The Co-op board of directors has decided to limit the number of Co-op members that they will allow to run for election to the board in the 2012 campaign. For the first time in Co-op history, the board has ruled that any member who has been a Co-op employee, or who has applied to be a Co-op employee, in the last two years cannot run.

Think about it. That’s a lot of people. Those people who are Co-op members have now been denied one of the basic rights of membership (the right to serve on the volunteer board) just because the board says that all these people are not to be trusted--because they have a “conflict of interest” with the Co-op leadership.

How did this happen? The Co-op has a governing document (the By-laws–which are available at the website) which allows the board to set qualifications for board candidates. The By-laws allow the board to reject candidates with an “overriding conflict of interest.” That one word, “overriding,” is the key. Overriding does not apply to a large number of potential candidates with no obvious axe to grind. Why would this board assume that any member who applied for a job at the Co-op in the last two years has an overriding conflict of interest?

I believe the Co-op should be a democratic organization that values open discussion, appreciates the broadest possible community involvement, and encourages volunteer service. I also believe that it is the right and responsibility of the Co-op membership to decide who should serve on the board. The board does not have the right to hand-pick which candidates they think are worthy.

This board’s decision to limit candidates is wrong. They need to rescind it now.
 
--Bill London, Moscow