I’ve always recommended that hams join the ARRL, but recent events have certainly tested my resolve. The ARRL seems to lurch from calamity to calamity. Earlier this year, there was the decision to discontinue sending copies of the print version of QST to members. Then, in May, there was the cyber attack on the ARRL’s shaky IT infrastructure.
The latest debacle is this year’s board of directors election. Every year, the ARRL conducts elections for five of the 15 directorships. This year, candidates in three of these elections have been disqualified, for somewhat dubious reasons, in my humble opinion.
Officially, these candidates were disqualified for violating one of the ARRL’s election rules. They all share a common characteristic, though: they are all critical of the current board and CEO, David Minster, NA2AA. Whatever the real reason, these disqualifications have turned this year’s elections into a sham.
N3JT Disqualified!
The first disqualification that I became aware of was that of Jim Talens, N3JT. At first glance, Jim seemed like a great candidate. Professionally, Jim was an attorney for the FCC for 22 years and has both BSEE and MBA degrees. He is an active radio amateur and is one of the founders of CWops, a group devoted to furthering the use of Morse Code. He had hoped to run for Roanoke Division director.
Jim lives in Virginia for about half the year and in Florida for the other half. He says that by law, he is both a legal resident of Virginia and Florida.
His FCC license shows his Virginia address. His long-time home of 49 years and his primary station are located in Virginia. He pays real estate taxes in Virginia. He pays personal property taxes in Virginia. His cars are registered in Virginia. The signatories to his nomination were all in Virginia. When he submitted his nomination petition, he was a full member in Virginia, and not living in Florida.
Despite this, the Ethics & Elections Committee decided—wrongfully in Jim’s opinion—that he was not a resident of Virginia, and therefore, not eligible to run in the Roanoke Division. ARRL By-Law 18 requires that a candidate must be a “Full member of the division.” The problem is that the by-law doesn’t define what that phrase means. In the absence of that definition, the committee just made up its own rule for political expediency rather than apply common sense, law, or fairness.
Sounds pretty shady, doesn’t it? Would Jim have been disqualified if he hadn’t been so critical of the ARRL? Over and above that, should the Ethics and Elections Committee have the power to disqualify a candidate when the bylaw isn’t specific about what constitutes residency in a division?
K1VR Disqualified!
Fred Hopengarten, K1VR was disqualified on even shakier grounds. In his case, he submitted his nominating petition 24 hours before the deadline (noon of August 16), but inadvertently failed to attach the pages containing the signatures of ten or more members of the New England Division. He was informed of this fact by email at 11:05 am the next day, less than an hour before the deadline. He didn’t see this email until after noon, and when he did, he immediately replied with the signatures. But, he was 27 minutes late. This is the reason he was disqualified.
I don’t know about you, but this sounds pretty shady to me. Could it be because Fred supports policies that buck the current trend on the ARRL board?
K7REX Disqualified!
This is another disturbing case. Dan Marler, K7REX, is as good a candidate as you’d want. He currently serves as Idaho Section Manager, has served as Section Emergency Coordinator, and is the founder of the Radio Amateur Training Planning and Activities Committee (RATPAC). He is a retired computer systems administrator for a Fortune-500 company and would bring a much-needed understanding of IT management to the League.
In an email—which I haven’t seen, to be honest—Dan made several statements that the Ethics & Elections Committee took issue with. The committee specifically demanded that he retract several statements.
Here’s the message that he sent to the members of the Northwest Division listing the supposedly offending statements and his responses:
Members of the Northwestern Division of our League
I have received a demand from the Ethics & Elections Committee to retract certain statements in my last email message within 24 hours or suffer the consequences. The complaints of the Committee are unfounded in my good faith view. But since they have the power to disqualify me if I do not comply with their demand, I offer each statement, their complaint, and my justification to them. I believe my statements contain nothing inaccurate, false or personally accusatory. Accordingly, I leave it to you to hear both sides in fairness.
