I am opposed to this proposal to eliminate the House of Delegates (HOD) and replace it with an (as yet undefined) non-binding advisory board.  The very fact that the Board had to delay the vote is evidence that they didn't have the pulse of the membership on this issue.  If they don't have the pulse of the membership on this, then how are we supposed to believe they can have the pulse on other issues typically reserved for the HOD.  I am all for modernizing the Board of Directors and complying with state laws, but specific examples of the legal implications having occurred or even threatened has not been presented.  I do feel that there has been an air that this change was a fait accompli.  It is not.  I believe the HOD can be modernized or otherwise reworked to provide the flexibility the BOD seeks. 

Matthew Parker, MS, CIH, CSP, ARM