General Meeting, Saturday, 4 August 2001
Minutes
Members Present:
New Members Present:
Visitors Present:
Voting Chits:
Submitted Documentation:
Record of Meeting:
TASMA Chairman, Bob Dengler called the meeting to order at 10:20 at the Standley Park and Recreation Center. There were 30 members present (including 3 new members) and 3 visitors. The attendees each introduced themselves to those present.
Andy presented his initial ideas on the band plan. He would like to start by reviewing the current band plan to confirm which areas may not in extensive use. A member pointed out that any band plans would have to be coordinated with the entire Southern California amateur committee.
He first presented a statistical summary of TC activities since April.
He next presented a summary of two technical tools that have been added to the Technical Committee repertoire; the Radio Mobile Deluxe (RMD), a freeware tool, and the Audio Spectrum Analysis (ASA), a shareware tool.
An output from the RMD analyzing coverage from a low level site in the Ontario region was use as an example. Bob explained how the tool was applied to a case. Bob agreed that he would add the URL of the MRD to the TASMA Web Site.
Bob went on to discuss the use of the Audio Spectrum Analysis tool. HE indicated that with 15 KHz channel spacing some adjacent channel interference was to be expected which is why a lot of the country has gone to 20 KHz spacing. However, this is impractical in Southern California. There are two things that determinate the occupied bandwidth, the deviation and the modulation spectrum. Where there are devices to address the deviation issue, less has been done to analyze the modulation spectrum. The ASA tool uses the PC sound card to stimulate and measure the audio response of a repeater. When a repeater is found with modulation spectrum wider than 3 KHz, it can lead to adjacent channel interference. What we want is a flat response to 3 KHz, followed by a sharp drop off above that frequency.
Bob will try to develop a white paper to further describe these tools, which will be posted on the TASMA Web Site.
A lengthy discussion ensued. One member offered that he was disappointed in having to support the TC with re-coordination data every few years due to lost records. This, of course, was not an issue with the bylaws but rather with the operation of technical committee. The member went on to offer that the reason why there may have been minimum comments as it did not impact most people personally.
The bylaws can be accessed on the Web Site or the organization will mail a copy to any member requesting a copy.
Jim indicated that it has been suggested that rather than forwarding individual messages, it might be better to consolidate the six issues into single messages.
Jim indicated that Yahoo has indicated that without more use of the Reflector, they intended to deactivate the service.
Jim will put out a note on the Reflector identifying the most recent issue of the Bylaws.
Following Jim’s report, Bob Dengler presented his views on changes recommended to the Bylaws (See Appendix C). There was a lengthy discussion regarding TASMA’s role in identifying and/or recommend possible frequencies for repeaters. TASMA originally assigned frequencies but has not done this in many years.
Jim pointed out that the purpose of the organization was already in the Articles of Association but agreed that this document was generally invisiable to the membership. Jim agreed to see to it that the Articles of Association were made available to the membership, possibly through the Web site. Cybil, W6GIC, offered to help retype the document as it currently exists in a poor condition.
Jim was concerned about including procedural requirements in the Bylaws, limiting flexibility in the future.
Bob next started a discussion concerning how many votes a single person can cast (for example, a person who is a delegate of one or more associations as well as holding a personal membership. Several extreme cases were explored.
There was some discussion of the definition of a "delegate" membership. Jim pointed out that only individuals could hold memberships, not organizations. A delegate is an individual who represents an organization.
Jim pointed out that TASMA does not provide for the right to vote by proxy because TASMA provides for a delegate membership. Jim also pointed out that he verifies that membership applications for delegate memberships represent real recognized organization.
Other topics, which were discussed without conclusion, were the membership requirement for election to a Board position and the definition of quorums for the various types of meetings
Bob recommended that specific duties be assigned to the Board Member at Large.
On the topic of the period of service on the Technical Committee, the possible issue is loss of corporate memory at the end of each year. One approach is having the members elected and have their period extend beyond one year (e.g. 2 years) and having their election date offset (e.g. on 4 month intervals).
Based on the feedback that has been received so far this year, Jim does not anticipate any rewrite of the Bylaws this year.
The discussion ended with a discussion again on the use of the Reflector.
A new schema has been drafted. Randy needs next to coordinate with Jim Fortney to assure that the ARRL and other requirements are met.
Randy hopes to eventually have the data as well the forms (e.g. RFC's, Membership Applications) available for submittal on-line through the Web site.
How about a designated cross border representative within TASMA.
Alex Hodoyan, XE2IO, can get TASMA a list of Baja repeaters. However, he expressed the frustration of the Mexican community that the US amateur’s ignore any prior frequency agreements. A lengthy discussion took place over the international coordination issues. Alex agreed to review the TASMA band plan and suggested that the international agreements should be mutually reviewed. Jim asked Alex to continue to be the liaison with TASMA over these matters.
Bob Dengler, Pat Finke & Ted Fukushima agreed to be candidates; Howard Brown and Jim Fortner were undecided at this point. There were no other nominations.
Howard G. Brown (KG6GI)
Secretary
Appendix A – Summary of Correspondence (Y-T-D):
42 pieces of incoming correspondence
Membership:
Technical Committee:
Business Operations:
Other:
Appendix B – Technical Committee Report:
Appendix C – Bylaws Review – Chairman’s Recommendation:
Appendix D – Spectrum Management Committee:
E-mail TASMA
RETURN