Before RIOC votes, residents deserve to know what happened to the promised search, what conflicts were reviewed, and who will be protected when the next negotiation begins.
"Life is untidy, and families have been known to produce more than one lawyer, but when the result of an independent search is a family member of a sitting board member, the institution does not get to shrug and call that independence. It must prove it." It is reasonable for residents to ask the board to disclose how the search was conducted, the number of candidates and the precautions used to recuse the sitting Board Member/relative from the selection process. The annual salary for the position of General Counsel is well over $200.000.
Thank you for continuing to ask the questions many of us don't and should.
"Life is untidy, and families have been known to produce more than one lawyer, but when the result of an independent search is a family member of a sitting board member, the institution does not get to shrug and call that independence. It must prove it." It is reasonable for residents to ask the board to disclose how the search was conducted, the number of candidates and the precautions used to recuse the sitting Board Member/relative from the selection process. The annual salary for the position of General Counsel is well over $200.000.
Can't decide whether this is more tone-deaf or foolish. Yeah, it's both. RIOC is immune to transparency. These questions will never be answered.
The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
No idea what the relevance is here, but in public service, the squeaky wheel isn't supposed to get the grease or be either silent or invisible.