A couple of weeks ago, I posted the agenda for the upcoming ARRL Board Annual Meeting. As agendas go, this one had very little content. Well, I recently found out why. There are some very controversial items on the agenda, and I can only surmise that whoever published the agenda didn’t want the membership find out.
This post on reddit clued me in. This post included a link to a communication from West Gulf Division Director, John Stratton N5AUS, on some very controversial issues that are going to be discussed at this board meeting. The West Gulf Division has published the motions being made on their website. They include:
- Motion To Honor Membership Contracts
- Motion To Replace Bylaw 46 (New Code of Conduct)
- Motion To Establish A Reduced Youth Dues Rate
An extra $25 for QST
The first issue is requiring members to pay an extra $25 per year to get the printed version of QST. N5AUS feels that it is a breach of contract to require current members to do so. I tend to agree with him on this.
Some have even called for a class action lawsuit to force the ARRL to either issue a refund or to continue sending QST to those members who paid for it. I think that the reason that there hasn’t yet been a class action suit filed is that there’s just not enough money involved. It’s not enough to get a lawyer interested in pursuing the case.
Not only that, does anyone really care about QST anymore? It seems to me that it’s been a long time since there was anything in the magazine that was really groundbreaking or useful. Most of what’s in there can already be found on the internet, and you don’t have to wait for it to be published every month.
The bigger issue
The bigger issue is that there’s a motion to once again put into place a draconian Code of Conduct for board members, the end result being a far less democratic ARRL. Don’t believe me? Read Fred Hopengarten, K1VR’s statement on this motion. K1VR is past director of the New England Division. In a nutshell, here’s what he thinks is wrong with this proposal:
- It keeps secrets from members .
- You don’t know what it says .
- Sometimes, you can’t even find out what it says .
- Prevents Board members from talking to old friends without seeking permission .
- Can overturn elections.
- A person accused of a violation has little, if any, ability to defend themselves before banishment.
- It is illogical when it prevents seeking input from members.
- It violates state law.
- The goal is elimination of dissent from the Board.
- It is designed to be revenge against meddlesome directors, and it would prevent new thinkers from being elected to the board.
Atlantic Division Director, Bob Familglio, K3RF, has also issued a statement on this motion. He writes,
Finally, the most significant motion on the agenda is a newly proposed Code of Conduct, which I believe is the equivalent of a loyalty, confidentiality and obedience pledge to the League itself and not to the members that elect us. This is a rerun of the 2017 fiasco. It will further limit transparency for ARRL members, and seriously affect the way ARRL operates. I strongly oppose it and here’s why.
I consider the proposed Code of Conduct to be the most intrusive change that I have seen in my 10+ years on the board. An onerous Code of Conduct was passed in 2017, which includes a gag order section. It was suspended in July 2017 based on overwhelming membership outrage. The new directors elected in 2019 repealed it after membership outrage sent incumbents packing in four divisions. Another group, choosing to ignore the membership uprising in 2017 and 2018 is again attempting to impose a Code of Conduct intending to punish those directors who do not fall in line with the majority. The new language offered is an attempt to appear beneficial to the members so as not to alarm us. Don’t be fooled.
My own newly-elected division director, Scott Yonally, N8SY, appears to be in favor of this bylaws change. I don’t think he’s trying to be malicious here, but if not, he’s certainly being naive about the effects this change will have. I am urging him to change his opinion and vote NO on this motion.
That this issue would come up and be seriously proposed again is amazing to me. I honestly don’t understand how anyone in favor of this motion thinks that it will make amateur radio better or improve the standing of the League. Is the majority of the ARRL Board really that much out of touch?
All this foolishness is consuming energy that would be better spent. The ARRL really needs to figure out how to be leaders in amateur radio again, and squabbling over the Code of Conduct isn’t the way to do that.
Jeff n1kdo says
Hi Dan,
As far as I can tell, they are doing their very best to kill the organization. Many friends and acquaintances tell me they are not going to renew for $59 to read electronic QST. The is plenty of (better) content on the internet, so I cannot blame them.
It is painful to watch.
73
Jeff n1kdo.
George says
$84 with QST! Sri , quiting ARRL . Ham for 67 yrs so sri to see the org going dwn the tubes. W2IUC
Goody K3NG says
This comes almost exactly a year after the Ria incident. Why does ARRL continue to pursue pointless drama with this Code of Conduct, and at such a tenuous time at the League with finances and the transition with QST?
