[SCCC] Code of Conduct & Director Richard J. Norton

Wed Nov 22 20:50:21 EST 2017

November 22, 2017

Actions taken this year by the ARRL leadership has undermined my admiration
and respect for the League, its officers and directors.  As a long time ham,
I grew up in the hobby with the understanding that I could always count on
the League to be a fair and democratic national organization devoted to the
best interests of amateur radio.

Well things apparently changed in 2017.

The Code of Conduct is one of the most outrageous piece of legislation that
I could imagine.  The gag order that binds the directors to secrecy offends
my sense of ethics and propriety.  What possible harm can result in allowing
a director to share with his or her division's hams the vote taken by that
director on any Board resolution that passed or failed?  Without that
information, how can the members evaluate whether or not he or she deserves
another term?  Members will simply have no basis upon which to reelect (or
throw out) a sitting director.  Worse yet, a challenger can freely slander
and attack the existing league administration; but the sitting directors
will not have the right to counter false and malicious attacks.

The Code of Conduct is something I would expect to be enacted in countries
that have totalitarian despotic leaders who strive to maintain a government
without opposition or dissent.  Shame on the ARRL; it should be better than
that!

As for Norton, he was convicted by the League in the absence of evidence
against him.  Apparently the ARRL's sense of due process does not require
evidence.

Since the Board's groundless censure of Norton, I have attended several
amateur radio gatherings.  Response to my negative comments about the Code
of Conduct and about Norton's censure has been 100% supportive of my
strongly felt opinions.

Please review the copy of my November 9, 2017 email that I sent to the ARRL
directors and officers.  In that email, I clearly stated (at the 2017
Visalia DX Convention) that it was the membership that expressed strong
disagreement with the Code of Conduct, not Norton.  Norton clearly stated
that he fully supported the League and its actions.

Please also review the copy of November 8, 2017 email to the officers and
directors of ARRL from Tim Duffy, K3LR.

You are authorized and encouraged to widely share and publish this email
(and the incorporated emails) throughout the ham radio community.  Maybe
responsive chords will resonate.

Thank you and 73,

MARK A. WEISS, K6FG

-----------------

Verbatim copy of November 9, 2017 email sent by K6FG to the ARRL officers
and directors:

November 9, 2017

Dear ********,

This email is sent to you in response Director Dick Norton's request that I
provide you with my recollection of some events that took place at the ARRL
Forum during the 2017 International DX Convention in Visalia, California.

For your consideration, at the end of this letter I have included a brief
statement of my relevant background information.

I don't recall the identity of all of the members of the Visalia ARRL
Forum's panel, but Dick Norton appeared to be the primary speaker. 

One of the topics addressed was the new Code of Conduct.

Dick Norton began the program by stating that he, as a Director, fully
supports the actions of the Board of Directors. He covered some points of
the new code that impact his relationship with the membership.  Dick then
inquired of those present if there were any questions or comments from the
floor.

In response to Dick's inquiry, several of us raised our hands and were
recognized.

When I spoke, I was very direct in my strong opposition to enactment of the
confidentiality provisions contained in the Code of Conduct. My expressed
thoughts included, but were not limited to the following:

               1. I acknowledged that Board member loyalty and commitment to
the League was properly mandated; but the gag order contained in the Code of
Conduct is clearly contrary to my sense of serving the best interests of the
ARRL members. 

               2. I stated that contrary to the view expressed by the
current ARRL administration, ARRL is a representative organization.  That
is, our districts elect directors and vice-directors to create and implement
policies and rules that best represent the interests of amateur radio in
general, AND THE INTERESTS OF OUR DISTRICT IN PARTICULAR.

               3. It is my understanding that directors and vice-directors
are precluded from informing their district members of the various (and
conflicting) views expressed by the directors during the legislative
process.  If my observation is correct, I fear following will occur:

                              A. I may never be provided with information
upon which I can evaluate the propriety of the Board's action.

                              B. I will never know the positions advocated
or supported by my director at the Board meeting.

                              C. I will never know if my elected director
acted in furtherance of the best interests of the hobby in general, or in
the best interests my district in particular.

                              D. I will have no factual basis upon which to
support or oppose my director's bid for reelection when his or her current
term ends.

Much to my surprise, as I was sitting down after I finished delivering my
brief remarks, there was unanimous and very loud applause. I was shocked
because I had not intended to stir up widespread opposition to the ARRL
leadership's action; it was my intention to simply express the reasons for
my opposition to the Code of Conduct.

It was immediately apparent to me that my remarks resonated with nearly
everyone in the room. In fact, at the conclusion of discussion of the issue,
the call for a vote in support or opposition to the Code of Conduct resulted
in an overwhelming condemnation of the Code.

The Code of Conduct has been discussed at meetings I attended this year at
our local radio clubs. The consensus among the club members was always
consistent with the reaction to my comments at the Visalia ARRL Forum.

It is my fear that the League is heading down the path of becoming a secret
"Star Chamber" organization without the transparency to which our membership
is entitled.

Please do not form the impression that I believe Board disclosure to the
membership is absolute. I indeed recognize the need to maintain
confidentiality of proceedings in appropriate circumstances. 

The Code of Conduct is already generating adverse consequences to the
League. I personally know of valuable bequests that have been withdrawn as a
result of the new disclosure rules. If this action is a trend, the League
will definitely be harmed.

It is my opinion that the League's leadership made a major mistake in
adopting the Code of Conduct. Please do what you can to cause the Board to
revisit the Code of Conduct legislation. Please remove the "gag order"
provisions.  Please freshen the air the surrounds the ARRL leadership.

Thank you & 73,

MARK A. WEISS, K6FG

P.S. The following is a brief summary of my background:

           Amateur Radio

                       ARRL life member

                       Former chair of IARU Region 2 Band Plan Committee

                       Former member of ARRL Band Plan Committee

           Employment:

                       1967-1968: Litton Data Systems. Engineer

                       1969-1985: Attorney

                       1986-2006: Los Angeles County Superior Court

-----------------

Verbatim copy of November 8, 2017 email sent by K3LR to the ARRL officers
and directors:

Dear Officers and Directors of the American Radio Relay League, Inc.;

I attended the ARRL Forum held at the April 2017 International DX Convention
in Visalia, California, as I do every year. Dick Norton, N6AA has asked me
to report on two of my observations during the ARRL forum.

One item discussed at the ARRL forum was the new ARRL code of conduct for
ARRL Directors. Dick Norton covered items contained in the code of conduct.
It was clear that the audience was not happy about what was being told to
them. A number of forum audience participants spoke in strong opposition to
certain aspects of the code. My own personal attorney (and ARRL volunteer
counsel) K3LA was surprised by what N6AA presented. K3LA is also opposed to
the code and seeing the audience was clearly upset by Dick's presentation
concerning the code, he walked out of the room. The opposition came from the
upset audience, not from Dick Norton. Norton specifically pointed out that
he supports the board's positions. I have previously discussed this code and
other ARRL topics with Dick. I was not surprised by the audience's strong
negative response to the code. Their reaction also mirrors my own feelings.

Second, I have been asked to report that there were many other topics
covered at the forum. That is true. The code of conduct was only a part of
the agenda that Dick discussed at the ARRL forum.

Please do not hesitate to contact me directly if you have questions.

Very 73,

Tim Duffy K3LR

ARRL Maxim Society & ARRL Diamond Club Member

ARRL Life Member