Emily, Could you give us some reasons why you think it would be useful to have dealers serving on your collection committee? From everything I've read, I think it's really not a good practice to have dealers involved with a museum at anything other in a very professional relationship (and, if that, very carefully handled). I'd agree that there is great potential conflict of interest. The dealer could advise you that something shouldn't be collected (or, worse, should be deaccessioned) in order to go after it her/himself. (I've personally been involved with a collection in which this happened, and the results were not pretty.) It also provides the dealer with an 'insiders' opportunity to get to know potential sellers, and even provides him or her with a 'connection' that they are likely use to try to legitimize themselves to enhance their own business. Finally, I think that having a dealer closely connected with your collecting activities casts a shadow on the museum --in addition to the other arguments, it creates a perception to the world that you are interested in artifacts for their monetary value more than for their historic (or artistic) significance. I, personally, would feel very, very nervous having a dealer on my Board or any committee related to collecting. It just has too many possibilities for negative consequences. No matter how nice that person is or how much you trust him/her, the public perception thing will be there. With all that bias now exposed and vulnerable, I do still really, really want to hear about the 'pro' arguments. Perhaps there is something that I'm missing. Lucy Skjelstad