I want to write more, but I don’t know what else can be said that hasn’t been said already over the years. Nothing has changed, nothing is going to change. ARRL is slipping into irrelevance.
K3NG
Regretful ARRL Life Member
Steve Stroh N8GNJ says
In the aftermath of the N2RJ issue last year, I gave up on the ARRL – https://www.zeroretries.org/i/111514163/my-arrl-membership-decision.
The thing is… the ARRL officialdom just doesn’t see the bigger picture – their mental model of the ARRL is the glory days of the 50s through the 80s… and they really don’t understand that the world has changed and ARRL’s position within it.
Yes, I think ARRL (tried to) pull a bait and switch with print subscriptions for existing subscriptions, but I for one won’t be trying to go after them about that. My existing subscription extends into 2025, so I’ll get to see some of the drama from the inside during 2024.
Matt W1CDN says
Hi Dan,
I reached out to Bill Lippert, AC0W, Dakota Division director. I sent him a link to this blog post and pretty much said “I agree with Dan.” Here is the response I got. The three attached documents are
“ARRL Board Member Statement on Authority, Responsibility, and Expectations.pdf”, Existing Bylaw 46.pdf”, and “Proposed New Bylaw 46.pdf”.
—————
Matt,
I appreciate you reaching to get the record set straight. Since the individual did not provide you anything that is actually from the proposed bylaw I’m attaching existing Bylaw 46, proposed Bylaw 46 and the Board Member Statement on Accountability, Responsibility, and Expectations.
Take a look at the Statement, you will find that almost everything in there is existing and is what we currently must comply with. If you look at each section, the source of the section is listed at the end of the section.
Currently when we file for office we sign a document that says we have gone out to find all this documents and read them. Almost no one takes the time to read them as they are all over the place and hard to find. This change puts the critical items in one document for easy reading to be provided at time of filing for us to certify. The one change is we will be required to recertified annual.
Not sure if your source talks about “secrecy” everything being confidential which other people talk about. Again that is inaccurate. I’ll just focus on the board meeting itself. While the meetings are in progress by Connecticut law the proceedings are confidently. The proceedings must be recorded and document. Once over meeting minutes must be produced that accurately record actions taken during the meeting include all motions made and votes taken. Once these minutes have been approved, they must be made public, again required by Connecticut law. If we don’t do this the ARRL and board members will be in violation of Connecticut law. The State Attorney General can prosecute all of us for violation of this law. Frankly I don’t want to go there.
After you have read the supplied documents let me know if you have additional questions.
As for QST, the Bylaw that requires QST to be provided as a member benefit was changed several years ago (way before my time). That change allowed the magazine to be provided digitally as a member benefit versus print.
You may not be aware, CQ Magazine, who charged more for their one magazine, has recently closed doors. The print industry is extremely volatile. Printers are leaving the business, paper makers are switching production to other more profitable paper products and costs are escalating. With the costs to print the magazine we were forced to make a drastic change in order to balance the budget. If you aren’t aware the last two year ARRL operate a with a deficit of close to $ 3 million. With out a change the predicted deficit would be $3.5 million in 2024. With the changes in dues and the magazine we have a balanced budget for 2024 and 2025.
People say you need to cut cost. Costs have been cut for several years. Employee count has gone from 120 to 88. In 2024 the employee count is being reduced to 86. Things have been done to reduce energy use and to reduce paper use. If we need further reduction we are at a point services and member benefits need to be reduced. If we don’t do that ARRL will go the way of CQ in a few years. Unfortunately that’s the cold hard facts.
If you have further questions on this let me know.
73
Bill AC0W
Director Dakota Division
Dan KB6NU says
Thanks, Matt for forwarding AC0W’s comments.
Jason says
With respect, Dan…
You had posted something about arrl back in September of last year, and after visiting HQ for a completely unrelated subject, I inquired with them about the subject matter of your post. I wish I could remember what it was about, but I don’t. It seems you left out several key things about that specific subject, so I wonder how cherry-picked this blog post is.
I love most of your content but we all can’t agree 100% of the time, nor should we.
Dan KB6NU says
I think that what you’re referring to is the blog post, “Is this good business or boneheaded?” I spoke to both Dan, K7REX, of RATPAC and Eric, 4Z1UG, and they both verified my story. Now, it could have been some misunderstanding between them and the ARRL, but if so, then ARRL is more than welcome to comment here. Or, if I did leave something out, I’m happy to update that post. What I can say is that both K7REX and 4Z1UG stood by their comments and seemed rather perplexed and disappointed about the ARRL’s position.