Each of the five specific statements questioned by the E&E state my opinion and belief as to certain matters that I believe do or may adversely impact the ARRL and invites potential voters to evaluate whether they share my concerns as to those matters.
Excessive employee turnover, expensive compensation, a decision to engage in the sale of amateur radio equipment that competes with the League’s advertisers, the extended absence of IT leadership that may have contributed to a $1,000,000 ransomware attack that resulted in damage to the League’s finances and operation, and the unacceptability of handicapping Directors by withholding financial information are what they demand is retracted. For your information as a voter, you decide. as to each of my stated opinions below:
My Statement
1. ” If you are concerned about historically high personnel turnover in Headquarters, where over 50 League employees have left since the arrival of the present CEO, your views align with mine.”
E&E’s COMPLAINT: As we discussed, there have been people leave the ARRL, but this was through natural attrition and not due to the arrival of the present CEO. It has been long known that we would experience a higher number of retirements since there was a large increase of employees hired in the 1970’s and 1980’s. This along with the natural attrition of employees leaving for better pay or advancements in their particular fields of employment has caused our employee numbers to fluctuate some but is not the fault of the CEO.
MY RESPONSE: The statement that employee turnover for the prescribed period of time is historically high is accurate. The statement that over 50 League employees have terminated their employment during the prescribed time period is accurate.
The statement does not identify any reason for the turnover or attribute responsibility for the historically high turnover to any specific cause or person. Your objection is based on the false assertion that the statement attributes cause of the historically high turnover to the “CEO.” The reference to the “CEO” merely establishes the time period during which the employee turnover is excessive; it does not attribute the turnover to anyone.
As there are neither inaccuracies nor anything false in the statement, my answer stating both sides of this issue here should settle the concern.
My Statement
2. ” If you are concerned that an annual salary of $350K plus benefits for the ARRL CEO is substantially above what is warranted, your views align with mine.”
E&E’s COMPLAINT: As we discussed, Mr Minster is not making $350,000 at this time. His salary is $315,000. This figure was verified today and is correct.
MY RESPONSE: The statement expresses my concern that the compensation for Mr. Minster exceeds that which is justified for his position and responsibilities. The dollar amount is sourced from multiple Directors who advised that the Administration & Finance Committee approved a $100,000 salary increase to Mr. Minster’s initial base salary of $250,000. If that compensation package has been modified, it appears the modification is unknown to multiple members of the Board.
If the $350,000 amount is not current, and if no increase to the $315,000 salary amount has been formally or informally agreed to, I have no objection to correcting the dollar amount, but a concern about executive compensation being too high will not be withdrawn or restated. I ask for verification of Mr. Minster’s current salary and benefits and any approved increases that have not yet taken effect. This will allow me to accurately respond to the membership.
My Statement
3. ” If you think there is no need for the League to sell antennas competing with its advertisers, your views align with mine.”
E&E’s COMPLAINT: As we discussed, we are selling “kits” to encourage folks to get back into building again. These “kits” are also being used for our STEM projects for students and teachers as well. Our advertisers do not have issues with us doing this, therefore there is no competition.
MY RESPONSE: The statement accurately reflects my concern that the ARRL, financially dependent on advertising revenue, has – or may have – erred by choosing to sell amateur radio equipment similar to that offered by the ARRL’s advertisers. All antennas require some assembly, so attempting to differentiate the League’s offering by characterizing it as a “kit” is disingenuous. I would point out that JK Antennas’ JK803 is also a “kit”. The ARRL’s rationale for offering the “kit” doesn’t alter the fact that it is amateur radio equipment of a type available from the ARRL’s advertisers.
The fact, if true, that none of the ARRL’s advertisers have publicly, or perhaps privately, objected to the ARRL’s conduct does not alter the reality that the ARRL is selling a product, an antenna, that is offered by multiple ARRL advertisers. It is competition whether anyone complains about it or not: a rose by any other name…
As there are neither inaccuracies nor anything false in the statement, my answer here should settle the concern. But members should decide.
