# data[].attributes.body
For board members who have been around what will feel drastically different if anything?

Will we continue to support regions with board work (charters, bylaws, board chair development?)

What does this evolution mean to the role of the board chair and national council?  Is that changing?

With the “regional leadership” shifting are we saying that we could expect different levels of board engagements in ED hiring in the future?  Meaning some regions may leverage the board while others may not?

# data[].attributes.body
1. it reads as though we are diminishing authority of the board chair and board—either relative to the previous iteration of the deck or relative to how some boards may perceive their role.  If just the former, I am curious how the thinking evolved.  If both of those are true, I’d be interested in the ‘state of’ there: (similar to Dr. Paula’s first question) to what extent are we anticipating an adverse reaction across regions?

2. Specifically, are board chairs and boards only playing ‘champion’ and ‘advise’ functions in the evaluation of ED performance, hiring of new EDs in their region, and regional budget approval?

3. I see less of the “hybrid” language here and this feels like a the layout of a true advisory board.  Is that accurate?  Are folks worried that this may diminish the profile of board candidates?  I’ve heard that feedback a few times in both SD and MKE: “Advisory boards won’t draw the heavy hitters…”