I was reviewing our by-laws with my President and we noticed one thing. One of the copies was signed by the board members at the time that doc was printed. The other copy had no signatures. Is there any significance to this, other than by signing that it is assumed that the person signing has read and understands the document?

It is presumed that a new officer, upon election, is bound to abide by the by-laws when accepting the position. A signature isn't necessary. The by-laws are fully in force until the proper procedures are taken to amend or abolish them altogether.

Perhaps, at the time the signatures were added, the secretary or the president felt that the culture/atmosphere of that particular group of officers could benefit by everyone making a clear statement of agreement regarding the by-laws, so the signatures were proposed in order to ensure "buy in".

That's more or less what I was thinking. Thanks Jewel3.

I agree, we don't sign our but, we do require them to be reviewed once a year (at least). email me, we can share ideas, sheetsbrad@yahoo.com

When official documents like your charter/constitution/bylaws are adopted, the original is usually signed by the Board members. You then retain that original as your "conformed copy". When we applied for 501(c)(3) status, it turned out our signatures were in the wrong area. We had a constitution and bylaws. It was two separate legal documents, but one Word file with the signatures at the end. Technically this meant to the IRS that our organizing instrument (constitution) wasn't signed. (The signature was on the page after the bylaws, so only applied to THAT document.) It was no big deal - but we had to write a letter to the IRS and sign it stating that the copy provided was the most current one in effect for our organization.

Signing a copy might have been symbolic or replacement of your conformed copy. Or it could have represented that the board members understood and accepted the terms of the organization.