| 1 |
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 5:16 PM Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> > So my objection in private is the same as my objection in public. In theory |
| 6 |
>> > the current board is accountable to the foundation members. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> In reality, they are not accountable legally. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I don't follow. Why not? The board already has a duty of care to operate the nonprofit. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
That is actually pretty limited under New Mexico law, and I'm not sure |
| 13 |
if further restrictions can actually be imposed by the org (and even |
| 14 |
if they could be, I'm not sure this is desirable). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
And that makes sense, because otherwise every recreational football |
| 17 |
league/etc would find it impossible to get people to volunteer to run |
| 18 |
it. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The more strict requirements tend to come into play for for-profit |
| 21 |
businesses, and especially for those that are publicly traded. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Ultimately, you get what you pay for, and collectively as a community |
| 24 |
we aren't paying for much. Nor, IMO, should we be. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Rich |
Archives