Good Morning, As the debate over the proposed By-Law revisions heats up in advance of the October Executive Committee meeting, here are some thoughts I’ve had and the perspective I’m looking at them. First, as to Minute 27 and the role of the Vice-Director (I hesitate abbreviating it to V.D.). There have been a few comments regarding the “heartbeat away” role of the Vice-Director. This is a specious argument. We are not talking about the President and Vice President of the United States and this doesn’t involve national security. Nor do I see anyone carrying around the “Nuclear Football” a step or two behind Kay as she makes her rounds. I have not made up my mind on this one, and can be swayed in either direction, but I have yet to hear any meaningful reason as to why I should support changing the way we do business at this point in time. As to Minute 28, I am opposed to making the E&E an elected committee. In my opinion this would politicize the committee. Frankly, I’d worry about someone who wants this particular job and is willing to seek votes for a position on this committee. Membership on the E&E is a thankless but necessary job. I would not change the way members are chosen. I would, however, look to make changes in the ability to disqualify a Board member stemming from any action regarding conflict of interest. In my opinion, this should always require a vote by the full board. At no time should as few as two or three people be allowed to decide the fate of a Board member. As to conflict of interest of a sitting Director or Vice Director, I believe the E&E should be charged only with making recommendations and not final decisions. This, of course, would also require a complete overhaul of By-Law 45, which is how we got here in the first place. My argument at the time was (and still is) that we need to deal with the By-Laws as a whole package and reevaluate the by-laws in that vein with the idea that one item affects others. In my opinion, to piecemeal this issue would be sell ourselves short and only leave other more pressing issues, such as By-Law 45, out of the mix. Let’s look at the problem as a whole and not attempt to put band-aids on only two rules. - - - - - A short note about HR-4969. We still have two weeks before Congress goes back into session. I know many of us have been busy chasing down local appointments with legislators and their staffers, however, there are still some who have not met the challenge. Please, please, please get involved. If not now, then when? 73 de Mike N2YBB