Today, the ARRL announced that Kermit Carlson, W9XA, has resigned as Central Division director, and that Carl Luetzelschwab, K9LA, the Central Division vice director, has been appointed to replace him. In other words, the ARRL board is pulling the old switcheroo on its Central Division membership and depriving them of a fair and democratic election this fall.
Honestly? All of a sudden, just months before the next election, Carlson finds the demands of the job too difficult to fulfill?
This is not the first time something like this has happened. My own division director, Dale Williams, WA8EFK, was appointed Great Lakes Division director when Jim Weaver, K8JE, stepped down in July of 2014, only months before the election. This, of course, gave WA8EFK a big advantage in the election that was held in the fall of 2014.
I’m sure that if I kept digging, I could find more instances of this kind of undemocratic behavior.
But, wait! There’s more!
This really got my blood boiling, so I decided to do a little digging on the ARRL website. What did I find? The same exact thing went on in July (are you seeing a pattern here?) 2016, when Dick Isely, W9GIG, resigned as Central Division director. At that time, was appointed division director and Luetzelschwab was appointed vice director only months before the fall election.
This kind of election rigging is part of what puts people off the ARRL. Seriously, why should they belong to or give any money to an organization that pulls these kinds of stunts?
If the ARRL really wants to claim that it is a representative democracy—which it does on its organization structure page—the bylaws should be changed to disallow this type of thing. If a director honestly has to resign less than a year before an election, then the seat should remain vacant until the next election is held. Or, the ARRL could hold a special election and fairly elect a new director.
I’ll also note here that none of the news stories mention that the directors resigned just before an election or when the next election was to be held. In fact, I couldn’t find mention anywhere on the ARRL website when elections for the Central Division—or any other divisions, for that matter—were to be held. I had to infer this from the news story announcing the 2018 board elections. Since directors are elected to a three-year term, the next election in the Central Division will be held this fall. It’s almost as if someone at the ARRL is trying to hide this shameful behavior.
Maybe the board actually thinks operating this way is a good thing, that they are rewarding people who have done good things for ham radio and the ARRL. That’s not how I see it, though. Rigging elections prevents new people with new ideas from getting involved. They come to see the ARRL as yet another good old boys organization and don’t even bother to get involved. The result is an organization that’s slowly, but surely, losing touch with the majority of radio amateurs.
Does the Board actually run things in Newington? After some past dealings with the hierarchy over there, not pleasant and not productive, along with some items passed by the Board failing to make it to the intended destination — see the ARRL BoD minutes from July 2019, item 31. Two years on and the Board passed, 14-1, resolution never made it to the FCC??? WTH.
Add in the latest ‘appointment’ hijinks and it kinda makes you wonder who is actually running the show.
Oh, it’s not League bashing by any stretch if it’s true, just in case some of the League defenders take exception to my comment.
K0IDT
Former ARRL member.
Years ago in my area we had a candidate for director, a guy who was super smart and a critic of ARRL. He held a position on a rather high profile IEEE 802 committee. This man helped write standards for technology that’s in your home, business, and likely all of your devices. ARRL disqualified him because they thought one of the 802 standards was at odds with amateur radio, and they declared it a conflict of interest. So, it’s possible to steer the outcome of elections even prior to them occurring.
I know what you mean. I was almost disqualified when I ran for Great Lakes Division vice director, because I had run an online technical bookstore. I appealed, noting that I was no longer in that business, and they rescinded my disqualification. I’m sure that there are other instances of this kind of election rigging.
“They come to see the ARRL as yet another good old boys organization and don’t even bother to get involved. The result is an organization that’s slowly, but surely, losing touch with the majority of radio amateurs.”
That’s the view from my cheap seats. I like the technical side of things there, but the rest of the operation seems like your typical bureaucracy. Let my membership lapse years ago and they haven’t been making the case for my return, at all.
I don’t see any of this as election “rigging”. If a duly elected Director has to step down before their term is over, you’re suggesting it would be better to not have one for the remainder of that term than to appoint one per the bylaws? Also, how does someone being appointed to serve out a term give them an advantage over anyone else? Do members prefer to vote for incumbents? And if they do, should that be taken from them? And in any case, if the seat were to remain open all potential candidates would still have spread their own information and convince voters – just like they would have to do if they were running against an appointed someone.
If a candidate for ARRL Director can’t defeat an incumbent in an election, perhaps they don’t deserve the seat?
73, Jeff
That’s some old school BS right there!
ARRL members need to be heard from directly when such leadership changes occur. There’s no more impactful way a member can be heard than through their individual votes. ARRL’s leadership appointments DO NOT recognize 3 things. One, that incumbents always receive the benefit of name recognition. Two, some of our newest (sometimes youngest members) are comfortable.using educational communications technologies in their daily lives (w/ more coming). And lastly, there’s some big comm tech changes ahead and a more democratic process of operation would result in a growing, healthier Club. Have a little faith ARRL!
