I would first point out that most other major ports in the world have direct users sitting on their boards of directors. They seem to work well, because those who use the port are the ones who know best about operating the port and the decisions that need to be made. Are you going to address all of the community and peripheral issues out there with that? No. That's where the other appointees come in and bring that into the conversation.
The Port of Vancouver doesn't allow even one user representative on the board. You have to be a retired worker from a grain terminal in order to even be appointed to the board of directors. It's not the same. We're saying there should be direct user appointees on that board. Then, of course, they'd have to sign on to the terms of reference, etc., requiring them to operate in the best interest of the port itself.
Does this create a bit of a challenge? Potentially. Is it insurmountable? No.