Having said that, I do realize there are two sides to every story. In this post, I linked to a statement from my division director, N8SY, who appears to be in favor of this bylaws change. And, I just approved a comment by a reader that includes a statement from his division director, AC0W. AC0W also seems to think that this bylaws change is not such a big deal.
You’re correct that we’re not going to agree 100% of the time. On this issue, I obviously side with K1VR and K3RF in thinking that this is a bad move for the League. I’d urge you to read the documents and then contact your division director with your thoughts.
Jason says
N5AUS just happens to be my division Director (you probably know that) and I already reached out to him for more info. We will talk over the phone soon, but haven’t yet.
You are correct about the issue I was referring to with Eric, 4Z1UG – and I did speak to ARRL about that issue and they claimed that Eric removed ARRL watermarks and logos from the subject matter, after ARRL had sponsored it. I don’t know the whole story, so I will refrain from commenting further on that, but when I read the story on your blog, it sounded like the ARRL didn’t want competition with teaching material, and according to my source at ARRL, that is untrue.
You are also correct that ARRL could comment here, and I wish they would. I am not sure why they won’t get involved more often on 3rd party websites.
73 Dan, thanks for your thoughts. I know you want to promote Amateur Radio just like I do.
Wes Plouff AC8JF says
In all the loud debate over abruptly ending QST print subscriptions as part of basic membership in ARRL, it’s interesting that I haven’t heard of any consumer protection complaint at the state (Connecticut) or federal level. A formal complaint to a regulator would require far less effort and expense than a lawsuit.
Also, I wrote a polite e-mail to my Director, N8SY, pointing out several ways the ARRL Board has failed to communicate openly with members, and asking him turn the Board away from secrecy and toward openness and transparency. However, K1TWF, the outgoing, long-time 1st VP, has written a report decrying a “shadow board” of about 10 Directors who seem to meet regularly to discuss ARRL business outside the formal board meeting structure. This old boys’ club behavior is not good.
Dan KB6NU says
See my latest post, ARRL 1st VP’s report sheds some light on ARRL board issues, for my view on K1TWF’s report.
Jerry Baker says
As for me the recent cost increases have soured me into maintain my membership. When this runs out I will not be renewing into their ever ending drama
David Gillooly says
Increases in dues is always hard to swallow. I think the move to pdf QST is.a good move to save money and as others have said this possibility was announced a few years ago.
I’ll continue to be a member as the DXCC, LOTW, and magazine material in pdf are of value to me. The interface with the FCC and Congress the ARRL provide is also something the hobby needs.
73,
Dave, AA6RE
Michael mulrooney says
It appears to me that it is mirrowing the federal govt . Well I am 82 now and if they increase dues and stop publishing Qst I will not renew my membership.😟
Bob K0NR says
The $25 extra for print QST is mostly an issue for people who already paid their 3-year renewal with the understanding that it included print QST. (The ARRL modified their subscription to be digital only, unless they pay extra.) This is clearly unethical, probably illegal, and definitely bone-headed.
I will not dig into the Code of Conduct issue, full of detail, subtlety and innuendo. Given the recent history on this from the ARRL, it seems unwise to propose another change without carefully greasing the skids with all of the Board.
Tom Pierce K8EBR says
QST has been in decline for years. My QST library is mostly just taking up space. Declining the magazine has now become a blessing but the old issues are still worth keeping.
Joe K9UR says
Why has no one started a new ham radio advocacy organization that is with the times.
The arrl is a corporation. An entity.
There is nothing to prevent a new advocacy group to be formed which capitalizes on what the ARRL misses entirely — focus on what matters most. Not openness. Not the price of QST but the need to defend our frequency allocations.
So why not create a new and more focused advocacy group before that train wreck called the ARRL folds for good ?
Dudley Pitts KM4IYQ says
With all the comments of how bad QST has become it sure is interesting that people would end their memberships to ARRL over a bad paper copy of a magazine. One would think all ARRL is nothing more than QST. That couldn’t be further from the truth.
ARRL has done more for Amateur Radio than any other organization in American. QST is a minor program. There’s a much bigger picture to see. If it wasn’t for the work ARRL does on spectrum defense, award programs, WARC bands, LOTW, and a long list of other things accomplished, including international agreements, amateur radio would have died decades ago. All the Board meeting minutes, and financial info is available and public to all members. Transparency is not an issue.
