Seely said the accusation might go to a Senate standing committee, but the BoC would probably argue that they cannot agree to a system run within the University which could possibly discipline them. If the BoC did not accept a recommendation from the Senate, then public opinion would be the only likely alternative. Any system, Seely pointed out, would be advisory, as is the case now with our system of shared University governance. Sloan asked for more detail about how a University employee might be in conflict with outside businesspeople. Seely explained that University personnel have an unfair advantage in that they may use University equipment and thus avoid overhead and other costs carried by those outside.
Most Universities have a policy to cover potential areas of conflict, such as college bookstores.
Bulleit said he often receives calls for consulting in Civil Engineering projects, but before accepting he has the developer check with local firms to see if they can and wish to do the work. Brokaw said he saw a need for a Conflict of Interest statement but felt the committee's plan was too strong. Seely said the proposal is a draft and encouraged University personnel to generate alternative wording and present it to the committee for their consideration. Seely pointed out that perception rules. There should be no perception of this occurring.