like dummy me because if you do then I'd wager that next week yours and my TQSL certificates will stop working and our remaining issues of QST will be lost in the mail.

I wonder if there is any way to have my remaining 11 months of QST credited to another magazine?

 

Moar typical League-bashing.

 

I guess you didn't really watch the video.....these guys all have a vested interest and a long history with the ARRL, and are not only urging ARRL members not to quit, but asking for non-members to join the ARRL in order to vote out those directors that have let the ARRL as they know it go astray. While I'm not sure my hip-waders can go that deep into the political swamp, this in clearly NOT league-bashing, it is a presentation of the state of the league. Don't bury your head in the sand.

 

ARRL is not "your friend".
It is essentially a corporation run for the enjoyment and profit of some guys in Connecticut.
The sooner you learn that, the better.

 

I agree, and to talk on your radio is free, unless you choose to pay someone.
I choose to talk on my radio and buy food for my family.

 

I may not always agree with some of the things the ARRL does or proposes, but we don't have anyone else representing us and helping protect our frequency spectrum in Washington, D.C.

 

That's one reason we're not saying "burn it down."

But the ARRL doesn't have any oversight, and critical Directors are being muzzled and turfed out. As the CQ editorial asks, "What is the ARRL afraid of?"

These five Directors are up for election next year. Their constituents should be asking them that question, and the answers should be public (list courtesy of www.N0SSC.com) :

• Kermit Carlson W9XA (Central Division, member of the now-infamous Ethics & Elections Committee and maker of the censure motion)
• Mike Lisenco N2YBB (Hudson Division, member of the Executive Committee and the one who seconded the censure motion)
• Tom Frenaye K1KI (New England Division and member of the Ethics and Elections Committee)
• Jim Pace K7CEX (Northwestern Division and member of the Ethics & Elections Committee)
• Jim Boehner N2ZZ (Roanoke Division).

 

One voice is good, but only after healthy debate and compromise, anything other than that is not representative of the membership. We need leadership and representation in DC and the rest of the world, but only if it reflects a well thought and well debated position that is best for all of Amateur Radio.

 

If you read the Code of Conduct, it does encourage 'healthy debate and compromise" and consideration of member's input, but only within the walls of the Board Room.

Before the Board votes on a motion, Board members are free to discuss and debate issues with members. But once the Board arrives at a decision our representatives are prohibited from telling us about the discussions, the pro's and con's, that came up at the Board meeting. If a vote isn't recorded, they can't even tell us how they voted. They can't tell is if they disagreed with the decision, or why, even if they say "I disagree, but I support the vote of the majority." The code says they have to fall in line, and suggests that if they can't, they should quit.

I don't think it's a stretch to say that the Board members can't even review the League member's debate that happened before the vote was taken - at least not the 'con' side. Well, they can, technically, as long as their comments can't possibly "bring the (ARRL) into disrepute". And who gets to decide if those commends do bring disrepute? The rest of the ARRL Board.

The Code notes that Directors need to be able to candidly debate issues without... what? Us learning about what they said? Whether or not North Korea should be a DX Entity? Whether or not we should reinstate the Morse code requirement?

Some issues fall in that category. Personnel matters are usually confidential. But today sessions of Congress, many congressional committee meetings and hearings, some courtrooms, many state legislatures and even county and city council meetings are broadcast live on the Internet for all to see. And fall asleep to.

As CQ editor Rich Moseson W2VU asks in the December editorial, "What is the ARRL afraid of?"

This is far from over.

 

While enjoying a non-profit status. What a racket.

 

The first rule of Fight Club is you don't talk about Fight Club. I'm convinced they censured N6AA merely because he brought the code of conduct up as a hamfest presentation, because otherwise the board passed it fairly unnoticed by anyone - until he dared to point it out knowing it would elicit a negative reaction without him even saying anything negative about it.

Exactly. Here in Texas government councils/boards have open public meetings, many of which are streamed on the Internet or are on Cable Access TV. They have the option to go into private "Executive Session" which only is supposed to include personnel matters.

ARRL isn't a Government entity, but when you have to vote representatives it should have at least the veneer of transparency. When can elected representatives not speak candidly in a public forum? When they fear that the people who voted them in won't like what they say.

The ways the ARRL have drummed out dissenters should only be reserved for the severe ethical infractions. Embezzlement, really detrimental comments about ARRL (i.e. going around saying the ARRL sucks and nobody should join). Nothing of the sort has occurred. This isn't good for the league. Everyone would rather have a board that doesn't nessesarily agree with each other any hashes out the issues than one that silences dissent. Speaking of North Korea, that's what they do...

 

Does anyone have a say in HOW they represent us? ARRL membership among US Hams is only approximately 22% (that's a high estimate because there are international members). So if the ARRL decided to make dipole antennas illegal, and they put it to a vote among their members and got a simple majority of 51%, that would allow 11.5% of US hams dictate whether the other 88.5% can put up a dipole. The only way to have a say is by paying to join the ARRL.

It may seem like a silly example, but by picking and choosing winners and losers in elections, and by banning directors from expressing a negative opinion about league decisions, they are guaranteeing a simple majority on EVERY vote. They aren't representing you and me, they are representing their own interests and their own agenda. If you want a voice in Washington, you've got to pay for membership, and even then you still do not have a voice if it is contrary to a league decision. It's really become a shakedown, but nobody wants to take a step back and consider this because until now, the ARRL has done their best to poll ALL amateurs on issues, even if they were not members. In the past I would agree, the ARRL represented US in Washington. Now they only represent themselves.

 

ARRL has followed the US Congress: They have become fat, bloated and all they care about is their own job and keeping it. Like many other organizations it has become all about the money. Burn me once shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me. ARRL does not represent me, they barely represent ham radio. It wouldn't bother me if they went away. I like the comment made by N6QIC, I am not paying to use my radio. If this means getting out of it, okay.... more room for other projects. They have become a bunch of power hungry fat cats and they need to go away. Decorum prevents me from saying what I really feel but POS comes to mind.

 

So what you're saying is that it is okay to dance with the devil if that is the only way you get to dance?