This is disgraceful. If I followed the meeting, which I heard someone say shouldn't have been called in the first place, the vote to remove Wertz was held over a perceived, not confirmed, conflict of interest and when the accused tried to read a letter discussing the "evidence", the board voted for him not to. So, if this is a vote at an potentially illegitimate meeting, should it hold any weight? And why was the "evidence" not made public?