by Amanda Suffecool is now the chair of the NRA’s Special Committee on Reorganization and Leadership. As I noted in my report on the NRA Winter Board Meeting, there was a great deal of discussion within that committee on finding the right size for the Board of Directors. There were quite a diversity of comments and suggestions. They ranged from leave it as is to set up a board of 12 paid managers.
Amanda has sent me an open letter that she requested I post which I was more than happy to do. The letter includes some of her thoughts on the matter. I am in full agreement that the Board needs to be a working board. There is no room for slackers who just want the title of being a director without putting in the work. The days of giving out honorific directorships similar to honorific doctorates awarded at university graduations are over.
More importantly, Amanda wants your thoughts on rightsizing the NRA Board of Directors. You can send your thoughts and ideas to her a couple of ways. First, she requested that you use eyeonthetargetradio@icloud.com if you want to use email. Second, there is good old USPS snail mail. The address there is PO Box 77, Wayland, Ohio 44285.
Her open letter in its entirety is below:
An Open Letter to Our Members 1/15/26
From the Chairman, Committee on Reorganization and Leadership
Dear NRA Members,
The Committee on Reorganization and Leadership has been hard at work on several important initiatives—one of which concerns the composition of our Board. You may hear this referred to as board size, board reduction, or, less charitably, tossing the bums out. I prefer to call it right-sizing the Board—ensuring that it is structured appropriately for the work our organization must accomplish.
Many voices are calling to make the Board smaller. But before we decide that a smaller Board is the answer, we must ask the more important question: What problem are we trying to solve? Reducing the number of members may not be the root issue—it may be merely one proposed solution.
So, I ask you to think deeply and share your thoughts. What are the real concerns driving these calls for change? Is it cost? The potential for misuse of resources? Challenges in decision-making? Comparisons to other organizations? Identifying the true problem allows us to address it effectively and craft lasting solutions.
Here are some key issues I believe we need to acknowledge and tackle:
1. A Trust Problem
We have faced serious challenges that tested the very stability of our organization. At one point, we were just a few votes away from losing everything. The battles on the Board floor were intense and critical. As we now consider ideas like appointing board members instead of electing them, I urge caution. Ask yourselves—Who do we trust enough to make those appointments? At this time, I would argue the answer is, quite simply, no one.
2. An Attendance Problem
Too often, Board members have been elected and then disappeared—never showing up, never contributing. This is a working Board, and that means full participation. Members must be active in committees, attend meetings, understand the ongoing motions and votes, and be able to speak knowledgeably about the issues before us. We need engaged members who are present and committed.
3. An Attitude Problem
Some Board members have seen their role as one of directing others rather than doing the work themselves. That won’t do. This organization needs leaders who contribute—who lend their skills, their networks, and their energy. This is not a role for those who want to take; it’s for those who want to give.
The Committee on Reorganization and Leadership has already taken steps to address some of these issues:
- Attendance Accountability: We passed a resolution ensuring that attendance is now a key factor in the renomination process. Any member missing more than one-third of meetings in their three-year term will not be automatically reconsidered. They may still choose to run by petition, but effort will be required to retain their seat—a reminder that commitment matters.
- Committee Reporting and Performance: Each committee now operates under a multi-step reporting plan with defined goals, milestones, and measurable outcomes. Committees must clarify their mission, track progress, and report results to the Board. We’ve enlisted members with expertise in key performance indicators to help guide this process.
- Ongoing Reforms: We are developing further measures that define the responsibilities and expectations of all Board members to ensure that each plays an active role in the organization’s success.
But now, back to the central question—Board size. Before we can decide what the right number is, I need your help in understanding why you believe a smaller Board is better. I’ve heard many suggestions: smaller boards, appointed boards, boards limited to specific skill sets. These may all merit discussion—but please, let’s not start with the solution.
Help us start with the why.
With respect and appreciation,
Amanda Suffecool
Chairman, Committee on Reorganization and Leadership