My Statement
4. ” If you feel that not having an Information Technology Manager for the majority of the present CEO’s term is unacceptable and may have contributed to the ransomware attack damage, your views align with mine.”
E&E’s COMPLAINT: As we discussed with this question and question 1, employment today is much different than it was for you and me. Young adults today jump from one job to another regularly for advancement, benefits or just plain old salary increase. The loyalty to stick to a single employer as you and I did in the past is not the philosophy of today. Today, these young adults, many of them in high-tech jobs, go to the highest bidder and the ARRL isn’t usually the highest. So, to imply that this is the CEO’s fault is something that just isn’t so.
MY RESPONSE: Once again, you are inferring causation, which I did not assert. I made no statement or implication that any of the foregoing was the fault of the current CEO. That said, lacking an IT manager for an organization of the size and importance of the ARRL for a substantial period of time, in this case a period measured by the term of the current CEO, is unacceptable because of the risk that the absence of such leadership, oversight, and knowledge poses to the organization.
My statement also conveys my belief and concern that the absence of such a Manager for such an extended period of time reasonably could have contributed to the lack of maintenance or installation of protocols that could have prevented a $1,000,000 ransomware attack.
As an aside, your comments regarding young adults are remarkably wide of the mark, as neither of the two IT managers since 2016 met the definition of young.
My statement contains nothing inaccurate, false or personally accusatory Accordingly, I leave it to the voters having sent the E&E concerns.
My Statement
5. “ If you feel that keeping any League financial information from ARRL Directors is unacceptable, your views align with mine. “
E&E’s COMPLAINT: As we discussed, this is a very misleading statement. If you or I are asked for information at a meeting that we aren’t able to provide immediately with but was willing to get that information and report back at a later time, is that refusing to give you the information? If the person wanting specific financial information demands information on the spot as has been a few times by a specific Director, is that fair to state later that you asked for and was refused the information?
MY RESPONSE: My statement accurately reflects my belief that failing to provide financial information to the Board of Directors is unacceptable. Although my statement does not explicitly allege that such conduct has occurred, in fact I previously provided the Ethics & Elections Committee with multiple, verifiable instances in which financial information had been withheld from or denied – not delayed – to Directors. E&E Chairman Baker did not disagree or advise me that any of those examples were not true and further advised me that he would allow them to stand. There are multiple Directors prepared to publicly verify the accuracy of those instances.
It is my opinion that my original statements do not contain any inaccurate, false, personal accusatory comments.
I leave it to you to evaluate the validity of E&Es complaints. Please make your own decisions.
I thank you for your time, your consideration and I again ask for your vote for Northwestern Division Director.
Apparently, that wasn’t good enough for the committee. In a letter dated September 28, 2024, Dan was disqualified. It’s not clear if he was being disqualified for not retracting all of the statements or just the statement about the CEO’s salary. In any case, we see again the high-handedness of the E&E Committee, and again I have to say that this all sounds pretty shady to me.
Is this really the best thing for amateur radio?
At this point, all three candidates plan to appeal these decisions by the Ethics & Elections Committee. It is doubtful that appealing will get them reinstated, but I think it’s worth going through the process, if only to emphasize the shadiness of what’s going on.
Over and above this, though, I really wonder how the powers that be can justify to themselves the shabby handling of these candidates? Do they really think that they’re fooling anyone with these political machinations? Do they reallly think what they’re doing is good for the ARRL, much less for amateur radio in general?
It’s really sad that it’s come to this.
I support the author and I voted for Dan Marler. I expect the ARRL to count my vote and that of all others who did so as the ballot listed him as a candidate at the time of publication of the ballots. I would be inclined to join a class action lawsuit if necessary to support my decisions. Dan has been an excellent example of an “Elmer” and someone who cares deeply about ARRL. I know nothing of the internal politics of ARRL and it would not take much to leave a group like this if the allegations of conduct by leadership listed here turned out to be true.
