<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Lucas Maneos <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:maemo@subs.maneos.org" target="_blank">maemo@subs.maneos.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 06:37:09PM -0400, robert bauer wrote:<br>
</div><div class="im">> It's a PA requirement for all nonprofit corporations.<br>
<br>
</div>Found the relevant act, I think [1]:<br>
<br>
> § 1708. Use of conference telephone or other electronic<br>
> technology.<br>
><br>
> (a) Incorporators and directors. -- Except as otherwise<br>
> provided in the bylaws, one or more persons may participate in<br>
> a meeting of the incorporators or the board of directors of a<br>
> business corporation by means of conference telephone or other<br>
> electronic technology by means of which all persons<br>
> participating in the meeting can hear each other.<br>
<br>
IANAL, but doesn't "Except as otherwise provided in the bylaws" allow<br>
for alternatives to be defined?</blockquote><div> </div><div>This is an "enabling" statute. In other words, it is meant to explicitly approve ("may") of audio enabled conferencing and that it is the default position (if the bylaws are silent). The proper construction of "Except as otherwise provided in the bylaws" is that it modifies the "may" - meaning that the bylaws can contrarily provide that directors "may not" participate by audio conferencing. If the statute was meant to allow a variety of alternative meeting methods, the phrase "by means of which all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other" would not be present. <br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> A quick search turns up several PA<br>
NPs that seem to have done exactly that (some examples: [2][3][4][5][6]).<br>
<br>
L.<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/15/15.HTM" target="_blank">http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/15/15.HTM</a> </blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
[2] <a href="http://www.hla-pa.org/StateOffice/StateOfficePolicies/index.htm" target="_blank">http://www.hla-pa.org/StateOffice/StateOfficePolicies/index.htm</a><br>
[3] <a href="http://www.wplug.org/wiki/ByLaws" target="_blank">http://www.wplug.org/wiki/ByLaws</a><br>
[4] <a href="http://pa.us.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bylaws" target="_blank">http://pa.us.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bylaws</a><br>
[5] <a href="http://ofcn.org/libraries/bylaws/Lehigh.Valley.txt" target="_blank">http://ofcn.org/libraries/bylaws/Lehigh.Valley.txt</a><br>
[6] <a href="http://www.kli.org/kli/KLI.Bylaws.html" target="_blank">http://www.kli.org/kli/KLI.Bylaws.html</a><br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br></div></div></blockquote></div>I can't explain why these non-profits have done what they have done. How do we know they have not made a mistake? <br>