In Baravordeh v. Borough Council of Prospect Park, 706 A.2d 362 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998), a plaintiff alleged any limitation whatsoever on the public's right to comment amounted to a violation of the Sunshine Act (Act). The Court stated: The Court deems the plaintiff's arguments to be patently untenable. The logical extension of the Plaintiff's position is that under Section 10.1(a) (Former Section 10.1(a) of the Sunshine Act now appears at 65 Pa. C.S 710.1(a)) a resident has a right at a municipal meeting to relate personal gossip or to read from a telephone book. Although the Court agrees that the reference in Section 10.1(a) to "matters of concern" that "may" come before an agency is very broad, it is clearly intended to prescribe some limitation. The plaintiff's interpretation would read that language out of the statute altogether. If possible, all provisions of an act are to be given effect, and none are to be rendered mere surplusage. 1 Pa.C.S. 1921(a); Concerned Citizens for Better Schools v. Brownsville Area School Dist., 660 A.2d 668 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1995). In addition, it is to be presumed that the legislature did not intend a result that is absurd or unreasonable. Id. at 367.