House File No. 404 proposes to amend the Minneapolis Nonprofit Corporation Act. It has been introduced by Representatives Wagenius, Clark, Biernat, Skoglund, and others. The bill would amend the law specifically involving neighborhood organizations contracted with or organizations like the Minneapolis NRP. The bill is honestly motivated by a desire to make neighborhood groups more inclusive. Few would quarrel with that goal. Many member of neighborhood groups, such as myself, have worked for broader definitions of membership. But reading the bill may have other far-reaching and undesirable consequences. In reading the bill, it looks to me that it will:
- Require physical posting of notices of all meetings of neighborhood organizations (it doesn't say just "membership" meetings and would apparently apply to all meetings of members, boards, committees, working groups, etc.). The physical posting has to be 30 days in advance of any meeting and must be posted in all "libraries, schools, park board, and other public buildings." Someone could object to a meeting if a notice wasn't up on all of the listed buildings for the 30 days before the meeting. It may also make impossible any discussion and action on anything that happened since the notice was posted 30 days earlier.
- Regardless of who the bylaws say is a member of the nonprofit, at any members meeting, anyone could vote who has proof of any type of residency in the neighborhood , anyone owning or "being employed" by any business in the neighborhood, or a "government entity" in the neighborhood. So even if the organization has given careful consideration to the nature of the organization and who is a member, any inconsistent bylaws would be nullified.
- Effectively nullify any "anti-packing" provision of a nonprofit's bylaws by requiring that anyone can vote even when they have been sold a bill of goods by someone with a bone to pick with the nonprofit.
Representative Wagenius wants notice of any "suggestions
or concerns" by next Monday, February 26th. If you have suggestions
or concerns, please let her know. At a minimum, it may be useful
to ask that consideration be given to whether this cure is worse than the
disease (or whether anybody is even sick).
Here are my thoughts on the changes:
- Is there really a problem of people not knowing when a neighborhood group is meeting? Is it already being publicized? Are those means effective? Will the physical posting requirement really get notice to anyone who hasn't gotten it anyway?
- Is there only one kind of neighborhood organization? Can a neighborhood have multiple organizations? Is it likely to be productive to have an organization composed of "those who show up" be at the mercy of "those who don't show up?"
- Has there been a problem in your neighborhood or have you heard about other neighborhoods where some group is secretly organized and shows up unannounced to "take over" an organization? Aren't requirements like 30-days of membership appropriate and common to keep new and current members on equal footing on what's going on?
Steve Cross
President, PPERRIA
