In the June 2007 issue of CQ, and in an online editorial, Rich Moseson, W2VU, takes the ARRL to task for being so secretive. He says that the ARRL seems to be “mimicking the federal government’s love of as much secrecy as possible as often as posible.” As an example of this secrecy, Moseson points to the recent action that the ARRL took with regard to RM-11306, the regulation by bandwidth proposal.
In mid-February, some folks from the ARRL meet with the FCC and drafted a Notice of Oral Ex Parte Presentation, which would have significantly changed the proposal. While this is part of the public record, Moseson notes that “noticed only by someone carefully tracking the comments on a petition on which comments have been closed for two years.” Fortunately, it was noticed, and the resulting controversy eventually caused the ARRL to withdraw the petition completely.
Before taking this action, ARRL CEO Dave Sumner, K1ZZ, tried to attribute the brouhaha to a “clerical error,” but many people found this to be less than believable. After all, Sumner’s been at this game a long time, and given the secretive nature of the FCC meeting, the explanation just didn’t sit right with a lot of people.
But Wait, There’s More
In the CQ editorial, Moseson notes that board meetings are open only to directors, vice directors, selected staff members, and invited guests. I really wasn’t aware of this, and this news, while it doesn’t necessarily surprise me, disturbs me. They’re not even open to other elected ARRL officials. Moseson writes that after his election as the Northern New Jersey section manager, he wanted to attend a board meeting (at his own expense), but his request was denied “quicker than I could blink.”
There might be some good reasons for holding parts of meetings in secret, but by not allowing members to attend meetings of their board of directors, the ARRL is not certainly not creating an atmosphere of trust. Is it any wonder that membership is declining? If they’re not allowed to observe, much less participate, why should they continue to contribute?
Many businesses have come to realize secrecy is not a good thing and are opening their books to both employees and investors. I would suggest that something similar would make a world of difference for the ARRL. If they’re going to get off the slippery slope to irrelevancy, something needs to happen.
Leave a Reply