I agree that Greg has stated the situation exactly right on both points: Article 11 has been correctly applied, but it may well be too restrictive. Many associations have policies that require that all potential conflicts be revealed in advance, and that the Board member recuse him- or herself on any matter on which there might be a real or perceived conflict. We have studied Article 11 in the past without finding a generally acceptable modification. Dave K1ZZ ________________________________ From: Greg Milnes [mailto:w7oz@comcast.net] Sent: Wed 9/7/2005 1:56 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12992] Re: Determination of Eligibility Dennis Speaking as a Board member and not as an E & E member, I can say that Article 11 of the Articles of Association do not talk about conflicts of interest but really speak to the potential (in a financial sense). "No person shall be eligible . . .whose business connections are of such a nature that he could gain financially through the shaping of the affairs of the League by the Board, or by the improper exploitation of his office for the furtherance of his own aims or those of his employer." Article 11 goes on to speak to potential: "The primary test of eligibility under this Article shall be the freedom from commercial or governmental connections of such a nature that his influence in the affairs of the League could be used for his private benefit." In my opinion, if one wants to call this a "conflict of interest", then it seems to me that it matters not whether it is current or potential. Both are verboten. Is not it a conflict of interest to have that potential? I think yes. Speaking as a lawyer, it seems that current conflict and possible future conflict are essentially the same. Thus I see no difference between the E & E Committee findings and the EC. Is Article 11 an overly strict provision? Maybe. Do we want to go that far? Maybe. At any rate it is a subject that might be discussed by the Board at some future time. Finally, if all this sounds like gibberish, remember I used to do this for a living. 73/Greg W7OZ -----Original Message----- From: Dennis Bodson [mailto:bodsond@att.net] Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 8:22 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [arrl-odv:12977] Determination of Eligibility Dear President Haynie: In reviewing the emails from the Elections and Ethics (E&E) Committee and the Executive Committee on this matter, it appears that the right hand and the left hand are not in agreement with each other. The E&E committee determined that there was a "conflict of interest" while the Executive Committee went out of their way to state emphatically that there was no conflict of interest at this time but that there was a potential for one in the future. As I read article 11, it states conflict of interest and not a potential conflict of interest. In light of the above, it is requested that the Board of Directors address this matter and make the final determination. Sincerely, Dennis Bodson ARRL Director Roanoke Division