Not to beat a dead horse, and ARRL is definitely a dead horse, but this seems to happen with enough regularity that you’d think it might eventually bother some Director?
The Board of Directors hired the CEO, they could fire him, but they don’t. Too difficult to find another sucker willing to take the helm of the Titanic?
I don’t know, but all too often Directors make poor choices, then complain about how their poor choice came round to bite them in the rear. I’m as sick of whiny Directors as I am of the entire organization.
73, Jeff KE9V
https://www.arrl.org/news/board-of-directors-elects-new-arrl-ceo-david-minster-na2aa
Some interesting stuff in Minster’s bio:
“Minster began his career as a software engineer, moving into management at Unilever, as a Chief Information Officer of this globally recognized portfolio of brands…”
Minster stated, “Building a culture of accomplishment and accountability is what I do best.”
“Minster earned a bachelor’s degree in computer engineering from The Ohio State University”
With this extensive pedigree and experience in IT, why is ARRL IT infrastructure still so bad after him on the job for four years? Whatever happened to the “culture of accountability”? In a normal organization, a CEO that had all this happen on their watch after four years of governance would be canned.
Every so often I contemplate joining the ARRL, but then they go to great pains to remind me they are more interested in power and politics than growing the hobby.
I applaud all those who continue to work within the ARRL to redirect it.
I wonder if a separate organization might be useful and necessary to support amateur radio enthusiasts who are currently underrepresented by the ARRL.
There is absolutely room for a second advocacy organization to fill the massive ARRL Membership gap (~160K of ~750K licensed hams). In an adjacent hobby, General Aviation, the community is represented by the AOPA, representing a more mainstream constituency and the EAA, representing pilots who seek the freedom of homebuilt and sport aircraft. Because it is the only show in town, the ARRL assumes the role as the defacto advocate and representative of the community. But with only 20% of the community participating, the ARRL is hardly a representative. Today’s ARRL is in disarray and is a disgrace to the community. It rests on the laurels of 100 years of history for which today’s effectiveness is an insult to the past. I would gladly evaluate an alternative group.
I joined the League in 1969 and at one point considered a Life membership. But by 1980, I was so disenchanted with their insider mentality and lack of transparency, that I let my membership lapse. More recently (2023), I tried to engage them on the matter of the ARPA initiative that seeks to overcome HOA antenna restrictions. My calls to League headquarters, specifically their legal and government affairs teams, was met with ambivalence and apathy on the matter. My take away was that I made the right decision to discontinue my support for this feckless scam of an organization.
These problems are not new. Claims of election interference and manipulation go back decades. Some of the actions of past ARRL directors and office holders can only be described as highly questionable. Unfortunately, the average members is either disinterested or he is blinded by cognitive dissonance in the form his own desire to see the League as “the good guy protecting his interests.” I am of the opinion that the League cannot be salvaged in its present form. The engrained corporate culture no longer serves the broad, diverse interests present within the Amateur Radio Service. Change will only happen if there is some form of external intervention or the creation of an alternate organization.
For now, I am very likely to stay on as a member, but I’ll be watching this and some other things very closely. I hope they don’t completely destroy themselves. Sadly, I’ve seen quite a few corporations and other institutions (all outside of ham radio) do just that, and it’s horrifying to watch, and the more slowly they self-destruct, the worse it is.
My Timeline since my 2022 3-year renewal:
— Division Director tossed out (significant influence in my joining in the first place)
— Print magazines are gone—the main visible benefit of my subscription, which I guess is not a contract.
— Ransomware hack, lack of communication, lack of accountability, lack of leadership. etc etc
I am not renewing in 2025. The train wreck is picking up steram
It’s a death spiral for the arrl. Members quit in droves whenever dues are raised.
