> The commercial interests were not well-represented in the number of votes. This is entirely by design. Anyone investing in or working for the for-profit had

> The commercial interests were not well-represented in the number of votes. This is entirely by design. Anyone investing in or working for the for-profit had to sign an operating agreement that literally states the for-profit is entirely beholden to the non-profit's charter and mission and that it is under no obligation to be profitable. The board is specifically balanced so that the majority is independent of of for-profit subsidiary. A lot of people seem to be under the impression that the intent was for there to be significant representation of commercial interests here, and that is the exact opposite of how all of this is structured.