Case in point… It took a global pandemic for the ARRL to act on “Remote License Testing”. In spite of the indisputable fact that by the beginning of the 21st century, more than half of all two-year and four-year degree-granting institutions of higher education in the United States offered distance education courses, primarily through the Internet”. Encyclopedia Brittanica https://bit.ly/2Whvpol
I’m an ARRL member. Yet I find it difficult to have faith in an organization making such impactful decisions on all members without any visible member input. Ham operators have opinions. Really, we do ;-). Had we been asked our opinion on what we thought would be the best “democratic” method of filling any open Board seat, I have no doubt data could have been easily gathered, analyzed and a more transparent and supportable decision would have benefited of the entire Club.
You don’t have to be a young to hear echo’s of “OK, Boomer…” from Millenial or Gen Z members regarding this decision. ARRL could do better yet chooses not to. A more welcoming statement of principle for newer members would be made IF Mr. Carl Luetzelschwab, K9LA… resigned his appointment. Then let it be known that he would welcome and election challenged through a change in ARRL Bylaws. Changes that allowed this, and other situations, to give ARRL members free and fair elections to replace Board members.
Here’s the real issue… what about communication technology changes facing us all in the next 20 years? “We are on the verge of a set of technological advances that will transform when, where, how, and why we communicate.” https://bit.ly/2Vhk8UQ Read the embedded comics if you don’t want to read the article. Much of this is coming no matter how we feel about it. I’d like ARRL decisions to reflect the faith I have that ham operators can influence the FCC in policy and adoption decisions that benefit our hobby.
There’s strength in numbers.
73, Larry
KD8MZM
Jeff,
If I’m not mistaken, the rules and regulations suggest that appointments cancel the upcoming election:
http://www.arrl.org/arrl-rules-regulations
Rules and Regulations of the ARRL Field Organization
Revised January 2011
…
5. Each Section Manager shall be elected for a two-year term of office in accordance with the following procedure:
…
5f) Vacancies in the office of Section Manager occurring between elections shall be filled by appointment by the Membership & Volunteer Programs Manager in consultation with the Director. The outgoing Section Manager’s recommendation may be solicited as part of this procedure.
So while “vacancies … occurring between elections shall be filled by appointment…” could be mistaken as “remainder of terms filled” it’s not actually required – as this is under section 5, and as this would be a section manager, then they get a two year term from appointment – entirely skipping the election altogether.
If I’m mistaken, and they are still holding an election this fall, then I agree with you that it’s not a big deal, but the way I read and understand it, this method is being used to avoid elections altogether.
Dale,
I’m under the impression there will still be an election in the Fall for this seat though I could be wrong. I base this on what Dan wrote about this happening in his division:
“This is not the first time something like this has happened. My own division director, Dale Williams, WA8EFK, was appointed Great Lakes Division director when Jim Weaver, K8JE, stepped down in July of 2014, only months before the election. This, of course, gave WA8EFK a big advantage in the election that was held in the fall of 2014.”
That seems to imply that a Director stepped down in 2014 and a replacement was appointed in 2014 and an election was conducted in 2014.
If that’s not the case then certainly I agree with you – if the appointment resets the clock then that’s clearly an unfair practice. But I don’t *think* that’s the case. I guess we will see soon enough.
73, Jeff
By the way, sorry, I meant my reply to Adam – not sure how “Dale” got in there! :-)
I was in the room when Mr. Carlson submitted his resignation after all business had been completed. This was the second and final meeting until the election. He gave a candid explanation of a personal family matter that was the reason for his leaving. It was a surprise to me as well as others in the room.
There is a succession plan of Board members so that the ELECTED Vice Director took office immediately. As required by the By-Laws, President Roderick appointed a replacement that was approved as eligible by the Ethics and Election Committee.
There is no conspiracy.. I get multiple messages from members in the Southeastern Division, ARRL staff and others directors and officers every day. I was surprised and a bit disappointed in this article because it does not reflect my perception of the facts as I witnessed them.
I encourage all to reach out to your director and ask when you have a question about an article like this. I’ve been as critical as anyone at the past secrecy in ARRL actions, but most,of you who know me know that I’m a straight shooter, as are most of my colleagues on the Board. There is no reason to jump to conclusions. Ask your elected director – we,are elected to serve our members.
73,
Mickey Baker N4MB
ARRL Director, Southeastern Division
My division director, Dale Williams, WA8EFK, explained the situation to me as well. I do apologize to Mr. Carlson.
Having said that, the frequency with which this seems to happen still doesn’t look good. I think it’s undemocratic that the vice director be appointed so close to an election. The bylaws should be changed.