[NLRS] Bylaws Change!
Baker, Donn B
[email protected]
Mon, 18 Feb 2002 09:43:59 -0600
Hi Jon,
Since I'm the one putting the proposed changes up for consideration, I
should be the one to take the heat... not John. (And he did do a great job
on the web site and the maps, didn't he !)
**************
>From the ARRL web site, 29 Jan:
(http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2002/01/29/1/?nc=1)
ARRL Field Day, Affiliated Club Competition Changes Announced (Jan 29, 2002)
-- The ARRL has adopted rule changes affecting Field Day and the
ARRL-affiliated club competition. The changes were included in the report of
the Membership Services Committee (MSC), presented to the ARRL Board of
Directors at its January meeting in Fort Worth, Texas.
SNIP
The Board also adopted the MSC's recommendations regarding club competition.
In accordance with the advice of the ARRL Contest Advisory Committee, five
specific changes were approved and
will go into effect November 1, 2002,
when the "General Rules for All ARRL Contests" are updated for the 2002-2003
contest season.
SNIP ....
***************
The only two changes that affect us membership and service area.
The service area for NLRS has (always ?) been as defined in the proposed
changes. It was intended to maximize the number of members. For example,
we wanted to include Duluth and Sioux Falls. Both had members at the time.
That required moving the center out of the Twin Cities proper to Winstead.
In the Cities, it wouldn't have included Sioux Falls.
Help any ?
73 Donn
WA2VOI/0
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 18 February 2002 08:39
> To: [email protected]; John P. Toscano
> Subject: Re: [NLRS] Bylaws Change!
>
>
> John, nice job web wennie. Two questions for the club.
>
> 1. Is the ARRLs change on the "2-meeting rule" for membership a lock
> ..... last time I check I thought that it was under discussion.
> 2. Regarding the placement of the club center, and I know this is a
> sensitive subject, have we looked at optimizing its position
> based on a)
> keeping the current NLRS members but b) sliding the center one way or
> another to pick up more ? I would not favor any shift
> (such as a change
> to MN Section) that would cause us to have to drop any
> current members.
>
> 73, Jon
> W0ZQ
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "John P.
>
> Toscano" To:
> [email protected]
> <[email protected] cc: (bcc: Jon C.
> Platt/US-Corporate/3M/US)
> n.edu> Subject: [NLRS]
> Bylaws Change!
>
>
> 02/16/02 12:41
>
> PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> As mentioned earlier on the reflector, ARRL is changing some of the
> rules concerning clubs and club competition eligibility. To take
> advantage of those rules changes, we should make some minor changes to
> the NLRS bylaws.
>
> The proposed changes are now available on the NLRS web site:
> http://www.tc.umn.edu/~tosca005/NLRS-Dev/
>
> If you're not inclined to look at the main page to see what else the
> web weenies (I hesitate to call myself a "master" of the web site!)
> have changed, and you want to go right to the proposed Bylaws change,
> you can go directly to:
> http://www.tc.umn.edu/~tosca005/NLRS-Dev/BylawsChange.htm
>
> 73 de KB0ZEV
> _______________________________________________
> NLRS mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NLRS mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
>