[SCCC] Additional link to explanatory message

[Michael Tope]

Does anyone have a sense of what is driving this? It was shot down once, 
but it would appear that some subset of the BOD/executive feel that it 
is so vital to the future of the league that they are willing to give 
another go at an unpopular initiative. Are there some overarching 
organizational goals that the proponents of the initiative feel cannot 
go forward without these rule changes, or is this just a naked power grab?

73, Mike W4EF.............

On 12/31/2023 2:58 PM, Marty Woll wrote:
> Thanks, Kurt.  I think your assessment is spot on.
>
> 73,
>
> Marty N6VI
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: SCCC [mailto:sccc-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of W6PH via SCCC
> Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2023 10:46 AM
> To: n6vi at socal.rr.com; sccc at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [SCCC] Additional link to explanatory message
>
> I have read the entire text of the proposed bylaw change.  I encourage everyone to read through the 18 page proposal.  There are a number of sections that I find ill defined.  The section on confidentiality is not well defined.  In my days on a school board any discussions on policy or debates on budget considerations were not confidential and should not be.  Confidentiality was restricted to discussion of personnel issues.  The conflict of interest is not well defined.  Essentially the the Ethics and Elections Committee has enormous power to determine the eligibility of a potential nominee for a director position.  It could blackball any suitably nominated candidate for an undocumented alleged conflict of interest because it didn't like that person's views.  The constituency has no recourse.  The E and E Committee has the power to call for a censure vote for any director it determines to have an opposing view.  It could further go to the point of the director being dismissed from th
>   e board and not eligible again for any ARRL position.  That director would be replaced with an appointee and not necessarily the vice director.  I believe there is a hidden agenda in this document to inhibit or hide debate and discussion of pertinent board matters that would be of interest to the membership.  This document flies in the face of a membership driven organization.  My not so humble comments.
> 73, Kurt W6PH (Life Member and Maxim Society)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SCCC mailing list
> SCCC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/sccc