The computer hacking debacle is far from over. The hackers were rewarded and
will be back again and again for millions more dollars. There’s no doubt various
back doors, time bombs, worms and other surprises were left in those systems.
The arrl’s entire budget isn’t enough remediate the problem.The VM program now
goes after conservative speech they don’t like. Keep sending them money to waste
on boondoggles, millions to hackers and trample on your First Amendment rights.
In the words of disqualified former director Doug Rehman K4AC – “All of these shenanigans in the last 10 years happened under one man.”
That’s not to say David Minster isn’t a problem (he is) but he doesn’t get prompted on how to do this all on his own. But in my opinion he is absolutely driving all of this.
Apart from the book issue, he tried to “get” me on other things including accusations of racism. He also had 1st VP McIntyre accuse Dick Norton of threats of physical assault. If you look at both of them, you would think it’s the other way around.
The ARRL is cooked, unfortunately, and short of a complete reboot I do not see the light at the end of the tunnel.
As a member of the RATPAC community, I fully support Dan. I live in Texas, so I have no dog in this hunt.
ARRL is starting to taste nasty.
By happenstance I just got my 120-days-out renewal notice from the ARRL, and I thank them for the reminder.. I suppose this means that they have 120 days to straighten this business out, or I won’t bother renewing.
Don’t worry, they’ll keep sending you those notices. I stopped being a member a decade (and home address change) ago, and still get a regular renewal reminder in my mailbox.
You’ll have plenty of opportunities to not change your mind (at a cost of something like a dollar a piece to the organization).
I just read about the “disqualification” of Dan Marler K7REX the day after I submitted my vote for K7REX. With this news, I went to cancel my membership with ARRL. I had wondered why I was not getting my QST magazine, but I never saw that they decided not to mail something I paid for in advance. That further confirms, for me, that the ARRL is a dead horse as another commenter stated.
There is a total absence of a way to cancel the membership. I don’t want a refund, I just want to completely disassociate with the organization. The IT issues alone are scary enough, but now Election Fixing or at least Election shenanigans?
Check, please…
Exit Stage Left.
So, I have a question: why do you folks feel it necessary to support the ARRL with your money?
Advocacy? Other than issuing strongly-worded missives on their website, when has the ARRL advocated for anything successfully in the last generation? They don’t have an office in Washington.
Education? When was the last time their emergency communications offerings were updated? Are they synced with FEMA ICS? It’s funny – I don’t recall Radiograms as a valid ICS form.
LoTW and other IT-based offerings? See here: https://youtu.be/7hVzXUGmWq4?si=e3Wcny_O7Jb-V8LC
The ARRL cares so little about their IT offerings that they were running it and other public-facing IT assets on Windows 98, CentOS 6.x servers, databases that literally need custom scripts run on them to import them into modern software because they’re *so* outdated – no backups, because why would any Corporation backup their data?
Drama? –Oh, yes, now *here* is where you get your membership’s worth — and so much more.
Look: I get that a great many ARRL members choose to renew their membership in this organization out of brand loyalty and nostalgia. And that’s fine – far be it from me to even so much as suggest how you spend your money.
But it’s be clear: the ARRL doesn’t do what it says on the tin, and has not for over a generation. It’s an organization that simply perpetuates itself for the sake of perpetuating itself. It doesn’t do the real work of advocacy, it doesn’t do the real work of educating; it can’t even see it’s way clear to investing in their own IT infrastructure.
And, if you’re one of those, “Well, yes — it has warts, but it’s all we’ve got.” — sorry, no. What does it take for the membership of the ARRL to finally say, “Enough is enough!” — and realize it’s not going to get better unless and until the ARRL is dissolved, it’s assets liquidated, and the proceeds used to start a new organization that actually does the work.
I’d be inclined to give *that* organization an opportunity. The ARRL, on the other hand? No: they’ve proven themselves incapable, inept, and, frankly, incompetent.
