Conflict of Interest Policy
Bitcoin District Initiative's conflict of interest policy outlining procedures for identifying and managing potential conflicts to ensure ethical governance and transparency.
Bitcoin District Initiative's conflict of interest policy outlining procedures for identifying and managing potential conflicts to ensure ethical governance and transparency.
The purpose of this Conflict of Interest Policy is to safeguard the Bitcoin District Initiative’s (hereinafter “the Corporation”) interests when contemplating transactions or arrangements that might benefit the private interests of its officers, directors, or key employees, or result in an excess benefit transaction. This policy supplements, but does not replace, applicable District of Columbia (DC) and federal laws governing conflicts of interest for nonprofit and charitable organizations, including the DC Nonprofit Corporation Act (D.C. Code § 29-401 et seq.) and the IRS “Intermediate Sanctions” rules under Section 4958 of the Internal Revenue Code.
An “interested person” is any director, officer, key employee, or member of a committee with board-delegated powers who has a direct or indirect financial interest, as defined below.
A person has a financial interest if they have or anticipate having, directly or indirectly, through business, investment, or family (including spouse, parent, sibling, child, or any individual in the same household):
An interested person must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest, including the financial interest and all material facts, to the Board of Directors or relevant committee considering the transaction or arrangement.
Following disclosure, the interested person may participate in a discussion with the Board or committee to provide relevant information. The interested person must then leave the meeting, and the disinterested members shall discuss and determine by majority vote whether a conflict of interest exists.
If a conflict of interest is determined to exist:
If the Board Ascending suspects a member failed to disclose a conflict, the member is informed and given an opportunity to explain.
After investigation, if nondisclosure is confirmed, the Board or committee takes appropriate disciplinary action.
Interested members may be counted toward a quorum at meetings authorizing transactions under this policy.
Minutes of Board and committee meetings must document:
Directors or committee members receiving compensation from the Corporation cannot vote on matters affecting their own compensation.
They may not provide compensation-related information to committees.
Each director, officer, key employee, and committee member with board-delegated powers must annually sign a statement affirming they:
Periodic reviews ensure the Corporation’s operations align with its charitable purposes and tax-exempt status, covering:
The Corporation may use outside advisors (e.g., legal or financial experts) for periodic reviews or complex conflicts, though the Board retains responsibility for decisions.
Directors, officers, and employees must not personally benefit from information gained through service (e.g., Bitcoin market data) until the Board reviews and approves such use to avoid harm to the Corporation.
All non-public information is confidential unless expressly declared otherwise in writing by the Board. Directors, officers, and key employees must sign confidentiality agreements upon appointment.
This policy complies with the DC Nonprofit Corporation Act, requiring disclosure and management procedures, and IRS 501(c)(3) guidelines, ensuring no private inurement. The Board reviews this policy annually, documenting compliance in minutes.
The DC Nonprofit Corporation Act (D.C. Code § 29-401 et seq.) mandates that nonprofits adopt policies to manage conflicts of interest, ensuring decisions prioritize the Corporation’s interests. This policy meets these requirements by:
Defining “interested persons” and “financial interests” broadly, as required for transparency (D.C. Code § 29-406.31).
Establishing clear disclosure, recusal, and decision-making processes by disinterested directors (D.C. Code § 29-406.31(c)).
Requiring detailed record-keeping of conflict proceedings (D.C. Code § 29-406.50).
Mandating annual affirmations and reviews, aligning with best practices and legal oversight expectations.