On the area of misconduct I think there needs to be a change. I've indicated that. It's one of the areas that I've asked that the task force consider when the report comes out, hopefully late in December, because there's a balance here.
With a one-year limitation, what you're saying is that the premise behind it is that a member who is under some serious allegations should not have an accusation hanging over his or her head indefinitely. That's simply not right. On the other hand, if you allow the limitation period to be too long, the thing would never get investigated. But we don't want even the appearance of somebody getting around a misconduct ruling just because a limitation period could run out, because there could be an accusation—I'm not saying it's happening—that the investigation purposely took so long that it didn't get down to the area of deciding on the misconduct.
So I'm asking that this area be looked at and a productive way found to address that problem.