QIA dissolves joint board
Directors vote to establish separate bodies to govern business and development arms
MIRIAM HILL
The Ulu Economic Development Commission is no longer acting as a joint board responsible for the Kakivak Association and the Qikiqtaaluk Corporation.
At a board meeting of the Qikiqtani Inuit Association in Qikiqtarjuaq last week, directors voted to dissolve the body, which had been responsible for both QC, the business arm of the association, and KA, a non-profit society that funds development and training.
The two arms of QIA will now be served by separate boards.
Johnny Mike, the interim president of QC and the vice-chair of the Ulu board said there were two separate boards for each association until 1997 when, as a cost-cutting measure, they were put together.
“The combined boards have been outgrown by the responsibilities of the two organizations,” Mike said. “The accountability has to be there also. Each board has grown in the last two years, so I would say we are talking about accountability and the representation to the beneficiaries.”
Each board will have five members. The six members of the Ulu board will choose on which board they wish to serve. The chair will also have his choice of boards. Another member of QIA’s executive committee will chair the other board. The remaining three positions are to be filled by eligible candidates.
Mike said while the move may be more expensive, as it results in 10 board members rather than seven, it is worth the cost.
“I think the direction we’ve been looking at is the money being well spent and if it’s viable, yes, it probably will cost more,” he said. “But doing a better job will cost you more money.”
A split board will also help alleviate any possible conflict of interest issues that could arise as the business arm of QIA and its funding association grow.
“The policy issues are getting to be questionable,” Mike said, citing himself as an example. “Whether I can be sitting on two boards and make a proposal that on the other hand I can approve, it seems to be a bit of a conflict of interest.”
(0) Comments