1 new of 20 responses total.
"I think it's a valid point to make, since electing a remote candidate will result in extra complications and quite possibly extra expenses." I think this is the point other tried to make in another item. When you're electing a board member, you want to elect the best person. And subtracting points based on localness isn't fair. The fair way to go is to come up with a solution that makes the factor of whether a board member is local or not a moot point in deciding whether or not to vote for him. However, ignoring the issue about how to deal with remote board members, and not coming up with a solution is going to prevent remote board members from being voted. It makes the whole policy amendment process moot.
You have several choices: