![]() |
|
Court transcript of hearing on motions regarding Pacifica bylaws revision and the settlement agreement 7-8-03 |
7-8-03 Hearing document index settlement agreement 6-19-03 bylaws drafts ------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 15:55:16 -0700
Transcript prepared by the Court Reporter of the Court's Orders
Ms. Spooner, I hope this is of assistance. Thank you, Teri F. Rosette, CSR ----------------- THE COURT: The matters having been submitted, the Court will make the following -- well, as a preliminary matter, I'll make the following observations. I do think that the interim board should be applauded for making considerable progress in the execution of the Settlement Agreement and addressing a number of very serious and complex issues which faced the Pacifica Foundation at the time of the settlement of this litigation. I also think that it is a remarkable endeavor that's worthy of praise, I think, to try and address the issues of diversity, inclusion and nondiscrimination as has been undertaken by the Pacifica interim board. They are the most challenging and daunting issues facing our society and facing the world and so it's not surprising that in that undertaking consensus has not been obtained in its entirety. But that should not diminish the otherwise laudatory efforts and work in that regard. But the larger question before the Court here today sitting in equity is the best interest of the Pacifica Foundation. And while we initially contemplated, I think, 15 months for the interim board to do its work, that has not been sufficient time. It appears to the Court that there is additional time necessary to complete the work of the interim board. That the sooner that that work is completed, the sooner Pacifica will be returned to independent -- independence, I should say, and return to the vigor prior to the litigation. So with those things in mind, the Court will also make the following legal conclusions: That the vote that was taken on June 26th in which the matter of consideration of alternative or proposal -- I should say Draft A, Draft B and Draft C, that vote does comply with the Settlement Agreement and that the vote of seven for Draft B does constitute a two-thirds majority of the 10 votes that were cast on the issue of which alternative should be adopted as the new bylaws, proposed new bylaws to be submitted to the LABs. The Court has considered the points and authorities filed by Ms. Spooner and the fact that the language on page 4 with regard to the interim board members present and voting is the context in which that two-thirds analysis must be considered. And the abstention of four [sic] of the voting members present or the nonvoting or the utterance of "none" is essentially an abstention in terms of that resolution. And Roberts Rules of Order suggest that the seven of 10 voting members constitutes the two-thirds majority required by the Settlement Agreement. Even if it were not so, the Court would be inclined as a matter of equity and in light of the need to bring resolution to these issues to find that there has been substantial compliance with the Settlement Agreement. And so as a second alternative, the Court would nonetheless approve the resolution adopting Draft B as the proposal that will be submitted to the LABs. In light of that and in light of those legal determinations, the Court would make the following orders: That the secretary of the foundation, the Pacifica Foundation, record in the minutes of the June 26th, 2003 special board meeting that the interim Board of Directors approved Draft B, the proposed bylaws, by two-thirds majority vote, seven out of 10 interim director members present and voting with Ferguson, Lee and Zakiya abstaining. Further, that the foundation secretary shall forthwith transmit to or by e-mail Draft B of the proposed bylaws to the chairs of the five local advisory or local area boards. Are they local advisory boards? MS. SPOONER: Advisory currently, Your Honor. THE COURT: Local advisory boards who shall convene special meetings of their respective local advisory boards not later than July 23rd to vote on Draft B as to those portions concerning the number and manner of the election of local and national boards and shall transmit to the foundation secretary the results of those votes not later than July 24th, 2003. And further, that Draft B shall be the Pacifica Foundation bylaws upon receipt of the required approval by majority vote of at least three of the five local advisory boards pursuant to paragraph 3.b of the Settlement Agreement. Additionally, the Court will extend the authority of the interim Pacifica National board to complete its work to not later than January 30th, 2004 or until the seating of the newly-elected Pacifica Foundation Board of Directors. And that presumably will take place before January 30th of 2004. That will be the order of the Court. And I'll either ask Mr. Fertig -- maybe I'll ask you, Mr. Fertig, to prepare an order consistent with what the Court has announced here today. MR. FERTIG: I will do so, Your Honor, in consultation with Ms. Spooner. THE COURT: All right. And that will conclude these matters this morning. Mr. Slater, I will look forward to seeing your application for appearance or application for appearing pro hac vice in these matters not later than this Friday, July 11th. MR. SLATER: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. (Audience applauds) (Whereupon, the proceedings were adjourned.) ---oOo---
----------------------------------
7-8-03 Hearing document index
|
top of page | bylaws revisions process info page | governance proposals | bylaws etc | home |