
Excuse me for repeating this, the last version had formatting from the ARRL site that gave the list server indigestion.
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 8:32 AM Bruce Perens bruce@perens.com wrote: On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 6:12 AM Mark L. Hammond marklhammond@gmail.com wrote:
It appears to me that Paul references a section in the ARRL bylaws that addresses *becoming* a member; that is what is being addressed in the proposed bylaws changes, which are consistent with the ARRL. Article 11 appears to address* expelling* a member. I don't think you can expel a non-member.
Hi Mark,
Here is the text of the proposed AMSAT rule:
Section 2. Applications for membership or *renewal* as Member or Member
Society shall be submitted to and in the manner prescribed by the Secretary. In the case of any applicant whose character, reputation, or conduct might make him or her an undesirable member, the Secretary shall refer the application to the Board of Directors (the "Board") for review; in all other cases, the Secretary shall have the authority to grant membership.
Obviously, "renewal" means an existing member seeking to continue their membership. If the board decided to not allow that continuation, they would indeed be expelling that member.
To repeat the ARRL Articles of Association Section 11:
What are the *conditions* which the ARRL Executive Committee is allowed to use as grounds for termination? They are listed in ARRL bylaws section 1:
The membership of the League shall consist of (a) Full members who shall be entitled to all rights and privileges of the League except as otherwise provided in these Articles, in the Bylaws, or in the Rules and Regulations of the ARRL Field Organization, and (b) International members and Associate members who shall be entitled to all rights and privileges of the League except the right to vote for Directors, Vice Directors and Section Managers and the right to hold office. The Board of Directors shall by appropriate By-Laws specify the requirements of each membership class, provided, however, that *the Board of Directors shall not terminate or reduce the rights of any member except for the lapse or termination of a condition now required as precedent to the exercise of such rights.* Nothing herein contained shall preclude the Board of Directors from expelling a member upon good cause shown and after notice and an opportunity to be heard.
I won't bother to repeat ARRL Bylaws section 4 on dues, but that is the other condition upon which membership can lapse, without action of the Executive Committee.
1. Pursuant to Article 11 of the Articles of Association, the following membership categories are established: (a) Full Membership. To be eligible, an applicant must be *a resident of the United States, its possessions, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a United States citizen temporarily resident elsewhere, and the holder of an unexpired Amateur Radio operator's license or reciprocal operating authorization issued by the UnitedStates. * (b) International Membership. Any person who is the holder of an unexpired Amateur Radio operator's license or its equivalent issued by any administration, but who is not eligible for Full Membership by virtue of his or her place of residence, is eligible for InternationalMembership. (c) Associate Membership. Any person who is not eligible for Full Membership or International Membership, but who is interested in amateur radio, is eligible for AssociateMembership.
So, ARRL can expel a member not for matters of character, reputation, or conduct, but only if the member does not meet the conditions for membership because they are no longer a citizen or have lost their license. Because the Articles of Association have precedent over the Bylaws.
But AMSAT only copied one half of ARRL's language about member termination, so AMSAT's proposed rule is much more draconian than ARRL's.
Thanks
Bruce

… What are the conditions which the ARRL Executive Committee is allowed to use as grounds for termination?
Is there a point to comparing AMSAT and the ARRL? Can AMSAT not establish its own rules?
And, again - conversations here are worthless - unless backed up with a letter sent to AMSAT.
Clint Bradford K6LCS

Hi Clint,
I apologize that even after my second try, that was a bit hard to parse.
The reason to compare the two is that Paul asserted that AMSAT had directly copied the rule from ARRL. I am sure that this was an absolutely sincere effort by Paul and the board, but they missed all of the language in ARRL's articles of association that modify that rule. So, it's not really a copy of ARRL's rule at all, it's much more draconian.
Thanks
Bruce
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 9:03 AM Clint Bradford clintbradford@mac.com wrote:
… What are the *conditions* which the ARRL Executive Committee is
allowed to use as grounds for termination?
Is there a point to comparing AMSAT and the ARRL? Can AMSAT not establish its own rules?
And, again - conversations here are worthless - unless backed up with a letter sent to AMSAT.
Clint Bradford K6LCS

I read the AMSAT bylaws as standing on their own …
And, again - conversations here are worthless - unless backed up with a letter sent to AMSAT.
Clint Bradford K6LCS

On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 9:11 AM Clint Bradford clintbradford@mac.com wrote:
I read the AMSAT bylaws as standing on their own …
Uh huh. I was objecting to this line specifically:
This provision is adapted nearly word for word from ARRL Bylaw 2
This was offered as a justification for the rule, and sincerely so. But Paul and the BoD entirely mis-interpreted the rule they were copying because they hadn't seen the Articles of Association text that modified it. So, the justification offered turns out to be misleading and invalid.
This is what makes law so difficult. To parse the actual effect of something, you need to first have all of the context.
Thanks
Bruce
participants (2)
-
Bruce Perens
-
Clint Bradford