<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bring Back the Gal&#8230; Please?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ubcinsiders.ca/2016/03/bring-back-the-gal-please/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ubcinsiders.ca/2016/03/bring-back-the-gal-please/</link>
	<description>Separating the wheat from the chaff.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2019 15:50:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spencer Keys</title>
		<link>http://ubcinsiders.ca/2016/03/bring-back-the-gal-please/comment-page-1/#comment-18040</link>
		<dc:creator>Spencer Keys</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2016 17:58:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=11375#comment-18040</guid>
		<description>No, because the bylaws must be read in the context of the Society Act, which limits delegation outright. But even then, where is the source of power for the membership as a whole? It&#039;s not going to be found in a bylaw on quorum without some type of associated general power - the language of Council&#039;s power is so much clearer. You have to consider the constraints of corporate law because the bylaws are not the be-all-end-all (sp?). And those constraints point in a different direction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, because the bylaws must be read in the context of the Society Act, which limits delegation outright. But even then, where is the source of power for the membership as a whole? It&#8217;s not going to be found in a bylaw on quorum without some type of associated general power &#8211; the language of Council&#8217;s power is so much clearer. You have to consider the constraints of corporate law because the bylaws are not the be-all-end-all (sp?). And those constraints point in a different direction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheldon Goldfarb</title>
		<link>http://ubcinsiders.ca/2016/03/bring-back-the-gal-please/comment-page-1/#comment-18039</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheldon Goldfarb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2016 17:38:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=11375#comment-18039</guid>
		<description>Actually, Bylaw 5 says that the prohibition on Council delegating its powers is subject to the Bylaws.  Bylaw 5 also says that the power of Council to manage the affairs of the Society is subject to the Bylaws, so if the Bylaws say that a referendum that passes shall be acted on by the Society, subject to the Bylaws, well, we have something interestingly circular and not as clearcut as Spencer is suggesting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, Bylaw 5 says that the prohibition on Council delegating its powers is subject to the Bylaws.  Bylaw 5 also says that the power of Council to manage the affairs of the Society is subject to the Bylaws, so if the Bylaws say that a referendum that passes shall be acted on by the Society, subject to the Bylaws, well, we have something interestingly circular and not as clearcut as Spencer is suggesting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spencer Keys</title>
		<link>http://ubcinsiders.ca/2016/03/bring-back-the-gal-please/comment-page-1/#comment-18035</link>
		<dc:creator>Spencer Keys</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2016 06:58:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=11375#comment-18035</guid>
		<description>For added clarity, the provision says subject to the bylaws. There&#039;s nothing in the bylaws that say Council can delegate its authority.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For added clarity, the provision says subject to the bylaws. There&#8217;s nothing in the bylaws that say Council can delegate its authority.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spencer Keys</title>
		<link>http://ubcinsiders.ca/2016/03/bring-back-the-gal-please/comment-page-1/#comment-18034</link>
		<dc:creator>Spencer Keys</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2016 06:46:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=11375#comment-18034</guid>
		<description>Only if you take a limited reading of the bylaws, which is not the allowed interpretive principle. That provision is clearly speaking to the standard of approval and not the general power of the membership. To interpret it differently would bring the bylaws into conflict with section 26 of the Society Act, which is illegal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Only if you take a limited reading of the bylaws, which is not the allowed interpretive principle. That provision is clearly speaking to the standard of approval and not the general power of the membership. To interpret it differently would bring the bylaws into conflict with section 26 of the Society Act, which is illegal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheldon Goldfarb</title>
		<link>http://ubcinsiders.ca/2016/03/bring-back-the-gal-please/comment-page-1/#comment-18033</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheldon Goldfarb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2016 06:40:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=11375#comment-18033</guid>
		<description>AMS Bylaw 4(4): A referendum of the Society shall, subject to these Bylaws, be acted upon by the Society where:
(a)	a majority, or such greater percentage as may be required by the Society Act (as in cases where the Society Act requires a Special Resolution), of the votes cast support the referendum; and
(b)	the number of votes cast supporting the referendum is equal to or greater than eight percent (8%) of the active members of the Society.
This seems more than advisory to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AMS Bylaw 4(4): A referendum of the Society shall, subject to these Bylaws, be acted upon by the Society where:</p>
<p>(a)	a majority, or such greater percentage as may be required by the Society Act (as in cases where the Society Act requires a Special Resolution), of the votes cast support the referendum; and</p>
<p>(b)	the number of votes cast supporting the referendum is equal to or greater than eight percent (8%) of the active members of the Society.</p>
<p>This seems more than advisory to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philip E</title>
		<link>http://ubcinsiders.ca/2016/03/bring-back-the-gal-please/comment-page-1/#comment-18021</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip E</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2016 05:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=11375#comment-18021</guid>
		<description>Thanks Spencer!  I appreciate your insight on this matter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Spencer!  I appreciate your insight on this matter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
