So if you're really looking for diversification and representation, how does excluding related persons from serving at the same time accomplish that, in your opinion? If you really want diversification and representation wouldn't mandating regional representation from all parts of the country be a better way to accomplish this?
Why have 2 or 3 board members from a particular state or region? Why not divide the membership base into 10 regions and elect one board member from each region, with an "at-large" board member....as an example?
The timing of this motion smacks of retaliation, and has nothing to do with diversification or representation. If having related persons serving on the board together were really an issue, KCBS wouldn't be where it is today.
Mike - Team Enoserv