The decision to disqualify N3JT because of the residency requirement is terrible.
All anyone with a sense of a goose has to do is look at the official FCC Database and find his listed address. That’s the end of the story.
I suspect this is another reason many Amateurs are not renewing their membership. When the board should have cut dies, it raised the dues, knowing that the most likely loss of members would be over 25%. ARRL will incur a net loss in the income stream.
I am one of the reasonably new life members. I now wish I had not procured a life membership for myself and my spouse.
The current regime at the arrl intends to keep it’s $300,000 plus sinecures and
luxury boondoggles by any means necessary. They suppress dissent, free speech
and have the same “democracy” as iran with the you aren’t qualified to run scam
The VM (volunteer monitor) program has also become a tool to suppress wrong-think.
Criticize the current regime on the air and you’ll start getting nasty threatening letters.
The OO’s (official observers) had to go because they were just too honest. They had to
reapply for the same volunteer work they were doing for years ? So sorry, but you
aren’t qualified to be a VM. The arrl doesn’t believe in free speech for others.
I am distancing myself from the ARRL, and will not be renewing membership. Volunteers could easily fill these paid positions, The money saved by discontinuing the QST was pissed away by paying a million in ransom. They see their members as a source of revenue to be squeezed.
Dan,You know from our discussions that I don’t generally subscribe to social media platforms. Thank you for sending me a link to this post. We certainly agree on many, but not all things. Healthy discussion of our differing viewpoints is good. I believe we do agree we have a lot of things that need to change. I understand your perspective on the elections. Without arguing each specific I will just caution against making generalized conclusions. We do have a lot of written rules to attempt to manage our structure as old and archaic as it may be. Those rules will never be able to cover every possible situation, especially as fast as our environment evolves. In the absence of a written rule or law that allows or prohibits something, one has to rely on ethics, and how it relates to ethical behavior. ARRL has an Ethics and Elections (E&E) Committee, appointed to address situations not clearly covered by rules and insure election materials presented to member voters are factual and written in an ethical manner. It is not intended to change or bend rules to facilitate anyone’s individual agenda but instead keep firmly in place any black or white lines the rules create. If the rules require a document be submitted before noon, then 12:01 is disqualified regardless of who you know. If something is not specifically against the rules, that doesn’t make it “legal” but E&E considers what reasonably should be consider ethical behavior.
Could one say that distorting facts and misleading member voters through omission and conjecture to fit a desired narrative an example of ethical behavior? It could in some circles, but the ham community I grew up in is better than that. If someone owned two homes in two different Divisions should they be able to vote in whichever Division they decide to. Extend this to somebody with even more resources and has homes in all 15 Divisions. Should he or she then be allowed to change what they call their “primary residence” every year, and be able to vote in all 15 Division elections? I believe the ethical answer E&E concluded was that only the “primary residence” should be considered. Getting to the bottom of this required significant research which in the case you site documented a legally certified tax sheltered homestead deed signed and certified that the “primary residence” in question was not in the division claimed.
Yes we need a lot of change. Destroying what good tools we have because there is a lot that needs fixed is not where I put my effort. You have pointed out where there has been progress before. Don’t give up now.
Roy,
Did you disqualify other candidates, or just these fellows?
Seems as though you want to choose the letter of the law, rather than the spirit of the law to boot the one ham- he was late in his documentation? But filed in time?
You drilled down into home deeds to figure out some “gotcha” on one candidate because he happens to winter in another district?
Then you want to choose the spirit of the law (the law is in my mouth, in this instance) by inferring that statements made by a candidate were factually incorrect- when they were not.
Combine this with a computer hack (did it really cost you a million?), high employee turnover, opaque financials, a 6 figure bump for the exec., the loss of our print magazine, and you wonder why everyone is upset?
The ARRL belongs to its membership, not its elected and hired leaders.
