Menu
Log in
Log in

    



 

Maine Alliance for Road Associations

"Statutory Road Assns may also incorporate as nonprofits."

<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
  • 29 Jul 2013 11:17 PM
    Message # 1354199
    Deleted user
    The MARA Forming and Running Road Associations Under Maine Statute Leadership Manual states the above on page 7.  I am assuming that this means that 2 separate entities can be formed with their own boards, annual meetings and bank accounts (which seems cumbersome); and that this doesn't mean that there is one organization with the benefits of both entities, correct?  If this is not correct, can you explain how this is done and what other road associations have done this.
  • 30 Jul 2013 1:19 PM
    Reply # 1354772 on 1354199
    What is meant is that a single association may form under Maine statute and also apply for Maine nonprofit status, which means as a nonprofit it obtains a certain degree of immunity from suit for its officers and directors and that might be reflected in insurance rates. So yes, it is one association forming under two laws that confer different benefits (ability to collect as statutory). Being a nonprofit requires an annual filing though.

    It does not mean forming two road associations. 
  • 31 Jul 2013 7:00 AM
    Reply # 1355253 on 1354199
    Deleted user

    Is this a legal opinion?  If so, could you tell me from which attorney/firm? Do you know of other statutory road associations that have done this?

    Maine's nonprofit statute, Title 13B, states in sec. 401(3) that "incorporators may be natural persons or domestic or foreign corporations".  The statutory road association statute, Title 23 secs. 3101-3106, does not include any language that confers corporation status to a statutory road association.  A road association is not a person.  So, it doesn't appear from these statutes that a statutory road association can be an incorporator that can form a nonprofit corporation.  Is there a way for a statutory road association to "apply for Maine nonprofit status" as you state without following Title 13B and becoming a nonprofit corporation?

  • 31 Jul 2013 7:32 AM
    Reply # 1355263 on 1355253
    Deleted user

    The road association wouldn't be the Incorporator.  An association official, such as the commissioner, would be the Incorporator, and each member of the association would become a member of the Corporation.

    It's no more complicated than that.
  • 31 Jul 2013 9:05 AM
    Reply # 1355310 on 1354199
    Deleted user
    Correct, a statutory road association can't be an incorporator of a nonprofit corporation according to Title 13B.  Individual members of a statutory road association can be incorporators, but what they are incorporating is a separate entity from the statutory road association, leaving them with two entities requiring two boards, two annual meetings, two bank accounts, etc.  I can find no statutory authority that allows a statutory road association to have the benefits of nonprofit status without forming a separate nonprofit corporation.
  • 31 Jul 2013 9:57 AM
    Reply # 1355365 on 1355310
    Deleted user
    Sue Olafsen wrote:
    Correct, a statutory road association can't be an incorporator of a nonprofit corporation according to Title 13B.  Individual members of a statutory road association can be incorporators, but what they are incorporating is a separate entity from the statutory road association, leaving them with two entities requiring two boards, two annual meetings, two bank accounts, etc.  I can find no statutory authority that allows a statutory road association to have the benefits of nonprofit status without forming a separate nonprofit corporation.

    Yes, the two entities are technically distinct.  That really shouldn't be much of a problem, though.

    In any statutory road association, the membership really only serves two purposes: To elect a commissioner, and to set and pay assessments to fund the association.  It's the commissioner that does all the real work.  And nothing says the commissioner needs to be a human being.

    The statutory association would be established first, with the membership voting to adopt bylaws authorizing the formation of a nonprofit corporation to conduct the business of the association.  The nonprofit would be incorporated with bylaws defining its members as the members of the road association, and granting voting rights to each.  Once the nonprofit is established, the membership of the road association can elect the corporation as its road commissioner.

    Since the membership of the association and the corporation are identical, any meeting of one is also a meeting of the other, so there is no need for multiple meetings.  There's no need whatsoever for the association to maintain bank accounts; only the commissioner needs a bank account, and the commissioner would be the corporation.

    Going forward, about the only action the association would normally need to take is setting the annual assessment.  The corporation, as commissioner, would do all actual collections, contracting, payments and so on.


  • 01 Aug 2013 7:53 AM
    Reply # 1356036 on 1354199
    Deleted user

    First - Is this a legal opinion?  If so, from whom.

    Second - I understand that the officers and the members of both organizations can be the same people and that you could have the annual meetings on the same day in order to meet the statutory requirements and properly maintain the legal existence of both.  But, because these are two organizations with different legal origins, issues remain about which organization carries the liability insurance and if there was a lawsuit, both entities could be named.

  • 01 Aug 2013 8:46 AM
    Reply # 1356077 on 1356036
    Deleted user
    No, of course this is not a legal opinion.  If it were, it would have come with a substantial invoice attached.

    And yes, of course both entities could be named in a lawsuit.  That's why only the corporation should ever take any action, other than setting the annual assessment.  

    There's no magic bullet; even in the case of an incorporated non-statutory road association, a plaintiff could name the individual parcel owners as defendants.

    Immunity from liability isn't the main reason for incorporating a road association, in any case.  The real benefit is giving the road association a more tangible legal personhood; statutory road associations barely exist as a legal entity.  The law gives them the power to file liens and to sue for assessment owed. And that's about it.  It can be tricky to buy insurance in the name of such a wispy legal entity, not to mention holding property or getting a loan.

    If you want immunity from liability, you're living in the wrong country.
    Last modified: 01 Aug 2013 10:28 AM | Deleted user
  • 01 Aug 2013 11:34 AM
    Reply # 1356208 on 1354199
    Deleted user
    My earlier posts do not say that I am looking for immunity from liability, although I think it is wise for road associations to purchase liability insurance.  All of my questions are regarding the MARA manual reference to becoming both and the MARA administrator earlier post that there is only one organization.  Just seeking clarity and accurate information.  You have been very helpful.  Thanks 
  • 01 Aug 2013 7:32 PM
    Reply # 1356617 on 1354199
    I was speaking in broad terms. Am glad there has been clarification.
<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 

                            The Maine Alliance for Road Associations


Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software