The debate, I'm afraid will go on regarding individual "feelings" about how individual board members deserve or don't deserve to continue on as such. What it comes down to is collectively organizing shareholders to agree to changes that, in my opinion, should be put into place.

We the people (shareholders in the case) should have a voice. It is important, in my opinion that we push for majority voting and term limits. Even the president of the USA has term limits so why shouldn't our board members also have term limits. I'd say no more than a 2-3 year term with two term limits. If they are doing a superb job, perhaps a provision can be put in place which would allow them to be there longer if their specific performance can justify this.

I also think that their compensation/severance should be seriously looked at for possible changes. I will leave that to others to come up with some ideas on that subject.

So, can we agree, and move forward with preparing a proxy that we can deliver by the deadline for next year's ASHM? I hope that next year's meeting will not be delayed and will be held in San Diego.