When I got my license in 2008 (after they quit requiring CW- I am still only up to about 5 words an hour), I joined ARRL with enthusiasm.
As the years went by, I quickly realized the league is a dog ‘n pony show (actually, dogs and ponys would be fun to watch… this aint).
The HOA fiasco (which luckily all failed, as it was evidently written by the HOA people, not for the ARRL members’ best interests), similar election garbage a number of years ago with K5AB suffering the same disqualification BS as the above – RAV and AUS staunchly holding onto their “power”.
Month after month receiving that paper rag with the same articles that could have been written in the late 60’s/early 70’s just with flashier plastic faces. I had submitted some tech articles of projects I did with current tech, 1 got printed a full year later…
At conventions (pre-Covid), I would attend the ARRL forums, and the self-aggrandizing I would hear was too much They acted like they were the ONLY ones we should pray to. Sounded like a politician trying to convince you there was nothing else/you HAD to listen to them only.
What finally did in my membership was, back in 2011, as a member (webmaster) of the core team of HSMM-Mesh/Broadband-Hamnet, I wrote a letter to the league, handed directly to my WGD VD (N5AUS) for delivery to the League, begging to help promote our 3.4GHz band (did you even KNOW we have a band there? my point exactly ! -105db noise floor! 40MHz channel to do 100Mb/s networking over), I said that if they dont help promote it, AT&T will back a truckload of money to the FCC door and buy it out from under us. It took a few years, but my premonition came true. Thats when I allowed my membership to expire, realizing the Spectrum Defense fund was really an Expensive Dinner Fund for the execs & Congress.
Since then, I havent even missed it. The pile of magazines in the corner got tossed into the recycle bin (except for the few July 2013 editions I acquired, 1 month they actually wrote about something of this millennium).
I am a proudly serving member of my local ARES, to help my community. Being a non-member of the league, I never have to worry about being suckered into taking the EC position.! :-) EC and above must be paying members of the league.
I will admit I do use their VEC services to run my testing sessions. But I am also W5YI accredited, and still consider getting their kit and switching sides. Especially after I had to print my own new Extra books this year because the League couldnt get me the new ones in time for my July session,, because they were still bumbling around after the hack.
I have heard so many say that if there was another Association started that would truly represent Hams, they would join it. Id even give it a try. As long as they dont go down the same path as Newington…
As a life member of ARRL and a supporter of Dan Marler I was absolutely stunned to learn that my vote was meaningless. I’ve been concerned for some time over what has been going on at headquarters, especially IT issues as well as a few of the other points that Dan mentioned. I never imagined that things were as bad as has just been horrifically demonstrated by the league’s decision to remove Dan as a candidate. So very sad.
I struggled mightily with renewing my ARRL membership this year. I’ve served on the board of a non-profit organization which was facing a self-inflicted loss of reputation with its partners and membership, and was looking to buttress its own power at the expense of those it served. I recognize an organization which is in decline, and in which leadership is accelerating the decline, because I’ve lived it first hand from the inside. Nevertheless, I renewed my ARRL membership for one more year, hoping against hope that change might be in the air.
I judged poorly. It is clear to me that ARRL leadership has lost its way. The organization itself serves a worthwhile purpose (however well or poorly it is doing so), but the problems at the top are manifest for all to see, and will not solve themselves as the leadership has maintained for itself the power to keep itself in power, and has acted to do so. Sadly, the only reasonable option left is to let it wither away.
I will not be renewing my ARRL membership this next year. I hope that some group of people with the necessary relational, organizational, technical, and leadership skills will stand up a meaningful national alternative to the ARRL. I’m ready to support such an organization with my wallet, effort, and time.
This appears to be only the latest of a long list of mismanagement issues and lack of leadership under the current CEO. My ARRL membership is good through Feb 2026 but I do not plan on renewing unless things change and I see significant improvement at the ARRL haven’t well before then. Very sad situation for an organization with such great history and support of amateur radio.
