William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
Which one of the first things wrt to the Council that would be mentioned in the Bylaws is the Council has full authority and veto power over the project. That means the board nor officers can dictate to the Council. Council remains on top of it all. Just legally declared, and with other rules, regulations, etc, stipulated in detail.
Would this run into any kinds of legal issues? Essentially you're creating a non-profit corporation whose governance is subject to what is effectively a board of directors that is very loosely defined/ elected/ etc. I'd think that this would run into issues legally, but I suppose that being a non-public company it might not be an issue. If you're not already familiar with such things you might want to talk to a lawyer.
I'm torn on this. In theory the council and trustees/foundation should be well-coordinated and they're really just two parts of a single effort. However, for legal reasons the money-handling parts of the distro are subject to a lot of controls that need not apply to everything else. If we mix them we either need to formalize more of what happens, or potentially risk running into legal issues.
If a lawyer doesn't see this as a problem then just disregard everything above. A little more formality might not kill the project, but on the other hand we don't want to create too many barriers to council members who are volunteers. In a more significant corporation like the Red Cross I suspect that board members would be paid to attend meetings.
-- [email protected] mailing list
