Conflict of Interest policy, 1 March 2012 draft

[Chris Leonard]

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Ian Lynagh <igloo at earth.li> wrote:

>> ** *Conservancy Retains Right to Request Competitive Bids.*

> In the (unlikely, I hope!) event that the PLC disagrees with the
> Conservancy on the competency of an alternative candidate, the PLC can
> choose not to go ahead with the project, I assume?

The essence of the SFC-project relationship is that the PLC has
technical and artistic control of the project, although surrendering
other control (especially contractual and financial matters) under the
"financial sponsorship" agreement.  My take is that for reasons of
satisfying IRS requirements of possessing overall "control" over the
actions of the SFC and member projects that language like this is
necessary, but does not represent any intent on the part of the SFC to
arbitrarily insert itself in technical execution of projects.

Let's face it, we've turned over all of our money and we have to start
trusting them at some point. :-)

Of course, I'll let the SFC speak for the SFC, but for my part I am
not overly troubled by this clause.

cjl
_______________________________________________
policies-discuss mailing list
policies-discuss at sfconservancy.org
http://lists.sfconservancy.org/mailman/listinfo/policies-discuss