Having been directly involved in printing paper publications, I know costs are out of control. Many professional orgs are already moving to digital only mags to save money and cut costs on archiving. It’s simply good fiscal sense and the future of information sharing.
The way I see it is we can all cancel our memberships to ARRL but we aren’t hurting ARRL, just the opposite. We would be hurting each other. ARRL only exists because we exist. Everything ARRL does helps us enjoy our hobby more. I for one can’t imagine nor want to imagine amateur radio without the ARRL. Frankly, I think when ARRL closes it’s doors, we can kiss amateur radio goodbye. There are too many corporations chomping at the bit to get our frequency allocations! They are worth billions and the FCC will sell them off and not blink an eye.
Is the ARRL perfect? NO! But right now, it’s the only association we have to provide any hope of continuing amateur radio. So, we can be petty and cancel our memberships over a stupid paper rag and help things go down the tube or, we can look at the bigger picture and help preserve what we have by working together. Because separately, we don’t stand a chance. As always, there’s strength in numbers.
Dan KB6NU says
Just for the record, I’m not cancelling my membership. And, actually, I would hope that everyone who’s currently a member would stay members.
Joel Nathan Schuman says
Regarding the QST magazine – I am paying the extra $25.00 to continue to receive the print version. I prefer to have a hard copy to read and look at. The info may be found on the internet – but I like having the option of grabbing the hard print and physically looking through the pages of information instead of doing it online. My two cents.
73 Joel K0JNS
Geoff KD8VAX says
Hi Dan,
I am a ham with an intermediate level of engagement with the hobby. To put this into perspective, consider that I recently upgraded from my Technician class license (obtained in 2013) to my General last month (Dec, 2023). I am interested in watching YouTube videos about the hobby, and I have a use case for amateur radio through my involvement with CERT.
That being said, I joined the ARRL a year ago because I am vested in what they do to protect our bands and keep them out of the FCC auctions. What I’m not interested in is an NRA-style group, top heavy at best, with magazines and books and boards and intrigue.
When my renewal came up late last year, I had to think long and hard about paying $50 to renew. Essentially it’s a super-expensive magazine subscription as far as I’m concerned, and I don’t read QST. I paid it…this time. But the value proposition is really weak, and I’m not sure that I would choose again to renew next year.
For $10 a year, they’ll have my renewal. I don’t need a magazine. I don’t need boards and politics, I don’t need derring-do. I just want a voice lobbying Congress and the FCC to keep amateur radio alive. That’s it. Nothing more. If they can’t make a decent magazine for $50, I highly doubt they’ll make one for $75 or more.
==Geoff
Calin Brabandt says
So did the “Motion To Honor Membership Contracts” pass at the Board of Directors Meeting?
I purchased a 3-year membership with printed QST and QEX last year. I have not yet received a print copy of QST for February. I believe that ARRL is unethically and unlawfully violating contracts with its customers (members) by not delivering products previously sold and paid-for.
Initially, I did not believe the reports that ARRL was doing so, but now that I’ve read the ARRL Board of Directors Meeting “Motion” (thank you KB6NU), it is confirmed that the ARRL and its Board are trying to cheat members from receiving already paid-for products.
If the ARRL does not deliver my magazines in print for the remainder of my paid-membership period, I will cancel my membership and demand a pro-rated refund. If my demand is not met, I will dispute the membership charges with my credit card company and seek a refund in that manner.
If ARRL quickly changes course and meets its sales obligations, I will consider renewing my membership when my 3-year membership expires. Otherwise, like my former membership with the long corrupt NRA, I will soon become an ARRL “Life Non-Member”!
73,
Cal — AD8Q
Dan KB6NU says
I haven’t heard. I’m still waiting for the official minutes. I’d contact your division director. Personally, now that you mention it, I haven’t seen the February 2024 issue in the mail here.
Dan kilner says
Seems to me we need to form another ham group that will represent US instead of their pockets. If they were to cut their big salaries, and wastefull spending on trips and such, we wouldnt have a hike in magazine rates. more than enough ads that cover the cost of the magazine. and operations. we are just spending for their gravy time.
Time to end the ARRL scam anf form a new organization before the ARRL scam dogs close their doors. National radio league? United states radio league?North American radio society?North American radio League?Radio society of North america? Radio society of America? Radio society of USA? United states radio engineers Society?Lots of title we can use and we need to do it NOW.