I canceled my ARRL membership this morning. They say they will send a refund check.
I wish life members like me could get a refund. Ironically we have less leverage than those folks with annual memberships.
After the League decided not to send our copies of QST and the selection situation. I have decided not to renew my membership next year.
I think the thing to do is for folks to vote with their wallet and not pay them anymore until they clean up their act.
On the face of it, I find the decision to disqualify Jim, N3JT, disturbing. Whatever his license states as his home address should be considered official no matter how many homes he has. Anything else is nitpicking.
Fred, K1VR, screwed up, that’s on him. Late is late, whether it’s a minute or a day. Rules are there for a reason.
Disqualifying Dan, K7REX, for expressing an opinion smacks of politics and doesn’t pass the smell test. If he was making personal attacks on an officer’s family member, or even an employee, the committee might have some grounds for action but he wasn’t. He was speaking to performance failures as he saw them and should have a right to his opinion. I don’t think anyone could argue there hasn’t been performance failures in the management of the ARRL.
Sadly this is a one-sided article and there is not enough known to comment clearly. I would say that in order for elections to be seen as fair deadlines are held fast to and rules are applied clearly. I am not sure where the complaints came from but if an opponent raised the complaints against these individuals then action would have to be taken. When you have high-emotion elections these sort of things are to be expected.
As to the current management, I have no strong opinion.
I’m not going to enter the heated discussion regarding disputed facts. Two items I *DO* believe:
1. The ARRL is the only game in town and familiar with elected federal officials and committees. People are being very good at finding fault without providing solutions.
2. We need to fix the perceived problems with the ARRL. How can we bring them into the world of today? Can we find ‘younger’ people to become directors and ARRL staff?
How would you react if you were a current director or high-level ARRL staffer?
John:
That ARRL is “only game in town” should not excuse these irregularities in throwing out the challengers for Division directors.
I believe that the ARRL is in terminal decline because of a now long history of poor decisions without regard to the future of itself and its role in Amateur Radio of the future. Thus, we’re going to be forced to figure out a future without ARRL, like it or not.
The issues of ARRL irregularities are so ingrained… the system so rigged… that in my opinion, they cannot be fixed, because the entire leadership does not want it to be fixed. They like the system just as it is.
And, because of those issues being so ingrained, younger people look at this organization with a century of history, and a very “20th century” way of doing business, and conclude “not MY fight” and they move on to other types of involvement in Amateur Radio, such as starting clubs like Narwhal Amateur Radio Society – https://nars.narwhal.be.
How can I, as a member, influence the ARRL, when they throw my vote out?
The time has come Dan.
Has anyone done a thorough review of the By-Laws to see if members have any ability to weight in and demand review of this?
Not a full member? At the time this was written about the only interpretation that makes sense as that a number of classes of membership existed, and the intent was that if you were not a full (not an associate or other type) member, you couldn’t run. The rules don’t say anything about full time, or physical or legal location.
A representative needs to be available and responsible to the membership. In the days of Zoom and the Internet one could be an effective representative working from the ISS.
I can only conclude the analysis was done with some predisposition to an outcome.
Given that all three outcomes yielded an establishment favorable result, my opinion remains that this was not the work of people ensuring that the election would maximize the voice of the membership.
I bet HPM is rolling over in his grave.
I have not done a complete review of the bylaws, but I don’t think that there’s anything that the members can do appeal these decisions by the Ethics and Elections Committee. Members can, however, recall their directors, and since Scotty Yonally, N8SY, is one of the directors on the committee, and is my director, I’m considering starting a recall petition.
Article 24 of the ARRL By-Laws reads:
Since there were just shy of 4,200 votes cast in the last election, we would need 420 signatures of full members in the Great Lakes Division for a recall election to be held. I bet something like that would get the attention of the ARRL. If there is anyone in the Great Lakes Division that would be willing to help me with this, please contact me.