From: Ed Cunneen [edcunneen@ameritech.net]
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 12:52 PM
To: rule-comments@sec.gov
Subject: S7-10-03: 

Gentlemen & Ladies of the Commission:   
 
    I AM A STOCK HOLDER IN SEVERAL PUBLIC COMPANIES. SBC, GE,
EXXON, CEDARFAIR, ANHEUSER, JUST TO NAME A FEW. I WOULD SUPPORT 
THE ISSUE OF PERMITTING STOCK HOLDERS , NOT AFFILIATED WITH THE 
COMPANY, TO BE NOMINATED FOR THE COMPANY BOARD. I FEEL THAT THERE 
ARE FAR TOO MANY INTERLOCKING BOARD MEMBERSHIPS. THE INTERLOCK 
COULD SIMPLY BE A "FRIENDLY " TOKEN OF APPRECIATION OR JUST AN 
ACQUAINTANCE BUT THERE  CAN AND ARE TOO MANY " GOOD OLD BOY " 
CORPORATE NETWORKS THAT  NEED MONITORING BY ACTUAL SHARE HOLDERS.
 
    I AGREE THAT THE CANDIDATES SHOULD MEET CERTAIN QUALIFICATIONS 
AND THAT THEIR ROLES MIGHT BE MORE CONSULTATIVE INITIALLY BUT THE 
PEOPLE THAT TRUST THE COMPANY AND INVEST SHOULD HAVE SOME BETTERR 
IN PUT THAN JUST ATTENDING ANNUAL MEETINGS WHERE IN RECENT CASES 
THEY HAVE BEEN REFUSED THE ABILITY TO ASK QUESTIONS. I VIVIDLY 
REMEMBER THE OLD AT&T MEETINGS WITH EVEYLN DAVIS AND CO. THOSE USED 
TO BE FUN AND IN THOSE DAYS THE "BRASS" AT AT&T DID GREAT WORK IN 
CONDUCTING THE HUGE MEETINGS.

     SO MUCH FOR MY 2 CENTS...LET THE SHAREHOLDERS IN AND SEE WHAT 
HAPPENS. I'LL BET YOU WE MIGHT NOT HAVE HAD THE CORPORATE MESSES WE 
HAVE TODAY..

    THANKS,  
	
    EDWARD T. CUNNEEN
    BEACHWOOD, OHIO